DCFusor
Yellow Jacket
Just ran across this over at slashdot. Too bad everyone's anon over there, so I can't give credit to the poster, who says this better (or at least more compactly) than I usually can manage. The topic's been on my mind of late, as telling my neigbors about the provisions of the new NDAA etc law around having a food stash are gettting "interesting" reactions. Here in farm country, of course people have guns, gold, food stashed all the time, often in considerable quantity - it's the norm. Maybe behavior that would be "Weird" or worthy of "profiling" in NYC or DC is the norm elsewhere, and that's why centralizing all power is wrong at the root - a rule you can't swing your arm, because you might hit someone makes sense in a dense city. Here it's only a nuisance.
Posted by "causality" at /. in reponse to a new bill taking back our right to see government funded research results (which never really did give us true access, but was a step in the right direction).
Bold added by me. This isn't a partisan issue - the only difference between the parties is wedge issues - like what you can do in your bedroom or the doctors office or who you can marry - they differ on nothing that matters. They are just two faces of the "Crony Capitalism party".
Posted by "causality" at /. in reponse to a new bill taking back our right to see government funded research results (which never really did give us true access, but was a step in the right direction).
causality said:"While many bitch that Obama is a socialist/marxist (even though nobody in this country can describe what these are) it seems these people are hell bent on creating a Soviet Russia of sorts."
Rather than trying to comprehensively define subjective and inherently nebulous terms, I prefer to keep it simple. Obama is a statist.
Unlike myself or the Founding Fathers, he does not view government as a necessary evil that's only a little better than having no government, nor does he view it as a deserving object of mistrust. He doesn't want legitimate matters of governance to be handled by the smallest and most local level of government that is able to manage them. He likes centralization for its own sake and accepts the regimentation that comes with it. He subscribes to the belief that people should be commanded and controlled rather than reasoned with, that they should not only tolerate this but also welcome it.
He may claim to be a Christian, a few may believe he is actually a Muslim, but his true religion is Statism. A lust for power is part of this religion, but only part. It's not quite that simple. It also involves a genuinely-held belief that people are unable to manage their own affairs, that they need and should desire for their "betters" to decide what is good for them and what should be important to them, that only the collective matters, that individual life and individual thought and individual liberty are meaningless. It's a form of dehumanization in favor of institutionalization.
If you understand what this really is, then you see why baser things like greed or desire for power are naive oversimplifications. Believe it or not, these people are not stupid. They know their policies cause more problems than they solve. They are not merely ignorant or misguided. People like Obama and most of Congress believe they are working towards some kind of greater good, that the damage they knowingly do to society will somehow be worth it when their utopia (really a dystopia) is finalized. The label "Marxist" is a feeble attempt to describe this quality.
Other than a few rare exceptions, this does not merely describe Obama. It also describes nearly anyone capable of acquiring the funding and the political backing it takes to win a federal election. It's sort of like an elite club and anyone who would seriously change things or otherwise rock the boat isn't invited. During the history of this nation, what we have changed from the statesman to the politician to the career politician to the ruling class with an extremely high incumbency rate. Average Joes don't stand a chance of winning a federal election. Candidates don't emerge; they are groomed.
Like they said on Monty Python's Life of Brian, "blessed are those with a vested interest in the status quo."
Bold added by me. This isn't a partisan issue - the only difference between the parties is wedge issues - like what you can do in your bedroom or the doctors office or who you can marry - they differ on nothing that matters. They are just two faces of the "Crony Capitalism party".
Last edited by a moderator: