That link isn't working.

Thanks. Fixed.

I just saw that new Pepsi logo for the first time (I think). It was on an ad behind home plate. About made me want to throw up. I guess I'm not Pepsi Generation material. But I think I can get over it. I think very soon now the new cool will be far less Scientologist.

Another random note: A friend of mine keeps bugging me to go to one of these meetings with him. It's a meeting held by the same people who organized that last terrorist (that's "tea") … tea party. My problem? Well, I think Larry Anderson's excellent article From Tea Parties to Political Parties helped to clarify my thinking. The next step really is to get good people to run for office. And because I have no plans to do that, or to directly assist anyone else with that (been there, done that….several times) what is there to do at such a meeting but, well…not to put too delicate of a point on it…but to jerk off?

Don't get me wrong. I think it's important to get people who haven't palled around with terrorists or back-slapped Teddy Kennedy (that includes McCain and Bush) to run for office. I think it's vitally important. I'm actually quite surprised with the brazenness with which the Apologizer in Chief is putting forward his radical left agenda. As I said before, he's even surpassing my expectations, and I went into this with my eyes fairly wide open. I know Orwell. I know Stalin. I know Goebbels. I know the power of the big lie. It's just amazing to see it play out like this. A person has to do something. If the ideals of freedom, free markets, and equality are being trashed, someone must stick up for them or else we are cowards and Rollers.

quote:

I think many Americans do this around Europeans. Europeans don't know shit any better than us, they just SEEM more cultured, they've got cool accents, and they know how to play a room at a cocktail party better. They have more experience with courtly life, having had to survive the days when being part of the court meant survival. Americans often feel provincial and stupid around Europeans, ashamed for their lack of "class."

The longer one lives, the more one tends to understand Will Rogers, apple pie, Wilford Brimley, Norman Rockwell, and Messrs. Smith and Wesson. There are two kinds of people in the world, those for whom some fancy French cologne is the finest scent and those for whom the smell of the sea, the smell of the pasture, or the smell of a mountain forest is the finest aroma. I like to think that Americans can dress up and throw as fine a party as anyone. But at the end of the party, Americans are smart enough to know that they were just dressing up. Pretension is for little and weak people. Pretension and putting on airs is not for a self-confident, noble, honorable people. Salt of the earth, not let them eat cake. There's a difference between people who gain their sense of value from their own selves rather than from other people. The former are generally strong enough to withstand the changing passions of the mob. The latter are the mob, and sometimes the most dangerous and ugly mob of all comes in designer clothes and fancy talk.

quote:

One of my favorite sports back in my academic days, was to go up against some of these guys, and simply not fall for their line of shit. I didn't care what kind of accent they had. I'd challenge them instead of belly rolling.

Separated at birth. The only "D" I ever got for a final grade was from a liberal flake literature teacher (I didn't think in terms of "liberal flakes" in those days, but he was one of them). He was full of shit and I don't have the slightest memory of what I called him on, but I disagreed with him in front of the entire class. That was the source of my D. (And I guess I must have been right.) The dog with the biggest, meanest snarl almost always comes dressed well…often too well. They depend so much on image and an inflated sense of importance that they become like a mother protecting her cubs. It's just that the cubs are really the ego. Hey, status and respect are important, and I'll grant you that 9 our of 10 people will make judgments of others superficially, so therefore the man or woman who can fake a good game has a tremendous advantage. But like I said, my own faith runs pretty deep regarding this one subject. I think there is something far more substantial to people than the airs they put on or the superficial image they project. But god save us from those who are addicted to status or who feel so weak about their true worth that they are little more than a construction of lies and half-truths. They are the dangerous kind. They are the ones easily insulted and thus easy to anger. They depend on crafting images and thus depend on manipulating people. They are moved more by emotion and outrage rather than reason or temperance, thus they are the potential frightening mob.

quote:

Actually, it's probably more important to point out that it's probably not wise to treat somebody who lives under a friggin' MONARCH, in a rigid class or caste system in a socialist government that merely CALLS itself democratic, as an authority on ANYTHING.

LOL. How true. And the image of B. Hussein Obama going around the world kneeling to tyrants, kissing up to fools, and back-slapping Marxists is not so much galling as it is just demeaning to the ideals mankind has worked so hard to achieve. It's as if someone was using the Magna Carta to light their cigarette.

Here's an article by someone I normally agree with. This next bit is going to probably be boring and geeky, but I think there's an extremely important point here if I can just figure out how to make it. I think George is bible-thumping under the guise of conservatism. But if conservatism is no more than a cover for religion (which some think it is, and which some bible-thumpers think it is), then conservatism is just another two-bit political philosophy with no more grounding than Obamamania. And by saying so, you can bet that I have self-consciously noted my rather radical notion that mankind can have ideas that may not be rooted in either god or men's religions. They can just be ideas that are self-evident, that "just work" because they are based on our experience of the world, not of heaven, and certainly not of The Worker's Paradise. For those who see no place for humans in the role of shaping civilization, stop reading here.

Okay, most of you are still with me. That's good. We can learn something here, or at least I can. It's why I write. The process of writing is the process of figuring out this stuff, at least it works that way for me. And one of the grand things any creature can do (not just mankind) is to learn new things. And we humans are particularly good at it. It's my contention that instruction need not be indoctrination. We can learn to think. Instruction can be a mind-expanding and enabling thing (while noting the various forms of narrow propaganda that simply borrow the term of "enlightenment" or "mind expanding" while not actually fulfilling it). You can crank out Hitler Yutes (of various stripes, including environment whackos, leftist stooges, or bible thumpers). Or you can help shape people into thinking, wise, temperate (yet still passionate) beings. One can remain a conglomeration of petty prejudices, myths, and misconceptions, or one can aim for something more. Isn't that the duty of modern man? Isn't leftism (as practiced by the masses) just a facile, conceited, lazy version of this goal? Isn't leftism the gold stars and atta-boys without actually doing the real work to earn them? And hasn't religion too often been an impediment to discovery because many hold that we already know all we need to know in our dogma?

I think I'm right about both things. And I'm not inclined to blindly support either faction. Conservatism, if it really is based on "what works," cannot be a dogma. It can certainly contain timeless principles, but never ones that are merely accepted like dogma or myths. We are constantly learning new things. We can expect that these new things will refine our principles. If this is not so, then just put me on the side of Cap-and-Trade and I will tax you to death for no good reason, or give me a bible and I will thump it. But axe-grinders are a dime a dozen. This is why I study and quote the Founding Fathers. These guys were aiming for something more. They were pushing the envelope of "what works" rather than pushing the envelope of Obama-like delusion and conceit. And when I see an otherwise very good conservative such as Neumayr run off half-cocked, it's an opportunity to learn something.

Brave New Barbarism
by George Neumayr

quote:

Modern liberals measure "progress" not by the unfolding fulfillment of the natural moral law but by its elimination. Consequently, most of what is labeled "progress" is basically just regress, a return, under a glossier guise, to the practices of antiquity and pre-Christian paganism.

Pagans stuck the inconvenient elderly on snow drifts; moderns dehydrate them to death in hospitals. Pagans left unwanted babies to die on hilltops; moderns bury them in bins behind Planned Parenthood clinics. Pagans attended orgies, moderns attend "gay weddings."

In its deepening moral squalor, in its raw defiance of reality as God made it, the Brave New World is as barbaric as the old one.

Oh...how to define progress? That's another essay unto itself. But is the current battle really between pagans and "reality as God made it"? I'd say a large part of the error of Progressives is just their rather vacuous affinity for novelty. It's the run-away self-flattery of high purposes without enough (sometimes any) grounding in fact. But is the answer to this to simply bible-thump and tell everyone how god says we should form our society? Whose god? And how do we know what god wants? Good god, look how quickly things get out of hand when just one mere human gets a Messiah complex. We don't need a whole society founded on that. And, in fact, we are not one of those. If the left have their myths, so does the right, and one of those is that we are a "Christian nation."

But I will readily admit that liberals have instituted their own quasi-religion. They have their own very large set of myths and dogma. Once you lay out all these myths on the table and expose them for what they are, this becomes all too apparent. So in a sense, there is a conflict of religions going on, but it's probably not paganism vs. Christianity, per se. It's the Cult of Liberalism vs. Christianity. But just because some define the conflict as paganism vs. God, I don't think that the resolution of our current problems is for either one side or the other to win. I think the wrong question is being asked, the wrong conflict is being named. I think Mark Levin, for example, has at least framed the question correctly: It's individual liberty vs. statism. And any bible-thumping by George or anyone else simply diverts us from this critical point. And any bible-thumping and demands to stick to "reality as God made it" doesn't sound like its full of all that much liberty anyway.

Is American justice, freedom, and prosperity really the playing out of reality as God made it? Again, I say believe what you want in terms of your own personal religion, but when you enter the public square of politics, you should expect no automatic deference to your beliefs (and, if you hadn't noticed, I do not defer at all to the myths and dogma of the Cult of Liberalism). If you make claims, you should be willing to be faced with counter-claims. Myths are so easy-pleasy because they don't need to take in the evidence of what is, but mostly rely on what it is we want to be. Well, what actually played out in our own American history was a bunch of people (many of them deeply religious people, such as Puritans) who were looking to escape persecution and who were looking for opportunity that they couldn't find in old, crusty, squelching Europe. America became almost by accident founded on "the pursuit of happiness" even without it being spelled out. You had so many different people who came here. We were not comprised of any one race, religion, or creed. It was, quite by accident, this happy (and sometimes not so happy) variety and diversity of people that helped to engender the "live and let live" credo because with so many different things going on, it was the one thing they all had in common. It's what we call liberty. It's why we say "the business of America is business." We're not about narrow societal goals. We really are about the individual pursuit of happiness. The orientation of an American's life is himself, his family, his friends, and the various clubs and organizations he belongs to (which is an extremely American thing to do as well). Nazis, leftists, socialists, Communists, fascists, and theocrats, on the other hand, all define themselves by what they believe the character and nature of the state and overall society is, and should be. And most Americans will, or should, say "screw that."

Of course, we've just stupidly elected a Marxist president, and have had a whacko leftist House and Senate for some time now. Not all Americans have been so careful to resist the encroachment of government on their lives. Many have become belly-rollers, King George-like statists, and outright useful-idiot Marxist sympathizers (even if they aren't aware of it, which many aren't). But the vast majority of big-government-friendly people -- arguably the most damaging faction of all in regards to individual liberty -- have been those who have simply traded their liberty for what they perceive of as security via the various entitlements, PC laws, and smothering nanny-state regulations. If liberty goes in this country, it won't likely be by a violent coup. It will be by the death of a thousand knives. And those who have been counting have found at least 500 such wounds already. We are closing in.

But I think that the answer to our problems is neither getting back to "god's law" or humping for The Worker's (or environmentalist's) Paradise. It's not about achieving cultural purity or about one group's set of religious laws winning out over another's. I think, as Reagan said, it's just getting government the hell out of the way so that people can pursue their own lives -- and their own religions -- as they wish. We know this works. But an idea that I think that 90% of conservatives have not yet grasped (and probably not one liberal in the entire country) is it's all well and good to have strong beliefs about how the moral character of people should be formed and shaped. But don't friggin' do it through the Federal government. "Teach your children well" is what the liberal flakes (but lovable artists and songwriters) CSN&Y said. And beyond overt child abuse, that's the level at which we should teach people morality. Let parents do it. It's inevitable, normal, and natural that our morality is reflected in our laws and regulations. But the goal of conservatism should be to roll back the heavy and intrusive role that government has tried to play in shaping people. We are not a society that was formed for the express purpose of finding the one-size-fits-all goal of life. The business of America is business, it's individual liberty, it's people finding meaning through their own lives, not through the state. There's a hugely secular or humanist aspect of America that is good and needed. And, no, I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. I know that the Cult of Liberalism has been trying for decades to indoctrinate people into their quasi-religion under the guise of secularism. This should be exposed, and really hasn't been for the most part. And often when this quasi-religion is exposed or talked about, the only choice offered as a corrective is bible-thumping. Bzzzt. Wrong answer. Individual liberty is the answer. The ideals in the Declaration of Independence are the answer.

But looking at the modus operandi of both the left and the Christian right, one wonders whether man can live without myth. Earth Day has come and gone, and that day could well end up to be the socialist equivalent of Easter. Again, make no mistake, I am for religious freedom. To deny the character and nature of man is what Marxists, socialists, Progressives, and Communists do. Their goal is perfection (a goal that has always come at an atrocious cost, and a goal that has never been achieved). A conservative's goal is taking an eyes-wide-open look at human nature and making the best of it. And man is a religious animal. But I am also for less-is-more regarding government. Let it carry out the very minimal functions that are needed and then no more. Do not social engineer. Do not regulate us to death. Because heaven is so hard to find on our own or through our religions and quasi-religions (it is only ever a promise or hope), do not try to make the state the object of our existential longings for peace, perfection, and purification. Let the individual pursue that. Let the state (restrict the state) to securing the ability to pursue individual meaning and happiness. But whenever anything becomes a group activity or pooling of resources -- as we often must do if we are to build roads, bridges, and various other things a society needs -- we must be careful to make sure our goals are not overtly utopian or overtly religious. It's impossible to not have some of that leak in, for we are all people and there is no Secular God who can stand above it all and say what is or what is not overtly utopian or religious (as liberals try to do while, of course, never judging their own Cult of Liberalism as an inappropriate intrusion into the state). But maintaining an eyes-wide-open view, and not having either too much heaven or utopia on our minds when it comes to government, is the only reasonable safeguard. We must remember to respect the Pursuit of Happiness more than the pursuit of another King George, Messiah, or utopia.

That's all much easier said than done, but I think stating the intentions of our society, and deciding what those intentions and ideals are and should be, helps to put everything into perspective. Only then can we make intelligent decisions about what to keep and what not to keep, what to vote for and what not to vote for. Willy-nilly is no way to run a great republic such as ours. Being pulled this way and that by fashion and fads works for yutes who are looking for a date and to get laid. But for people concerned with protecting freedom, we can't be so silly or superficial.

Okay, barring a change of plans, I'm going to the terrorist meeting (err...post-tea party meeting) at a local....err....church. If I go a bit early I can take part in a prayer meeting. But I go for the sole reason of observing what is going on and then reporting back here to Terrorist Central (errr...thalo.net). I was pleasantly surprised by the tone and tenor of the people who attended the tea party. I'm interested in seeing what happens, though, when everyone who desires non-leftist policies hits the inevitable wall of political correctness. And that wall is an important and, I think, now quite substantial wall. What I'm saying is what I've always said: To take on the left, one will have to question some of their basic assumptions or one will end up doing little other than being one of those Democrats Lite, otherwise known as Republicans. No, I'm not questioning anyone's intelligence or motive. I just don't know if people realize yet what it will take to face these guys down. I don't think they do. And I don't think the Bobby Jindal approach is going to wash. I don't think the John McCain "bipartisan" approach is going to wash either. Whenever you hear the word "bipartisan," just substitute the word "Stockholm Syndrome." It's the same thing. It's the inability to face one's captors and, instead, a desire to suck up to them to avoid their wrath.

Listen, I know there are some very courageous and eloquent leaders out there. But will the rank-and-file support them? Do they know what it will take? I don't think they do yet. I think many people are now motivated to stop or slow the onslaught of Marxism/socialism, but I don't think they really know the rules of this game yet. Simply taking back the reins of government and being in control of the same overblown monster is not the answer. That's just playing a shell game where the pieces move around, but nothing really changes. But as soon as you really start rolling things back and effecting real and needed reductions in spending and government intrusion, you're going to be deluged by the inevitable parade of victims that the left will trot forward. And you'll be faced with the inevitably hysterical and mean-spirited tirade of name-calling. You'll be called a racist, an un-caring bigot, a homophobe, the works. Generally speaking, polite and decent people aren't up to facing these people down. And that has been 90% of the problem. And I don't really think that has changed. But if it has, great. I'll report back with my observations either way.

You should stand up there and tell conservative patriots to extract their noses from the sphincters of the Christians.

If you had a white board and put side-by-side conservative values, up against CHRISTIAN values, you'd see that the conservative secular ones are essential for freedom and liberty in our society, and the Christian ones are merely incidental.

Personally, I'd rather have all that small government stuff WITHOUT having the GOP dictate or espouse any sort of religious agenda whatsoever. The SECOND they can do what they do without playing the baby jesus card, is the second they will win. And stop baby jesus from spinning in his grave, or cloud, or wherever he is.

A distinction must be drawn between the devout, personal beliefs of individual Republicans, and the POLITICAL, governmental issues of conservatives. The idea is not to sell fucking Christmas, or religion, or a Christian nation.

Go ahead and BE Christian, but keep it out of government.

There's a lot of truth in what you say. But most people wouldn't be receptive to it, and most of those who would be are the current problem. But we need to find a way to say what needs saying. I have yet to write the 2009 equivalent of Paine's "Common Sense." I think I'd need Brothers Sowell and Jonah as consultants to do it. You can edit. But I do know it needs to be written. I've tested many ideas here with you guys and tested many ideas out in the field among people I know. I know the hot buttons I could push if I wanted to demagogue. But those buttons aren't the things that need pushing. Adding to the difficulty, and perhaps lying at the very heart of the difficulty, is that people are truly confused about the issues. Few can define the problem. And even if they're not confused, I think they're often at cross purposes with themselves. For example, I think many on the right don't really want to scale back government despite this being a core conservative principle. And many of the rest on the right – those who still might want to reduce the size and scope of government – figure it can't be done. And so if they can't have it smaller, or don't care to want it smaller in the first place, they can at least have it be Christian or to reflect their values.

A certain amount of this I understand and even agree with. (My core value is a smaller, more limited Federal government, and I'm sticking to that.) But the problem isn't which direction to move the culture. The problem is what is actually moving the culture, and what is doing so to a greater and greater extent is government, and that is not good for a variety of reasons. (The reasons are grist for an essay unto itself, but many of Reagan's speeches spell this problem out quite excellently.) For the right simply to want to hold the reins of government, instead of reducing it, is merely to wear the furrow in the road deeper.

I've often thought about what I'd say to a roomful of people such as at a meeting that I may attend tomorrow. I admit I just haven't figured out the words. But I don't know that there are any right words. The words "stop" and "no," in various flavors and forms, are the essence of the message that needs to be said, but very few people are willing to hear them. They're mostly still thinking in terms of simply steering this gigantic overgrown beast of a government in the direction they want, not realizing that it's not the direction of the beast that is the problem. It's its size.

Cut back government. Gut the bureaucracy. Entirely dispense with 30% (or more) of the existing programs. Cut taxes. Reduce regulations. All of this "no" stuff is key, especially cutting taxes and government. Many of our current problems are monetary. And those that aren't, such as runaway Marxist and socialist ideology, are restrained, if not outright cured, by starving these ideologies of the necessary funds.

No. Stop. Cut back. Let fail. Don't touch. But I have yet to run into anyone (with the possible exception of you) ready to hear this. They're all distracted by various hot-button issues that don't really amount to a hill of beans in the scheme of things. I feel I would have to be like Kreskin and find a way to break the spell of distraction and misdirection. I just haven't been able to do so yet. The next "Common Sense" still eludes me.

quote:

They're mostly still thinking in terms of simply steering this gigantic overgrown beast of a government in the direction they want, not realizing that it's not the direction of the beast that is the problem. It's its size.

Yes! Yes! Yes! I'll have what he's having.

And none of that has the slightest pussy hair to do with fucking religion. Nor with abortion. Nor with whether or not homos can marry each other.

It's like Apple and the happy horseshit overdesigned graphics of OS X. Rubes get all emotional about them, but that stuff has nothing to do with creating a good, functional, streamlined, lean-and-mean interface. There's just way, way more important stuff NOT being addressed in the design.

The solution to everyone's problem is the same old subtractive process that I harp on all the time. The same old back-to-basics approach, the same old BACKLASH that you have to do when things get out of control bloated.

Yes, it's so true that people get distracted by various hot-button issues. That's EXACTLY the problem. They're distracted, and it keeps them from doing what it takes to actually SOLVE the fucking REAL problems!

This postmodern culture gets so mired in the word-association that it completely loses sight of the mission critical crap. Now it's gotta be Republican = baby jesus = pro life = merry christmas = etc. And the hotbuttons sink the truly important stuff like any kind of a grip on reality when it comes to fiscal responsibility and fair taxation.

I would vote for a fucking GAY MARRIED SATANIST ABORTION DOCTOR WHO SAYS ONLY HAPPY HOLIDAYS INSTEAD OF MERRY CHRISTMAS if he'd lower taxes --fuck, scrap the tax code and start over-- and cut spending and the size of government.

Things will eventually get bad enough where the American people will HAVE to choose whether to live in a fucked up Marxist reality, or whether to realize the truth, which is that government is the problem, not the solution. We're almost at the point where our government is so bad and bloated that we'd be better off living in the woods without any Federal government at all. History is frikkin' REPLETE with fragmented central governments that turn into city-states. It's human nature. It happens over and over and over again in our history. The only way to stop it and stay democratic and free, is going to be to cut waste. To know the difference between reality and bullshit vocabulary.

Here's an outstanding article by Brother Jonah:

Giving Back Cold War Gains

Brother Rich gives the one-two punch:

The President of Barack Obama

Brother Steyn adds the knockout:

The End of the World as We Know It

Brother Limbaugh (the other one) analyzes more totalitarian thuggery by the Obama clowns:

Lifesaving Memos

And brother thalo likely won't be voting for Huckabee anytime soon:

quote:

I would vote for a fucking GAY MARRIED SATANIST ABORTION DOCTOR WHO SAYS ONLY HAPPY HOLIDAYS INSTEAD OF MERRY CHRISTMAS if he'd lower taxes --fuck, scrap the tax code and start over-- and cut spending and the size of government.

America, having been polluted with Marxist "values," leaves many people, at least in the short term, unable to cling to any other moral conception of themselves and their country, including the conception of a country founded upon freedom and on goals larger than mere conceited identity. Forget, at least for now, about espousing the principles that this country was founded on and with which freedom has flourished and tyranny restrained and defeated. Forget about revealing the rotgut lies that this modern Obama form of Marxism are based upon. That's too much for many people to take in right now. Yes, those at the terrorist (err…tea) parties had an instinctive feel for "no, no more, stop, enough already." They weren't stumping for so-called family values. They just wanted to turn the spigot off on the insane borrowing, spending, and purchasing of the private sector by the government. They were relatively few in number. But think about the hordes of people (such as that fairly recent and much larger protest by Hispanics, legal and otherwise) who will, at the drop of a hat, come out and protest because they feel they are entitled to something they aren't getting. The "want more, expect a handout" crowd now can gather millions at the drop of a hat while the "enough, no more, turn it off" crowd struggles to even get the mainstream media to cover them.

This is the bizarre and twisted environment we are all operating in at the moment. There is so much gunk, axe-grinding, and misinformation coming in that we are (to reverse the analogy a bit) like the punch-drunk fighter who just needs to go to the neutral corner. We are the people who have been so long in a lifeboat tossed about at sea that we just need to set foot on solid ground, any ground, so long as it is not moving. And I think the only way to stop digging this hole is to stop digging this hole. We Americans are in the midst of a vicious addiction, and there are always stages you must go through before you can kick such a thing. Stage one: admit you have a problem, and that problem is an addiction to big government hand-outs and Federal moralizing (the idea that all truly good things can come only from the supposedly bright minds at the top). Tea parties are the exact opposite of this top-down stuff. The mainstream media and academia love the top-down stuff because they get to be a huge part of the top. Stage two therefore is: admit that your pimps are lying to you…these Federal drugs they are pushing will not make your life better. "But didn't you know that your state is getting 400 billion from Obama?" said the idiot CNN reporter to one of the tea party participants. Heck, at least she wasn't lying about where her allegiance lay. And, yes, these tea party folk knew that, but they also knew it was just coming from money borrowed and recently printed. They, unlike most of the left, and certainly most of academia and the mainstream media, are not so stupid or gullible

The Federal government has long been past a size that is good or conducive to freedom and prosperity. And "Federal" is really the wrong word, for "federal" implies a federation. If only. If only we weren't becoming one great, big, top-down Washington DC totalitarian state. This is a very bad idea and is not the defining characteristic that has made America and much of the West a free and prosperous place. It is our individualism and "diversity," if you will, that are our strength. America has always been a breeding ground for great ideas precisely because we are not king- or government-oriented. We are pursuit-of-happiness-oriented. The free market is the very engine of liberty and produces the true fruits of diversity which is innovation. Government doesn't innovate, it just makes everything "one size fits all" that it touches. It squeezes out diversity, innovation, and reason (works/doesn't work) itself. For example, if Obama and the Democrats were in charge of the internet (and just give them time), instead of having a thousand and one different forums like this one based on various topics with various rules, they would tell us how all forums should be and what their rules should be. Hey, they and George Bush did this regarding education. They do it regarding almost everything these days. They insert a little Federal money into something and then claim (and often get) control. That's totalitarianism, and it's been coming for quite some time. Liberals talk of "diversity" but they don't want diversity. These people are frauds (and/or idiots). What they want is their way of life to be predominant, including their very narrow idea of what diversity means. But think back to the founding of this country. Could we have been a more diverse conglomeration of states, cities, and districts? This is a healthy thing, not something to be stamped out.

And with everyone's mind focused on winning the culture war – with getting their narrow values infused into us all – we forget that America was never intended to be one of those angry, chaotic, monolithic, banana-republic, dirt-poor countries that our idiot president admires so much. Our way of life is not supposed to be centered around a war for the culture, one way or the other. There is supposed to be limited government which then protects the rights of individuals to pursue happiness, within reason, any way they want to. What we're really seeing right now is a cultural onslaught by the left, and the backlash (understandable, though it may be) by the right to simply fight "culture with culture" is missing the key point. As soon as you give the Federal government the power to shape lives in very personal ways (ways we used to leave up to our families, churches, partners, businesses, organizations, friends, and free-choice itself), you've unleashed a terrible beast, and that terrible beast is running rampant right now. The stake through its heart is not stumping for a Christian nation. It's stumping for the Bill of Rights (the 10th amendment is a particularly badly abused one by the Federal government). It's stumping for fiscal responsibility. (Spend your money on any loony thing, so long as it is not unconstitutional, and so long as you're not merely borrowing the money to do so.) It's stumping for limits on government. It's stumping for a return to true diversity and allowing the individual to decide most things for his or herself. Who out there ever thought it was either "free" or "diverse" for some Federal bureaucrat or functionary to tell you how to live your life? Perhaps some of you can look deep and get in touch with your fascist nature, because it is very likely that many of you have no problem with the Fed controlling the other guy.

And I don't know why so many of us have become so cowardly or meek that we can't be responsible for our own lives and instead insist that government provide for us. That is bad enough. But I also don't really know why we've all become so weak-minded and so weak-egoed that we simply must see the entire culture embrace us and look like us. We must see ourselves reflected in the culture (and especially in the government) at large. If you're gay, you simply can't have anything less than gayness being on the front burner everywhere and have everyone praising the supposed attributes of corn-holing. Likewise, if you're Christian, you simply can't have anything less than Jesus acknowledged as the real force behind our country. And so it goes. And all the time we forget that our success is based not on the narrow pursuit of conceited, ego-based identity but on freedom itself. And this focus on freedom has been such a positive force in this world, while the focus on all these small-minded Obama-like banana-republic concerns just makes as all petty third-world pirates by comparison. America's ideals are great and do not need to be apologized for. What needs to be apologized for is the stupidity, gullibility, and downright malevolence toward freedom that these Obama types have. But I'm not sure people can be easily weaned from the many things that have turned them from being a proud, freedom-loving individual (who respects these same rights and privileges in others), to a weak-minded, weak-ego victim- and entitlement-based dweeb who demands from other things he or she ought to provide for himself. How did we become such spoiled ninnies?

I wonder if someone will thrust into the president's hands a book on the real and great sins of Marxism, socialism, and Communism? And why, among the pointed-head academic types, is it moral to vilify free markets (which is another word for capitalism)? Why such cultural suicide? Well, the alternative to individual-choice free markets is a top-down rule by the elite. Guess perhaps why some in the elite (whether in government, academia, or the media) love that approach? And the final touch is that these same power-grabbers can delude themselves that their main concern is for the poor and downtrodden. It's a nice religion if you can find enough adherents to thump the same dogma – and they do.

Book Chavez Gave to Obama Is Used as Core Text on Many College Campuses

If you want to help the poor, let loose a vibrant free market that will provide them with jobs. And central to this trickle-down strategy is that it actually trickles down. A fair, impartial, and uncorrupted political and court system is vital for maintaining everyone's rights. That's where our separations of powers comes into play. It works.

Few have exploited the poor like Marxists and Communists, especially in Latin America. When will the smarty-pants professors teach this? I love this quote from one of the professors explaining why he used that Marxist-friendly book:

quote:

"The story of global capitalism is often told from a U.S. viewpoint often without the recognition that people in other parts of the world may have a very different explanation," Alaniz wrote in an e-mail. "To gain a more holistic understanding of the consequences of capitalism, a critical student must be exposed to different interpretations of those consequences. Galeano's book offers a critical Latin American perspective."

That's how people are programmed with Marxism. The "story of global capitalism" began the first time one tribe traded goods with a neighboring tribe. That's called the free market. Some regulation is required. But trading goods and services isn't some narrow construct of the evil United States. It's the nature of life. Marxism, at heart, is simply overturning free choice and free trade and replacing it with dictates from the top. That they can get many of the truly abused poor to believe that it was the nature of free trade that was their abuser just shows you the cleverness of these fiends.

quote:

I would vote for a fucking GAY MARRIED SATANIST ABORTION DOCTOR WHO SAYS ONLY HAPPY HOLIDAYS INSTEAD OF MERRY CHRISTMAS if he'd lower taxes --fuck, scrap the tax code and start over-- and cut spending and the size of government.

A central truth is that money, governmental power, law, and regulation are all ways for the state to intrude on individual choice, no matter the orientation of the intrusion. An intrusion is an intrusion. When you set up the rules so that it's okay for the state to intrude beyond the mere nuts-and-bolts means of civilization (roads, bridges, law enforcement, national defense, etc.) and allow it to become a cultural crusader, well, there's no guarantee that the crusaders who are on your side today will be on your side tomorrow.

So, yeah, a gay married Satanist who had a proper understanding of the Constitution and the limits of government, and who was for the "nuts and bolts" stuff of government but against the Federal government being a cultural crusader, I would vote for him.

Here's a curious quote I came upon at random from The Great One's book, "Liberty and Tyranny":

quote:

The Conservative believes that the moral imperative of all public policy must be the preservation and improvement of American society.

Now, let's be fair. With Jonah Goldberg's quite excellent book "Liberal Fascism" in mind, that doesn't sound all that different from something Hillary Clinton would say. It is Progressives who are always trying to improve things – everything – through government and who try to lay a political meaning on every little detail, including the type of butt-wipe you use. I should hope to hell that your run-of-the-mill conservative is NOT trying to make all public policy about the improvement of American society. That just sounds like more statist activism, something Levin quite rightly rails against in his book. The thing that has produced 99% of improvement in this country is the American people acting in the free market. And that action is almost entirely directed toward the betterment of oneself and one's family (and perhaps one's local community). It is certainly not effort and action with the goal of the improvement of American society. That just happens as a natural outgrowth of freedom. What works against this kind of progress is the top-down statist approach of an FDR or Obama. They do little but create messes with their central planning. So I admit I'm more than a little confused by Levin's comment above. I don't know what's going on in his thinking there. Surely you hope any public policies enacted work toward preserving freedom, justice, and the Constitution of the state or country. But I think we have WAY too many people looking to "improve" things when if they just stayed the hell home (out of Washington and out of government) and opened a corner lemonade stand, they would be doing more good for America than all the carefully planned policies of either liberals or conservatives.

And one thing to note about one of the central lies of Marxism, especially regarding Latin America, is that the abuses of the poor are mostly attributable to feudalism, to a few wealthy landlords or landowners controlling the peasantry. That is certainly not free-market capitalism. But what feudalism is is another version of a state-controlled peasantry by their supposed betters, which is part and parcel of Marxism. And that these Marxist fiends and their apologists have the temerity to call it otherwise, let alone to call it morally superior to capitalism, is truly ghastly. But it shows you the big lie that Marxism is. It can only be defended and advanced with more big lies.

Samuel Adams Update

I just got back from the terrorist cell meeting (that's liberty meeting). In general, the people who attended this meeting (at least from what little I heard from them) remain equivalent to the Sons of Liberty. No bible-thumping. This is pure, 100%, "it's my government, damn it" American patriotism on display. If the meeting was reported on by the press as being a meeting of racist, red-neck, Troglodytes (although I didn't see any reporters there), you can know this is doubly so. I'm not sure they would have been completely receptive to thalo standing up and saying, "I would vote for a fucking GAY MARRIED SATANIST ABORTION DOCTOR WHO SAYS ONLY HAPPY HOLIDAYS INSTEAD OF MERRY CHRISTMAS if he'd lower taxes," but it wouldn't completely surprise me if they were.

The meeting ran for an hour and a half and was generally filled with organization details with little to no discussion of issues. Not that I needed to be reminded, but this is one reason I don't tend to get involved in stuff like this. The committee members spoke for about one hour and twenty minutes on various minutia. At the end of it, two or three people from the public (there were about 150 people at the meeting) were allowed to speak. I wasn't one of them. But I did run into a political operative friend of mine (he ran unsuccessfully for office in the last election cycle). He and I corralled one of the heads of the organization and expressed our concern that the energy and ideas of the people who had specifically came to this meeting because they weren't being heard elsewhere, were not being heard here either. We said it in a very nice way, but that was the gist of it. We also expressed our concern that these types of ventures often become focused on growth, growth, growth, while the ideas often get put on the back burner…and that's what we saw on display tonight. Organizationalitus.

It's not that a certain amount of organization isn't needed. But I suspect that they'll not get quite as many people coming to the next meeting. I'll come…maybe. But I was mostly just bored out of my mind. My political operative friend made some excellent suggestions about getting speakers to speak about the organization and their ideas to various local groups. He's going to talk about this at the next meeting. I've talked to a few people behind the scenes, but I've pretty much kept my mouth shut and just gauged the mood of others. One guy got up and gave a very nice short speech about George Mason. I caught up with him later and he told me I should read the anti-Federalist papers. He says George Mason is perhaps the most influential Founding Father that most have never heard of.

There was talk about expanding their current web site and I told one of the guys to please be sure to include a forum. That could get used. I shall have to clean up my language a bit though I suppose.

The suggestions I sent to this budding liberty group:

The venue was fine. The organizers did a terrific job presenting their information. As I had already expressed to one of the committee members, the committee business needs to be paired back substantially so that there is much more time for people to speak and to share ideas. Let's remember that most of these people who have become involved in this cause, and who have attended this meeting, were motivated to do so because they weren't being heard elsewhere. They should be heard here.

I also think the idea of a tight focus for this group is a good one. But I think this still can allow for several, perhaps dozens, of different issues. The tight focus can be on two or three core principles such as limited government, individual liberty, adherence to the Constitution, and/or fiscal responsibility (this goes with the first principle, but it's a rather pressing special concern at the moment). The various individual issues (such as cap-and-trade or gun rights) can fall under these general principles. Such a structure could also help everyone to keep their eye on the ball. All these sub-issues have larger principles in common. It's what connects them. It is what (generally speaking) connects us together.

Although the individual issues are extremely important, one of the most overlooked issues is the core principles themselves, the very philosophy upon which America has been built. From these principles, all else tends to flow. But people's understanding of these core principles is changing. Equality means one thing to those who agree with the Declaration of Independence, and it means something quite different to those who understand equality as taught by Karl Marx. The former is equality of opportunity, which is a good and healthy thing. The latter is the unhealthy expectation of equality of outcome, which only an overpowering and intrusive state can ever hope to achieve.

These core issues underpin and guide all other issues. Gun rights, for example, speak not only to the idea of individual liberty, but especially to the idea of limited government. Those who support gun rights generally are aware that a suspicious "trust, but verify" attitude toward government is healthy. This attitude is opposite to that which sees government as the trusty companion that can be the ultimate solution to all problems. This latter attitude is directly responsible for the current financial issues we face. Too many people trust government beyond all good sense.

Individual issues are extremely important, but I think the main cause of encroaching socialism and statism is that the left is winning the ideological battle in terms of the framing of the general philosophy of government question. People, acting in their own interests and making free choices in the free market, is what has built this great country. It hasn't been government. Government is there to secure our ability to pursue our own happiness with a minimum of interference, not to try to provide that happiness pre-packaged (and on credit). The best way to help people is to have a vibrant free market which offers people jobs and the ability to support themselves. That is compassion, and right now compassion is too often understood as the redistribution of wealth by government which often results, not in helping people, but in miring them in dependency.

Ideas matter, and in America this has proven especially and successfully so.

I hope whatever this group does that they don't get lost in individual issues and keep at least one eye on the philosophical ball. The specific philosophies of freedom, government, and of the individual that underpin the American ideal are what have produced so much freedom, prosperity, justice, and true compassion.

One of the interesting phenomenons at this meeting was that no one wanted to say the word "Obama." It's almost guaranteed he is the primary reason all these people were there. "Don’t get me wrong," one will hear time after time in various ways. "We're here because of high taxes, the mortgaging of our kids' futures, and to try to restore limited government." All are good goals. But somewhat out-of-bounds are the words "Democrat" and "Republican." Granted, both parties need a gigantic kick in the ass. And I do quite agree that the problem at hand transcends party. But I can't help thinking that we're all just a little band of Helsinki (err…Stockholm) belly rollers if we keep pussy-footing around that gigantic leftist elephant in the room and pretending we don't see it. Everyone is so conditioned not to criticize a black man for fear of being called a racist. I guess I'll have to invite Thomas Sowell to the next meeting or something.

But these are good people. And these people are not cows or they wouldn't be here. The cows are sitting at home mooing. But I still think people are being way too deferential. You won't find the left being deferential. They are alligators with sharp teeth. And it occurs to me that unless and until young people find it cool to understand our Constitution and founding principles, we're just spitting into the wind. The indoctrination of our yute via the education system into the Cult of Liberalism continues, as one of the yutes who attended the meeting alluded to. As long as schools teach Marxism and statism at the expense of the free market and limited government, we are doomed. This is a gigantic uphill battle. It might not be too long until they pledge allegiance to Obama in the schools. There are already movements to name schools after him. When America turns away from a nation based on principles of freedom and turns to little more than a statist cult, we are doomed. Freedom will have at least been temporarily lost from the earth in a big way. And I doubt most of these yutes (including yutes in their 30's and 40's) understand the full implications of this. They are taught how the greatest danger to humanity is our environment, not the various dictators and evil regimes around the world. The world will be ripe picking for these people if America falls to indifference and loses moral clarity.

quote:

As long as schools teach Marxism and statism at the expense of the free market and limited government, we are doomed.

You didn't honestly think you were going to sneak that one by me, did you?

Danger, Will Robinson. You're falling into the same pseudo-religion trap with your own biases. This is your global warming. And you're hysterical about it, losing perspective

I think there's more proof that schools teach Darwin and the Theory of Evolution, than what you just said.

And trust me, it ain't that I'm STICKING UP for the dysfunctional education system. It has a ton of problems. But this whole indoctrination factory theory is bogus as far as I'm concerned. There is no evidence that schools teach Marxism and statism at the expense of free market and limited government, as part of the curriculum. That's your fear, your assumption, your worst-case scenario.

That being said, our PC culture, including the expressions of it in the classroom, DOES favor the liberal bias. The culture favored this bias enough for the majority of our citizens to elect Barack Obama. Welcome to Democracy.

But to assume that the dominant majority opinions are in place because of a concerted indoctrination effort on the part of schools, sounds hysterical. Because it is. The cultural predominance of these neo-socialist and marxist ideas coming from the left does not happen in any kind of organized way. It's simply that the ideas themselves are, at first wash, seductive. Easy. It's like the Dark Side of The Force, where Luke asks Yoda if the Dark Side is more powerful, and gets the answer: "No, easier, more seductive." That's what we have here. The left taps into this stuff because it's EASIER to be taken care of, than to take care of yourself. It's easier for other people to foot the bill, than for you to pay for things. And this is made all the easier when the bill goes to some generic demonized "rich folks". It shouldn't come as any surprise to us why this ideology has taken root. It should be a surprise why American values and the Free Market System are still in the hunt at all.

The trouble politically with selling conservative values to the American people, is that the truth is harder than fiction. Difficulty and sacrifice are uncomfortable, and warm fuzzy lies are more comforting. The bitter pill of reality is only swallowed by SOME conservatives, because the tone of sacrifice fits in with the pervasive Christian mythology that drives a lot of them.

Ah, but myth is myth... lies by any other name are still lies. Liberty is an extraordinarily tough sell. The only thing that makes it work, is when people actually SUCCEED and reap the benefits. In a period of economic downturn, people panic. They'll glom on to anybody that promises them the moon, anything to ease their "suffering." It doesn't help that the wus culture turns even the SLIGHTEST inconvenience into suffering. Such as not being able to buy Cheetos, ice cream, gummi bears and GoGurt every day as "going hungry"...

The thing working against the Democrats in government right now, is that in order to PAY for all their bullshit, they're going to have to tax everyone to the nubs. That will cause true suffering. While one or two industries that can play within the bounds of the con may thrive (like "green" shit... where they can charge up the butt for things that are supposedly environmentally better), by and large, people will NOT be better off under this administration. They'll furiously try to spin it and blame shift, but unless things improve, unless jobs and salaries and all that get better, their days are numbered. All the Bush haters who paid less tax under George Bush and had decent jobs are going to look back fondly at those days, and go well, he may have been a moron, but I was in way better shape financially back then.

Why we conservative republicans and independents look back at the Reagan years with such fondness, is simply because things were better. Ronnie's shit WORKED. The Dems' shit DOESN'T. Fundamentally it doesn't. And they're going to be hard pressed to MAKE something work, or change enough vocabulary to con people into thinking something is working... but it'll fall flat if the reality doesn't back it up.

When the government DOESN'T take care of our healthcare and lower our taxes, or create enough jobs, or keep people in their homes and the economy moving... well, then heads are going to roll. That's what WILL happen, because the liberal ideology doesn't really do anything but talk and call shit shinola. That will fool some of the people some of the time. Eventually the grey curtain of socialist misery will descend onto this great land, and people will want out.

Only then will we see the tide turn. It won't be that schools will suddenly start teaching American history and free market mechanics. Nah-ah. It'll be that the culturally dominant ideas will shift to those things that best preserve the American way of life. This socialist interlude won't be able to sustain itself. It'll get very unpopular very fast. Judging by how ALREADY there are all these grass roots baby jesus orgs popping up. Would I prefer that they could do it with the Constitution rather than the culture-war baby Jesus way? Uhm, yeah? But fuck. The bullshit that is driving the Obama administration is just wrong. It's going to collapse under its own weight, no matter how many european countries pretend to like us again. Americans are almost genetically incapable of living under tyranny, and eventually tyranny and totalitarianism, socialism, and nanny-statism will be outed and exposed. You'll see the lightbulbs going on, you'll see the heyyyyyy, wait a minute..... as people get wise to the con. It will happen. It's just going to be damn frustrating to try and get through the thick skulls of the weak minded and gullible in this nation.

quote:

You didn't honestly think you were going to sneak that one by me, did you?

What's to sneak? If we keep teaching the supposed superiority of socialism and Marxism to kids, that's what we're going to crank out. It's infused all over the place.

quote:

Danger, Will Robinson. You're falling into the same pseudo-religion trap with your own biases. This is your global warming. And you're hysterical about it, losing perspective

Really, since when it is falling into a pseudo-religion trap to admit the obvious? It is standard procedure to teach what amounts to a reverence for big government and hostility toward the free market. This happens big-time in college but is filtering down all the way to Kindergarten. Environmentalism has been raised to a near religion in the way it's taught. Many of you are still convinced that CO2 is our dreaded enemy. Yes, Virginia, there really is a leftist drive to move the culture in a particular direction, and they are doing so through education and the media. The great success of this campaign can be shown in your repeated denial of this rather obvious fact.

quote:

But this whole indoctrination factory theory is bogus as far as I'm concerned. There is no evidence that schools teach Marxism and statism at the expense of free market and limited government, as part of the curriculum. That's your fear, your assumption, your worst-case scenario.

There is lots of evidence. For some reason, you want to wish it away. Understanding why so many want to wish it away is getting to the root of the problem. Why has it become politically incorrect to simply point out that they are teaching what amounts to Marxism and socialism in schools? It's radically obvious in higher education, but it's spilling down into even elementary schools. We need to ask as a society where we want to go and then aim for that. But is a European-style of socialism where we really want to go, especially when even they are making small moves away from that? But to simply deny where our education system is aiming people now is to lay down all means of putting forward an alternative vision.

quote:

But to assume that the dominant majority opinions are in place because of a concerted indoctrination effort on the part of schools, sounds hysterical. Because it is. The cultural predominance of these neo-socialist and marxist ideas coming from the left does not happen in any kind of organized way. It's simply that the ideas themselves are, at first wash, seductive.

The point isn't whether or not socialists and Marxists are better organized and more aggressive than free-marketers. They are. The point is what is actually being taught at the expense of something else, and what is being taught as the truth when it is instead a lie. To me, this matters. Now, it's probably the case that you, like many others your age and younger, have been taught that to treat this stuff seriously is to fall for "the red scare" and stuff like that. It's to be laughed away as ridiculous and hysterical. Well, earth to thalo, we now have a bona fide Marxist/socialist president. I'm not laughing anymore. And guess who taught this aversion to naming Marxism and socialism for what it is? I think it's imperative that we learn to un-Helsinki-roll ourselves and be able to call a spade a spade.

quote:

The trouble politically with selling conservative values to the American people, is that the truth is harder than fiction. Difficulty and sacrifice are uncomfortable, and warm fuzzy lies are more comforting. The bitter pill of reality is only swallowed by SOME conservatives, because the tone of sacrifice fits in with the pervasive Christian mythology that drives a lot of them.

Most people like progress. In fact, America wasn't conceived as a holy ground for asceticism. It was a place where one could better oneself and live a freer, happier, more noble life. We are a strange mix of conservatism and creative destruction. America, unlike many other countries in the world throughout time, has found a way to balance change while holding onto the "what works" principles of our founding. What we're in danger of now, however, is being totally driven by the novelty of change while the founding "what works" principles are forgotten or replaced by Progressives/socialist/Marxists principles that ingrain change, and change produced not by people but by government. Big difference.

It is unfortunately far too easy for people to become indoctrinated. Look at the typical European. Except for the nobel Yabor, they typically will defend their gilded cage. They apologize for their captors. And I see more than a little bit of that coming from you as you leap over and deny huge swaths of rather plain evidence of the heavy axe-grinding that Marxist-socialists are doing in this country, particularly through the education system. That isn't particularly helpful. It's playing into their hand.

quote:

The only thing that makes it work, is when people actually SUCCEED and reap the benefits. In a period of economic downturn, people panic. They'll glom on to anybody that promises them the moon, anything to ease their "suffering."

Fear is greatly fed by uncertainty. The message we can give people is to not forget what certainly works. Freedom and the free market work, and there is reams of evidence for the destruction that a too-big and too-intrusive government causes. But it's a tough sell because, as always, the hope of promises (no matter how lame those promises are) is often too seductive. And when fear is ramped up, such promises made by government seem even more appealing than the inherently less clear-cut (but ultimately far more certain and stable) answers of the free market. And when you have a political movement that is quite adept at intentionally inciting fear, you've got a powerful combination. This is why, in large part, we have the troika of Obama/Pelsosi/Reid in charge right now. But the groundwork for a statist, even fear-based, society was laid, and is still being laid, by Progressives (liberals). Instead of rolling over and pretending they don’t have an agenda that they will not flinch at advancing (including indoctrinating our yutes), I'm willing to face up to it. I'm even willing to face down these rather ridiculous assertions that to call a spade a spade in regards to Marxism/socialism is somehow being hysterical. Again, it's amusing to me that you don't notice this, but that is exactly the mindset they themselves have tried to foster. And it's worked.

quote:

The thing working against the Democrats in government right now, is that in order to PAY for all their bullshit, they're going to have to tax everyone to the nubs. That will cause true suffering. While one or two industries that can play within the bounds of the con may thrive (like "green" shit... where they can charge up the butt for things that are supposedly environmentally better), by and large, people will NOT be better off under this administration.

There are two, and only two, scenarios for this. We either reject this statist incrementalism and begin paring it back, or every once in a while (like now) we'll make a fuss, but the fuss will die down and the march of Marxism/socialism will continue. And soon we just become apologists for it. Maybe not us, but future generations will have grown up in this system and will see it as normal. They will not have the same conception of freedom that you or I do. They will not be able to call a spade a spade (and look how much difficulty we have even doing that now…it's not going to get any easier). And splitting hairs over how organized these socialist/Marxists are is to miss the point that they are and that their ideas need to be confronted and defeated with equal confidence and axe-grinding where necessary. Anything less is just rolling over to them. Part of rolling back this Marxism/socialism is not to be cowed by it. We need to face it directly and call it what it is. If that's what people ultimately prefer, then fine. But unless and until they are getting the real story of America, they're just being indoctrinated. It's not a free choice if people aren't free to choose.

quote:

Only then will we see the tide turn. It won't be that schools will suddenly start teaching American history and free market mechanics. Nah-ah. It'll be that the culturally dominant ideas will shift to those things that best preserve the American way of life.

Instead of waiting for disaster to strike and hoping people (who have never been taught any other way) will suddenly embrace Reaganomics, why not tell people the truth right now? Why not teach the truth of state-run healthcare systems as opposed to free market health care systems? Sometimes backlashes happen, but I wouldn't depend on them. It can sometimes be too late.

quote:

This socialist interlude won't be able to sustain itself.

But it *can* sustain itself. That's part of the problem. Oh, it takes heavy government taxation, control of information, control of indoctrination, and lots and lots of lies and coercion. But it can be done. The Soviet Union was able to sustain itself for over 50 years. Europe, while even now starting to crumble from within and which will soon likely either change or die, has been able to sustain their brand of socialism. But the costs are enormous. In America, we are perhaps the last generation that understands that all these costs do not need to be paid. They are all false choices made by people who hunger for power and/or have a little bit too much socialist heaven on their minds. But these socialists can maintain their system, at least long enough for the newest generation never to have known anything different. That is the clear and present danger. We either roll back now – this is our last chance – or we continue on the path we are now. Which will it be? Who will put up a fight for freedom, limited government, and the free market, even if it does mean the yutes who are already indoctrinated will simply call us a bunch of hysterical red-scare McCarthyistic fascists? That's what goes with the territory now of defending Founding Father principles. Nothing less. It's not time to go all wobbly on me, thalo, as Margaret Thatcher once told George H.W. Bush. This is who these people are and how they operate. Through long indoctrination even we can be cowed. We have bought into some of the assumptions. But screw that. I know these people and surely you do as well. Again, take a look around at what people are being taught. Read some David Horowitz for a bird's eye view. It's not pretty. And it does no good to deny it and simply plays into their hands.

quote:

Americans are almost genetically incapable of living under tyranny, and eventually tyranny and totalitarianism, socialism, and nanny-statism will be outed and exposed. You'll see the lightbulbs going on, you'll see the heyyyyyy, wait a minute..... as people get wise to the con.

Some will, but they must have the kahunas to speak up. As Rush said, there is nothing genetically different about Americans. It is not our race that makes our way of life better than China, North Korea, The Sudan, Syria, Pakistan, and other third world dives. It is our ideas. But those ideas are under attack. We either have the gumption to defend them or we do not. If we do not, those ideas will be replaced, as they are being rapidly replaced now.

This article is about much more than the left's intrusion into academia, but it does include that. But it is about far more than that. It is the correct template or lens through which to view the left, and it's probably never been more succinctly or intelligently put:

Marxist Kitsch and the Politics of Race
By David Horowitz (from the book Hating Whitey: And Other Progressive Causes)

quote:

Civil rights is just one battlefield in the real war of the left, which is the war against America itself. The big guns of this war are directed from the centers of intellect on the high ground of the university culture, where tenured radicals have created an anti-American ideology and forced it on the nation’s youth through the educational curriculum. The thrust of this curriculum was summarized in a text by a constitutional law professor at one of America’s elite universities a few years ago. It is the credo of the progressive left:

The political history of the United States…is in large measure a history of almost unthinkable brutality toward slaves, genocidal hatred of Native Americans, racist devaluation of nonwhites and nonwhite cultures, sexist devaluation of women, and a less than admirable attitude of submissiveness to the authority of unworthy leaders in all spheres of government and public life. (Robin West, Progressive Constitutionalism.)

Of course the political history of the United States is exactly the reverse. It is in large measure the history of a nation that led the world in eliminating slavery, in accommodating to peoples it had previously defeated, in elevating nonwhites to a position of dignity and respect, in promoting opportunities and rights to women, and in fostering a healthy skepticism towards unworthy leaders and towards the dangers inherent in government itself.

This is a vision that is now called “conservative,” but only because leftists currently shape the political language of liberalism and have been able to define the terms of the political debate. There is nothing “liberal” about people who deny the American narrative as a narrative of freedom, or who promote class, race and gender war in the name of social progress. But they have created a situation in which “conservative” describes those who cherish the constitutional and philosophical framework of American pluralism, and guard it against the advocates of a political bad faith.

Here's an excellent resource for understanding the left. In particular, this section on the left in academia is particularly instructive. It spells it out rather well, including this excellent article by Alan Dershowitz regarding the spreading of anti-Semitism in universities by the left. Whether through careful organizing, belly-rolling (caving to peer pressure), or just plain stupidity, it's happening. And it's having a very bad effect. This section gives evidence of the infiltration of noxious leftist ideas (lies, really) into K-12.

Here's a typical incident:

Indoctrinating the Third Grade
by Ari Kaufman

quote:

The day before Thanksgiving, third-grade students at the Frank Allis Elementary School in Madison, Wisconsin, were given a curious lesson in civic responsibility. They were told to write letters to their congressman and various media outlets calling for an end to the war in Iraq.

Parents were sent a letter justifying this political indoctrination as a social studies lesson. “The Frank Allis third grade will be writing letters to encourage an end to the war in Iraq,” the letter explained. “The letter writing will teach civic responsibility, a social studies standard, while providing an authentic opportunity to improve composition skills and handwriting. If the war has not ended by the 12th day [of the letter writing campaign] we will start the whole sequence over again, writing to students in middle school, high school, and college.”

Signed by the “third grade staff,” the letter in closing asked parents to fund ten postage stamps and 12 envelopes for the project. As a “courtesy,” the teacher gave parents the option to opt out of the assignment – as if that excused the school’s attempt to recruit impressionable third-graders into the service of “antiwar” movement and mold their views on the War on Terror.

Brad, come on. The reason these ideas filter down to Kindergarten is the same reason they filter up to academia and all across the nation. They are culturally dominant. All the shit you are railing against, all of it, is a product of the politically correct cultural morass that everyone is knee deep in.

It's being taught in schools because the schools are in the culture. It's not being taught because marxists and socialists have this plot to teach that shit at the EXPENSE of free market reaganomics.

Now, BELIEVE me, I'm all for changing the culture. I'm all for winning hearts and minds with the frikkin' TRUTH, which is obviously what you want. But the hysterical shit, the pseudo religion is locked up in this idea that what we're talking about is an actual concerted and malicious effort on the part of marxist socialists to subvert and indoctrinate.

I don't know how many times I can keep making the same point, but it's like taking PEER PRESSURE, and inferring some sort of conspiracy to get kids to smoke, drink, and take drugs.

YES, there are people who benefit from just that... but these things happen way more by mob mentality and cultural osmosis and popular prejudices than they do by indoctrination. Indoctrination is a myth. It's a flavor of blame shifting. I argue nobody indoctrinates squat. It's simply that people who have already bought the line of shit as true, such as a liberal third grade teacher or whatever, will DO things like have their students write letters to end the war in Iraq. The end result is, OK, a student who just follows along and goes with the flow, will write that letter and not QUESTION it. They may be being culturally influenced by their teacher. But it's the teacher's RIGHT to have a political point of view. And as long as there's some mechanism in place where the student, or parents can OBJECT to the curriculum (which in that case obviously there was), then no harm no foul.

It reminds me of the people who say that because a teacher is gay, they're going to indoctrinate their students into the gay lifestyle. Or if a teacher is a Christian, then all students will have to write letters to baby jesus.

The tyranny and totalitarianism you worry about can just as easily come from you trying to filter out the left, as leftists obsess about trying to filter out the right.

The fact remains, both ideologies are part of the culture, and both can be questioned and examined. I defy you to tell me a school system in the country that absolutely forbids this. Just as kids can petition to be taught creationism, they or their parents can pipe up and say hold the phone about things like ending the Iraq war.

In fact, it's only going to take ONE kid, whose Daddy is over there, fighting for freedom, to say hey wait... my Dad says we're fighting for a reason over there. And you know what? That teacher would get dragged through the press and hauled in front of the school board faster than you could shake a stick at.

If she was truly, honestly TRYING to be an indoctrinator, rather than simply express herself or be PC or whatnot, she'd be FIRED.

Teachers get fired for far less. It doesn't mean there's a pervasive indoctrination scheme going on. Nah-ah. It merely means a lot of young teachers are duped by leftist ideology, the same way as the fucking VOTERS were, when they voted Obama in.

I'm all for arguing, fighting, and exposing these ideologies. You know that. You know I am just as much about answering con-jobs with the Truth as you. But I'm not going to say that the REASON that these ideas are culturally pervasive and dominant, is that there has been this successful indoctrination engine working behind the scenes for years and years. Because that's nuts. I'm not saying belly roll to the ideology. No way. I'm saying know what you're REALLY up against, and don't invent stupid shit that doesn't really exist.

Peer pressure works the same way. Public opinion works the same way. Popular urban legends, myths, rumors, all KINDS of shit works the same way.

These ideas infiltrate only...ONLY because people get roped in by them and believe them. They are offered side-by-side in many cases with the alternate viewpoints. Trouble is, the alternate (i.e. true) viewpoints are TOUGHER and less seductive. You yourself have said that a lie can circle the world five times before the truth has one leg in its trousers. That's what's at work here.

It's not that leftist ideas aren't noxious... they certainly are. It's not that I'm trying to wash over them, I'm certainly not. It's that I refuse to build up one pack of lies to fight another pack of lies. The mechanisms by which leftist ideologies become pervasive is insidious and frustrating, yeah... but so isn't that true of religious ideas, scientology and other cults, and crap like global warming.

Boo hoo, a lot of people believe stupid shit. That's not a newsflash. And they do it without any help from indoctrination squads with magic mind control powers.

Fighting these ideas is not about squelching them, but exposing them for what they are. And many of them are EASILY exposed. It's just difficult to win hearts and minds when the opposing ideology is as full of shit as the bad guys.

The pure, beating heart of conservatism is so bolloxed up with off-message crap, that it's rendered ineffective. All this tells us is that people are loathe to hear the truth.

To get the truth, or these ideas to become culturally dominant, they have to usher in prosperity and freedom, which they will eventually... but government has become bloated and corrupt and full of exactly the kind of politically correct nonsense that defines our culture.

The CULTURE needs to change. People's minds need to be changed. And the only way to do that, is to find a way to communicate some of these hard truths in clear, compelling ways.

It's like a doctor telling you you have cancer. You want him to give it to you straight, but what he's saying isn't a picture of roses and sunshine. Still, you'd rather hear the truth.

That's what the American people need to hear. Not that schools are leftist concentration camps. Not that the media is pravda for the left. Just that the cultural ideas that are bringing us down, are finding expression in those free institutions. And the truth, the opposing views, could just as easily find expression there.

You yourself, could walk into any school in the land and give a talk that would explode 75% of all these firmly held beliefs. Just like the kid whose daddy was in Iraq could blow up the letter-writing class. You just can't be lazy about it. You can't whine and point indoctrination fingers, when you are not willing to step up to the plate and offer your own view of patriotism.

Thalo.net is a hedge against that laziness, but if we were really going to walk the walk, we'd take some of our ideas to Washington DC. We'd start writing letters to Newt and Ann and other conservative thinkers. You know I don't believe indoctrination is a real thing. To me it's a ginned-up thing. Easily, easily proven false by waltzing right up into its supposed stronghold, and offering another view. This is friggin' AMERICA. Free speech still counts for something. And if you don't like what you see around you, fucking pipe up.