It’s time to face the bitter reality before us. What should be two of the most potent weapons in this ideological war are proving to be ineffective duds. There are many reasons to explain the impotence, even irrelevance, of the charge of “Communist” and “Socialist,” despite what should be their devastating accuracy. However, I have an alternative that just might do the trick.
While researching and writing “Serf’s Up!” an action/adventure period piece screenplay about a peasant uprising, I had a startling revelation:
Maybe Barack Obama and his supporters are not Communists, not Socialists. Maybe they are Feudalists.
What if we are dealing with a resurgence of Feudalism, but under the guise of modern Progressivism? It may seem preposterous, but do not be so quick to dismiss the idea. Let’s look at what is actually happening and see if it fits.
We have a president trying to rule by executive power and regulation, making Congress irrelevant. Under Feudalism, there was no legislative body; the king or lord ruled by edict; his word was law.
We can see a special relationship between this president and many large union organizations. They receive preferential treatment from the government, and in turn, donate money and labor to election campaign efforts. The Feudal equivalent would be vassal states who are granted estates to oversee in terms of fealty in forms of tribute and troops for military campaigns.
Currently we are seeing an erosion of the middle class, with particular assaults on small business. One of the forces that helped bring an end to Feudalism was the creation and rise of a middle class and the emergence of mercantilism from an agrarian economic system.
As illustrated by the Fast and Furious fiasco, as well as sympathies for many in the administration for gun control efforts both domestic and global, it is evident that private ownership of firearms is also targeted. The invention of gunpowder and its effectiveness against fortifications helped to break the power of feudal lords, and the battlefield superiority of the armored vassal-knight.
Currently, there are many efforts aimed at controlling internet content, even wanting a “kill-switch” to shut it down. Feudal authority, manifested in the Lord or the church, effectively controlled information and knowledge (The Dark Ages) until the printing press (the internet of its day) changed everything.
Currently we see a trend to create a permanent underclass of people, wholly dependent upon the government, coupled with a deterioration in the protection of individual rights. Under Feudalism, peasants or serfs were seen as chattel, allowed to scrape out a meager living by toiling for the Lord, and wholly dependent upon His good graces for their existence, and afforded no rights or protections by law.
Are you with me yet? Can you not see the parallels? There are more examples, expanded government land grabs, rise of anti-Semitsim, and so on, but I think I’ve made my case. We could just as easily be seeing an attempt to return to a type of divine kingship (especially with all of the Messianic symbolism thrown about by the Obama faithful, as a effort for a new worker’s paradise. Frightening thought, isn’t it?
Now why try to make this point, why try to make the case for Feudalism? Because it’s all about messaging. When we cry “socialist” we often hear “So what? There are socialists in Europe. Big deal.” If we say “Communist” people often laugh. The young vote is compromised of people who have no memory of the Soviet Union. They probably think of guys in big fur hats and long coats when they hear talk of communists. Thanks to our educational system, “Marxist” is meaningless. Kids too young to remember Richard Marx certainly have not been taught anything about Karl. (Coincidentally, “Hold on to the Night” does have scathing undertones critical of redistribution of wealth philosophy.)
So, how is Feudalist any better than the others? Simply because it holds a connotation to something terrifying that most everyone can reference: the Renaissance Festival. Is there any future more dire than living in a never ending RenFest? I dare say not. And, thanks to Michelle, the few redeeming features, like suckling pig and roast turkey legs, will certainly not be allowed. If we can equate the over-priced entry fee with high taxes, the never ending parade of pathetic drama majors with government bureaucrats, then we just might start to be heard. Besides, it doesn’t matter what we are fighting against, but what we are fighting for that should matter. The enemies of freedom, though known by different names, are always the same in their oppression. In our struggle against this oppression, we should use every tool, every word that might be effective.
In conclusion, let me leave you with the title of part two of my soon-to-be-pitched epic trilogy:
“Resistance is Feudal!”
(And be sure to watch for the thrilling conclusion in part three, “Liege Siege.” Now, just out of curiosity, anyone happen to know how to get a script to Jason Statham’s agent?)
I’m totally on the same page. I’ve been using the term “serf” for quite a while now.
D. W. Robinson
@_DWRobinson
Resistance Is Feudal #ObamaDerbyNames
5:07 PM – 5 May 12
Great minds really do think alike.
Well, I would disagree with this tact. The Left often changes the language to suite their power-gaining purposes, from Progressive to Liberal back to Progressive-lite. What’s needed is to educate, explain what the words really mean, give factual and illustrative definitions of terms. Often times kids are given the romantic versions of what Socialism is without the brute cost in human life. “It’s all Flower Power, dude”. No, it’s not. It’s millions of deaths. To use your analogy we need to be the keepers of the tomes of wisdom, gathering and learning as much information as possible before it gets scrubbed off the internet and the book burnings start.
Oh, and they don’t really use Turkey legs, it’s really Emu. I saw the boxes.
WWBD? What Would Breitbart Do?
In a similar vein:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/311630.php
“Maybe Barack Obama and his supporters are not Communists, not Socialists.”
Correct, he is a conservative.
Review the evidence:
Obama has surrounded himself with conservative advisors, many taken from previous administrations, and a large number from the Trilateral Commission.
Obama has appointed a former Monsanto executive as Senior Advisor to the FDA.
He has extended Bush tax cuts to the ultra-rich.
Obama has presided over a spiraling rich-poor gap (America’s Gini coefficient is now 93rd in the world, behind Russia and Iran.)
He has sacrificed more American jobs with recent free trade deals.
Trade union rights have also eroded during his term.
He has expanded Bush defense spending, killed civilians with drone attacks, and failed to close Guantanamo.
He has supported the NDAA which effectively legalizes martial law.
Obama has allowed more drilling.
Obama has adopted a soft-touch regulation position on banks that is well to the right of European Conservative’s positions.
Obama claims to want universal health care, and yet his first choice for Secretary of Health was a man who had spent years lobbying for the pharmaceutical industry against that very concept.
The President calls for economic justice, while simultaneously appointing a Chief of Staff, who as a former Citigroup executive worked with hedge funds that bet on the housing market to collapse.
Off Topic:
Photo of TINY book or VERY LARGE bullets?
Looks like one of those mini-books. Or I need glasses. Or stop playing with my….um…cards, yeah.
Normal book photoshopped over another pic of .30 cal cartridges.
- “Maybe Barack Obama and his supporters are not Communists, not Socialists.”
- Correct, he is a conservative.
Pft, hardly. Only in a totally Bizarro world where logic and words are so twisted pretzels are considered straight and narrow could he be a Conservative.
- Review the evidence:
- Obama has surrounded himself with conservative advisors, many taken from previous administrations,
- and a large number from the Trilateral Commission.
Oh you mean like Van Jones, who admits he’s a Communist and gosh darn proud of it? Anita Dunn who’s inspired by Mao, who I think was also a Communist who killed millions. Andy Stern who quotes doctrine from Marx by heart. Obama’s Manufacturing Czar, who says that he agrees with Chairman Mao that “political power comes from a barrel of a gun.” You mean like those Conservatives? It’s like that scene in M.A.S.H.
Trapper: Klinger is not a pervert!
Margaret: How do you know?
Trapper: Because I am one, and he’s never at the meetings.
There isn’t a single adviser or staff member that follows the Conservative philosophy.
- Obama has appointed a former Monsanto executive as Senior Advisor to the FDA.
Not sure about this, do you mean Michael Taylor? From what I’ve read on WikiPedia and all that I can’t tell what political leanings at all about him, so I’m not sure what the complaint is.
He has extended Bush tax cuts to the ultra-rich.
And to the middle class, basically to those that pay taxes. He’s not getting much kudos from our side on that, if he’d really wanted to impress us he’d send his own tax cut plans instead of just saying every five minutes, “It’s all Bush’s fault, but we’ll need to keep doing what Bush did”.
- Obama has presided over a spiraling rich-poor gap (America’s Gini coefficient is now 93rd in the
- world, behind Russia and Iran.)
That’s mostly because of the increase in entitlement spending, where it’s incentivized to go on the government dole, especially when he continues to obstruct job creation.
- He has sacrificed more American jobs with recent free trade deals.
That we’re in agreement on.
- Trade union rights have also eroded during his term.
Seriously? Talk to Andy Stern and Richard Trumka.
- He has expanded Bush defense spending, killed civilians with drone attacks, and failed to close Guantanamo.
Yeah, weird man. That’s not so much being a Conservative as that he lied. To get votes. That’s called being a Politician.
- He has supported the NDAA which effectively legalizes martial law.
Ok not seeing what you’re seeing here. Wikipedia says it’s the budget for the military, thought there is a provision about enforcement on Terrorism laws, is that what you’re referring to? Besides, if it gave him that power wouldn’t he have used it already, it’s been six months? Any cases where it’s been used?
- Obama has allowed more drilling.
Where? He’s stopped all drilling in the Gulf, despite a Judge order telling him to cease. He’s stopping the Keystone Pipeline. He said prior to being elected that he was going to institute policy that if you wanted to open a coal-powered plant that you could but the cost in fees and stuff would bankrupt you. He has taken credit for allowing drilling in areas that were approved prior to his Presidency on private land that he couldn’t stop if he wanted to. So he also takes credit for the sun rising, the stars twinkling and for keeping the universe from collapsing. Way to go Preezy!
- Obama has adopted a soft-touch regulation position on banks that is well to the right of
- European Conservative’s positions.
That’s because several of his advisors are from AIG, Citibank, etc. Generally whenever government enacts regulation to constrict something, say the meat packing industry with health standards, it ends up benefiting the few companies that have the ear of the Senator or President or whomever. This usually pushes out the little mom&pop stores that can’t compete and don’t have the financial backing to support their own candidate. Why do you think GE didn’t pay a penny in taxes? Good looks and charm? That’s what’s called “Crony Capitalism”. Not Conservatism. Conservative principles are “get the government out of the way”, not pick who wins by the largest campaign contribution.
- Obama claims to want universal health care, and yet his first choice for Secretary of Health
- was a man who had spent years lobbying for the pharmaceutical industry against that very concept.
Not sure Kathleen Sebelius has a dangly. I could be wrong.
- The President calls for economic justice, while simultaneously appointing a Chief of Staff, who as
- a former Citigroup executive worked with hedge funds that bet on the housing market to collapse.
Again that’s the Crony Capitalism, has nothing to do with Conservatism. I am so glad to see you’re coming around, I’m proud of you.
WWBD? What Would Breitbart Do?
“Oh you mean like Van Jones, who admits he’s a Communist and gosh darn proud of it?”
He said absolutely no such thing. He was briefly a member of a leftist organization during his student days in the early ’90′s.
“Anita Dunn who’s inspired by Mao, who I think was also a Communist who killed millions.”
No, she quoted Mao in one speech once. She also quoted Mother Theresa in the same speech.
“Andy Stern who quotes doctrine from Marx by heart.”
You say that as if it were a bad thing, but anyway Andy Stern has never been a member of the Obama administration.
“From what I’ve read on WikiPedia and all that I can’t tell what political leanings at all about him, so I’m not sure what the complaint is.”
The complaint is he was a former Monsanto henchman.
“Where? He’s stopped all drilling in the Gulf, despite a Judge order telling him to cease. He’s stopping the Keystone Pipeline.”
The Obama administration has overseen the largest rise in drilling rigs in American history, from less than 200 in April 2009 to over 1,200 today. U.S. oil production is the highest it’s been for eight years. the USA now imports 15 percent less oil than it did in 2005. For the first time since 1949, the United States is now a net exporter of gasoline, diesel, and other fuels.
“That’s because several of his advisors are from AIG, Citibank, etc.”
Yes thank you, that’s exactly my point.
“Not sure Kathleen Sebelius has a dangly. I could be wrong.”
Sebelius was not Obama’s first choice.
“Again that’s the Crony Capitalism, has nothing to do with Conservatism.”
One and the same thing. You can;t have one without the other.
- – “Oh you mean like Van Jones, who admits he’s a Communist and gosh darn proud of it?”
- He said absolutely no such thing. He was briefly a member of a leftist organization during
- his student days in the early ’90′s.
According to Wikipedia he said he was a Communist. The Washington Post has an article where he was a member of STORM, which is Marxist. Is there any quotes where he’s denounced the Communist/Marxist positions? I see a lot of quotes where he’s going straight down the Communist Manifesto, from his own YouTube videos, not my saying so. If you have a YouTube video or a quote from him that he said he was wrong and he repudiates all that as the indiscretions of youth then I’ll retract it.
- – “Anita Dunn who’s inspired by Mao, who I think was also a Communist who killed millions.”
- No, she quoted Mao in one speech once. She also quoted Mother Theresa in the same speech.
“A lot of you have great deal of ability. A lot of you work hard. Put them together
and that answers the why not question. There is usually not a good reason. And then
the 3rd lesson and tip actually come from two of my favorite political philosophers.
Mao Tse-tung and Mother Teresa, not often couple with each other, but the two people
that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point which is you’re going to make
choices, you’re going to challenge, you’re going to say why not. You’re going to figure
out how to do things that have never been done before. But here’s the deal, these are
your choices, they’re no one else’s.”
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Tse-tung
“The U.S. State department in 1976 estimated that there may have been a million
killed in the land reform, and 800,000 killed in the counterrevolutionary campaign.
Mao himself claimed that a total of 700,000 people were executed during the years
1949–53.However, because there was a policy to select “at least one landlord,
and usually several, in virtually every village for public execution”, the number
of deaths range between 2 million and 5 million. In addition, at least 1.5 million
people, perhaps as many as 4 to 6 million, were sent to “reform through labour”
camps where many perished. Mao played a personal role in organizing the mass
repressions and established a system of execution quotas, which were often exceeded.
He defended these killings as necessary for the securing of power.
This man is a monster, not someone to revere like Anita Dunn does. If she looks up to this man I have zero respect for her, she should be shunned as anyone who thinks like him should be.
- – “Andy Stern who quotes doctrine from Marx by heart.”
- You say that as if it were a bad thing, but anyway Andy Stern has never been a member of the
- Obama administration.
He’s an adviser, visiting the White House 53 times:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Stern
“Between Inauguration Day and February 23, 2011, Stern visited the White House 53 times”
And yes, following a failed philosophy that’s caused only misery and death around the world for a hundred years does mean it’s a bad thing.
- – “From what I’ve read on WikiPedia and all that I can’t tell what political leanings at all about
- – him, so I’m not sure what the complaint is.”
- The complaint is he was a former Monsanto henchman.
Right. So? He worked for Monsanto, so what? I worked for McDonalds when I was 18, what does that mean? Is there any evidence of malfeasance or is this another “Haliburton” thing?
- – “Where? He’s stopped all drilling in the Gulf, despite a Judge order telling him to cease. He’s
- – stopping the Keystone Pipeline.”
- The Obama administration has overseen the largest rise in drilling rigs in American history,
- from less than 200 in April 2009 to over 1,200 today. U.S. oil production is the highest it’s
- been for eight years. the USA now imports 15 percent less oil than it did in 2005. For the first
- time since 1949, the United States is now a net exporter of gasoline, diesel, and other fuels.
And your source for this?
- – “That’s because several of his advisors are from AIG, Citibank, etc.”
- Yes thank you, that’s exactly my point.
So then you agree that Crony Capitalism is bad?
- – “Not sure Kathleen Sebelius has a dangly. I could be wrong.”
- Sebelius was not Obama’s first choice.
She still has the job. She could be the tenth choice, she still has it. Who are you referring to, you never gave a name.
- – “Again that’s the Crony Capitalism, has nothing to do with Conservatism.”
- One and the same thing. You can;t have one without the other.
Conservatism is not Crony Capitalism, never was. Saying it as “one and the same thing” does not make it so, any more than saying “oil and water are one and the same”.
WWBD? What Would Breitbart Do?
BRAVO SCHNEYER – JUST LET PURPLE COW TRY TO REFUTE THIS LATEST REBUTTAL. I have to put up with these vague, imaginary, non-sourced “facts” from libtards all the time. Gee wonder why Purple Cow can’t name the first HHS Sec? Or any sources AT ALL for the oil drilling “data”? I haven’t seen another post, guess all PW can do now is mutter insults to the computer in Mom’s basement.
G-Man, your post simply back up what I have previously said.
Where does Van Jones say he is still “a communist and dashed proud of it”?
You agree with me that Anita Dun quoted Mao in one speech when she also quoted Mother Theresa.
Andy Stern might be an advisor to the White House, but so what? He is not a member of the administration and you have not backed up your previous claims about him.
You could have discovered the facts about increased oil production yourself, but you are either too lazy, or you didn’t want to see the results. I’ll post them in a second posting to avoid this post being held up again.
All this is supposed to be your proof of your idiotic notion that Obama is a leftist, when ALL the proof shows that there is little or no difference between Democrat and Republican policies.
You have a Right-of-Centre party (Democrats) and an increasingly hard-Right conservative party (Repugs). The difference is only of emphasis.
- G-Man, your post simply back up what I have previously said.
Your point was to say that President Obama is a Conservative because he surrounds himself with Conservatives. The people I listed are all Leftists, if not Marxixt/Communists.
- Where does Van Jones say he is still “a communist and dashed proud of it”?
- You agree with me that Anita Dun quoted Mao in one speech when she also quoted
- Mother Theresa.
- Andy Stern might be an advisor to the White House, but so what? He is not a member
- of the administration and you have not backed up your previous claims about him.
- You could have discovered the facts about increased oil production yourself, but you
- are either too lazy, or you didn’t want to see the results. I’ll post them in a second
- posting to avoid this post being held up again.
I looked at that graph, it doesn’t say where the data is coming from. I can post an equally glitzy graph without showing where I get the data from and still not convince you. I looked at the people that run those sites, there’s no credentials that I can find that make their opinion any more or less valid than a guy from off the street, I don’t know. You haven’t proven your point with someone else’s graph, as I keep saying “what do you think”, I don’t care what others think. But I’ve given up on that since it’s clear I’m not going to win debating a Speak-n-Spell. Just keep copying and pasting, my point was and still is that President Obama is engaging in activity that suppresses oil exploration and drilling, along with coal and other forms of energy, other then the “green technologies” which have gone bankrupt.
- All this is supposed to be your proof of your idiotic notion that Obama is a leftist,
- when ALL the proof shows that there is little or no difference between Democrat
- and Republican policies.
Well, you do have a half of a point there, the acting and previous Congressional Democrats and Republicans have been acting like the same, that’s been a long-term complaint. However the Democrats have been leaning hard on the gas towards bigger government while the Republicans have been tepidly touching-toe to the brake. Mostly it’s because they’re hoping to get a turn steering, not dealing with the already out-of-control monster truck barreling down the highway.
- You have a Right-of-Centre party (Democrats) and an increasingly hard-Right
- conservative party (Repugs). The difference is only of emphasis.
Democrats are Right-of-Centre? Seriously? Ok, I have to stop laughing, ok ok. ahem. So , the Conservatives are on the far Right, the Democrats on just a bit to the left of them but they’re still right of the Center. Then there’s the center, yes? So who’s on the left of that center? Who’s on the far left from that center? If I applied for the position of any one of those points on that graph what would that look like?
http://fuelfix.com/files/2012/01/Bush-Obama-Oil-Production-graph.jpg
I looked at the chart, but it doesn’t saw where the data is being culled from. The people that’s cited I’ve never heard of them, the websites that they’re from are blogs that anyone can say they’re from. When I look at their credentials I can’t find any, so I can’t vet them. Is there an industry group or government agency that has these numbers?
So who’s on the left of that center?
c-e-n-t-r-e
In the USA, nobody.
Who’s on the far left from that center?
In the USA, nobody.
So what parts of the world are you? UK?
Yep
A lot of how you talked now makes a little sense. (This is where I was trying to get to understand you comes in.) Some of the political views that you were talking about didn’t make sense to me. However I was trying to base all that on an American template. Now that I realize it’s not and I can better relate it to an English template some of that makes better sense. I have a friend that immigrated from England that I have great conversations with, although to be fair none were political in nature.
This also means I’m afraid that disqualifies you from the discussion here. As Tip O’Neill said, “All Politics is Local”. So how can you adequately give a cogent discussion of American policies and their repercussions? Now if you want to discuss how they affect you on the World-stage that is a valid argument, and I actually find your thoughts on that even more valuable than you realize. But for you to debate on your view of American politics is not valid, just as my opinions of Cameron, or Brown, or Francois Hollande or anyone else on that side of the Pond is invalid.
Let’s try a sports analogy. It would be like talking about football, where I’m viewing it as American Football rules, but you’re thinking of European Football rules. How about we talk about Baseball and Cricket? (oh if you could explain Cricket to me I would greatly appreciate that.)
Now I have no real knowledge of England, other then what I’ve seen in movies and tv programs. I doubt I can give a cogent political analysis to you just because I’ve watched Red Dwarf, Doctor Who and the Black Adder. (Yes I am a geek and darn proud of it, thankyouverymuch) I also cannot give my opinion of your culture either, inasmuch as how its directly related to you. Sure I can talk about how I see it, as visions of shadows on glass, but that’s not real to me, is it? Just because I know “West End Girls” does not mean I can direct your driving.
And lastly your explanation of how you view the people here as this side or that side of Centre may be how you view us, as viewed by how your politics are there. That’s perfectly reasonable, I have no idea how the political physics works over there, my conjecture would be unfair to you. That also means it’s unfair for you to speculate on our side about us based on the rules of how you live. For example, we Yanks drive on the right side of the road, yet you’re looking at us and speculating on how we operate the country on your view of us in the left side of the road. See how that doesn’t work?
Anyway I do find that your perspective is different and therefore valuable here, however that its value is limited in scope. There is one concept in American politics that equates to a family, where I can say anything mean about my brother, however you cannot say mean things about my brother otherwise the family will rally against you, it’s the nature of politics here. We saw that, for five minutes, after 9/11. Those of us on the Right (our Right) still tend to follow that lead, for example if Putin said something bad about Obama we’d grit our teeth but would defend him. When you’re talking about our President, or any other politician here, as though you know them more then we do? I’m afraid that’s why I’m saying that disqualifies you.
WWBD? What Would Breitbart Do?
“Great minds really do think alike.”
Not many people quote the second line of that saying, which is..
‘…and fools seldom differ.’
G. Schayer
This also means I’m afraid that disqualifies you from the discussion here. As Tip O’Neill said, “All Politics is Local”.
Tip O’Neill was an idiot.
I dated his niece for a while back in the early 90′s, the stories I could tell you…
Did you know he was the Irish Republican Army’s most important global fund-raiser? He was also a special advisor to to the IRA’s army council. This at a time when they were launching a bombing campaign against innocent civilians in the UK, a campaign that cost one of my best friends his fiance and his left leg. America’s ‘war on terror’ doesn’t seem to stretch as far as white christian terrorists.
Anyway to his broader point about local politics, it is of course total nonsense. We live in an increasingly global and interconnected world, political decisions made in one capital have repercussions all over the planet.
You say that I can’t have a cogent discussion on America and it’s problems, yet I notice that doesn’t seem to preclude you guys having discussions on elections in France. I haven’t seen a single one of you put a hand up and say “You know what guys, we live a long way from France, we can’t have a cogent discussion on this.”
Now we are all connected to the internet, we all have more information at our fingertips than we can cope with, if we are interested in a given subject. So shortage of information and facts is not a problem.
As far as context goes I have an American wife, my own two sons are American citizens, and my brother is a Professor at Michigan State, I have worked for American corporations before, and I have American clients now. So I spend quite a bit of time in the USA, I think I have a pretty good feel for context.
Further, it is my contention that Americans largely do not understand the American context. Americans are badly served by their news media. They know what’s going on in their own state, but by-and-large people do not have a clue what is going on anywhere outside of their own locality.
As for the rest of the world? Forget it. When I lived in Amsterdam a college educated American woman asked me if Amsterdam was “anywhere near Australia” because she had a cousin there…
And I’ve lost count of how many Americans thought Amsterdam was in Denmark!
As for the political spectrum, yes Obama may be on the left of the relative American spectrum, but that does not make him a leftist or a socialist. He is a less radical conservative than you certainly, but his politics and his speeches are still deeply conservative.
To be a socialist you have to have socialist policies – doesn’t matter if you live in New York, Paris or Leningrad. Obama does not have a single one. Where is his commitment to ending immigration controls? Where is his commitment to worker control of the commanding heights of the economy? Where is health care free at the point of delivery? Where is the 75% tax rates for the rich? Where is free child care for all? Where is abortion on demand?
Not a single one, instead he has surrounded himself with corporate elitists, and has cow-towed to Wall Street.
- – G. Schayer
- – This also means I’m afraid that disqualifies you from the discussion here. As Tip O’Neill
- – said, “All Politics is Local”.
- Tip O’Neill was an idiot.
- I dated his niece for a while back in the early 90′s, the stories I could tell you…
Um, ok, not sure how that fits into anything.
- Did you know he was the Irish Republican Army’s most important global fund-raiser? He
- was also a special advisor to to the IRA’s army council. This at a time when they were
- launching a bombing campaign against innocent civilians in the UK, a campaign that cost
- one of my best friends his fiance and his left leg. America’s ‘war on terror’ doesn’t seem to
- stretch as far as white christian terrorists.
Yeah, how odd, a Democrat in league with a terrorist group. I never saw that one coming. I do have to admit I know nothing, other than in U2 videos, about that whole conflict. One of those examples of me not living in the culture that surrounded you so I cannot or should not give my two cents about something I have no experience in.
- Anyway to his broader point about local politics, it is of course total nonsense. We live in
- an increasingly global and interconnected world, political decisions made in one capital have
- repercussions all over the planet.
Not necessarily. You still have sovereignty over your nation, as do we over ours. That type of mentality has been used in the past and is being used in many ways to justify breaking sovereignty over many nations, especially ours. “Since your nation pollutes so much, which we breathe that air, you must be bound by these environmental rules.” um, no, we don’t.
What you do on your street only impacts you and your neighbors, possibly to the city you live in, very slightly to the entire nation. The other nations surrounding you, not even a statistic. Us over here? How about you right now, this very moment, open your window and shout out to us, see how far your impact is on the “global and interconnected world”.
There is a need in human life to “matter”, that what we do has an impact. “I want to be remembered, to have someone know I existed!” That’s one of the reason people write on these blogs, to have their views and ideas circulated. Maybe people agree, maybe not. In the end though it’s all words in zeros and ones until someone decides to log on and read. I can sit here and write the best post of them all, yet if you didn’t go to the site and read, did it matter? Did my existence matter? See me waving?
Ultimately we find whether we matter or not based on our own criteria, how we live our lives and the people that surround us. Some feel they have to have a specific dollar amount in their bank accounts to matter, others feel they need to be on the tv news or front page to matter. Then there are those that take a more proactive course, such as going into government or taking up a cause. All are worthwhile, depending on that person’s criteria. It won’t matter to me, I’m way over here. In the end we’re all Seekers, we’re trying to find where we fit in this universe, who we are. Are we just a flicker on some alien planet’s telescope or did we make an impact?
So you come on this blog and feel the need to matter, as though your opinion, like my opinion, or her opinion or their opinion, matters. If you’re trying to gauge on how much you matter to people, you might try to have some metrics to base whether your view has any sway over what we say here. I honestly do not see any movement in that dial. Do you?
- You say that I can’t have a cogent discussion on America and it’s problems, yet I notice
- that doesn’t seem to preclude you guys having discussions on elections in France. I haven’t
- seen a single one of you put a hand up and say “You know what guys, we live a long way
- from France, we can’t have a cogent discussion on this.”
Fair enough. If you can show how any one of us went on a blog in France, UK, Spain, et al and told them how to run their elections, who should and should not be in the government, I might agree with your premise. If all we’re doing is commenting on how it’s a bad idea, that’s called “Free Speech”, it’s what we do. We can say how it might not be a good idea for those two people to get married, but we don’t interfere with them marrying.
Yet you are here trying to present your views onto us. As I said I find the value that you bring as a reflection of what the attitude is across the Atlantic, but as anecdotal. After all, your view might be different than 99 people around you right now. Or 39. How would I know?
- Now we are all connected to the internet, we all have more information at our fingertips than
- we can cope with, if we are interested in a given subject. So shortage of information and facts
- is not a problem.
And everything on the internet is true. I read it on the internet once, so it must be true.
- As far as context goes I have an American wife, my own two sons are American citizens, and
- my brother is a Professor at Michigan State, I have worked for American corporations before,
- and I have American clients now. So I spend quite a bit of time in the USA, I think I have a
- pretty good feel for context.
Yeah, that’s on par with those on the Left that say “of course I’m not Racist, some of my friends are black”. Oh or “my maid is Latino so I’m in touch”.
- Further, it is my contention that Americans largely do not understand the American context.
- Americans are badly served by their news media. They know what’s going on in their own
- state, but by-and-large people do not have a clue what is going on anywhere outside of their
- own locality.
That is exactly why that disqualifies you. That attitude that those of us that live here, that breathe the air, that eat the food, that actually have the very soil under our finger-nails have no knowledge of what is important that surrounds us. And yet you, with an ocean in between but an internet connection and “an increasingly global and interconnected world” feel you know better? That you know more about the people that we elect and what they say and how they run things in office more than we do? Interesting.
- As for the rest of the world? Forget it. When I lived in Amsterdam a college educated American
- woman asked me if Amsterdam was “anywhere near Australia” because she had a cousin there…
- And I’ve lost count of how many Americans thought Amsterdam was in Denmark!
It’s not? Damn. Then where does the cheese come from? And those wooden shoes?
Well since you’re such a great expert on American culture where can you find the best pizza? I’m dying for a slice right now, there isn’t anything good around here. And who do you think will make the play-offs, the South Bend Blue Sox or the Racine Belles? My money is on the Comets.
- As for the political spectrum, yes Obama may be on the left of the relative American spectrum,
- but that does not make him a leftist or a socialist. He is a less radical conservative than you
- certainly, but his politics and his speeches are still deeply conservative.
This is where I cannot help you. If you cannot understand the basic concepts of politics then you don’t have the ability to speak on them here. I did give you the benefit of the doubt, that your local politics are coloring how you view things here, and they may. But if you do not have the basic definitions of say biology or Newton’s laws you should not give lectures on medicine or physics.
- To be a socialist you have to have socialist policies – doesn’t matter if you live in New York,
- Paris or Leningrad. Obama does not have a single one. Where is his commitment to ending
- immigration controls? Where is his commitment to worker control of the commanding heights
- of the economy? Where is health care free at the point of delivery? Where is the 75% tax rates
- for the rich? Where is free child care for all? Where is abortion on demand?
There are several, that’s all we’ve been complaining about. If you Google just Obama and Socialist you get almost 20 million hits. From his campaigning in 2008 where he said “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody”, to his talks about “Social Justice”, they’re all tenets of Marxism and Socialism.
- Not a single one, instead he has surrounded himself with corporate elitists, and has cow-towed
- to Wall Street.
And that I’ve said we agree on. That doesn’t mean that he’s any less a Socialist, only that Wall Street and other businesses are siding with him. That’s referred to as a “Protection Racket”. That’s also how businesses in pre-WWII Germany and Italy, and here too, moved towards. That’s what Socialism does, the government doesn’t own the actual businesses but regulates them to comply with their dictates. Some will go in willingly, after all they can they get to set some of the rules to drive out competition, go ask GE.
It’s a vicious cycle, it starts as Crony Capitalism, which has government siding with select businesses, which creates disenfranchisement, that leads to people demanding more regulations, yet those initial businesses get to control those new regulations’ implementation. So that’s it, Capitalism sucks. Let’s try Socialism, where the government, which the same people were in bed with the same businesses, send out even more regulation to take by fiat control over all industry. Communism of course if just outright confiscation of the industry, but that’s for another discussion.
The solution is to get rid of the Crony Capitalism in the first place, punish the government officials and the businesses that engage in it with harsh sanction, and get rid of all that regulation that only empowered the select few. To change analogies, if a criminal defense attorney found that the police had used “questionable” tactics to get a confession from his client he would say it all gets thrown out.” Fruits of the poisoned tree, your Honor.” The same goes for the politicians and the businesses they dealt with, pull the poisoned tree out from the roots and the rest of the Capitalism forest will thrive.
WWBD? What Would Breitbart Do?
“Since your nation pollutes so much, which we breathe that air, you must be bound by these environmental rules.” um, no, we don’t.”
Yes you should.
There are no islands anymore. We are all connected, you can try an run away from that fact if you like.
The rest of your post doesn’t make a lot of sense, (though I was amused by your admission that social justice can only be achieved through socialism), I’ll look at it again in the morning.
But there is this…
“That you know more about the people that we elect and what they say and how they run things in office more than we do? Interesting.”
Yes I know. But there it is.
Just as you guys seem to think you know what’s better for France than the French electorate.
- – “Since your nation pollutes so much, which we breathe that air, you must be
- – bound by these environmental rules.” um, no, we don’t.”
- Yes you should.
Actually no we don’t. If you want to go talk to someone about their pollution talk to China, they surpass us by far.
- There are no islands anymore. We are all connected, you can try an run away from
- that fact if you like.
And when credible science talks people listen. Not the “we’re all gonna die!!!” people. You want to believe them, that’s your call. I still live my life as I live my life, not how someone else says I have to.
- The rest of your post doesn’t make a lot of sense, (though I was amused by your
- admission that social justice can only be achieved through socialism), I’ll look at
- it again in the morning.
Yeah, I can see how reason and logic might fool you.
- But there is this…
- – “That you know more about the people that we elect and what they say and how
- – they run things in office more than we do? Interesting.”
- Yes I know. But there it is.
- Just as you guys seem to think you know what’s better for France than the French electorate.
Again with the France thing? I already asked if you had evidence that any of us went to a French blog. You’re going to an American blog and telling us what we can and cannot do. We’re not doing that over there. That is our OPINION, and we have a right to express it. If we think that they’re going down a bad road then that is what we feel and we have the right to say so. We are not by fiat declaring the election null and void are we? If the French people want to re-elect Hitler that’s their business, but we have every right to talk about it. You’re complaining about the fact that we’re talking about it? pft, b-bye.
WWBD? What Would Breitbart Do?
“Again with the France thing? I already asked if you had evidence that any of us went to a French blog. You’re going to an American blog and telling us what we can and cannot do. We’re not doing that over there. ”
There is no such thing as an American blog. I am not in America, I’m in Cheshire.
America does not own cyberspace, though I’m sure you would love to. I ahve as much right to talk about thye USA
Sorry, hit the wrong button.
As I was saying I have as much right to talk about the USA on this website as you do to talk about Europe on this website.
“That is our OPINION, and we have a right to express it.”
As indeed do I. The right to freedom of speech does not only apply to Americans. Again this is not an American blog.
“You’re complaining about the fact that we’re talking about it? pft, b-bye.”
I’ve done absolutely no such thing.
Unquestionably imagine that which you stated. Your favorite reason
seemed to be on the net the simplest thing to remember
of. I say to you, I definitely get annoyed whilst other folks
think about concerns that they plainly do not realize about.
You managed to hit the nail upon the top as
smartly as defined out the whole thing with no need side effect , people can take
a signal. Will probably be again to get more. Thank you