I'm not sure you get 1984. It's a call out against what happens in a communist society not a capitalist society. I disagree whole heartedly with you about your assessment. Capitalism is the only system that allows one to succeed and advance themselves through hard work and determination. What you are describing is what happens in communist society. I've studied communism and had travelled to the USSR before the collapse. In communism you have your three easily defined classes. The Inner Party are members of the central elite in power and control of the state. The Outer Party would be those with valuable knowledge to those in the Inner Party like engineers, scientist, doctors and such. The Proles would be the rest of the population who are mere labor.
Was your daddy too liberal with the lash? Did you fear the sound of his car pulling into the driveway? Did Uncle Roy have something for your in the pocket of his sansabelt slacks? Did you mother turn to the bottle to drawn her depression? That's a fine way to go through life; fearing the bully and never making a stand. By your rationale, you'd let the bully wail on you until he tires out or loses interest. Give into your base human desires. Crack his skull. He deserves it. What does this have to do with "patriotism"? Everything and nothing at all.
Socialist "libertarianism' is simply a new name the Marxists picked out due to the fact the ideas of Marx have been a bit tainted by the actions of those who have come to power through the appeal to Marxist ideology. Like the socialists, who in the US stole the word liberal, due to the disdain for the word socialism in the US, the Marxists changed their name. Under any name it is quite impossible for the state to wither away when the proponents of Marxism favor every damn extension of government they can imagine. Power, once obtained, is seldom given up willfully. It irritates me as a libertarian, from the classical liberal tradition, to see the term libertarian associated with Marxism. Life is unfair. Government simply adds another level of unfairness to the equation. Our founding fathers recognized this. They risked their very lives to free themselves from a government much less oppressive than the one we have today. They crafted a constitution that was meant to limit the power of the federal government. It was meant to keep the federal government from picking out the winners and losers. Government is needed; it is needed to channel individual self-interest (greed) to keep third parties from being harmed by the actions of two consenting parties. Even governments with limited power will abuse their powers. Capitalism is what naturally exists in the absence of government. Socialism, beyond small groups of either related or like-minded individuals, requires the presence of government. Communes have a very low success rate....why is that? What the history of the last century has shown is that capitalism and freedom are positively correlated and that states that have tried the Marxist route have universally failed. There will always be need for government; let us keep it limited. A couple quotes: Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. -- Karl Popper To be ignorant of the past is to remain a child. -- Karl Popper We have seen what Marxist ideology has produced...a hell. I am no child.
Sarcasm must escape you.... As well as who the bully may be.. a bully rarely sees him/herself as such.. I told ya, I'm a tough guy tenderizer..
What does it have to do with Patriotism? "Patriots"are patriotic to bullies all to often rather than patriotic to the truth.. much like yourself. Odd thing about the nature of bullies.. they think the people standing up to them are the bullies and use it as justification to continue.. Another odd thing about bullies.. truth in words and a cracked ego is far more devastating to them than a cracked skull.
And now that "liberal" has a negative feel to it, the socialists are calling themselves, "Progressives".
Wez, please. As we?ll be more often in each other?s company on this site, when given to utterance of that type ? consider drinking.
I should please you because, why? Was your daddy too liberal with the lash? Did you fear the sound of his car pulling into the driveway? Did Uncle Roy have something for your in the pocket of his sansabelt slacks? Did you mother turn to the bottle to drown her depression? Shall I utter more utterances of that type then play stupid? hahahahaha
This is possibly the most misguided attempt at propaganda I've seen in my life. Why didn't the Jews fight back? Are these people seriously comparing the "War in Iraq" to the Jewish Genocide of WW2? There's like, you know, nothing in common or anything. But yeah, they're totally like, the same thing. And Pearl Harbor? I have to laugh. The audacity that you'd blame "civilized people" for not being prepared is utterly unfathomable. It's not like the PRESIDENT knew about it beforehand or anything, and just dismissed it... And if this guy is so knowledgeable and less naive then the rest of us, why didn't he stop it? Fact is, we were due for an attack from somebody. Isolationism can't work forever. The rest is just anti-liberal, anti-peace bull. It must be nice to generalize the world into a black-and-white view that allows for cultivation of such an assinine and pervasive ignorance.
I didn't whore myself out to the federal government and have them strip me of my individuality, tell me what to think through anger, intimidation, and hypocrisy then hand me a gun and tell me who to kill, or else. I'd of chose or else.. like I always do.
I'm quite certain... I am neither shocked, nor awed by anger, intimidation, and hypocrisy, only disgusted.
I'm all about what is ok for me to do to another human being is ok for every other human being to do to me. Only cowards and hypocrites need violence.
Agreed; Commies want big government. Their idea of it eventually falling from the hands of the 'party' into that of the people is silly, assholes always grab the reigns of power. I am not advocating communism. Folks around here seems so stuck in this "Yous either a pinko or a FREEDOM loving capitalist" state of mind. History has shown the hell of Friedman's version of the world quite aptly in Chilie, as the USSR showed the inevitable abuse of a communist state. "As Nixon put it in his ineffable style, "It's that son of a bitch Allende. We're going to smash him." As early as October of 1970, the CIA had warned of possible consequences: "you have asked us to provoke chaos in Chile. ... We provide you with a formula for chaos which is unlikely to be bloodless. To dissimulate the U.S. involvement will be clearly impossible." The Pinochet dictatorship lasted 17 long and brutal years." A little help from your friends and you can have a the putty you want. But I suppose that more concern US **** then Friedman himself, though the **** economic productivity of Chile during those years doesn't say much for it either (Suppose as compared to the USSR, under constant economic sabotage by both the US and China, Chile faired pretty well). There have been examples of working, small scale societies which did not function on capitalism and their "inherent evil nature' didn't get the better of them. The Mi'Kmaq nations are more real then unicorns, though I suppose we like to pretend they're not there. BUT we saw to it that such ways of life were properly smashed, probably never to rise again. It seems to me these selfish/ destructive tendencies have arisen from those cultures which, by the mouth of a cannon, dominated and assimilated any and all who were otherwise getting by with less destructive/ domination based models (suppose thats Darwin though isn't it). We are now the products of those dominating cultures and pass that taint onto each new generation. We are all responsible, "its just that some are more responsible then others" . The peaceful and complacent majority allowed themselves to be taken over in all ways, and continue to do so. How many people are simply looking to live a happy life with their damn friends and family and be left alone? I'd say its a great majority. Who jeopardizes that simple aspiration? A self serving few without remorse and a knack for manipulation and exploitation. Its not the "Leeches" at the bottom who are the problem, its the jerks laying out the fishing nets for us all to get tangled in (****ty metaphor eh). I don't want to see a state apparatus enforcing a guise of equality and 'freedom', neither communist nor capitalist, I want the simple family folk to realize that in order to ensure that they remain unsuppressed, un-manipulated, and fully empowered to take care of themselves (I can sing for my supper but I dunno how to make it) then they have to kick this **** to the curb. So long as this global capitalism exists, so long as states maintain their power over us, then this is a dream that will remain unfulfilled. Oh and IWS-> George Orwell, in a letter to Francis A. Henson of the United Automobile Workers, dated 16 June 1949: "My recent novel [1984] is NOT intended as an attack on Socialism or on the British Labour Party (of which I am a supporter) but as a show-up of the perversions ... which have already been partly realized in Communism and Fascism. ...The scene of the book is laid in Britain in order to emphasize that the English-speaking races are not innately better than anyone else and that totalitarianism, if not fought against, could triumph anywhere." The way I am drawing on this book is to demonstrate the totalitarian side of our society as it resembles that of Orwell's Ingsoc.
