From AT:
Re: "As we look around the world at the countries that practice Islam as a state religion, it is almost incomprehensible that the left should defend Islam so fervently."
Well, the Left's Prime Directive is to put the collective under the rule of collectivizers. Sharia Law is nothing if not collectivist. So what's not to understand?
To help give Leftist Obysmalism the bum's rush, the following may help:
1) Preserve America's territorial and corporate borders.
2) Resist enabling or allowing government to be invested in or bought as a commodity. Instead, help and rely on charity to spread wealth.
3) Educate those who desire opportunity to express individual initiative and creativity (middle class), so their insights can help reinforce and educate the lowest common denominator among those who are blinkered, dumb, addicts, pushers, and pimps.
4) Educate how the wealthy often seek to hoodwink the lower class in order to eliminate the middle class so that the masses can never again have a say.
5) Educate how wealthy elitists often masquerade as Robin Hood, as if to redistribute to the poor, while they really use the poor as props, to stand on while claiming to know best.
6) Spread the truth about Islam, Marxism, Diversity Divisionism, Unprincipled Multi-Principalism, and Obysmalism: They are fronts for Collectivizers.
7) Understand that a higher field of consciousness does exist, and that it contends against spiritual pathologies (evil), which also exist.
8) Understand that you cannot be a moral agent to the extent you leave your salvation up to government or believe and behave as if government should be your mediator to Higher Consciousness. Obysmalism must go!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
The National Socialists were leftists. Once they got in power, they were, shall we say, unfriendly to Jews, blacks, gypsies, free spirits, homosexuals, etc. Islamists are unfriendly to Jews, homosexuals, and women. They are also unfriendly to European whites who advocate for values above the State -- a commonality with American Leftists. Both Islamists and Leftists support collectivism and a stop to economic development (i.e., environmentalism). They have much in common. This begs a question: If Brown Shirts wanted to build at Ground Zero, how much support would American Leftists be lending? OK, I know they would not support now, post 1939. But if this were 1939, would not the same Leftists as are supporting the Mosque be supporting the Brown Shirts? How else did the National Socialists take over? Do they have a clue where their principles lead?
Sometimes Americans trust too much to their luck. On Obama, too many gave him the benefit of the doubt, voting for him to try to get us past race baiting. Instead, they fell for reverse racism and utter treachery. Now, all ground for doubt is gone. Everyone who can think knows Obama is an anti-American collectivist who would be gratified to reduce all Americans who are not on the take from corruptocrats to live under the boot of any kind of collectivist redistribution. There is no longer any benefit of the doubt to give. None. As Cato would teach, every speech should end thus: Obama must go.
For his spiritual mentor, Obama traded Wright and BLT for this guy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ku4lSm17Vc
What are the odds that this guy is tight with Obama's notion that his individual salvation depends on his collectivist salvation? What School of Theology teaches that Jesus said to go forth and use government to force people to spread their wealth to those who can acquire political power to take it? Marx was an atheist. When did theologians morph into Marxists? When did despots morph into theologians?
Re: Obama’s Rats -- I don't need to distinguish whether the people around Obama are (1) so morally multi-principled as to be unprincipled, (2) duped idiots, (3) spiritually pathological, (4) or spaced out party dudes who hate responsible society. I just want them sent back to study hall. Until they grow some sense.
Re: “The Republican Party has become the Party of the People, as the words of the GOP simply reflect the frustration held by many Americans.”
Yes. We must run the rats out. Then, what is our vision after that?
Re: Co-opting the Party of the People (i.e., The Ways of the Dark Side): Suppose a forum were to begin to incite hope and movement towards revivifying middle class freedom and dignity as a check against rulers of the collective. Given modern networks for finance, for abuse of trust, and for communication and monitoring of tactics, would not reigning oligarchs simply buy the forum, abusing their fiduciary trust in order to co-opt and rot out any such threat from within?
For anyone looking for an incorruptible exemplar in the vein of Jesus, Washington, and Lincoln, do not forget that such exemplars tend to come along only when conditions border apocalypse closely enough in order to objectify our common attention. Otherwise, every mouthpiece that approaches becoming a threat to the “progressive” onslaught of rule over the collective tends simply to be either whacked or bought. (E.g., Huffington and Johnson.)
We badly need a leader who can inspire us to assimilate around a defense of human freedom and dignity, sustained more under decently assimilable values than under coercion of ubiquitous dictate and regulation by moral criminals fronting as “law” and government. However, until a way is prepared in the hearts of most decent people, that realm will remain beyond this world. Simply put, a libertarian philosophy will not get us there, so long as it retains little regard concerning the kind of values that must be respected in order to sustain decent civilization without intrusive need for Big Government or invitation to Crime Inc.
Is there reason to discern hope in the dim future? Yes. The hope is in apprehending a general field of empathetic consciousness, independent of Crime Inc., Big Gov, and Libertarian adolescence. However, that field needs to be catalyzed in order to condense to objectifying leadership in the here and now. To grab our common, objective attention, to herd all our subjective impressions onto the same page, is an apocalypse of sorts quickening? Can vision among people of decency help to soften it?
Can we reasonably and meaningfully act and fortify against the worst, and still hope? Yes! Does the Republican Party understand that? Apart from their blocking of Dinos, is there affirmative evidence? Is there evidence that they will not stoop to their own brand of representative prostitution in the service of Prog collectivists? Will they close the border, restore energy independence, stop enriching clear enemies of liberty, stop selling military technology to collectivist despots, and take reasonable steps to restore American industry? They ought to.
Yes, they are venal. More than that, they are entirely unprincipled -- both in character and in beliefs. Yet they are what our society has come to float to the top. They do not believe anyone really cares, certainly not God. Once one sinks to that level, to the level of believing our entire reality is purely a matter of uncaring indifference, then why exert yourself to any cause higher than getting the next high, or even the ultimate and permanent solution: Kool aid akbar!
But that's just the liberal version of kool aid. The conservative version is to expect that you can reason with people who fundamentally do not respect or believe in reason. You can't fix stupid. The best we can do is this -- realize: these philosophies are extant; a lot of people suffer spiritual pathologies under these beliefs; we can monitor symptoms, but we cannot cure deeply ingrained spiritual pathologies; if given power, these spiritual sociopaths will force everyone to drink their kool aid. Resist now, or watch Obama continue to sink us under continuing appointments of Jim Jones-like czars. There's no principled reasoning in Leftism, but there is venal scheming.
Jim Jones and Obama both had/have wholly imaginary, unreal, unprincipled messiah complexes. Once America disavows Obama, we will not safely be able simply to turn our backs on him.
From AT:
Uriel said, "Personally, I'd also like to see a Constitutional Amendment which FREEZES the ASSETS of anyone holding elected office for the duration of their time in office. Obviously, some restrictions would need to also be placed on their family, and on the use of proxy investors."
The dream of my father is to see every D.C. traitor to American values and the Constitution, as well as his co-conspirators, stripped of all honors, forfeited of all assets, and restricted to house arrest, except upon being bonded and accompanied by U.S. Marshalls. That is, unless he could convince some collectivist utopia to accept his sorry self. When you run for higher office, make promises to the American people, knowing that you plan to use and undermine them, there is no rehabilitation. But there should be shame and great gnashing of teeth.
When you submit your identity to the collective, you authenticate yourself by how you please the ruler. The ruler tends less to be concerned with individual justice than with preserving control. Fear quickens and consolidates his control more efficiently than any other thing. He wants everyone to know he has but to let it be known that he is displeased and all who displease him become at risk of his Oz monkeys, fatwas, and "get in their faces" urgings and community uprisings. Collectivization has always been less about spreading wealth and decency than it has been about spreading control, misery, and hopelessness. The hopelessness of collectivists is their twisted notion of hope and change. No collective ruled by man without having inculcated general respect for a caring God has made the transcendental leap from dystopia to utopia. Collectivist fascism, at its root, is necessarily sadistic and evil -- to body, mind, and spirit.
Don Pullen said, "Mayor Bloomberg is no twit or fool."
Quite right. He's a spiritual pathogen. (That's scientific lingo for demon.) "Spath" for short. Conveys more of the essence of evil than "twit."
We need a dictionary for the dialect of Ebevileks. We need a mirror to hold up to the demagogues.
@Alz said, "This is why no amount of reason will ever sway them on the issues (all of them). We're working to make things better and they hate it!"
Good insight! Even before Obama was elected, he expressed that it was more important to narrow the gap caused by inequality than to improve everyone's economic condition.
For only one purpose could I agree with the need to narrow the gap: To help defend against collectivism brought down at the other end, not from state enforced communism, but from a cabal of oligarchic corporatists made so disproportionately wealthy as to have essentially bought our politicians and governments.
Apart from that, I think gap reduction just for the sake of gap reduction -- whether forced by the State or by wealthy elitist corporatists -- is an evil abomination. No one should have a right to prevent his neighbor from exerting himself to improve his mind or his property. But collectivists want to reduce all who are not of the ruling class -- in education, income, and property -- to the lowest common denominator. This kind of forced equalization is evil mind enslavement, but it is what collectivists want to force submission to, by hook or by crook.
I truly wish liberals and atheists could get a clue about what is the the real nature of the enemy against human freedom and dignity.
Re: "The affluent Muslim theocrats effectively bribed France into accepting Sharia finance laws while the poor Muslim theocrats start riots in Paris suburbs whenever the police try to enforce French laws."
Well, we let corruptly backed politicians of the USA lead the way in making the world dependent on Collectivists' oil, in order to enrich enslavers while rotting out producers. The more you want big, quick riches, the sooner you find the most corrupt agents on earth. How much bribe money is being taken by our politicians, so they can lie to us while helping the bribers to siphon us dry? To what extent have we rotted away the capacity to elect decent representativies? How is it that so many so smugly expect us to get by while denigrating nearly all aspects of traditional values, religion and education? This situation is extremely unstable and does not appear likely to lead us to anything decent. Instead of waking up, a lot of folks are blaming the only institutions that have any chance to save us from this accelerating descent into utter depravity. In these days, nearly everyone does his own thing and thinks that is a sustainable recipe. Uh, no. It's not. It's a situation that guarantees pedophilia practicing sheiks and priests, raids against our children's future, and celebrity for rotters.
Re: "What need have we for a white Jesus when we are not white but black? If Jesus Christ is white and not black, he is an oppressor, and we must kill him. The appearance of black theology means that the black community is now ready to do something about the white Jesus, so that he cannot get in the way of our revolution."
If Christ is Christ, then He cannot be below religion, man, or state. That is is a truism; to argue otherwise is to argue against a truism. It is to argue that 2 plus 2 is 5. One may as well say: If Christ is not primarily for my situation, then off with Christ. One may as well promote oneself to being God. Well, that is rather a perverse orientation on one's place in the fundament. That so many folks have been sucked into that vortex should be a warning about just how confused and desperate mankind can be. How could any reasoning adult consider BLT and its spiritual double cousin, Islam, both of which are fixated on ruling the secular realm, to be other than twisted? To fear for mankind's spiritual welfare, to be "phobic" of BLT and Islam, is hardly the sign of a sick mind; it is consistent with a sane mind. To fear a President who was raised as an apologist for such twisted philosophies is not racist, bigoted, or phobic. It is to be sane ... which our MSM obviously is not.
Ordinary Christians accept much of the Reformation; they know to read the Bible in context; they know it would be wrong to stone people for adultery. If they took the Bible as a literal checklist for imposing atrocities upon nonbelievers, they would be little better than psychopaths following a twisted killer. The Koran IS taken by its believers to be a literal prescription. To fear the massing of minds that are so easily twisted to such a vortex is hardly "phobic" in any sense that is less than sane. Rather, to deliberately choose not to see the danger in such massing is to submit and sacrifice one's capacity for reasoning to the mindless void.
Radicalized Ignorance and Evil do not try to prevail by employing reason or good will. They seek to prevail, at first, with passive aggression. As they draw strength in numbers, there comes a tipping point into full fledged aggression gone wild. There is a stark choice that requires that a line be enforced: either we timely preserve liberty and reason, or we tolerate mind submission to totalitarianism. Liberals and Progs are the ones who don't see the line until it can no longer even be discussed.
From Rand's "Anthem": "There are Solidarity 5-6347, who are a bright youth, without fear in the day, but they scream in their sleep, and they scream "Help us! Help us! Help us" into the night ...."
Fools and incompetents need a champion to show that their condition is the fault of others. Once their champion is shown to merit neither the respect of scholars nor the fear of thugs, they lose twice. First, their hopes are dashed. Second, their self esteem is shaken. They must now turn on their champion, for otherwise they would necessarily admit the fault was in themselves. It would seem humane to take pity on such a champion. But that also would be folly, for until the faux champion realizes and admits his fundamental shortcomings, any relaxation against his perfidies would simply reinflate him to his previous state of dangerous deficiency. We cannot long afford to allow fools and incompetents to remain on pedestals of delusion.
Surely, we can experience and appreciate logical lunacy, but I'm not so sure we can "see" it. Had we elected McCain, could we ever have learned (or deconstructed?) the looney limits of Obysmalism? Of course, either-or reasoning has its place: as related to perspectives of a reasoner! Some think we must have either natural selection or intelligent design. They fail to apprehend a third alternative: participatory conscious design, which unfolds in response to feedback that rebounds in respect of parameter limits. It's easy to fall into error in assuming that all phenomena must be completely subject to either-or reasoning and must be completely and exclusively derivative either of natural selection or of intelligent design. However, "God" may have said: "I must experience logical lunacy so that I may hope to plumb some of the limits of my mind." Perhaps, to reassert American style exceptionalism, it was necessary to experience Obysmal deconstruction. Sort of like an ipecac syrup.
Post a Comment