Hi Craig,

Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they in control of our daily lives?

On 9/9/2012 10:30 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 7:25:57 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:

    Hi Craig Weinberg
    I really don't know much about the John Birch Society,

"The John Birch Society has its roots in the 1950s when*it opposed the U.S.’s affirming the human rights principles of the United Nations*. It was used as a grassroots corollary to McCarthyism, insisting that imagined Communists were standing behind every light pole, ready to end the world as we know it. It still sees itself as fighting Communism, as well as the New World Order (whatever that is!), big government, the Civil Rights Movement, feminism, wealth redistribution and more. You are not likely to hear the John Birch Society using epithets or spewing base language; its values are more carefully hidden behind flag-waving and obscure and irrelevant legal principles. Its words are cloaked in concern for the "direction of the nation."

John Birchers *opposed the **1964 Civil Rights Act*, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Civil_Rights_Act> saying it violates the Tenth Amendment <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution> to the United States Constitution and overstepped the rights of individual states to enact laws regarding civil rights. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rights> On its website, the John Birch Society complains that <http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5476-obama-gets-what-thats-right-the-nobel-peace-prize> "President Obama - the man who got fawning media treatment for no reason, was elected with a thin resume and exalted without even being a king - has now been given the Noble Peace Prize." The John Birch Society also opposes health care reform, gun control, public schools and a host of other progressive causes.

The Right-wing "watch" group, Public Research Associates, <http://www.publiceye.org/tooclose/jbs.html> notes: "(T)he Birch society *pioneered the encoding of implicit cultural forms of ethnocentric White racism and Christian nationalist antisemitism* rather than relying on the White supremacist biological determinism and open loathing of Jews that had typified the old right prior to WWII. Throughout its existence, however, the Society has promoted open homophobia and sexism."

Because it is more "libertarian" than openly racist, anti-Semitic and sexist, the John Birch Society is often not characterized as a hate group like the Ku Klux Klan <http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/type.jsp?DT=7> or the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), <http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846> at least as defined by the Southern Poverty Law Center. <http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intpro.jsp> One way the John Birch Society escapes that designation is because it receives support <http://watch.pair.com/jbs-cnp.html> from prominent politicians and elected officials. Birchers work hard to mask the anti-human rights beliefs that underlie their opinions." (from http://archive.truthout.org/topstories/112909ms1)

    but googling it up, find that it was once falsely accused of being
    no doubt due to over-zealous liberal hatred of conservatism.
    The KKK was very racist. As far as I know it's mostly dead. Good.

Huh? Hate groups are huge. The KKK is pretty small (about 100 chapters and 5000 members from the estimate I just saw), but there are many more Aryan groups, growing fast. As has been pointed out - not all conservatives are racists, but clearly the overwhelming majority (perhaps all?) racists are conservative. There are no liberals in any hate groups.

    A greater sin, IMHO is political correctness, supported by Al-qaeda,
    which is sending America down the toilet. If you don't see that,
    no amount of explaining on my part will enlighten you.

Political correctness certainly can be irritating, but it is also important to protect groups who are vulnerable from threats that escalate violence. Anti-American/Anti-Western terrorism around the world is certainly a threat, but not really a significant one for American citizens. Certainly nothing on the order of the response, which has amounted to open surveillance and unrestrained powers of control over the population. There is a far, far greater chance of being struck by lightning than being affected by terrorism:

"A companion piece <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703481004574646963713065116.html> in the /Wall Street Journal/ lays out the statistics. Since 2000, the odds of you dying as a result of a terrorist act aboard a commercial American airliner is 1 in 25 million. The odds of getting struck by lightning: 1 in 500,000." http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2010/01/odds_of_dying_in_terrorist_attack_on_airline_1_in_25_million_struck_by_lightning_1_in_500000.php

Political correctness has not frozen wages for 35 years. Political correctness has not outsourced millions of jobs. Political correctness doesn't evade paying taxes in offshore accounts and lobbying for tax cuts for the rich. It didn't deregulate the banking industry and make billions of dollars disappear into a few people's pockets. These are the things that threaten America. Political correctness? What? Rush Limbaugh is being hampered in his free expression by liberals? The threat has always been fascism - from the left or the right. Hate, not politeness. Brutality not sensitivity.

As you say though, if you don't see that already, I can't make you see it.


    Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net <javascript:>
    Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
    so that everything could function."

        ----- Receiving the following content -----
        *From:* Craig Weinberg <javascript:>
        *Receiver:* everything-list <javascript:>
        *Time:* 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
        *Subject:* Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

        On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:

             because ironically and
            paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
            Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
            saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
            the subject up.

        Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would
        you call those liberal organizations? I don't want to get into
        a political flame war, but just so you know, liberals do not
        see the world in terms of race, but they are prejudiced
        against conservatives because they see them as people who are
        unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of
        the consequences of that ignorance. Of course that may not be
        the case, but any of the hundreds of millions of liberals who
        might read what you have written there will interpret it in
        precisely that way.

        Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or
        contradict the political orientation of the first strongly
        political person they are exposed to in their life. Usually a
        parent or older sibling - if they like them, they see the
        political world through their eyes, if they dislike them, they
        seek to prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple.
        Very few people research politics methodically and impartially
        and formulate a set of opinions based on 'facts'.





You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to