The Truth About Dorner: Leftism Is Violence
What Coulter calls “Imaginary Violence from the Right vs. Actual Violence from the Left” is not an accident. Violence is an essential part of the left’s approach. The 19th century political philosopher Frederic Bastiat pointed out the fact (that Ayn Rand later popularized) that redistribution of wealth is in and of itself an unjustified use of force against the property of individuals. The fact that it’s a collective use of force in no way legitimizes it. Nor does the sanction of raw democracy which, as the old joke goes, is just two wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for supper. In Bastiat’s words:
As the force of an individual cannot lawfully touch the person, the liberty, or the property of another individual — for the same reason, the common force cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, the liberty, or the property of individuals or of classes.
Leftism requires this illegitimate use of force — this use of violence — because free individuals simply will not do what leftists, in their wisdom, have decided is right and good.
The left has never bought into the central revelation of the Enlightenment: things are made to work perfectly fine without much control from above. This Enlightenment insight was inspired by the earlier work of Isaac Newton who discovered that God didn’t have to move the stars around in the sky or cause the apple to fall to earth. The Big Dude had cleverly put machinery in place that worked pretty much on its own. The economist Adam Smith translated this insight into economics when he pointed out that individuals working in their own interest frequently promote the interest of everyone as if by an invisible hand. The founders translated the idea into politics by creating a system in which individuals could act without too much government interference. These geniuses didn’t trust in individual goodness, not at all. They trusted in the handiwork of the Creator — that is, they trusted the overall human system was built to work without kings and aristocrats — or a democratic mob — forcing people to do what they wanted.
Jean Jacques Rousseau, the founding saint of modern leftism, rejected that Enlightenment wisdom. He hated the modern world and thought humanity had been better off in a state of noble savagery. In that state, Rousseau believed, men were truly free because their laws naturally followed the general will. If people in the corrupt modern age violated the general will, they had to be “forced to be free.”
The logic of Rousseau led to the guillotine. You can’t say: “Well, it’s no fair blaming the pundit Rousseau for the violence of the madman Robespierre.” The guillotine was inherent in Rousseau’s thought. And it’s Rousseau’s thought — his idea that individuals should be forced to follow the “general will” — that informs all leftist thinking — including, by the way, Obama’s second inaugural address.
So no, I don’t think we should be so quick to disconnect Dorner’s kill spree from the left-wing pols and pundits who inspired it. They are philosophically complicit.
Leftism is violence. It always was.
Also read:
Rousseau is a poison found throughout Leftist ideology. Pol Pot idolized him. Mao gave him respect. Society is corrupt and must be re-made by the Elite to conform with the “natural condition” which only the Elite knows.
All about the “fundamental transformation” of society.
Well,ever since I was a wee lad in college back in the late 60′s,the lefties I have come into contact with have embraced and enthused over the prospect of “the revolution”….discussing it as something inevitable,natural,desirable…something that they would lead eagerly and joyfully..marching shoulder to shoulder in lockstep shaking their fists like something out of a bad propaganda pamphlet….and it was understood by them…if not by others…that the blood would flow cupiously….I rather suspect all of them had their own little enemies list who they imagined they would personally dispose of….well,40 years on,the rhetoric and imaginings of the fever swamp lefties are pretty much the same…all of them engaging in some romantic notion that they and they alone care about “social justice” and righting wrongs in the world…and all of them permanent residents of Karl Marx’s toilet
Very well said.
The true leftists seem to have trouble identifying leftism throughout the ages as being all “right-wing”. Yet when they are dismantled point by point, they seem to have little left to say.
They most commonly claim that Nazi Germany was a fabrication of the right…or Mussolini’s Fascism. When it is explained and disassembled right in front of them, they then scream some other ridiculous taunt.
Leftism is about control, for your own good and they will kill you in order to make that improvement.
Sorry, Flagra, the Nazis were extremely right-wing, despite their name. Just ask the officers of Krupp and Daimler — or any competent historian, for that matter. But your mistake is understandable, considering the fantasyland that the US right has spun around itself.
A totalitarian is a totalitarian. The political spectrum is not a line, but a circle; Hitler and Stalin were basically a few degrees away from each other. The biggest difference was the color of their shirts. That is not a fantasy, that is a reality. You are either for freedom or against it, the face the totalitarian puts on his lust for power is just a mask he wears to fool the gullible.
I’m with you. I put ALL totalitarians on one side of the spectrum…because that’s what I measure on my political spectrum, how much power government has. It is a line, however, not a circle.
The Nazis were left wing.
“A totalitarian is a totalitarian. The political spectrum is not a line, but a circle; Hitler and Stalin were basically a few degrees away from each other.”
In Europe the political scale may be a circle, with everything revolving around what we (used to) consider left wing authoritarian govt, but in America and in reality, it’s a line going from leftist total govt to the no-govt right.
There simply cannot exist a maximum freedom, minimalist govt that is also authoritarian. There is no such creature. Authoritarian control is by definition, of the left.
Yea, Hitler and Stalin were only a few degrees from each other, but they were both still on the left. A fascist is a socialist is a communist and they are all decidedly different forms of left wing govts. Do I need to trot out what Nazi actually means?
I agree with the circle analogy; perhaps even more like a sphere. “Left” and “right” are useless descriptors in attributing motivation. Totalitarian, fascist, marxist, socialist, those are more helpful in describing one’s place in the political sphere.
National Socialists Party, or NAZI. Fascism, Socialism, Nazism and any most other ism you can think of come from the left.
The lefty is correct. Deal with it.
http://www.baen.com/chapters/axes.htm
The fact that Random has agreed with HillelA, left by left and prog by prog, confirms beyond a shadow of a doubt they’re wrong. There isn’t two emptier vessels on the board or two more consistently wrong. Multiply the two together and you get exponentially wrong.
By the way Ellen “Random” Barkin. If the Nazis were Right as you and Sieg HillelA suggest, why were the Nazis so busy persecuting those Evangelicals like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and later murdering him? That’s sound a whole lot like you.
The Lefty is wrong. Deal with it.
http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0767917189
Tex
The *link* supports him, genius. All I did was post it.
It’s Jerry Pournelle’s work. He has a PhD in political science. A wild guess says he may know more about this than you do.
Now I can add inane to the descriptor vile before your name, Ellen “Random” Barkin. You must be the most naive adult rube on the entire planet if you think a PHD in political science lends itself to supporting your argument that Nazis were right-wingers. And who designed that web page? You ought to direct that redundant idiocy joke you use time after time about needing crayons to the web designer – you stooges were made for each other.
What a piece of crap.
Dummy, how many times do we have to post proof here that academia is a hotbed of radical red diaper before the dim bulb lights up in your mostly empty head not to use some poorly designed lefty link to prove your points?
I’m once again laughing at the ‘superior’ intellect.
Pournelle’s a liberal academic? Heh. Clearly you’re in over your head. This is the guy who helped designed the strategy for Reagan for SDI, the guy who… oh screw it, you’re too vapid to even use google. Pournelle’s a conservative, genius, and he has a vast list of actual accomplishments.
Learn to read.
I did learn to read, giant. I read your book and that crayon website you directed us. Here’s what I discovered about your “Conservative” hero – he’s a religious bigot like you with an agenda. No wonder you love him.
Like calling you ‘Conservative’, Dummy. You never answered my question if the Nazis were right-winged as you insist, why were they persecuting the church then? I’ve noticed you never answer a question, zealot. Why don’t you try thinking for yourself for once and answer that disconnect, Ellen.
oh, randomengineer, In Europe, “right” and “left” on the political spectrum mean quite a bit different things than they do here in the US. “Right” and “left” were used in European politics to distinguish commuism from fascism. The two ideologies are both collectivist and understood as leftist ideologies in America because they both lead in the end to tyranny and total government control. In Europe that’s how the axis shifts, between government control of one type or another.
In the US our axis swings more between anarchy and tyranny where “right” falls closer to the anarchy end and “left” falls on the tyranny end. Under no circumstances can you call a fascist government like the one the Nazis had a limited government, limited control, maximal individual freedom government that lies close to an anarchy without actually being one (which is where true American libertarians lie with American conservatives often not far to the left of them).
So, yes, technically the Nazis were “rightwing” in the European sense, but never in the American sense.
Tex Taylor: you’re ignoring, or simply ignorant of the following:
Lucifer’s Hammer was co-authored with Larry Niven, who’s less conservative than Pournelle.
The book was written in part on a bet that they couldn’t write a New York Times best seller. It in fact started out as Footfall, an alien invasion masterpiece, but their editor? suggested they remove the aliens and focus on the silly humans below. They obviously kept the hit from orbit but changed it from a possibly more redirectable asteroid to a fragile comet.
I haven’t read the book since the early ’80s, but I don’t even remember “evangelical religious fanatics” being a part of the opposition, while I do distinctly remember the other 3 groups listed before them. I’m certainly willing to believe there were some in that group, but their issues certainly weren’t driving it.
I’ve read every bit of fiction Pournelle has ever written by himself excepting Starswarm which I haven’t gotten around to yet, and lots of his non-fiction, and while I’d guess he’s not very religious I found absolutely no evidence he’s “a religious bigot”.
Getting back to his chart, it has nothing to do with “right” or “left” (which I think he noted didn’t even last through the French Revolution), it’s only intent is to uniquely plot out everyone. So Communists and Nazis are on the far side of State Worship, but uniquely plot out on reason. Going from memory of the book that introduced it in a short chapter, he said the Communists claim to have the only scientific theory of history, vs. the Nazi’s depending on the “Führerprinzip, German for “leader principle”, [which] prescribed the fundamental basis of political authority in the governmental structures of the Third Reich. This principle can be most succinctly understood to mean that “the Führer’s word is above all written law” and that governmental policies, decisions, and offices ought to work toward the realization of this end.” Which is explicitly “irrational”.
aHarris, you’ll get no response for that highly accurate differentiation of American vs European politics.
In Europe the political scale may be a circle, with everything revolving around LEFT WING givt, but in America it’s a line going from leftist total govt to the no-govt right.
“It’s Jerry Pournelle’s work. He has a PhD in political science”
Hey random, Howard Zinn wrote American History books, does that mean he’s right about American History too? Even the parts where he’s verifyably lying his ass off and/or just lacks any kind of citations to those he talks about?
I wish I could directly reply to randomengineer, alas there is no reply linky.
I reached out to Mr. Pournelle stating your view as had been presented, and he was gracious enough to reply to me, I have yet to seek or receive permission to reprint his reply in toto, but it sums up to be aware of the limits to the comparisons. He cited Mussolinni’s views vs Hamilton.
I will partially quote him from his reply (I feel safe enough to do so under fair use)
“Differeces [sic] of degree are still differences”
I would also note that his first response was slightly tart, though thoroughly professional.
Harold,
Well, then you’ll have to take up your argument with ‘Wiki’. Because I just cut and pasted the critique. My ignorance of Lucifer’s Hammer, truly ignorant because I haven’t read it nor do I care to read it, doesn’t change the fact that Random can’t answer my question which is historical fact and in complete contradiction to the insufferable RandomEngineer, the Ellen Barkin of PJMedia.
But I triple dog dare him to try.
By the way, Harold. One mea culpa in my first response to Ellen “Random” Barkin. I mistakenly should have said the “critique” of the book – not the entire book itself.
aharris
The pournelle axis shows that conservatives are just as statist as the liberals they hate. The difference is what they think the government ought to do. All of the anti-government rhetoric on this site is just that.
Gedankenexperiment time: It’s fairly easy to see. You just have to look. Just yesterday there was a thread re dorner and lapierre where lapierre has said in a speech that the problem of gun crimes wasn’t guns, but hollywood and video games ‘media violence.’ Let’s assume for argument that this is absolute truth — movie and game violence begets real life gun violence and spree killers. OK, so what’s next? Do you think the conservatives on this site, paragons of constitutional virtue they claim to be, would rush to the aid of hollywood and argue that 1st amendment free speech protects them? Of course not. Not in a million years. No, the clowns here would be wetting themselves at the prospect of taking their country back, starting with the vile filth spewing from communist hollyweird, and start hounding their representatives for laws to regulate the movie industry. Statism at work.
Go ahead and deny it if you like. But you know it’s still true. The conservatives are more than happy to use government to impose their beliefs. They’re just as statist as the liberals, and Pournelle nailed it.
Yea, not so much
I can guarantee that Zinn knows more than you or me about the things he’s studied, otherise the entire concept of advanced degrees is meaningless. This doesn’t mean that he’s automatically correct, but he certainly stands more of a chance than either you or me, and this needs to be factored in. Just because he’s a democrat doesn’t imply that he’s evil personified. What’s wrong with society is certainly on display on this site, where Zinn being a democrat automagically means he is not to be respected. That’s not just stupid; it’s vulgar.
tex If the Nazis were Right as you and Sieg HillelA suggest, why were the Nazis so busy persecuting those Evangelicals like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and later murdering him?
Oddly, dictators don’t seem to take too kindly to plots to kill them.
“I can guarantee that Zinn knows more than you or me about the things he’s studied”
Yea, not so much. why do his books look so much like revisionist, lie filled propaganda then?
Obviously you have never read The Road to Serfdom or Main Currents of Marxism by Leszek Kolakowsk because the fact that Fascism is a Left wing philosophy is absolutely proved. Nice trolling though. You have a future in comment spamming.
Or Jonah Goldbergs Liberal-Fascism. But give him a break. It must suck having histories most violent and prolific mass murderers be lefties.
So exactly what is “right wing” about forced labor and death camps Genius? And where exactly is the individual in all that except at the point of a gun doing slave labor. God ,I have never heard such blithering ignorance in my life as just spewed from your mouth.Seek Help Clown.
agree; but the left pinned the ‘right wing’ label on their American opposition. I’m pretty sure most people here would be called liberals in Europe. As the Euro right; it tends to be anti free market, anti Christian, pro strong state, and hostile to liberal democracy. Taken together it creates confusion for Americans on forums like these… as to the left; their confusion is self consciously created so as to slander their opponents.
Sorry,HillelA…but the right wing conservatives in Germany then were those who had supported the Hohenzollern Kaiser and then later transferred their loyalty to the Weimar Republic under Paul von Hindenburg…Hitler was a man of the left…he knew his Marx..and he established a “dictatorship of the proletariat” just as Marxism required
The definitions of left and right shouldn’t be difficult to understand. The right supports and tries to preserve the status quo, whatever that might be. The left criticizes and tries to change the status quo, whatever that might be.
Hitler and Mussolini were leftists – they destroyed the status quo in their countries and replaced it with something new. That they happened to be a national socialist and a fascist didn’t make them right-wing.
Franco was a right-wing leader. He opposed his country’s turn toward socialism (change, the left-wing’s agenda) and tried to preserve the old Catholic/conservative order. If Spain’s elections had gone differently, we would never have heard of him.
The American Founders were leftists. They staged a revolution to change the status quo and create a new order in the colonies. Their opponents, the British crown and conservative politicians, were on the right. Obviously, though, the Founders were not socialists or communists.
The real argument isn’t over “left” or “right” – it’s over the definition of terms like “socialist” and “collectivist.” Hitler was a socialist and a collectivist, but he wasn’t as much of a socialist or collectivist as Stalin was. Franco and Mussolini were fascists and collectivists, one on behalf of the old order and one on behalf of the new.
I’m not sure any of these distinctions are important; they were all collectivists who ran brutal police status and killed millions of people. So when considering modern American politics, I tend to think more in terms of collectivist vs. individualist rather than left or right. Governments don’t slaughter their own citizens in the name of individualism.
Bugs,
Alot has been written about Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, and the rest being conservative revolutionaries because for over 100 years since Cromwell and the Glorious Revolution of 1688 the Colonists had pretty much been left alone by the Crown in England whose attention had pretty much been directed toward domestic, Irish, Scottish and Continental troubles, like James II, Louis XIV and then with his grandson. Not until George III did the Hanoverians start looking to America as a source of revenue to pay for their French wars. Then we did not want to change things as to go back to the old way of just being left alone. Sounds more reactionary than revolutionary, and it may well have been one of the few conservative revolutions in history. Anyway, most leftist revolutions fail. Ours, from the Right, succeeded. That’s my take anyway.
Ed – I think you’re right in a way. You could say that the colonists just wanted the government to recognize their traditional rights as Englishmen. They were a bit like the nobles who signed Magna Carta because they wanted the King to stop being “creative” with *their* ancient rights and privileges – a connection that wasn’t lost on the Founders. So maybe their intentions were conservative or right-wing.
On the other hand, they ended up with a completely new system of government that recognized no privileged classes and had no king at the top – something radically different from the status quo. So did that make them radically left-wing, too? I don’t know.
You are either deluded or a deceiver. Mussolini and Hitler admitted to the root of their programs in Marxian socialism. Mussolini’s thesis, which Hitler adopted, went to attempting to preserve the economic efficiency that arises from private ownership of capital while redirecting the output to the purposes of the State: socialism under a thin veneer of property rights.
From Hitler Speaks:
Have a nice life.
Don’t forget, Franklin Delano Roosevelt praised Mussolini and his form of Socialism (Fascism). What Party did Roosevelt belong to again? Which POTUS did more damage to the US Constitution during his tenure, Roosevelt…
“The day of individual happiness has passed,” Hitler returned. “Instead, we shall feel a collective happiness.”
Spoken like a true Obama!
“We shall know then that every road leads us forward, no matter how much it seems to go in another direction.”
I find that sentence to be especially chilling and eerily relevent to today.
I see that we have some items in common in our respective libraries. The funny thing is, even when confronted with incontrovertible evidence that their premises are wrong, these leftist fools refuse to deal with it.
The even greater irony is that they’re usually the first ones to go when the monsters they’ve applauded and voted into absolute power get down to business.
Youre seriously delusional or just plain indoctrinated… You surely must have went to an “elite” University for this knowledge, right?
Next up, the GOP fought the Civil War against the Democrats who wanted to abolish slavery, oh wait… The GOP must have OBVIOUSLY formed the KKK then right?
Oh, so at some magical point in history all of the RACIST Republicans jumped ship from the Democrat Party and joined the GOP, isnt that the argument you morons make?
God isnt going to save the LEFTISTS from the American Patriots… They have pushed too far and the time has come to push back..
Meh – that’s a lie.
Here’s a clue: Leftism is of the State. HEAVY state control.
The further you go to the right the more the state disappears. EXTREME rightism is Anarchy, or NO state control, and every man for himself.
No, the Nationalist Socialist Worker’s Party was leftist. Granted, it was to the right of Communism, so it that’s your vantage point I suppose you have a point.
The Nazis were Socialists. That, after all, is part of the acronym. Unlike the Soviets, they were National Socialists, but socialists they were. They, like the Soviets, were also Fascists, as socialism is a subset of fascism.
The extreme LEFT WING Dictator Adolph Hitler and his National SOCIALIST German WORKERS Party (AKA the NAZIs) had a plan for a post war Europe , it was to be a Union of SOCIALIST Nation States controlled both Financially and Politically by GERMANY. And that Ladies and Gentlemen is the EU in a nutshell.
Oh and BTW HilleIA what far RIGHT Dictator would promote and commission a motor vehicle and call it a VOLKSWAGEN literally a PEOPLES CAR.
The left are running scared of facing the reality that the three greatest MASS MURDERERS of the 20th Century HITLER, MAO and STALIN were all LEFT WINGERS.
You keep using that phrase “right-wing,” but I do not think it means what you think it means. I do not entirely blame you, though, as for decades the left has made a concerted effort to label anything bad but not explicitly Communist as “right-wing.”
Right and left, politically speaking, refers solely to the control of the economy. The extreme left (Communism) believes in complete government control of the means of production, while the extreme right (Capitalism) believes in complete private control of the means of production. Fascism (the economic policies of which were largely followed by the Nazis) was presented as a “third way” between the two, in which economic production was ostensibly in private hands, but was subject to strong government regulation, control, and direction. To my eyes, the fact that you still own the factory does not make it “right-wing” if the government says who you can hire, who you must hire, what you must produce, etc. In many ways, the United States in the 1800′s (with the exception of the Civil War period, when they were a bit distracted) was the most truly Capitalistic large state ever, and also, incidentally, the fastest growing ever.
As a school of political thought, though, the idea of “free market” (let’s arrive at a mutually beneficial agreement we both like) is just not conducive to the use of force or violence.
http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment/
Watch this video. All totalitarian governments are on the left.
http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment/
All totalitarian governments are on the left.
Project much hill?
So without a shred of analysis or evidence you postulate that Hitler was right wing and then accuse the right of fantasizing?
Your post might have made sense had you remembered to end with a /s.
Oh for Pete’s sake – the ‘Nazis as right-wingers’ meme again. You left-wing troglodytes never tire of that one, do you? But what the hey – let’s hear it from the horses mouth, so to speak:
Right wing. Riiiiiiight. Uh huh.
Fools like yourself won’t get it until you’re looking at the world through a razor wire fence. And probably not even then.
Unfortunately, historical fact does not support your ideological delusion. Might try reading history instead of rewriting it…or worse, making it up as you go along.
Well all other Leftism is horribly fascist and nasty, but theirs is good and bringing rainbows and unicorns to The Peaople…
I rest my case.
The inability of ardent leftists here is incredibly obvious to even the most casual observer.
In my original post, I was not referring to the uber-academic pseudo-intellectual over-think that results in morons calling themselves “gifted”, no. I was referring to the empirical evidence that history has provided us over hundreds of years.
Whenever a government forces the people to do something against their will, it is leftism. Further down in the blog-posts here, someone said it that it is the virtuous, those self-proclaimed betters who install and take control over the masses, for their own good, you understand. From lead-free paint to having to hand-pump everything because “aerosols are destroying the ozone layer”…and all of it.
With that said, there are also cases of “every good idea has someone in the background who insists that “if doing X is good, then doing X times 1,000 must be better.” So we have the inevitable over-control result. Usually such things are the result of over-zealousness coupled with lack of creativity and thought. In other words, they saw someone make name for themselves by coming up with a good idea and are simply trying to make a name as well by providing overkill to said idea.
But at the end of the day, far left is far left. Doesn’t matter what they call themselves or what academicians call them either. They desire control. Control over everything but especially people and usually in the delusional fantasy so as to be proclaimed the most benevolent ruler ever.
It boggles the mind.
Academia has created this LEFTIST problem just as Joe McCarthy predicted. Once you control the Degree/License industry over time you will control everything. Without that Degree in indoctrination you are not elevated to any position of power…
This is precisely why the left is so obsessed with denying others the right to keep and bear arms. Free men and women with the raw power to defend their rights, and in fact their very lives, are far more difficult to dispose of or enslave.
The leftists know, in the marrow of their bones, that a “revolution” perpetrated upon armed (and therefore free) citizens would end with the perpetrators lying face down in a pool of their own blood, or hanging at the end of a rope.
Just get the leftards annoyed and they’ll gripe how the subject of the their annoyance will “First up against the wall [and shot, of course] come the revolution!”
When a leftard spouts their broken-record line “Come the revolution, people like you will be up against the wall and shot”, put on your serious face and reply to the leftard that come the revolution you will make it your business to – if nothing else – hunt down and shoot dead said leftard.
Such news startles leftards. Let the startle just begin to evolve into a smidge of fear. Then say, “You talk a lot about shooting people. Do you own a gun?” When the leftard answers “Omigosh no!” tell the leftard that you do. And you have friends who own guns. And come the revolution, you and your friends will be ready to use ‘em.
Report back to us how wide the leftard’s eyes get. Wide as saucers, dinner plates, automobile hub caps…
While it sounds cute the reality is THEY control the Govt and will just sick DHS on you and anyone else they see as a threat. They already think of us as their enemy just as we do but they have WON….
They control the bureaucratic side of government, not the military side. They currently control the highest lawyers (DOJ), but not the state police forces.
The perception that they control more than they do is a very powerful ally (for them). Don’t play into it.
“If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Tsar himself.” – Mikhail Bakunin
Bakunin knew lefties.
That’s communism for you..i know it, i lived it..the non- producers want the producers work…simple.
Read the Dorner Manifesto……. whuuu…… chatty tr0ll is chatty………
Dorner must have been a troll. His manifesto is full of tell-tale references and blogosphere slang.
He wuz driven mad by the Internet! Ban it! Ban it!
“Leftism is violence. It always was.”
Often extremely violent like the fraternal twins of Communism and Fascism, both left/socialist.
Totalitarianism, there’s really any difference?
“There is no longer a reasonable presumption that just because someone wears the uniform of a federal, state or local law enforcement agency they’re a good guy; indeed, the presumption is shifting rapidly to they’re a bad guy and aiding someone in some sort of criminal enterprise — if they’re not engaged in one themselves. Countless acts of invading the wrong house at gunpoint, tossing flash-bang grenades onto couches and shooting through windows injuring or killing innocent people and now multiple officers wildly spraying bullets at innocent newspaper carriers are the acts of those engaged in war crimes and myriad felonies, not the acts of legitimate law enforcement.
The people didn’t ask for this change to take place; the so-called “law enforcement agencies” committed all of these heinous acts on their own initiative and as such have nobody to blame but themselves for the consequence they now face.
If you’re a politician and think you can just call out the jackboots to enforce your dictates you better rethink that strategy. People only cooperate with the government willingly when they think the government is doing good things. When they become convinced it’s doing bad, evil things instead at best you get shunned.
At worst you create thousands of Christopher Dorners.”
But Leftism makes “just following orders” and getting benefits (regardless of how many disposble people are hurt) a good thing…
“People only cooperate with the government willingly when they think the government is doing good things. ”
I’m afraid that in 2013 America “people” birthed on progressive anti-Judeo-Christianity and fed with relativist self-esteem and anything gooes, values, can no longer identify what is “good” or not. We have been successfully divided and programmed as to what our “identity group”likes or doesn’t like. The Democratic Covention that brazenly booed God and celebrated lust and free lunches represented much of the morally corrupt view of many a fiscal conservative, but socially liberal(code for “keep God away from me)voter as well as the Godless left.
This nation was gone long before Obama came along–the recipe for disaster happened in the revolution against all moral authority in the 1960s and 70s.
When you throw away the source of all goodness and truth, you can no longer discern muchof what is good or bad besides your animal wants.
Obama’s attack on Catholic conscience (hardly noticed by the GOP) was aimed at the heart of America’s freedom, but the “money is God” folks on the right naively seem to think they can buy it.
Leftism is tyranny.
It cannot exist in any other form.
Extreme leftism is violent tyranny. Radical leftism is violent tyranny disguised as “protection”, much as the Mafia disguises its heavy hand by offering “protection”.
The state of eternal “revolution” is leftism swirling down its own toilet.
It cannot stop swirling or it clogs and the stench is impossible to hide.
Doing violence to the freedoms of the people it intends to rule first comes wrapped in a Valentine. It’s all hearts and candy passed out to entice the easily swayed. First you dominate the information stream. Then, you savage the reputation of anyone not eating your candy and swooning at your Valentines.
The rest is inertia. Useful idiots pave your path to hell.
The Soviets and Chinese, the Cubans and the Venezuelans submitted to violence. But, the small c communists of Neo-Ayers and NeObama, don’t march in jackboots. The march in Uggs, doing the virtual violence dance in soft shoe, so as not to wake the intellectually slumbering masses.
The “plate glass window” crowd of the uber-violent daydreaming sort, don’t like revolution by evolution. The lack of speed and vitriol disturbs their weenie dreams. But NeObama and Neo-Ayers are free as birds and guilty as hell still.
They will chip away at the rights, freedoms and protections nibbling like mice on cheese. Midwest Academy, New Party, Socialist Scholars, Cloward-Piven, Soros media…you can’t hear them marching. But, make no mistake. They’re here. To stay.
Put down your Big Gulp. Throw out your salt. Bury your guns and ammo. Your healthcare is someone else’s decision now. Your wealth cannot be passed to your children or kept. It’s being confiscated.
Your gas is going to cost you a fortune. Moving around will not be without groping or paying through the nose.
And, the use of guns by gangbangers and Manifesto writers…isn’t on the “enemies list” to take away. Only your guns, your rights, your freedoms. Because YOU are the enemy…of your government.
From wiki:
The Jacobins’ overwhelming power rested on a very slender material basis. Some compared the club’s autocracy to that of the Inquisition, with its system of espionage and denunciations which no one was too illustrious or too humble to escape. The power of the Jacobins was frequently felt through their influence with the Parisian underclass—the sans-culottes – who the Jacobins could reliably count on to support them, and to mass ominously in the streets and at the National Convention when a display of force was considered desirable. Yet it was reckoned by competent observers that, at the height of the Terror, the Jacobins themselves could not command a force of more than 3000 men in Paris. A primary reason for their influence, or strength, was that, in the midst of the general disorganization in revolutionary Paris and in the provinces, they alone were organised. The police agent Dutard, in a report to the minister Garat (30 April 1793), describing an episode in the Palais Egalité (Royal), adds: “Why did a dozen Jacobins strike terror into two or three hundred aristocrats? It is that the former have a rallying-point and that the latter have none”
Is is just me or is that not the resume’ of the current Liberal Democrat?
And at the end of the current crop of Republicans?
Not just you.
From wiki:
‘The Jacobins’ overwhelming power rested on a very slender material basis. Some compared the club’s autocracy to that of the Inquisition, with its system of espionage and denunciations which no one was too illustrious or too humble to escape. The power of the Jacobins was frequently felt through their influence with the Parisian underclass—the sans-culottes – who the Jacobins could reliably count on to support them, and to mass ominously in the streets and at the National Convention when a display of force was considered desirable. Yet it was reckoned by competent observers that, at the height of the Terror, the Jacobins themselves could not command a force of more than 3000 men in Paris. A primary reason for their influence, or strength, was that, in the midst of the general disorganization in revolutionary Paris and in the provinces, they alone were organised. The police agent Dutard, in a report to the minister Garat (30 April 1793), describing an episode in the Palais Egalité (Royal), adds: “Why did a dozen Jacobins strike terror into two or three hundred aristocrats? It is that the former have a rallying-point and that the latter have none” ‘
Is is just me or is that not the resume’ of the current Liberal Democrat?
And at the end of the current crop of Republicans?
And yet I have no doubt there is a grain of truth to his story. I have no doubt the trainee supervisor did unnecessarily kick the snot out of a suspect with Dorner a witness to it. It’s in keeping with the run of the mill professionalism of the LAPD–two separate incidents of attempted murder by the LAPD of three people in attempting to find Dorner, for example–that is acceptable behavior until it becomes public. Thing is, I think Dorner’s only beef with the LAPD is, they wouldn’t let him in on it.
Why that is either beyond the perception of the left, or okay by them, is beyond me.
Well, other than as evidence of the general execrableness of Rousseau and all his ideological get.
I think both cases of shooting defenseless innocents were committed by the Torrance Police Dept, not the LAPD.
If you look at the court documents that were filed for Dorners appeal to his firing,you’ll see CIVILIAN witnesses that stated they never saw anybody kick the arrestee.Before you make such accusations you should do your homework.
I did my homework. Why do you presume those witnesses were chosen to testify for the cop in question?
Chosen? Chosen??.. do you have any other witnesses we don’ t know about..we’d like to hear their side of the story..chosen.Dorner is a liar and through his idiotic ramblings managed to polarize the globe, feeding paranoia and manipulating everyone and everything.
Uh – because they were employees of the hotel where the complained about event was alleged to have occurred and they testified credibly that they witnessed said event and did not see the training officer kick the subject. The Superior Court’s appellate review of all the proceedings is here: http://content.foxtvmedia.com/kttv/news/chris_dorner/dorner_%20v_LAPD_appeal_oct2011.pdf
Dorner’s innocence ain’t a hill I’d be willing to die on.
“Dorner’s innocence ain’t a hill I’d be willing to die on.”
Hey Art, quote where I said I thought he was innocent. Your reading comprehension goes far to explain with your GOP participation, the relative uselessness of that party for several decades.
The biggest problem the Republican Party has is that it is riven with arrogant, ignorant asses like you, Tom, who style themselves “true conservatives.”
The biggest problem with the GOP, Art, is the people like you who have been in it far too long for any good they’ve done. People like Rick Moron, who imagine compromise has value in and of itself, when it’s almost never really bipartisan, it’s just deciding how much the Dems get this time, with no GOP goals attained.
I have actual principles Art, ones I will not compromise on. Prudence is one of those, and right now, nothing that stands in the way of re-adopting strictly constitutional government is prudent, we’re too close to the edge. That means useless so-con grandstanding has to go, and so does seeing how far down the road the RINOs can kick the can–when it’s always closer to the gutter. People like you need to be ignored–you’re not doing any damn good. How much good are you doing? Ask Mitt Romney if he’s picking out new carpet for the Oval Office. You’re stuck on stupid.
Every time I hear you say how sick you are of true conservatives, all I hear is you saying how you think the constitution and limited government really just means legal pot, with the implication you’re agin the both of them.
Since the left believes in government; believes they know best how to run government and believe (depending on ego) that either they as an individual or as a limited collective should be the ones permanently in charge because their ideas are infallible, you have no other logical ending but violence, and which also explains why even when they’re in charge of both the White House and Congress, they’re still never happy.
If you’re in charge and have implemented your ideology and things are still falling apart, you can either change course, or decide that you still aren’t in charge enough, and that conspiratorial forces are working against you. The left is a virtual lock to choose the latter every time if they can get away with it, which leads to attempts not just to eliminate their enemies, but eventually to turn on each other, because they all think they’re the only ones who truly know how to tell everyone to run their lives (which is why the left during it’s post-World War I heyday and going all the way into the 1970s kept splitting into more and more factions — the most egotistical alphas of the group want to be the ones telling everyone else what to do any get enraged, in some cases to a homicidal stage, when they’re the ones who have to take the orders).
The underlying impulse (I won’t dignify it with the word “thought”) of Leftism always end in either failure, or bloodshed and failure. The rhetoric coming from Lefties today is eerily similar to the rhetoric spewed by Lefties just before and during the Spanish Civil War. Lefties took over the Government by a slim margin of 1% or 2% percent and proceeded to try to ram their radical agenda down the throats of the people. (Sound familiar?) They can’t help themselves. In order to remain “consistent” in their “thinking” they are compelled to support the most radical lefties in society. This Dorner business is merely the camel’s nose. The “support” you see out there for this nut, is the same “support” that Obama will have when he calls for “official” violence against his “enemies” in society. We are almost there. The Zombies are awakening.
…hence the manic effort on the left at gun control — it’s kind of hard to coerce the masses into following all your orders when the masses can fight back. Even if Obama were to try to pull a Hugo Chavez on his enemies, he would have few minions other than those in the Bluest part of Blue Stat America willing to answer the call, because people can fight back, even if only at the ‘armed street resistance’ level.
Those on the left who cheer on Christopher Dorner’s rage and love the fact that he has the entire LAPD, surrounding agencies and their family and friends in panic mode because they don’t know where he’ll strike next are the same ones who are not going to be out there trying to forcibly impose their will on an armed population — i.e., they’re not going to suppress people as long as they think they can get wounded or killed trying to do it (though, perversely, they wouldn’t mind if the LAPD or other law enforcement agencies did the job for them).
The authoritarian types want to tell everyone what to do, but they want the game rigged so those they’re ordering around can’t fight back. That’s why you won’t see a total crackdown in the style of Chavez or other authoritarians until the Second Amendment is suppressed.
“Jean Jaques[sic] Rousseau, the founding saint…had to be “forced to be free.””
With Rousseau, the Enlightenment died, and was zombified into the Endarkenment. The American Revolution is the product of the Enlightenment, the French one that of the Endarkenment.
The idea there is a general will which is genuinely sovereign, one which legitimately overrides individual will and conscience in whatever area of life the majority passes a law about, the grand error of Rousseau. For the left, “I was just following orders.”, really is an excuse. Funny though, their majoritarianism is legitimate, the opposition’s isn’t–to them, it is self evidently the product of “false consciousness”.
We should pick up where the revolution of 1775 left off, and reject the twin Europeanisms of Burke and Rousseau both, neither is conservative in an American’s clear eyes. The tumbrels an obvious moral atrocity, and justice and liberty lie in drawing a bead on Burke’s peers, and putting them down.
“Leftism is violence. It always was.”
And, I might add, Leftism is violence. It always was. It always is. It forever shall be.
To be fair, leftism begins with lies, and only when they get to power do them move on to theft. After people stop producing goods that can be stolen, they move on to enslavement. When slaves fail to produce enough goods they move on to torture. When people try to escape or resist torture, they move on to murder.
After a generation of being trained that all virtue consists of lies, theft, slavery, torture and murder, any reasonable man would be a pervert.
The horror of the crimes the man committed should not be involved in political discussions. Feelings about race should not be involved in rhe discussion of his crimes. Too often, these days, political correctneaa ia uaed to noderate reactionss to violent crimes.
Once again Klavan constructs a straw man and demolishes it, What a man!
(Snore)
Why don’t you, brilliant lefty troll, do an analysis of Mr. Klavan’s argument and explain to us exactly how his piece constitutes the informal fallacy called a strawman argument. Surely you have the rhetorical and logical skills to distill Klavan’s argument and point out any falacies, invalid premises, or invalid syllogisms and explain it all so that even we ignorant and deluded conservatives can understand.
See, I don’t think you even know what a strawman argument really is other than an insult to someone’s position that you heard somewhere and thought it was a cool thing to say.
Klavan’s creative view of the Enlightenment as some sort of odd Panglossian discourse on invisible hands and laissez faire politics contains little of fact and much of fabrication.
If he bungles through history with such blatant disregard for basic facts I don’t think one needs to say there is a straw man or not. The whole charade should end right there.
“Klavan’s creative view of the Enlightenment as some sort of odd Panglossian discourse on invisible hands and laissez faire politics contains little of fact and much of fabrication.
If he bungles through history with such blatant disregard for basic facts I don’t think one needs to say there is a straw man or not. The whole charade should end right there.”
lots of words, nothing actually said. Panglossian? Did he say anywhere that this is the best of all possible worlds? As for the invisible hand and laissez faire politics, Lefties are Newtownians – they believe that if you just have the Right People in charge, and have enough data, you can predict and run everything correctly. Libertarians and most conservatives know better. Society runs better as a quantum entity.
Another lefty idiot coming to the aide of the other lefty idiot; neither one of you addressed the challenge. That would be because you’re both lefty idiots and have never been challenged to do anything that required intelligence. Flash, lefty punks; lefty and smart are not synonyms.
That “critical thinking” your lefty perfesser taught you isn’t serving you well. What asserted facts are not facts and what proof do you have that they are not facts. Oh, they didn’t expect you to do that hard stuff did they, idiot?
What is the argument and what is wrong with the argument? Logical argument, not naked assertions; it’s what educated people have learned to do.
Logical Argument? Art, did you go to school? Did you read what he wrote about the Enlightenment?
“The left has never bought into the central revelation of the Enlightenment: things are made to work perfectly fine without much control from above.”
It’s wrong. Grade F. Failimento, big fat Zero.
There’s no logical fallacy, no proof it’s just wrong. The whole freaking period is defined by writers who look to Reason and Scientific Method to dispel superstition and dogma and replace it with knowledge and progress. Time and again the answers they saw were a threat to the authority of church and state. This is not finding out that the “Big Dude” has everything covered. Not by a long shot.
I know this is beyond your high self-esteem comprehension, but you still haven’t made an argument! You’ve shouted, “You’re wrong,” but you haven’t laid out anything to say how or why either Klavan or I are wrong. “I feel strongly” is not an argument no matter what your mind-numbed lefty teachers told you. You are simply too ignorant to participate in a discussion – or in a republican democrach. Some day we’re going to have a serious disagreement.
You are acting just like the lefties do – reading what you want into a story so you can make points for your “team”. This guy was a fan of the first Bush, of Colin Powell, and John Huntsmen.
Yes, he’s also a fan of Obama. So politically, he’s basically the same as David Frum, Peggy Noonan.
Not exactly hard right, but not really hard left, either. Squishy middle is what this guy is.
LOL bringing up Frum, Noonan, Huntsman and Colin Powell as conservative bonafides, all supported Obama.
Dorner’s celebrity/political shoutouts were over 95% libs. Also noteworthy is that it’s the left who are celebrating this psycho who murders innocent people.
This is where it gets weird. He also praises, at great length, John and Ken, a couple of drive-time radio talk show hosts here in LA. They’re basically halfway between conservatives and libertarians, and they can be pretty strident. He also praises Chris Christie. I know Christie isn’t *always* on the conservative side of things, but really? That makes him a “liberal”?
Every name you mentioned– every one of them– is the name of a leftist. They can call themselves whatever the like I suppose, but they’re all leftists and therefore statists.
The guy is a nut.
The nature of leftists is shown in their support of him.
These are thoughtful comments, but they seem to me to be a bit too philosophical. There’s no doubt that we’re in the midst of a social evolution…I’ve likened it to being as deep seated as that sexual revolution of the sixties and seventies. Something long suppressed now has been unleashed by our current sans-culottes.
Our Conservative position now is not likened to any elitism as much as we must realize that we are now simply outnumbered at the voting booths. Conservatives can be of modest means and of honest straightforward dispositions, and they simply have different thought processes than the arrant leftists, or liberals, our current Democrats. But, if we Conservatives are outnumbered, we must be pragmatic and change our vote gathering techniques.
This whole Democrat-lax-approach to our severe illegal immigration problem is solely based upon their gathering/enrolling of these newest sans coulottes who barely speak our English, they are desperately escaping Latin poverty, our borders are comparatively open….so in they come. Since they are vulnerable to the promises of the Democrat vote searcher-collectors, we Conservatives are and will remain outnumbered and will continue to lose elections all over the place, unless Conservatives change their vote gathering techniques.
Not a promising outlook for entrepreneurs trying to conserve capital while at the same time coping with the liberals’ higher taxes to support all of these new immigrants’ social service plans such as entree to our medical care/security without ever having contributed anything at all, anywhere.
Round and round we are going into a whirlpool. We’re being literally sucked, crudely put.
Post Script:
Let’s say that this Dorner’s left-wing views/actions are the most visible spike on our chart….for now.
This event scares me because it makes the system look fragile.
one man with a rifle and at least to the naked eye no patrolmen on the street. hopefully they are elsewhere but i don’t see them.
what if it were 2 pissed off psycho’s with rifles?
The current situation is akin to the Beltway sniper case from a decade ago, right down to the same sort of crackpot compilation of liberal outrage and left-leaning buzzword ideology the fueled John Allen Muhammad’s rage. The only difference there is that those around Washington didn’t know who the murderer/murderers were until they were captured and as a result, the media and certain top law enforcement officials in the area used same template liberals use as today when a shooter’s background is unknown — pop psychoanalyze the killer and immediately brand that person or persons as right-wing nutjobs.
The fact that Muhammad turned out to be exactly opposite that never fazed them for a minute, because that would have required them to rethink their views and claims that all violent hatred comes from the right. They want it to be from the right, and they want the masses to think it comes from the right, but 90 percent of the time if there’s any ideology at all out of crazed killers, it’s the type that would be perfectly at home coming out of an MSNBC show host.
Were it not for Christopher Dorner’s claiming credit for the three murders and his long Facebook post highlighting his support for liberal politicians, news people and celebrities, rest assured that the same type of reporting and specialization that the big media used with Muhammad and Lee Malvo would be out in double or triple the force now, in blaming the murders — including an Asian woman and an African-American man — on some racist Tea Party type. As it is, thanks to so many liberals taking a “You Go, Chris!” attitude towards the L.A. killings, the innocent victims might as well be non-persons, while the gun control cries are actually muted, because gun control pols and media types know to use it against this Dorner would irk part of their core audience, who think he’s targeting the right people.
“…because that would have required them to rethink their views and claims that all violent hatred comes from the right.”
Typical repression (of the truth) and projection on to others. Many circles claim Lee Harvey Oswals was a “right-wing” nut job who killed Kennedy. Intellectual honesty and self relection is non existant on the left, hence the same end results.
It’s easy for them to switch narratives. An angry, victimized black man fits just as well as an angry, bible-clinging white man. Two sides of the same coin.
It doesn’t “make the system look fragile”, it shows that the system is fragile.
Well, I feel good about walking onto an airliner mostly because I expect my fellow passengers to kick ass on terrorists since 9/11. I think it is nice that TSA might keep explosives off the planes, but really, I have more faith in other passengers.
Same with respect to crime. There is a reason citizens should own ARs, 30 round mags (or larger), large quanitites of ammo, high capacity semi auto pitols, and hollow points.
The cops usually get to your house too late, or in a real emergency they won’t even come. You and your neighbors have to defend yourselves.
Boehner will be following the “general will”.
There’s nothing wrong with believing that the god you worship is the one true god, until you start trying to force others to worship him.
There’s nothing wrong with believing that communism is the best form of existence, until you start forcing others to join your commune.
There’s nothing wrong with wanting everybody to have healthcare and a good retirement, until you start forcing others to join your welfare state.
It’s not the ends you are pursuing that makes you a tyrant, it is the means you use. Liberals have drunk the cool aid of tyranny and convinced themselves that not only is the welfare state the only valid way of living, but that they are justified in using coercion to achieve it.
Is America facing its greatest challenge? It has survived the tyranny of the British monarchy at the founding, the tyranny of slavery imported from the old world, the tyranny of the Nazis and Japanese in WWII, the tyranny of communism in the cold war. Now it faces the home grown and virally spreading tyranny of liberalism. Is America still the land of the free and the home of the brave? Can it defeat this most insidious and seductive of all tyrannies?
Sounds like a movie trailer. Klavan should write a novel about it and turn it into a movie and make millions, and retire to some tropical island.
“There’s nothing wrong with …, until you force…”
Ok, you seem to get it so I want to test just how deep your thinking goes and whether you ACTUALLY get it. And I’m only going to ask this because MOST republicans I have the displeasure of talking to (including some VERY popular ones on this site) will froth at the mouth and utter some serious left wing platitudes that resemble the left’s wettest of ‘If we only passed a law…” dreams in regards to pot and or drugs in general.
So here goes….
Theres nothing wrong with NOT wanting to smoke a little doobie after work, until you start forcing others to join your War on Drugs.
Agree or disagree?
The drug war has caused a lot of harm, but I don’t really care to debate it now. Right now we have bigger fish to fry, like Obamacare, $16.5T in debt, $1.1T deficits, new gun control, immigration, etc.
“I don’t really care to debate it now. Right now we have bigger fish to fry, like Obamacare”
There’s really nothing to debate in the first place. I posed the question to test whether the other poster was a Whig. You claim to be small govt when you actually just want a different version of GIGANTIC, oppressive, progressive govt than democrats do. You have no principles. You sir, are a whig.
That’s why you’ll completely ignore (and prolly support) the unconstitutional War on Drugs and it’s myriad constitutional abuses and focus on eliminating the unconstitutional Obamacare and its constitutional abuses. Get it?
It’s IRRELEVANT if drugs can harm someone or you dont like them or you had a friend that robbed someone to make a score. So dont do them. So look out for your friends.
You either believe in personal responsibility and freedom or you dont. It seems you do not, but I suspect you’ll talk outta the other side of that hole about democrats that’re no different than you are.
Yea, thats just one reason why I’m not so much a republican.
“You claim to be small govt ”
I’m presuming you’re a republican because of your focus on obamacare. For all I know you’re a democrat that just doesn’t like obamacare, but I suspect I’m right and you do claim to be a ‘small govt republican’
I don’t much care about the drug war. We have much larger issues to tackle right now.
Note that I don’t support the drug war. It isn’t working any better then Prohibition, and lacks a constitutional amendment. So I agree, it is unconstitutional (at the federal level).
That said, it is not an important issue now. People who bring this stuff up are distracting us from what IS important. And the government does many other things that are unconstitutional, including social security, medicare, medicaid, NFA ’34, GCA ’68, the ’86 Houghes Amendment, EPA, etc . . .
There you go. I can agree with just a small disagreement. The WoD is an easy kill of federal overreach power and a HUGE cost savings.
You want that doobie, go for it. Heck, sprinkle PCP on it if you want to. I don’t care.
Now, if you try to operate a motor vehicle or other machinery while you are seriously f**ked up, and injure somebody, I want the book thrown at you, index, dust cover and all.
If you kill somebody, I want you charged with murder, not just “manslaughter”. With the fact that you were, of your own choice, f**ked up on drugs at the time as a compounding factor, not an “extenuating circumstance”.
What’s more, if you’re that irresponsible, I hope you do use “recreational” drugs. Considering things like the fact that there’s more tar in pot than in the roughest shag tobacco, odds are you’ll contract emphysema or lung cancer even before the three-pack-a-day Joe Sixpack does.
Which means you probably won’t live long enough to collect Social Security. Thereby leaving more for everybody else.
So, yes, go ahead and light up that roach. Just be aware that personal responsibility doesn’t miraculously disappear in your much-desired state of “doing your own thing”.
And oh, yes, before you ask; No, I don’t drink (alcohol), smoke (tobacco) or use (recreational drugs). The only actual “addiction” I have is Hoyle Chess.
Reversi is fun, too.
clear ether
eon
Of course, the way you’re foamnig at the mouth about it I seriously doubt you’re being genuine.
But yea, that’s personal responsibility.
And yes, people should steer clear of the substances that make you their slave.
And no, smoking a doobie doesn’t automatically make you irresponsible any more than drinking your wine makes you an irresponsible wino.
Yes, drugs will destroy some people (I think they do now even with all your laws) the same as alcohol and food and everything else in the world but it will also benefit a host of others.
The Drug Warrior right dont seem to get the dual justice system that’s sprung up around this – on top of their glaring two faced hypocracy every time they spout about their love of the Const.
We’re hammering the hell out of the poor people confiscating everything they have and breaking their families, ensuring they’ll be poor and broken all their lives while the rich people on wall street, in hollywood and yes in our political houses are all snorting blow secure in the knowledge that they will not be prosecuted to any extent.
Remember the douche on the news in DC waving around the illegal magazine. He was told that was illegal before going on the air. Now you do it. meh, who cares.
Actually, I’m serious. To me, it’s like this;
Prohibition gave us Al Capone, Bugs Moran, and made the Mafia major players in the U.S. economy where before they had barely qualified as a factor in same. Benny Siegel wouldn’t have had the money to make that little startup known as Las Vegas without the profits from a decade of illegal booze sales.
Drug laws have given us gang-bangers, the Cali and Medallin cartels, and Mexico being in what amounts to a state of civil war even before our brilliant President and Attorney General started shipping guns south across the Rio Grande.
Anybody else see a similarity, here?
Make something scarce, and if someone finds it desirable, you’ll make it a premium commodity. It’s supply and demand in action.
Now, I don’t believe for one minute that legalizing drugs will solve all or even most of the problems. I suspect quite a lot of “casual” drug users do it because it fits with their self-conceived “rebel” image;
If we made every drug that’s illegal right now legal tomorrow, this sort would immediately switch to something else, because if it’s legal, they are no longer “rebels”, and it’s no longer “cool”.
What I think is stupid, and hypocritical, is that drug advocates strenuously deny that the drugs they advocate carry health risks. I know people who think pot should be legal, and tobacco should be outlawed, or who think alcohol is poison, but cocaine and LSD are just “stimulating”. Which, medically speaking, is about as honest as claiming tobacco doesn’t cause lung cancer, or booze doesn’t cause cirrhosis of the liver.
My idea is, the people who want pot, etc., legalized should shut up about the “evil weed” tobacco, and etc., or at least accept that others may find their drug of choice as objectionable as they find a pack of Camels. By the same token, if they want “smoke-free” workplaces, etc., I don’t want them lighting up a doobie in public, either. Who knows, I might object to their second hand smoke as much as I do to the guy smoking a Raleigh. (And I really don’t like second-hand smoke, and haven’t since I was a kid.)
It’s called the “mote-beam syndrome”. Look it up, sometime.
clear ether
eon
I recall a few years ago when the FBI released two reports on extremists of both political directions.
The left wing one named names of groups that were of concern. It wasn’t reported.
The right wing one made sweeping statements, taring a number of perfectly legitimate groups as being dangerous.
Of course, this was widely reported.
I was on CNN and noted one commenter who proclaimed loudly that it only right that the right wing be highlighted as this was the place from whence the threats were coming. He was wrong, but ultimatly he was just unwittingly echoing the information he’d been fed.
“I was on CNN and noted one commenter who proclaimed loudly that it only right that the right wing be highlighted as this was the place from whence the threats were coming. He was wrong, but ultimatly he was just unwittingly echoing the information he’d been fed.”
I disagree. There was nothing about his statements that could be classed as “unwittingly echoed”. I’d bet dollars to donuts (sorry Michelle) that he knew exactly what he was saying and it was carefully crafted to feed the lemmings that watch and believe, word for word, whatever is said on CNN.
Crazy people make for bad politics.
This murder is an awful awful thing. You aren’t going to be able to find a way to connect politics or a wrongful termination with killing somebody’s daughter.
Back of my mind too is the you video of Richard Kelly being beaten to death, begging for mercy.
Together it adds its little droplets of fear to the cauldron.
Its like this country began going crazy after 911 (and for good reason, for good reason) and somehow we are just getting worse.
No cops on my street anymore. the news didnt say ‘hey there will be no cops today, because we are cleaning the street or they are all out somewhere on holiday’ it just happened.
what else will happen?
Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system. Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! HELP! HELP! I’m being repressed! Oh, what a give away. Did you here that, did you here that, eh? That’s what I’m on about—did you see him repressing me, you saw it didn’t you?
ignoring facts wont make them go away.
Bloody peasant!
/somebody had to say it.
The Left is trying to make out Dorner to be a kind of Winston Smith, an everyman driven mad by daily contact with injustice in an unjust system. The system, every day society, is so unjust, our hero Dorner breaks off contact with it and stages a one-man rebellion, even to executing any symbol of the system that stood in the way of Dorner’s otherwise bright future.
Unjust persecution ending in rebellion centered around one man is a classic theme in our society, from Robin Hood to Dune to The Stars My Destination to On The Waterfront and Schindler’s List.
The problem with the political Left’s version of this trope is one of principle and the particulars wrapped up in those principles. Endemic hypocrisy is not the vision of the heroic individual but of a childish sociopath. Steadfastness and evenly applied principles are the mark of a just man. The difference between the Giffords shooting and Dorner’s shootings in the mythology of the Left is marked and shows the Left to be, not Winston Smith, but the Ministry of Love.
The problem for the Left, who have in recent years come to practically adopt verbatim all the grievances of the Rainbow Coalition and the NAACP, is that the entire history of the USA is basically an internment camp that has imprisoned by gender and race and sexual preference, and that prison camp continues unabated to this very day. If true, any force exerted against this injustice is justifiable.
Throw in the Left’s penchant for behaving like every day is 1858 and one can easily understand why Dorner is seen as a Paul Muadib, and how the Left sees themselves as his Freman.
Everyone think they’re right; that’s why in society, we have an analogue to sports referees and umpires and it’s called a principle and those principles form the basis of our laws.
On the Orwellian Left, law is something that is situational according to one’s identity. Morality and innocence are presumed to reside in history’s oppressed: women, gays, blacks, etc. On the Left, this innate morality seems to be handed down by DNA along with guilt if you happen to be the wrong identity. However invoke that exact principle in reverse and suddenly you’re a Nazi or a member of the KKK.
Abusing reality in that fashion is a form of madness at worst and intellectual depravity at best. The staunchest proponents of race and identity-based political correctness on the Left veer between those two poles.
‘On the Left, this innate morality seems to be handed down by DNA along with guilt if you happen to be the wrong identity. However invoke that exact principle in reverse and suddenly you’re a Nazi or a member of the KKK.’
There’s quite a few sites where the concept that white people are genetically superior to ‘Aztecs’ and ‘Africans’. Thats all very cute if you are in your in group. And usually it does seem to devolve to include basing catholics. That is pretty much the kkk arena.
If you find that insulting, then doesn’t it mean that you really aren’t a racist. And therefore should not be offended.
Because of my marriage I have had to find out what some of these complacent sentiments sound like to other people. Ones childs biggest academic problem might be being to young to gain admission to the desired university without dispensation. but still you have to hear that drek.
If on the other hand you want to be the brave misunderstood little Aryan I am not afraid. Dont count to much on the internet super intelligence or the fuerhers secret weapons rescuing you this time either.
My point was that liberals adopt the same arguments and principles that white supremacists do. The classic argument is that black folks are not responsible for crime by other black folks and they shouldn’t be stereotyped and profiled. Content of a man’s character and all that. I agree.
But then liberals do worse and connect me by skin to people who once owned slaves. It’s a common argument in the black press as well. You often see white liberals express guilt.
These are two mutually exclusive sentiments.
The other point I was making is that white supremacists are entirely marginalized in America, and rightly so. Their counterparts on the Left are mainstreamed and institutionalized. The rhetoric of Roland Martin, CNN, Tavis Smiley, PBS, Cornel West, Princeton, Michael Eric Dyson, MSNBC and Georgetown, Melissa Harris-Perry, Tulane and MSNBC, and Dr. Boyce Watkins, Syracuse and HuffPo, wouldn’t be at all out of place at Stormfront.
Your right. I’m wrong. I got my tail in a crack about something i read somewhere else.
^^ Liberals/Progressives please note ^^
The above thread is a fantastic teaching moment.
Conservatives, when they disagree, present their data and their worldviews, listen to the other party, and consider what was said.
If the other party has relevent facts, or a world view which they had previously not considered, or if the person realizes they were simply incorrect, they admit it and adjust their perspective.
Yes, Dorner is just seeking Social-Justice.
I have spent a lot of time trying to talk very mentally ill people into not being crazy.
I have never succeeded. At some point it comes back to the cats are laughing at them, or something else worse. dead babies.
I can think of a died and true liberal and one southern conservative right now. More liberals than conservatives if it makes it more honest.
Politics is something crazy people can talk about that makes sense to everyone else. Its actually pretty safe ground because the you know in advance whats going to go over and whats not.
The histroy of leftism:
1) we’d like you to do this
2) we want you to do this
3) we’re legislating you to do this
4) we’re adding fines and civil penalties if you don’t do this
5) we’re adding jail time if you don’t do this
6) we’re putting you in prison becasue we heard you don’t do this often enough
7) we kill you for not doing this
Only the speed on how quickly it goes from 1) to 7) differs
8) We’ll kill you, your family and all of your friends and relatives because, well… we can.
So the MSM and Government Hacks arent giving this guy and those he has referenced in his manifesto the full Anders Breivik – Fjordman treatment?
Color me unsurprised.
Well said, Andrew.
But it’s not left or right. It’s the virtuous!! Robespierre said and his nick name was “Mr.Virtuous”, that, “Terrorism is the natural emanation of virtue.” The ‘witches’ that were murdered in Salem weren’t killed by left or right but the virtuous of the community. Many Germans I would assume wouldn’t have beaten a Jew, a homosexual (is that word eeeever going to come back into use?), etc to death but they did feel themselves to be on a higher virtuous plain and could rightously turn their heads at abuse of the untermensche. Imperial Japanese could conduct themselves as beasts in human form because their race was the most virtuous on the planet. Abortion doctors, and such, are murdered by the virtuous. Past a certain point you assume the cloak of a demigod where you can feel perfectly justified in killing to protect the perfection of society, well, as you see it and these other people are in the way. Look through history, it’s all the same animal, different stripes.
Change of subject.
This attempted gun grab is an illustration of just how inept the left is. Take a look around at how breathtakingly far our rights as Americans have eroded. It they were smart they would have kept their mouths shut and just quitely finessed the rest of our civil liberties and rights away. Because, you see, if you think about it, and Bill Maher of all people is who slapped my face with this idea, that all the guns in all the basements and closets during all these years didn’t stop this poisonous erosion and trumpet all you like but they are not going to in the future either.
Ah, but consider this. Of the people in this country gun owners are: 1) More concerned with Constitutional rights than others, 2) We are organized, we are articulate and we are used to pushing back politically.
Further, I will suggest that it is the First Amendment we need to concentrate on (along with the Second) because this one will give leverage to free up all the other amendments. Take a second and list all the crucial areas that we are in effect forbidden to talk about openly e.g. pernicious subcultures, propaganda masquerading as education, etc. If you can’t list at least fifteen in the next ten minutes you’ve been asleep.
What to do? Joining the Tea Party is a good start.
Doesn’t fit the Left’s vision of “Falling Down” does it?
Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song
“If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Tsar himself.” – Mikhail Bakunin
Bakunin knew lefties.
Spot on article.
Liberals love violence. Their movies, music, and games are full of violence. Even their pornography is increasingly violent thus linking to base urges in young minds, the main consumers of that stuff.
Consider also that the liberal path offers more power and control than conservatism. That will make it more attractive to psychopaths. From American style politics to bureaucracies, psychopaths are right at home. Some of of there are out there right now waging very open war against that which threatens them most: private gun ownership. Won’t be long before a Stalin or worse gains enough power…
Everyone who voted for the B.O. in 2012 would have voted for Stalin , Mao and Hitler. The Democratic Party are the new Nazis .
Liberals are mentally ill. They are a complete paradox claiming to be the exact opposite of who they really are and projecting their envy and greed onto conservatives. They are not only violent when claiming the TEA Party is violent, but they are in general the least generous with their own time and money. A Salvation Army collection tracked traffic flow and donations in San Francisco outside a high priced store and a rural, conservative Mall. They re-checked the data when the fly-over folks gave significantly more in donations per person. They claim others intolerant while they shout down those that do not “Bend” to their political correctness. They claim to be loving and caring while they worship at the altar of abortion.
Violence is on all sides. Do we want to stop violence, finally, or just cont trying to fight sides? People need to self regulate and work on emo and energetic hygiene. Left or right , there are problems.
have we not been brainwashed to believe that persons of color, minorities, CAN NOT be racist because they “have no power”?
Sgts Jackson and Evans, what is their racial affiliation.
all the rest seem to be of Hispanic lineage, persons of color, therefore they cannot possible be racist.
do i have that right?
and is that not the primary complaint of dorner, that he is being singled out for being a black man.
not because he is by definition a morbidly obese man. nor an incompetent man. nor a man not meeting the requirements for promotion in the navy, hence his separation.
and not because he was deficient in “in the areas of report writing, officer safety, suspects, prisoners, and use of common sense and good judgment”
sounds like dorner was pretty well versed in doing nothing related to his job well.
so of course it was do due the evil intentions of all those around him.
I often wonder about the thinking behind a political philosophy that claims to hate public unions and the MSM…but which believes and promulgates the things those two entities promote.
The MSM are lying iars, but you more often than not back and promote the memes they spread.
Public unions are a drain on the economy, are known to be corrupt and violent, and are known to lobby against conservatives and conservative values and policies…but when they claim that Dorner is a liar, you believe them.
You know that America has become a police state. You know that American’s LEO’s have become militarized. (Military drones are now being used to hunt Dorner and have been used to spy on American citizens in America. [a farm family in North Dakota.]) You know that America’s LEOs have been trained to hate and distrust conservatives. You know that conservatives have been legally defined as domestic terrorists by those same LEO agencies.
Those same militarized civilian LEO’s are an intimate part of the government. You claim that you don’t trust the government. The LEO’s in question are in a solid blue state, known for it’s corruption and for the lies told by it’s politicians and media. …but you now believe whatever they tell you.
So that justifies murder?
In many of the more recent mass murders, the criminal(s) were either registered democrats or come from a family whose members are registered democrats. One of the great bait and switch tactics used by the left is to infer conservatives are either nazis themselves or strongly leaning towards nazism. There seems to be a real problem with that as the nazi party was/is the “National Socialist German Workers’ Party”. Just substitute the word “democrat” for “German” and it seems to be very accurate.
I remember on obama’s wish list from his first term was the formation of a “civilian army”. I have heard unsubstantiated rumors (so far) that this is actually being done. Sounds like the brown shirts to me.
Nice that you acknowledged Ayn Rand appropriately. Rand also noted how terrible it was that two academic Philosophers, a socialist and a capitalist, could have a huge debate before their students, but then go and have lunch together as nothing had occurred. The capitalist could not grasp that the socialist’s position was life destroying, and was fuel for every murderous thug seeking a way to get away with it. She then asked who is the more evil, the socialist academic who advocates the immorality, or the thug who commits it?
A similar problem occurs between the religious right and the capitalist right. The socialists and the religious share the morality of altruism, which is inherently anti-capitalist. It is why the GOP, as a whole, has been floundering about for decades, unable to provide a truly different view of economics from that of the Democrats.
Square on the nail head!
“…the religious share the morality of altruism, which is inherently anti-capitalist”
Please explain that. From where I sit, that it utter nonsense.
Just because I’m a believer and believe that I/me/myself must help others as I can, does not in any shape, manner or form mean that I believe the state should FORCE anyone to do that for me.
So why do conservatives give so much more money to charity than liberals? Oh, I forgot that only government handouts count. My bad.
Not in the least.
Altruism by religious persons is the encouragement, of a free soul, to give something of their own to others. The freedom to keep what you have produced also includes the freedom to give some of it away.
“Altruism” by leftists is to take something from people who have no choice but to give it up. The leftists keep some for themselves, and distribute the rest to the others who implicitly or explicitly help them do the taking. This is tyranny, and in no way represents altruism.
With Crazy Obama Guy still on the loose in the Big Bear area, LA Mayor Villaraigosa offered a million dollar reward to stop the reign of terror. No word if Obama will accept. Certainly we have Miss Coulter’s Real Violence from the Left right here in SoCal.
Left, Right phuc both of you meddling holier than the common man/woman a$$holes. The job is to serve the citizen and not for lunch or mass murder either.
The problems are, No Term limits and career politicians.
Get rid of those and you will be getting somewhere.
The DHS is now looking more and more like an apparatus to impose state control:
http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/why-is-government-stockpiling-guns-ammo/
There are also reports of US military personnel having to take an oath to fire on US citizens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=kzT6X3_Bg9o&NR=1
This comment was a reply to Jao at #37.
The Left often……with understanding or not……often practices what is called “projection.” Putting their own rage, aggression, tendency towards violence off on other people–usually their political opponents on the Right.
And its not just rage–most folks recall that back prior to the 1st Obama election it was folks on the Left that were running around making “racist” comments about the President.
Leftism is all to often simply a cover for rage/frustation filled people to vent their hate and fury upon other people.
To lift and alter a line–if Leftism didn’t exsist it would be necessay to invent it.
Sorry forgot a point/s
I really wish I could get back to the debate I was having a few weeks ago on gun control.
Then I could have answered as to why I feel I “needed: a gun:
“Cause there are clearly A LOT of people perfectly willing to SUPPORT and JUSTIFY the killing of perfectly innocent people simply because they happen to be the children/boyfriend of a person they have a beef with.”
I “need” a gun not just because of the criminals and sickos that might directly threaten me/mine. I “need” a gun because of all the people willing to give tacit approval and tacit support for the sickos DOING the killing.
A gun might or might not help me–but its a SURE bet that a whole heck of lot of my “fellow” citizens are NOT going to do so–indeed, they might well be cheering my attacker/killer on…….and once I’m dead/injured they will be justifying their actions.
You omitted good reason. It can happen that suddenly the police are off the street chasing somebody they really really want bad and now its only literally only the criminals with the guns.
I mean whats the point of speeding if no ones giving out tickets.
War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage. Laurence H. Keeley.
[Right, all that stuff Rousseau said about the Noble Savage and the rotted nature of civilized man is utter rubbish.]
By 1790, Rousseau et al smashed the Church. The secular religions scampered out from the corpse, letting loose a plague of Deductive reasoning on the earth.
Hitler is far right and the spectrum works if one remembers the zero point is the view from atop Lenin’s tomb. The spectrum works better if one thinks in terms of who owns what and power of life/death. That puts Xerxes, Mao, and Stalin in kind of a sandwich. Hitler still is far right in that he is at the far right of the Socialist part of the spectrum. The Right in the US is off the chart beyond the Socialst spectrum.
Regarding the Nazi – rightwing or not discussions above, in Germany reference is often made to “black” and “red”. And the posters who say that right-wing in Europe means something different in Europe are correct. Europe’s right wing tends to favor strong state powers vis a vis the individual. Only in Britain is there a conception of personal liberty similar to that of the US.
Published on Feb 11, 2013 On the practice of locking people up on the grounds they are a potential danger to themselves or others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOeRSL0crcg&feature=player_embedded
New Liberal Hero: Cop-Killer Chris Dorner
We are all Ted Kaczynski! James Holmes for President! I support Charlie Manson!
Such enthusiasm for killers would be absurd, right? Yet, Christopher Jordan Dorner has been receiving similar accolades from many of America’s leftist-liberals.
As of late Monday. President Barack Hussein Obama hadn’t declared that if he had a son he would look like the fugitive ex-cop, accused cop-killing, mass-murderer Dorner. Last year, Obama made that “son” comment about the teenage thug Trayvon Martin so it may only be a matter of time until he joins his fellow, disturbed liberals who have all but canonized Dorner because, well, because Dorner is somehow heroic in the bizarre alternate universe in which libs exist.
Lefty writer Len Levitt on the leftist Huffpo.com has suggested Dorner will be a “martyr” if and when the LAPD finds him and HuffPo commenters have been gushing admiration for Dorner who has a million dollar bounty on his head after he allegedly murdered three innocent people including Monica Quan and her fiance as “punishment” of Monica’s father Randall Quan because he blames the former LAPD captain for getting him fired from the police force.
According to London’s Daily Mail, to emphasize his venom Dorner actually called the bereaved Mr. Quan and taunted him after murdering his daughter.
That makes sense, right? Murder the child to punish her father and then taunt him about it. It apparently makes sense to the deranged puppy Chris Dorner who is out to get just about anyone and everyone he feels ever did him wrong over the course of his 33 miserable years of life.
The Huffpoites enthusiastically wished Dorner all success in wreaking vengeance in retribution for his victimization by . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=30051.)
The USURPER HUSSEINS ‘do whatever’s necessary’ style of laid back disassociated absentee governing is extremely reminiscent of that other SOCIALIST Dictator Hitler’s style. Adolph did not give instructions he just made ‘suggestions’ such as ‘lets remove all these pesky Jews from Germany’ and ‘cripples and the mentally retarded are a drain on our rescources’ and his acolytes rushed to make his ‘suggestions’ reality. Unfortunately for the American’s in Benghazi HUSSEINS minions are incompetent.
One of the key differences between right-think and left-think is the reaction to a sudden good idea.
If you are conservative, you think, “This is brilliant! I can make a fortune off this!”
If you are liberal, you think, “This is brilliant! Everyone should be forced to do this!”
The Little flower saint who prayed for the “most evil man alive” in her day and the result
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2012/12/therese-and-the-death-penalty
His house is burning down and he is in danger perhaps of burning alive as all those people did in waco Texas This is very painful as I remember
broad and spacious according to Jesus is the road leading to destruction so who can be sure they are not on that road?
Who know?
In God;s eyes maybe I am the worst sinner for threating to nuke Iran little girls to save Israel who deply believe in Holy Maru The virgin Mother of Jesus?
i have some praying to do and confession of possible great sin maybe
but good no one listen to me yet
You’ll never hear of NRA or TEA Party Members driving loaded school buses off of cliffs.
Bernard Levine (c)1998
Excerpt CUT & PASTE
THE GREAT DIVIDE
Ever since its first European settlements, in the early 1600s,
America developed as two completely different republics. We have been
politically divided ever since, and will always remain so. This is
because our two founding republican traditions are both opposite and
irreconcilable.
On one side of the divide were the agrarian republicans like Thomas
Jefferson and James Madison. They gave us the Declaration of
Independence and the Constitution, with their foundation stones of equal
creation, personal freedom, and the inalienable rights of every citizen.
Theirs was a republic of innate virtue, where crime and vice were
nothing more than aberrations. An individual’s misbehavior was only of
concern to the State when other citizens had been harmed by it.
On the other side of the divide were the puritanical republicans
like the autocratic clergyman, Cotton Mather. These men believed all
citizens to be innate sinners, irresistibly driven to dastardly deeds
unless rigidly restrained by the State. Their puritan republic, their
City of God, was like a brittle chain, which a single weak link would
sunder. In their world, even the slightest mis-step from pious purity
had to be prevented at all cost. Countless detailed laws and regulations
were devised, and then constantly revised, in order to eliminate every
possibility of straying. To the true puritan — whether pious Christian,
secular humanist, or leveling socialist — notions of rights and
responsibilities are meaningless. All that matters is the prevention of
sin. No form of prior restraint can be too severe, if it advances this
fundamental goal.
> WHY THEY DO IT
The puritanical impulse is a deep one. We all have it. It is
founded in the fear that other people’s freedom of action is a threat to
our own safety, our own sanctity. It is the impulse to make the other
fellow toe the mark.
The puritan knows that his own motives are good, but he does not
trust yours. By regulating every detail of everyone else’s life, he
believes he can prevent crime before it happens. This is so much neater
and safer than waiting to punish actual crimes after the fact.
The puritan impulse is the wish to make all risk disappear. This
seems much more direct than learning how to manage or avoid risk, and
much less demanding than arming oneself to defend against risk. The
puritan, like the primitive shaman, seeks to make everything right in
the world by magical words of command.
Has it ever worked? Can it ever work? Look at the record — it has
never been successful. Puritanism is, at bottom, simple tyranny, and
tyranny is doomed to failure.
But puritanism’s unbroken record of failure will not stop people
from trying again and again. Every new generation is born with faith in
the power of magic words — written laws — to prevent sin.
I absolutely hate when progressives call themselves liberals. I am a true liberal by definition meaning that I believe in liberty for everyone to have the ability to do what they like within reason. If I don’t agree with someones views I don’t say they should be locked up as terrorists against the state as progressives do against the NRA. I don’t try to take away peoples rights under any conditions. With the crap progressives constantly have oozing out of their mouths I am so glad we don’t live in a democracy.
“He has a PhD in political science. A wild guess says he may know more about this than you do.” I disagree – a PhD is NO guarantee of integrity.
The text below from Wikipedia shows that even a PhD can be a bigot. And resort to phoney data to “prove” his prejudice.
So does Michael Bellesiles. A teacher at Emory university. And author of Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture. That book earned him the Bancroft prize from Columbia university. He replied to Heston’s criticism by telling the actor to earn a Ph.D. before criticizing the work of scholars.
Except that the brilliant PhD saw his award rescinded after Emory University conducted an internal inquiry into Bellesiles’s integrity, appointing an independent investigative committee composed of three leading academic historians from outside Emory concluded that “his scholarly integrity is seriously in question”.
A ridiculous article, definitely in the “pot calling the kettle black” category.
Here’s reality, folks. Leftists are every bit as violent as rightists, and vice versa. “Leftists” are every bit as fascist as “rightists”. “Rightists” are every bit as socialist as “leftists”. These are just labels, just as meaningless as the names of the football teams you support.
A few days ago I was arguing on a gun forum against the socialism of government schooling, and having a hard time with it. So much for the supposed “conservatives”…
There are two kinds of people: those who believe the government religion, and those who don’t. The former (including both “liberals” and “conservatives”) are all by definition violent, because that is what government is, institutionalized violence. The latter are generally not violent. That is how society splits, on the question of violence. Not left vs. right.
Klavan is on point and so are some of the other more grounded folks here who realize we are in for a serious shitstorm.Nothing is going to be settled because all sides dont want it to be.Thats the plan.Does anyone really think that pushing some tyrants or their minion eggheads writings/theories now is going to suddenly cause the whole world to wake up and ponder the consequences of their evil and turn a new leaf?Politics is a talking war,and for years nothing has changed,only gotten worse.Humans fight,conflict is in our DNA.Figure it out.How far some tyrant was on a left-right scale line/circle..WTF?This nation is the best and closest it has ever come to being truly free,but thats done.Get over it and stop being lawyers for politics.Political BS will be slung aside like a recently soiled baby diaper when SHTF.There will be very little,if any grey area left.They have an agenda and you cant stop it now,you better prepare.Hopefully someday someone will be writing worthless crap about whats coming in another comments section.If this gets published and I offend anyone,good.