“I used to think (as an old leftie union man) that we needed to be more activist and militant. Voting as we now have it is as exasperating as the vote in the old Soviet Paradise or whatever farces exist in Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq….” – archy
“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.” – Emma Goldman On Nov 22, 4:42 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > I used to think (as an old leftie union man) that we needed to be more > activist and militant. Voting as we now have it is as exasperating as > the vote in the old Soviet Paradise or whatever farces exist in > Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq. I began to think that the turn to the > soggy middle-class 'meritocracy' might help, but this is now > functionally tribal and selfish. We are dealing with pathology, but > this is a dangerous thought given the potentials of zealot behaviour. > We need deep constitutional change that controls our representatives. > They are so out of it that a few of them have just seen fit to elect' > an EU President and 'Foreign Affairs Minister' with no reference to > the electorate. > > On 22 Nov, 04:35, dj Briscoe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > True > > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 5:08 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I go along almost all the way here Slip, though I don't like Randism. > > > Truth eludes us in the absolute sense and I probably agree with Rorty > > > that we wouldn't know when we had achieved it even if we could. One > > > can look at Orn's citation of Emma Goldman and agree, yet see that the > > > world's population has increased three-fold since we were kids, find > > > no decent revolution anywhere and worry that certain types will soon > > > be using the term 'carbon footprint' with the same callous intent > > > carried by 'collateral damage'. Politics, as Slip says through > > > Mencken, is screwed. > > > > I'd slip off to the fact that we could now operate real-time feedback > > > in evaluating what we are doing in order to be more truthful. > > > Technology could get the banks and politicians off our backs and bring > > > about more direct democracy that had no room for the 'demas'. The > > > design of this would require that we take genuine looks at what goes > > > on in terms of cover-up and manipulation. Yet how do we start when > > > honesty is such a joke? > > > > On 21 Nov, 16:33, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > “I don't find anyone to be anathema, I find the word harsh, > > > > especially > > > > based on opinionated views that don't coincide with yours. Sometimes > > > > enlightenment can lead one into darkness, like the far right. > > > > Impartiality is hand in hand with being open minded.” – SD > > > > > Cool Slip!...you not finding anyone anathema and all. > > > > > And, harsh or not, the term is a part of our language and as such has > > > > specific uses. I mostly reserve it for those I sense are professing > > > > things against humanity. Having impartially approached Ms. Rand in an > > > > open-minded way, in fact I dare say as an idealist looking for new and > > > > preferable ideologies and methodologies when I first read her decades > > > > ago, my conclusion (for I do possess a discriminating mind) is > > > > precisely as posted. > > > > > “Our impartiality is kept for abstract merit and demerit, which none > > > > of us ever saw.” – George Eliot > > > > > “Do not waste your time on Social Questions. What is the matter with > > > > the poor is Poverty; what is the matter with the rich is Uselessness.” > > > > – George Bernard Shaw > > > > > “The open mind never acts: when we have done our utmost to arrive at a > > > > reasonable conclusion, we still…must close our minds for the moment > > > > with a snap, and act dogmatically on our conclusions.” – George > > > > Bernard Shaw > > > > > = = = > > > > “The ultimate end of all revolutionary social change is to establish > > > > the sanctity of human life, the dignity of man, the right of every > > > > human being to liberty and well-being” – Emma Goldman > > > > > On Nov 21, 7:40 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I don't find anyone to be anathema, I find the word harsh, especially > > > > > based on opinionated views that don't coincide with yours. Sometimes > > > > > enlightenment can lead one into darkness, like the far right. > > > > > Impartiality is hand in hand with being open minded. > > > > > > The art of politics, under democracy, is simply the art > > > > > of ringing it. Two branches reveal themselves. There > > > > > is the art of the demagogue, and there is the art of what > > > > > may be called, by a shot-gun marriage of Latin and Greek, > > > > > the demaslave. They are complementary, and both of them > > > > > are degrading to their practitioners. The demagogue is one > > > > > who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he > > > > > knows to be idiots. The demaslave is one who listens to > > > > > what these idiots have to say and then pretends that he > > > > > believes it himself. -- H.L. Mencken > > > > > > On Nov 20, 11:20 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > As to Rand, I find her to be anathema. > > > > > > > Truth is of value. Truth and reason are only one aspect of humanity > > > > > > and thus any system based on a partial view of our ‘being’ will not > > > > > > address the other aspects. > > > > > > > Two kinds of democracy: > > > >http://www.encyclopedia.com/video/f9OP2YXKIFs-noam-chomsky-two-kinds-... > > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > “Do not be alarmed, I have no dynamite in my pocket…Education is the > > > > > > only bomb sanctioned by true anarchism, which stands for freedom in > > > > > > the truest and highest sense.” – Emma Goldman > > > > > > > On Nov 20, 4:56 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Truth be that it is and has been, but it doesn't seem to correlate > > > > > > > with democracy and therefore we the people as has been > > > demonstrated, > > > > > > > have been duped and cajoled into what is basically a falsehood. > > > > > > > Randian and Randism are terms that Ayn Rand detests and I can see > > > that > > > > > > > you could have just set it as Ayn Rand socioeconomics. The rest is > > > > > > > based upon socialist and communist presumptions of a lack of inner > > > > > > > light, and I agree, but they are not without validity if founded > > > upon > > > > > > > pure truth politics. Let's face it, no system works without truth > > > > > > > within its tenets, which coincides with Rands tenet of Reason > > > leading > > > > > > > the way. The system of government within which we live in today > > > does > > > > > > > not reflect that of the government of reason that the founding > > > fathers > > > > > > > envisioned. Everyone loves to chew on Rand but you have to admit > > > that > > > > > > > some of it has value, even if it lies in the value of alternate > > > > > > > aspect. > > > > > > > > On Nov 20, 3:43 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > The US has always been mostly an oligarchy with some fascist > > > > > > > > tendencies. There has always been an extreme divide between the > > > > > > > > socioeconomic classes with a short lessoning of this for a few > > > decades > > > > > > > > last century. However during that era, the tax structure was the > > > most > > > > > > > > progressive and the US reached its zenith economically during > > > > > > > > the > > > same > > > > > > > > time period. Those who embrace Ayn Randian socioeconomic > > > > > > > > theories > > > like > > > > > > > > the neo-cons at once expand the economic divide and exacerbate > > > human > > > > > > > > suffering with a lack of empathy and compassion, similar to pure > > > > > > > > capitalism. Even when socialism and communism are founded on a > > > lack of > > > > > > > > inner light and wisdom does a similar chaos and arising of non- > > > > > > > > idealism result. The problem is not ‘out there’. We all have met > > > the > > > > > > > > enemy and it is us. > > > > > > > > > __ > > > > > > > > “Do not be alarmed, I have no dynamite in my pocket…Education is > > > the > > > > > > > > only bomb sanctioned by true anarchism, which stands for freedom > > > in > > > > > > > > the truest and highest sense.” – Emma Goldman > > > > > > > > > On Nov 20, 6:54 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > "You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the > > > wealthy > > > > > > > > > out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, > > > another > > > > > > > > > person must work for without receiving. The government cannot > > > give to > > > > > > > > > anybody anything that the government does not first take from > > > somebody > > > > > > > > > else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not > > > have to > > > > > > > > > work because the other half is going to take care of them, and > > > when > > > > > > > > > the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work > > > because > > > > > > > > > somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear > > > friend, > > > > > > > > > is about the end of any nation...You cannot multiply wealth by > > > > > > > > > dividing it.." Dr. Adrian Rogers > > > > > > > > > > Obviously our nation has been crumbling for some time. We've > > > seen our > > > > > > > > > manufacturing giants fall and corporate outsourcing leave > > > people > > > > > > > > > stranded. The government has become too large and > > > dysfunctional and > > > > > > > > > impotent other than its ability to waste taxpayer dollars, 98 > > > billion > > > > > > > > > in 2009. They could have given taxpayers thousands each to > > > stimulate > > > > > > > > > the economy, but that would have been too obvious and too > > > > > > > > > easy. > > > > > > > > > Instead they "take what we work for" and toss billions of > > > taxpayer > > > > > > > > > monies, to Wall street, Banks, and the Auto industry with much > > > of it > > > > > > > > > going to multi-million dollar bonuses to executives for doing > > > > > > > > > absolutely nothing. It is obvious that the government is no > > > longer a > > > > > > > > > governing body for the people but merely a tool used by the > > > wealthy > > > > > > > > > for the wealthy, an entity without a conscience. People have > > > become > > > > > > > > > just cogs in the mechanism of operational finance, > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=.
