You've been called out

Moderator: Super Moderators

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-05-2011 09:21 PM

voguy wrote: Then you can't ask for freedom, HB3. Your request is too silly to be considered.


If aliens came down and proceeded to capture, cook, and devour us a la the classic Twilight Zone episode "To Serve Man," but did it in the name of "global democracy," a huge percentage of us would apparently be lining up at the oven doors.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-05-2011 09:24 PM

Diogenes wrote: I didn't find his comments the least bit offensive - and rather enjoyed that he had the candor and guts to say it - instead of pandering and slobbering over all of these folks.

In his defense I've yet to hear from any one of them who sounded the least bit cogent. Also I think if you come from Herman Cain's background - his father had three jobs, janitor, barber and chauffeur, his mother a domestic - you came up the the very hard way - poor and black and so he knows what it is to dig in and push on.


Look again at this statement:
"Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks, if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself!" Cain said. "It is not a person's fault because they succeeded, it is a person's fault if they failed.
That is absolutely horrible -- cliched "evil capitalist" bull**** that proves every stereotype the Democrats are going to be pushing about Republicans next year.

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5862
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 10-05-2011 11:58 PM

Against the Institution: A Warning for ‘Occupy Wall Street

While I fully endorse the efforts and actions of the Occupy Wall Street protests, now emerging internationally, there are concerns which need to be addressed and kept in mind as the movement moves forward.

The process through which a potentially powerful movement may be co-opted and controlled is slight and subtle. If Occupy Wall Street hopes to strive for the 99%, it must not submit to the 1%, in any capacity.

The Occupy movement must prevent what happened to the Tea Party movement to happen to it. Whatever ideological stance you may have, the Tea Party movement started as a grass roots movement, largely a result of anti-Federal Reserve protests. They were quickly co-opted with philanthropic money and political party endorsements.

For the Occupy Movement to build up and become a true force for change, it must avoid and reject the organizational and financial ‘contributions’ of institutions: be they political parties, non-profits, or philanthropic foundations. The efforts are subtle, but effective: they seek to organize, professionalize, and institutionalize a movement, push forward the issues they desire, which render the movement useless for true liberation, as these are among the very institutions the movement should be geared against.

This is not simply about “Wall Street,” this is about POWER. Those who have power, and those who don’t. When those who have power offer a hand in your struggle, their other hand holds a dagger. Remain grassroots, remain decentralized, remain outside and away from party politics, remain away from financial dependence. Freedom is not merely in the aim, it’s in the action.

The true struggle is not left versus right, democrat versus republican, liberal versus conservative, or libertarian versus socialist. The true struggle is that of people against the institution: the State, the banks, the central banking system, the corporation, the international financial institutions, the military, the political parties, the mainstream media, philanthropic foundations, think tanks, university, education, psychiatry, the legal system, the church, et. al.

The transfer of power from one institution to another does not solve the crisis of our ‘institutional society,’ whereby a few have come to dominate so much, to concentrate so much power at the expense of everyone else having so little. True liberation will result only from opposition to ‘the institution’ as an entity. Placating power from one institution to another renders resistance ineffective. The power structures must be discredited, and power must be distributed to the people, through voluntary associations, communal groupings, and people-powered (and people-funded!) initiatives.

In order to survive as a movement, money will become a necessity. Do not turn to the non-profits and philanthropic foundations for support. The philanthropies, which fund and created the non-profits and NGOs, were themselves created to engage in ‘social engineering’: to ‘manufacture consent’ among the governed, and create consensus among the governors. The philanthropies (particularly those of Carnegie, Ford, and Rockefeller) fund social movements and protest organizations so as to steer them into directions which are safe for the elites. The philanthropies are themselves run by the elite, founded by bankers and industrialists striving to preserve their place at the top of the social structure in the midst of potentially revolutionary upheaval. As the president of the Ford Foundation once said, “Everything the foundation does is to make the world safe for capitalism.”

Money from philanthropies will organize the movement into a more professionalized entity, will direct its efforts around the promotion of legalistic reform, making slight changes to the system’s symptoms, promoting particular legislation, rallying around very specific issues removed from their global historical context. The effect is to turn anti-system revolutionaries into legalistic reformers. With such funding, movement organizers are drawn into the world of NGOs, international conferences, international institutions, aid agencies, and mainstream political participation. The leaders of the movement become professionalized and successful, both in prestige and finances. Thus, their own personal position becomes dependent upon promoting reform, not revolution; on maintaining the system (with minor changes to the aesthetic), not moving against it. The movement itself, then, would be institutionalized.

For the finances to grow without the threat of institutional dominance, the money must come from the people. A truly populist cause could be funded by the people. Keep the people in charge.

If we truly want freedom and liberation, we must begin to act free and liberated. If we want the ‘true liberation,’ we must understand the true system of power that confines, oppresses, segregates, exploits, impoverishes, and controls us. It is not a matter of the state or the banks or the corporations. It is a matter of the institution, itself. The structures of power must be struggled against so that we may come to liberate humanity from all that confines it, and experience what our true ‘human nature’ is.

If one studies mice in a maze, no matter for how long or what the maze is built of, looks like, feels like, you cannot deduce the nature of the mouse separate from that of the maze. Break down the maze and you may observe the true nature of the mouse. We have been living, always, within a maze. The walls are constructed as institutions which direct, steer, manipulate, define and segregate us from one another.

First we must tear down the barriers that bind us from ourselves, and then we may truly understand what it is to be human and free.

Andrew Gavin Marshall
- source
"It is not a person's fault because they succeeded, it is a person's fault if they failed.


Success? Is that what that was? I could have sworn it was actually the criminal sale of trillions of dollars of bogus derivatives to unsuspecting pension funds, 401k plans, etc., all around the world.

Obviously a large portion of the population now has no problem redefining large scale theft as 'success', and defining anyone who questions any of it a 'failure'.
Last edited by SquidInk on 10-06-2011 09:30 AM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5862
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 10-06-2011 12:26 AM

HB3 wrote:
But here's a question regarding the rationalizations of the protesters, specifically in regard to the "99%" thing.

How much wealth does that "one percent" hold? Let's say we took all of it. Would that even pay off the U.S. deficit for a single year? How much wealth does Bill Gates have? Steve Jobs? (Oh, wait -- he'd be exempt from any wealth reclamation :) ) It's not anywhere close to even a trillion dollars, right?

So maybe if we seized all the wealth of the wealthiest citizens we'd make a minor dent in the budget for one year.


The numbers are deceiving.

As I linked earlier, Apple, Google, etc., are asking for a 'tax holiday' in return for the repatriation of the money they've hidden offshore. Not only is that a blatant reversal of western cultural tradition (- source ), but it's ridiculous for a number of additional reasons.

Businesses like Apple can only exist because we have a taken the time to create a civilization. That civilization requires certain upkeep -- taxes. There are plenty of uncivilized places in the world, where the taxes are lower, but I don't think Steve Jobs wants to live there. No, he wants it both ways - as do they all. Even though the rules were in place long before the first dollar was earned, arrogance leads them to believe the rules don't apply to them, and that they owe nothing.

Worst of all they pound their fists on the table and yell, 'it's not the government's money!'. If you contract to be paid in dollars, it quite literally is .gov's money. You are using a convenient medium of exchange, provided by the fed -- and you will be charged for it. Try 'selling' a laptop for a dodge truck --- no tax... you didn't use the fed's money. Of course, that's illegal -- but that's where they get you.

Who should pay taxes? Taxes should be paid in accordance with the burden placed on the infrastructure. For instance, UPS requires an interstate system, cops in every town to protect it's buildings and other assets, courts to enforce it's many contracts, and on and on. Exxon Mobil & GE also place large loads on the American infrastructure, so why should they pay nothing (or in the case of the Wall Street Corps, receive free bailouts from taxpayers) while the girl on the corner selling flowers (who requires next to nothing from the publicly supplied infrastructure) pays a full tax burden? She can't afford a highrise full of CPAs to help her 'avoid' taxes. So yeah, if you contract to be paid in dollars, the more you earn (unless you build wealth without using any public infrastructure, which is not possible, and which the dollar is essentially a part) the more you owe. Simple.

Now I also happen to believe (aside from severe disability cases and other obvious exceptions) that if you burden the infrastructure by accepting food stamps or participating in any number of social programs, that a process of repayment should be in place -- probably a donation of labor, since those individuals may never have an income expressed in dollars.

Anyway, none of it matters. Any socio-economic system is only as 'good' or 'bad' as the people within it. What the protesters (and the Tea Party) fail to realize is that without a population of genuinely decent people, no system can endure. They should go home, and live their lives as the best, most honest & uncompromising people they can be -- there is nothing more disruptive to the M.I.C. than that. To be disruptive all you need to do is stop using their system, stop coveting their dollars, and stop believing their message.

We've seen, in this thread, people who define theft as 'success'. That is why we will ultimately fail. We have become dishonorable, as a people.
Last edited by SquidInk on 10-06-2011 09:55 AM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

User avatar
Fan
Lady with a
Posts: 5270
Joined: 05-09-2011 02:18 PM
Contact:

Post by Fan » 10-06-2011 08:35 AM

About the "protestors" - no one sleeps outside in a city park for 2 weeks for nothing. There is money and influence behind these people, it is engineered. We don't have real protests anymore, we have hillary clinton-ian organized revolts spread through techno-experts with thousand-persona twitter accounts. We have selective arrests. We have fake propaganda media coverage of the events. If ever we do get a legitimate protest going, police dress up like "anarchists" and throw rocks, then quickly hide behind police lines while the real people get gassed and batoned. We are so far down the rabbit hole nothing is believable any more. The fake "personalities" like Cain and Moore come out of the woodwork... bah humbug.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-06-2011 10:02 AM

Yeah, the unions etc. are backing this now. Remember when Hoffa said, "President Obama, this is your army?"

Here we go.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-06-2011 10:05 AM

Success? Is that what that was? I could have sworn it was actually the criminal sale of trillions of dollars of bogus derivatives to unsuspecting pension funds, 401k plans, etc., all around the world.

Obviously a large portion of the population now has no problem redefining large scale theft as 'success', and defining anyone who questions any of it a 'failure'.
You know, it's not even that complicated. There are many otherwise decent people who are unemployed through what could normally, in a well-functioning society, be described as "no fault of their own." Cain is betraying a libertarian, Social Darwinist consciousness that is ultimately inconsistent with American culture. This is going to be the entirety of the Democrats message next year: "Yes, everything's bad, but at least Obama CARES, unlike..." [roll clip of Cain].

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5862
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 10-06-2011 10:13 AM

HB3 wrote: You know, it's not even that complicated. There are many otherwise decent people who are unemployed through what could normally, in a well-functioning society, be described as "no fault of their own." Cain is betraying a libertarian, Social Darwinist consciousness that is ultimately inconsistent with American culture. This is going to be the entirety of the Democrats message next year: "Yes, everything's bad, but at least Obama CARES, unlike..." [roll clip of Cain].


That's right HB3, I agree. What will the defense be? Tea Party II? Some other movement with distorted historical linkage?
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

User avatar
Diogenes
Pirate
Posts: 5784
Joined: 07-14-2011 03:01 PM

Post by Diogenes » 10-06-2011 10:59 AM

HB3 wrote: Look again at this statement:



That is absolutely horrible -- cliched "evil capitalist" bull**** that proves every stereotype the Democrats are going to be pushing about Republicans next year.


It doesn't prove a thing.
A man's character is his fate

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-06-2011 11:23 AM

It was a campaign gift to the Democrats. Cain's an amateur.

User avatar
Diogenes
Pirate
Posts: 5784
Joined: 07-14-2011 03:01 PM

Post by Diogenes » 10-06-2011 12:09 PM

HB3 wrote: It was a campaign gift to the Democrats. Cain's an amateur.


Herman Cain is an amateur on the national scene of politics and intelligent voters are so weary of slick borderline sociopatahic politicians that his candor, intelligence and 999 proposal has resonated, and obviously with lots of folks. Being thrust in the bright light of a national campaign for President can get the best of people on occasion - if the clinging to your guns and religion still got President Obama 53% of the national vote- I think Herman is ok still.

The so called impromptu grass roots Wall Street protest is so rife with complainers that people who are lucky enough to still be working or those out seriously trying to find work probably aren't all that sympathetic anyway.

It would not surprise me if the Romney people have polled a Romney/Cain ticket.
A man's character is his fate

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5862
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 10-06-2011 12:39 PM

From the comments section of the article in the OP:
I doubt you want the press coverage [of the protest] to be honest. The way the process works is this, at first the demonstration gets ignored, when it doesn’t go away, the ‘police disruption team’ begins infiltration, followed very shortly by the media. The media starts to pervert the message of the protestors, slowly turning the message to the government ends as the ‘disruption teams’ start acts of violence. Before you know it the riot is on, the riot police are in full force, and message that the demonstration started with is lost, with the protest movement discredited. After the riot, clean up contracts are given to the large corporations who make a good profit … welcome to Psy-ops.


This is why protesting will no longer work. It's been effectively countered. Time for a new approach.

I still suggest an Article V convention. It's legal, and it's within the original design.
Last edited by SquidInk on 10-06-2011 12:41 PM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-06-2011 12:43 PM

The so called impromptu grass roots Wall Street protest is so rife with complainers that people who are lucky enough to still be working or those out seriously trying to find work probably aren't all that sympathetic anyway.
But wait, the statement I'm highlighting doesn't just apply to the Wall Street protesters -- that's a statement that sounds like it's being applied to everyone. Imagine how independent voters would react to that. To remind you, many people in the Tea Party are also unemployed. Is every case of unemployment the fault of the person losing his/her job? How can that be? That's what I mean by the Social Darwinian implication of what Cain is saying. I maintain that that's a stereotype of conservatism -- or maybe it's the real thing, I dunno. But I'd say at its best "conservatism" is more than Social Darwinism. To take up from another thread, morality isn't simply defined by what "is" but includes the need for a well-wrought society. I'd guess that most Independents and ever Tea Partiers would agree with this.

User avatar
BenSlain
Pirate
Posts: 3419
Joined: 09-14-2000 02:00 AM

Post by BenSlain » 10-07-2011 10:49 PM

HB3 wrote: And this is pretty funny. Did you see that guy on the left? Jesus, what a douche.




Wow.....this sideburn little guy gets really scary to listen to after the 7 min mark.
Put in a prison cell, but one time he could-a been The champion of the world.

User avatar
Diogenes
Pirate
Posts: 5784
Joined: 07-14-2011 03:01 PM

Post by Diogenes » 10-08-2011 09:09 AM

Can you imagine bringing this guy home to the folks?

Talk about a wingnut and then the young woman right after him - she started hearing statistics from Adam the interviewer and there was actually pain on her face - the facts were so confusing she reverted back to "Bush and Haliburton".
A man's character is his fate

Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy”