Exposes the true left in this country.

http://www.aim.org/guest-column/alias-marx-and-alinsky/

Oh balls, here we go again. "Come out of the closet!"

Feral, who is that in your avy?

Hot, ain't it?

Melanie Iglesias.


I'll throw up a big post when I get a chance.

And so this isn't considered off topic:
Suck it, left and right!

I meant 'Left' and 'Right'. Hehe.

Did you read the article?

I got that.

By the way, I think you may be misjudging the article above by its title. It spares neither side.

I believe that you might be pleasantly surprised by it, based on your posts here.

I could be wrong, but I suspect I'm not.

Course I did, I'd never comment on someone's work without reading it first; that'd be asinine, something I've come to expect from joiners on both sides. I spent a good hour today clicking links through the LVM Institute to eventually Youtube, where 'Socialists' attacked 'Libertarian' ideas with false dilemma and compositional fallacies and 'Anarchists' argue about voluntaryism and mandatory private defense gangs.
It's fascinating to me the way language itself is manipulated, the War Equals Peace mentalities that arise alongside the State God. It happens over and over again, and most fascinating to me, is that it seems to work repeatedly. Generational amnesia, so to speak.
And while everyone argues the finer points of contemporary philosophy, the plutarchs seem intent on pushing us into whatever they want to call another civil war, to then step in as saviors with whatever authoritarian system might work best, or worst if you will.
I wonder what they'll call it next.

Well, as I've had some here not even bothering to read posts of mine, and noting that in their responses to said posts, I thought it prudent to ask before commenting further.



It was the article itself, and not the chatter you may have found wandering about the LVM site, that i was referring to.

In fact, it was the article's observation and explanation of how the term "liberal" had been co-opted by the left (for lack of a better word atm) that I found interesting. It would seem to conform to your own observation on the manipulation of language.

However, I don't find the fact that history repeats itself repeatedly fascinating. It would seem that that generational amnesia is a product of human nature. And the control and harnessing of human nature is the object of any government. And the redefining of words is a classic tactic to accomplish that objective.



I am just going to assume (potentially bad move on my part) that you meant plutocrats and not "plutarchs" as in a plural number of Plutarch - the Greek-born Roman citizen known best for his "Parallel Lives."

As for the plutocrats, they are only able to wield their power given willing political partners.

Of course, this has been the case throughout history. There's that pesky human nature asserting itself despite our best efforts. A person can be reasonable, people seem to resist that quality.

What is the solution?

Most folks don't. As I said before, people tend to include ideas that correlate with a predefined world view and ignore all else, and the result is debating with parrots and brick walls.

Very interesting, including what could be said about 'Conservatives'. Even in the early 90's probably up to 2001 it meant something vastly different than it seems to today.
Direct actions taken to further manipulate speech itself give me pause sometimes. Like how 'torture' became 'enhanced interrogation' and as I mentioned earlier, 'shellshock''s transformation into PTSD. Euphemisms.
Carlin said that soft words make soft people. When I was younger, I laughed at that.


Quite right. I've been looking for an answer to this for a long time. I think an idea may be in nursery rhymes, as sad as that sounds. "Sticks and stones" being an interesting take on the first amendment and the initiation of force. lol.


Indeed I did, good catch. Long days end with wrong words, particularly when reading about inherent character and those with 'power'.


That goes without saying. Unfortunately, I believe they absolutely have that. Worse, is that there are far more people willing to continue participation in this theater than there are not, and I think we can see that.

I mentioned ants before. With humans, it seems to be a perfect < when charting population and intelligence.

Ah, back to the mob question. You know as well as I do, better philosophers than myself have tackled this question many times. I have no idea.
How does one absolutely ingrain into people the importance of critical thought? Should we use Bernays' PR ideas? Children can be taught. There are great masses of full grown adults that it never even occurs to, to question the most basic aspects of any given system.
Individuals will ask me who I intend to vote for, and when I posit something such as, "we don't need a president", they get extremely tense. Also fascinating, purely from a psychological standpoint. I think I've posted this quote from Crichton before, but I've always found it interesting:

Crichton goes on to describe individuals and populations, and how innovation and evolution progressively tank as more individuals become involved, and how that conformity can breed eventual destruction. Mass communication and transportation become variables, as well as the speed of transit itself. Even in a fictional dinosaur context, it is important to note.
And utterly fascinating.
As for an answer, well...my search continues.

To be quite honest, the more I read (and I read alot), the more convinced I become of the sad fact that there is no solution; that we are in denial about the lessons of history thanks to that generational amnesia.

It might be viewed as the single salutary effect of that generational amnesia, that people keep trying to solve what history says is not solvable, giving us these little, short-lived islands of relative peace and prosperity scattered throughout mankind's history.

Think about it. When has mankind ever shown any promise of creating the perfect society Every effort ever advanced has been met by defeat at the hands those who coveted power over freedom aided by those who desired comfort over knowledge.

Still, one can't help wondering "what if"

I think unfortunately the answer tends to reveal itself in conflict. People remain idle up to and until they are directly affected. They are tolerant to a point.
I believe when there is true civil disruption, there will be a chance for the pendulum to swing one way or the other. It'll be interesting to see considering man as an animal.
The spirit of liberty does not exist in hungry men.

That is an interesting little quotation in context.

The downtrodden masses, so many conditioned to their status, unable to alter their economic circumstances because of the heavy-handed policies of a faceless bureaucracy...altruistic middle-class souls expected to provide more and more for those who are destroyed by the economic system itself..

Funny how a turn-of-the-century call to socialism can sound so familiar today. I mean, add a few patriotic platitudes and this speech could be given without blushing by candidates from either party...or Lenin.

But this will be just another rerun; Revolution! The Sequel!

Whatever "solution" is proposed will be a mere bandaid - a short term "fix" that will fix nothing in the long term.

This is what history has proven beyond doubt.



This not a hard-and-fast truth. Far from it actually. The hungry have risen up many times throughout history to throw off the rule of those that kept them in hunger.

Just as often if not more so, we have seen the spirit of liberty die amongst the fat and happy, the complacent masses.

We are seeing that here today.

Substitute "faceless bureaucracy" with the "evil rich" and Obama's been giving that speech for years.