01-11-2007, 09:09 PM | #41 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
You would not be just a nuffin' Your head all full of stuffin' Your heart so full of pain. You would dance and be merry Life would be a ding-a-derry If you only had a brain... ...and the vision to support, (in response to MM's quest for solutions from Democrats).... ...A Statement of Principles and a Policy Agenda for the 21st Century from the Democratic Leadership Council - the centrist Democrats. link (yeah, yeah, I know its just more socialist/communist american-destroying propaganda to you, DK)
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 01-11-2007 at 10:03 PM.. |
|
01-12-2007, 02:01 AM | #42 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
It has alot more to do with the whole way the constitution is now 'interpreted', than just the 2nd Amendment, so back off the notion that I'm bitching that I can't have a tank, etc.
In the early 1930's the new deal democrats in congress did more than stretch the limitations of power that the constitution gives them. They convinced the USSC to accept that interstate commerce also includes anything that affects interstate commerce, including intrastate commerce OR any activity that has a 'substantial effect' on interstate commerce. They also imbued themselves with the power of not having to show any cause or correlation that interstate commerce is affected, just make the claim that it is. That is why a once limited federal government is as bloated and cancerous as it is today.....and it's been that way for so long now most people just accept that this is the way that it is. Look at bill of rights cases in the last 70 years compared to what they were in the 18th and early 19th century cases. The individuals rights are no longer protected, except for freedom of speech. That little puppy gets alot of attention but is catered to because it makes people 'feel' like they have freedom still, but the rest are ALWAYS judged on how much compelling government interest OR how much societal benefit is garnered by infringing on the individual rights. Look at Kelo v. New London....or almost ALL eminent domain cases. Police power is practically unlimited and nearly unaccountable for any infringements of civil rights. The supremacy clause is used dozens of times a year to deny just compensation or redress of grievances to the citizens, who are the ones that the constitution was designed to protect and empower. No, the socialists and communists have indeed won because nearly all of you resignedly accept that monopolistic practices of a government run amok and are not only unwilling to change it by vote, but do nearly all you can to keep the parasites in power. As for 'centrists', that just means that they are a whole new group whose sole purpose is to get you to agree that the individuals rights matter less than society as a whole by using 'moderate' as a compromise.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
01-12-2007, 06:04 AM | #43 (permalink) |
Tone.
|
dks, to be totally blunt, that's a load of crap. Socialists have lost. Period. Capitalism has won. The corporation is the only thing that matters now. Corporations can get away with just about anything as long as they make money at it. Everyone likes to get down on Enron -their real crime? Not making money. Hiding it is what got them in trouble. Haliburton is so evil as to make Enron look like a fairy tale, but they haven't been stopped or even impeded. Why? Because they make money.
I don't see how you can sit there and say the republicans have done so much better when, since Reagan first got his hand in the country, corporations have been moving more and more toward total domination of society. Small businesses can't make it because the corporations are too huge. If you want employment and you're not lucky enough to have started a unique business for which there is no competition, you have to work for a corporation where you're expected to give everything you have to the neglect of your personal time, your family, and even your health. Yet that loyalty is not returned - the corporation will cast you adrift in a heartbeat if they think they can be more profitable (even just in the short term) without you. There are countless stories of executives and middle managers who once had a solidly middle class lifestyle and did their best for their corporate masters - and are now working menial jobs at Home Depot and Walmart just to get by because they were "downsized." I guarantee you this dks - you can take this to the bank. The current system of capitalism is not sustainable. A revolution is coming - it's just a question of when - and the longer it takes to get here, the worse it's gonna be when it does. Reagan kicked off the idea that it would be terribly fun to widen the gap between rich and not-rich. Now it's a yawning chasm - that's simply not sustainable. Eventually the poor and middle class will be fed up with watching the country's elite spend more money in a day than they make in a year while they worry about having enough money to buy groceries. Eventually that anger will reach a breaking point. It's happened before (the French revolution comes to mind) and it will happen again, I guarantee it. |
01-12-2007, 06:23 AM | #44 (permalink) | |||
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
|||
01-12-2007, 06:26 AM | #45 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
The Supreme Court's power of "judicial review" was confirmed in 1803, when it was invoked by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison. In this decision, the Chief Justice asserted that the Supreme Court's responsibility to overturn unconstitutional legislation was a necessary consequence of its sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. That oath could not be fulfilled any other way. "It is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the law is," he declared. As Marshall also noted in McCulloch v. Maryland, a constitution that attempted to detail every aspect of its own application "would partake of the prolixity of a legal code, and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind . . . . Its nature, therefore, requires that only its great outlines should be marked, its important objects designated and minor ingredients which compose those objects be deduced from the nature of the objects themselves." What it comes down to is that the interpretation in 20th and 21st century American may be more expansive than in the 19th century....a natural progression envisioned by the founding fathers. But decisions that you dont agree with are hardly a communists/socialist plot. While many basic interpretations of Constitutional rights stand the test of time, a 19th century interpretation of a more complex 21st century law or government action, which you seem to suggest is the correct role of the Court, would be as irrelevant and irresponsibile as it is ignorant.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 01-12-2007 at 07:18 AM.. |
|
01-12-2007, 06:52 AM | #46 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
Tone.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'll tell you how government can stop this mass downsizing trend that's destroying the middle class. Pass a two-fronted legislation requiring unemployment benefits for at least a decade after you downsize someone, and requiring large companies to extend the same benefits to independent contractors as they do to regular employees. Remove the profitability of treating people like chattel, and the corporations will stop doing it. It's a whole lot cheaper to keep that well trained worker on than it is to pay his salary for 10 years AND pay the guy in India who took over his job. Legislation taxing the holy crap out of imported labor would also help - I'm thinking a variable tax based on the gap between the US worker and his foreign replacement. If your US worker made $20 an hour, and your 3rd world worker makes $1, then the tax is $19 an hour. Remove the profit from the unpalatable activities, and they'll magically stop. |
||||||||||||
01-12-2007, 09:18 AM | #47 (permalink) |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Bottom line, to end this threadjack, the US is not even close to being socialist in any way. Suggesting so shows a massive misunderstanding of both socialism and the world around us. Also, this thread has nothing to do with guns. How would you like it if I brought up the 9/11 conspiracy in every thread?
|
01-15-2007, 02:55 AM | #48 (permalink) | |
Banned
|
Quote:
And, There it is.....dont you just hate it when reality gets Ugly? |
|
01-15-2007, 07:11 AM | #50 (permalink) | |
Tone.
|
Quote:
Well, ok, if you consider it palatable to have killed tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis and over 3,000 Americans in pursuit of an illegal war that the president had to lie to get us in to. . . I guess we'll just have to disagree. If you consider it palatable to now be faced with the reality that absolutely nothing can prevent an Iraqi civil war, and probably nothing can prevent a regional war in the Persian Gulf, we'll have to disagree there as well. |
|
01-15-2007, 07:19 AM | #51 (permalink) | |
Darth Papa
Location: Yonder
|
Quote:
What you've said here is: My opinion is right, and won't ever change. Others who disagree with me are wrong, and are hypocrites, and probably bad people. And I have no respect for elected representatives who are actually interested in their constituents' views--especially not when 70-odd percent of those constituents disagree with me. Better things keep going the disastrous way they're going (in fact, let's pour some gas on the fire), because I believe in it without any evidence or support or rationale for that belief. Even Bush admitted errors this week. Can you really be so narrow-minded? |
|
01-15-2007, 07:51 AM | #52 (permalink) |
Psycho
Location: Western New York
|
Shakran, if only the world were that black and white.
I deeply wish literally every political decision in this country didn't come down to party lines.
__________________
The Man in Black fled across the desert and the Gunslinger followed. Last edited by desal75; 01-15-2007 at 08:17 AM.. |
01-15-2007, 08:08 AM | #53 (permalink) | |
has all her shots.
Location: Florida
|
Quote:
I'm still uncomfortable when our resignation becomes trite I'm not at all sure that there is nothing we can do to secure a more functional and secure Iraq. And quite frankly (I say to no one in particular), us losing military personnel doesn't even enter into the equation of whether we should leave or not. Granted, that is just my opinion, but I find discussions of how many US soldiers we're losing to be distasteful considering what is happening in Iraq now. I think we're all familiar with the casualty numbers. Not to mention that many of the people who would be able to contribute to the maintenance of a functioning, healthy society are either dead or have fled the country with their families. We are responsible for it now. I can't settle for the purely political "republicans did it, it's not our problem now" point of view. I can't wrap my head around that kind of aloofness.
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce |
|
01-15-2007, 08:25 AM | #54 (permalink) |
Tone.
|
I don't have that viewpoint Mixed. I mean, yes, Republicans did it, and they were dumbasses for doing it, but that doesn't mean we can ignore the problem.
However, if we stay the country will degenerate into years of bloody civil war. If we leave the country will degenerate into years of bloody civil war. there is NO way to prevent the civil war. None. At all. It's like a tire fire. Once it gets going, you are NOT going to put it out. It will burn until it's out of fuel. You have 2 choices. Send your firefighters in where they might get hurt and inhale toxic fumes, and do absolutely nothing towards getting the fire out, or pull 'em back and just watch it burn. Either way, the result in the tire pile is the same, but the 2nd option at least lets you preserve the life and health of your firefighters. Iraq is no different. We've sparked the conflagration. It's going to happen. Nothing will stop it. Why not at least pull our guys back so they don't get hurt any more than they already have? The parallels of this war to Vietnam are becoming more obvious every day. Back then we said "oh we can't pull out, what will they do without us," and it was only when people finally realized that the country was sunk with or without us that we finally pulled out. The fact is that when we stick our nose in where it doesn't belong, bad things happen - especially if we let incompetent boobs that couldn't even lead a kid to the crapper take charge. And now not only does Mr. Bush want to stay in Iraq where we will do precisely no good, he wants to move on to Iran as well. This insanity has got to stop some time - it may as well be now. Oh, and desal75, if you're going to make fun little snips at what those of us in this thread have to say, perhaps you should come out with an opinion of your own. These little quips frankly make you look more like a troll than a debater. If you think I'm seeing the world black and white then please, by all means, educate me. Show me where the grey is. If you think it all depends on what I call palatable, then give us your definition of palatable and tell us your solution. Otherwise you're just taking useless pot shots which might work on Fark, but around here, we're not very impressed by it. Last edited by shakran; 01-15-2007 at 08:28 AM.. |
01-15-2007, 09:24 AM | #55 (permalink) | ||
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
And thus, the Datyon accords: Quote:
It could work in Iraq, with the only difference being to minimize the US role and face in the process and let Sunnis and Shia, through the Arab League, conduct the negotiations and replace US forces with an Arab Implementatin force. Its hardly a perfect solution, but IMO, more likely to lead to the cessation of sectarian violence then adding more US troops and maintaing a US occupation. Before anyone laughs it off, I do recognize that al Queda and other outside terrorists now in Iraq, although small in number, are not open to peace negotations. But they can be marginalized if the US presence is removed and the Iraq people and regional powers (Saudis and Egypt putting political pressure on Iran) demonstrate a commitment to route them out. The result would be providing for three self-governed regions in Iraq, under a loose central government. The current Iraq was a creation of western geo-political colonialiism. Its time to give it up.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 01-15-2007 at 10:17 AM.. |
||
01-15-2007, 09:45 AM | #56 (permalink) | |
has all her shots.
Location: Florida
|
Quote:
But that said, I do believe there is a measure of that attitude behind the popular pressure for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. I've grown quite skeptical of the political imperatives of both parties on this issue. Surprise! Your tire fire analogy is very compelling. I'm just not sure we are dealing with a conflagration out of control, yet. I'm just not sure.
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce |
|
01-15-2007, 09:51 AM | #57 (permalink) | |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
there might be a way out of the iraq mess via an internationalization of the conflict. the americans would have to recognize that there is no way out FOR THEM because they are and have been from the outset--that is from the invasion--a party within the civil war.
jacques chirac proposed an international congress of some unspecified type that would address these problems last week: i started a thread about it, which went nowhere. one option would be the un. another would be something like a congress of vienna, i dont know: but the idea seems far more likely to actually accomplish something positive in iraq than any of the options that are on the table right now--i understand that something like this is an element of biden's plan for iraq as well. what i see as the primary obstable to this is that from the far right/neocon viewpoint occupied by the bush people, any such internationalization of the conflict would be tantamount to defeat. so the primary obstacle is the hyper-nationalism of the bush administration, the neocon "realism" that remains intact (even after its obvious pulverization by events)---from the start, i have thought that the best document for thinking about the rationale behind the invasion was the project for a new american century website: if you look at it, it is clear that this iraq war is about the first iraq war and the Problem was less saddam hussein than it was the un. a subtext for the "surge" appears to be saber rattling at iran: Quote:
and this at a point when iran really must be included in a larger dialogue that would enable the americans to make themselves less central to the debacle that they have unleashed (thanks, bushco).... so with the bush administration still anywhere near power, it seems to me that the americans have no good options. there ARE options, but the ideological worldview of the bush people seem to preclude them. after losing in the polls, the right is now hiding a bit of its ideological underpinnings: they are still as ideologically incoherent as before november, but now prefer to downplay ideology and instead to act as though its alternative universe was a fact of nature, its strategy reasonable and its sense of alternatives legitimate. reality has demonstrated that none of this is true. the people of the us, despite republican gerrymandering efforts, rejected the policies of bushco. the american system of governance is now an ongoing demonstration of the problematic version of democracy we have: bushco is still in power and is still in a position to impose its blinkered, dysfunctional worldview on iraq, on american troops, on their families, on all of us, on the international community--and there appears to be nothing to be done about it. this does not mean that there are no alternatives: but it does mean that with george w bush in power, these alternatives will not be explored. meanwhile, again, lots of people will die as the far right cycles through version after version of its idiotic politics based on its idiotic fetishism of the american nation-state as global military hegemon. lots of people die and the bush administration is not, and in all probablility will not be held to account for it. quite the system we have here.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 01-15-2007 at 09:56 AM.. |
|
01-15-2007, 10:11 AM | #58 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
More on the Biden plan:
http://www.planforiraq.com/
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
01-15-2007, 10:45 AM | #59 (permalink) | |
Psycho
Location: Western New York
|
Quote:
And I would think calling another's post useless is more in the vein of being a troll than anything I said. I did not make a personal attack upon you and I'm at a loss to explain why you retaliated the way you did but I guess that is neither here nor there. Its not my job to educate you. Its not the job of this forum to educate you. As far as I know this is a place to express ones political ideas. Finally, I apoligize for ever giving you the idea that I would post to impress anyone.
__________________
The Man in Black fled across the desert and the Gunslinger followed. |
|
01-15-2007, 11:41 AM | #61 (permalink) | |
Psycho
Location: Western New York
|
Quote:
It may not be much but I would argue that this qualifies.
__________________
The Man in Black fled across the desert and the Gunslinger followed. |
|
01-15-2007, 12:09 PM | #62 (permalink) |
Pure Chewing Satisfaction
Location: can i use bbcode [i]here[/i]?
|
At the risk of sounding elitist, I'll reiterate what shakran said: it might qualify on Fark, but we'd prefer a little more "meat" in the expression of your political ideas here.
So, if you please: tell us what you feel is "palatable." Show us the gray area between the black and white you mentioned.
__________________
Greetings and salutations. Last edited by Moskie; 01-15-2007 at 12:11 PM.. |
01-15-2007, 01:23 PM | #63 (permalink) |
Psycho
Location: Western New York
|
I'm intrigued by the way this thread has become less about politics and more about teaching me how to use this forum. What is Fark anyway?
As for palatable, I wasn't trying to force what I think is or isn't on anyone. I was simply stating that what is needed is different to different people. Some would argue that any loss of life due to war is unnecessary. Others see justifiable reasons for killing and death, no matter on what scale. The grey area is that in any conflict there is no easy answer. Especially in conflicts like Iraq where the opposition isn't easily distinguished and the goals not easily expressed. Even the notion of winning or losing a conflict such as this is not easily defined. Some would say victory has already been achieved while some would argue that victory can never be attained. The grey is that both arguements have merit.
__________________
The Man in Black fled across the desert and the Gunslinger followed. |
01-15-2007, 02:03 PM | #64 (permalink) | |
Asshole
Administrator
Location: Chicago
|
Quote:
Back on topic, I doubt that I can find anyone stupid enough to try to argue that Iraq isn't SOME form of quagmire at this point, at least based on the information we have now. We're back to figuring out the "least bad" option to extricate ourselves whiles still maintaining some sort of dignity. In the meantime, I just received an email from a client purported to have originated from some Marines in Iraq who, by standing in formation, spelled out something to the effect of "we remember 9/11 and why we are here" despite the fact that the upper echelons of government have admitted that there's no real plausible link between the Saddam regime and the terrorist attacks. I'm starting to come to the conclusion that any sort of pullback without at least the facade of victory would do long-term damage to the national psyche. It may be that that damage is necessary or even welcomed, but I'm not sure of either.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo |
|
01-15-2007, 02:08 PM | #65 (permalink) |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
mr. jazz: what exactly is the national psyche?
just wondering. i really havent any idea. my husky grows impatient, wanting to go outside and flounce about in the pseudo-snow, so maybe more later.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite |
01-15-2007, 02:25 PM | #66 (permalink) | |||
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
Quote:
The connection with 9/11 is Islamic extremist are at war with us. The war front is currently in Iraq. If we leave Iraq, the war won't end. If Islamic extremist obtain and hold Iraq they will expand their offensive. I don't know what would be next, but you can believe the war will continue. Quote:
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
|||
01-15-2007, 02:34 PM | #67 (permalink) | |
Asshole
Administrator
Location: Chicago
|
Quote:
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo |
|
01-15-2007, 02:45 PM | #68 (permalink) | |
has all her shots.
Location: Florida
|
Quote:
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce |
|
01-15-2007, 02:46 PM | #69 (permalink) | |||
Banned
|
Quote:
Of course you wouldn't know what it is, roachboy. Reagan and Bush '41 believed it existed, and they successfully manipulated it to lull the sheeple into a state of amnesia induced, national pride and self satisfaction: Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
01-15-2007, 02:51 PM | #70 (permalink) | |||
Asshole
Administrator
Location: Chicago
|
Ace, I understand where you're coming from, but I just can't buy into most of your response.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo |
|||
01-15-2007, 03:07 PM | #71 (permalink) | ||||
Banned
|
Quote:
Hundreds of billions more spent on an intelligence apparatus and a department of fatherland security that has it's head up it's ass.... In Negroponte's first annual Threat Assessment testimony, he mentioned only the farce of a criminal investigation in Lodi, CA to describe the grave threat we face in America from "Islamic Fascist Butcher Killers", ace..... http://www.senate.gov/~armed_service...2002-28-06.pdf Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We were told, after 9/11, that there were "thousands" of "terrorist sleeper cells" in the US, ace, can you point to one that was "busted up", by the US government? |
||||
01-15-2007, 03:11 PM | #72 (permalink) | |
Banned
|
Quote:
|
|
01-15-2007, 03:17 PM | #73 (permalink) | |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
A lot of people have onest trouble differentiating between the fantasy spun by the media and reality. In reality, there is no evidence to suggest that there are terrorist cells in the US. There is no evidence that Saddam was a threat to the US. There is no evidence that the war in Iraq has decreased terrorism, in fact there is staggaring evidence that shows it has INCREASED terrorism substantially. There is no evidence that the US has done anything but hurt Afghanistan, and now warlord are making millions of dollars on drugs that could easily fund 'terrorism'. There is no evidence that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction following the destruction of most if not all his weapons in the early 90s. There was no link between 9/11 and Iraq whatsoever. There is, however, evidence that the US does not have the funding or manpower to 'win' against the 'terrorists' (they are not actually terrorists, but rebels) in Iraq. |
|
01-15-2007, 03:34 PM | #74 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
We took out Sadaam because he was a threat. He used weapons of mass destruction and would develop and use them in the future if he remained in power. He was in violation of, I don't know how many, UN resolutions, he used his military to attack us in the no fly zone. He sponsored terrorists to the tune of $25k. We should have taken him out in the first Gulf War.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
|
01-15-2007, 03:34 PM | #75 (permalink) | |
has all her shots.
Location: Florida
|
Quote:
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce |
|
01-15-2007, 03:37 PM | #76 (permalink) |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
i was thinking about this while i ws being dragged around outside on the far end of a huskyleash: the "national psyche" as a construct, the ideal-typical recipient for conservative ideological memes, and so the subject-position built into those memes, taken in sequence: the optimized receiver post, the presumed addressee of these messages. when you read them, or receive them (these memes) you can allow yourself to be enframed by them, so they appear to speak to and for you. since this positioning is never without accompanying claims, this act of being-enframed (interpellation in althusserspeak) is never neutral: so you position yourself as you allow yourself to be positioned, and you position yourself via assent as an element within this "national psyche".....and because the whole of conservative ideology is predicated on the notion of the nation, and within that on the notion of a "national will" it follows that to position yourself as an element within the "national psyche" is to position yourself on conservative ideological grounds.
conservatives like to imagine this national will/national psyche as being identical with themselves, politically speaking, and by extension as being "unified" it would follow that the "national pysche" or will has to be referenced in the singular, as if by dissenting you fall outside of it, fall outside of the "nation" as conservative like to think of it. seems a pretty effective way of getting folk to police what they think, doesnt it? and to experience it, all you need to do is buy the underlying mythology enough that conservative ideological propositions--which effectively tell you how to react as they tell you about the world as that ideology allow it to be understood--seem to make sense to you intuitively. if that happens, then dissent in any meaningful sense of the term threatens to push you off the edge of the earth. and all that is Out There is chaos. so it is no wonder that you worry about that, mr jazz: if you find these types of sentences to be compelling, and you read them as they "should" be read, you react as you are instructed to without that requiring much of any effort beyond the normal assimilation of infotainment in written form. its all about this goofball noun "nation" and what it entails. and in the hands of the right, that noun is about the least democratic possible. because its inclusive effects are all about exclusion. what you see in it depends on where you find yourself falling in relation to the propositions that use it. i dont find anything commonsensical about that word. i dont find it to be anything other than an ideological function. when i read books of american history written by americans, i find the same tic everywhere: the american mind, the american people, the american nation: all are first person plural names that get to run around and do things: it (the noun) assesses, reacts, does stuff, goes to a bar, has a few beverages, stumbles home, like the good mr. zappa talked about back in the day. it is all about a strange, and very particular fantasy of unity where none necessarily exists. i have never understood why americanists indulge this particular mythology, but they do, and all the bloody time. i guess the word "nation" appeals at some level, so the host of analytic problems that should be raised about it arent raised. and so all these first person plural standins for nation get to do stuff. very strange. anyway, without the notion of nation, conservative ideology has no signifieds. it already has no referent, but in that it is not different from anything else. the material host posted above gets to the same point, i think, in a kind of historically oriented fashion. i wonder if this qualifies as a rant. huh.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite |
01-15-2007, 03:38 PM | #77 (permalink) | |
has all her shots.
Location: Florida
|
Quote:
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce |
|
01-15-2007, 03:50 PM | #78 (permalink) | |||||||||||
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also, he lied because he left some with the impression the threat was more imminent than it actually was. I think we are splitting hairs. I think it all depends on how you define imminent, as Bill would say.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." Last edited by aceventura3; 01-15-2007 at 04:05 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost |
|||||||||||
01-15-2007, 04:08 PM | #79 (permalink) | |||||||
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"Terrorists" are not a threat to our freedom. They *might* be a threat to our safety becuase they have been galvanized together becuase the US attacked Iraq without provocation, but they are certinally not a threat to our freedom. Quote:
Saddam was no threat to us. He was even losing his power in his own country. |
|||||||
01-15-2007, 04:25 PM | #80 (permalink) | ||||||||
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
||||||||
Tags |
debate, vent |
|
|