Thursday, May 3, 2012

Revised: Occupy - No Shame for Stupidity Let Alone For Being Leftist
Added 5/4/12-

There are two videos on this link. The bottom one is the longer version. An Occupy dolt/lunatic/Joseph Goebbels type got Sean Hannity more than riled up. Among other things, the Occupy rapists were said to have been sent to Zuccoti Park by the NYPD to discredit their operation. Later, Sean lit into the guy after finding out that, according to Mr.. Occupy, certain jobs were beneath him.

The Left has got these people in a state where they convince themselves that life after the establishment of the worker's paradise will be pretty much the same as it has been for the last 20-30 years, if not better.

Original post below:
Occupy gave up trying to veil themselves in legitimate gripes such as Bailouts long ago. The cliche must be annoying, but a leopard can't hide its spots.

The movement unfurled the red banners a few weeks into their program last year. On May 1st, they came in with colors flying.

The videos, along with the posts, in the following links must be seen to be believed. Communism, Marxism, Unions taking over the means of production- it's all there. Patently absent is any acknowledgement that, once the factories and farms are taken over, progress grinds to a halt. Bureaucrats are in business to maintain what is under their supervision. Unlike demonic Capitalists, civil servants will not go out on a limb and risk substantial capital to invest in an entirely new infrastructure of fabrication (Unless the purpose is for war or other propaganda victories such as space travel). Nations such as Cuba and North Korea stand in testimony to the consequences of government-controlled economies; factories are inefficient, farms do not produce at anything hear their capacities, and those in charge just keep issuing orders to work harder and to tighten one's belt. Cuba of course has made some changes, but the damage runs deeply there; their water pipes, for one example, are crumbling to pieces underground and massive amounts of water are being lost daily.

If you have time for only one video, you have got to watch the one in which the two sad dopes talk about getting rid of currency. In the same segment, they profess their attachment for such staples as big-screen TVs. When asked to explain how this type of item will still be around after the money economy s history, they provide some wonderfully insightful answers.

The excising of any education on Western Civilization has, in my opinion, been far and away the most effective means of producing blank-minded young people. I hold that, even taking in to account all of the damage done by the constant attacks on Christianity and Judaism, along with our own acquiescence to the marginalization of our faith, the loss of the knowledge of Western Civilization has had far worse effect. Even if most people do not follow the path of regular devotion as did their ancestors, the memory of it remains and will continue to have an effect on one's decisions. What causes the complete dearth of understanding is the ignorance of how the society in which one is standing at the moment came to be. Without being aware of the fusion of Greek, Roman, Northern European, and Christian and Jewish elements that made us what we are, one can actually convince himself that we could have reached the point that we have by any means. I could go on at length on this subject but will leave that for another time.

Suffice to say for now that the advent of a money economy was the means by which the world was able to create the living standards, achievements of science, the arts, architecture, engineering, literature, and others  that we take for granted. Even those who contributed to medicine, which has lengthened our life expectancy far beyond that what we had in the past, could not have accomplished a fraction of what we now have had we not had the means for people to earn a living while learning, researching, and applying themselves to their chosen profession. Running to and fro with bartered food and handmade products leaves a society in a primitive state, period.

Money allows for specialization of work in a manner that even the advanced Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Mayan, Mohenjo Daro, and other societies  could not approach. Sure, the grain surplus (The Left wants us eating mostly grains too) allowed for a few people to be set aside to think of things and apply what they learned, but an abundance of food is not enough to convince people to venture far away to trade, to make better products to sell, etc.

In his Penguin Atlas of Ancient History, Colin McEvedy notes how the world changed with money economies. Primitive societies utilized wealth for display and to show rank. After apparently learning to use coin money from the Lydians, who used the gold/silver allow electrum, the Greeks applied this to their society. The author states "With a fistful of coins and an eye for the main chance, the individual had arrived in  history". As the Left detests the very concept of the individual, I am not surprised that they too want to do away with the means by which a civilized society can actually have free individuals.

Decades of welfare and Leftist-dominated college courses have created a dangerous voting bloc. According to a Gallup poll, 36% of all Americans view Socialism favorably. Even taking into account the 4% margin of error given on the site, we are looking at almost a full third of Americans who look at property, financial risk, and success with either a jaundiced eye or outright hostility. As we have no reason to hope that colleges will begin giving their Leftist professors the boot, we can expect the 36% to creep ever closer to half of our body politic.

Even a win for a Romney who hypothetically turns out to be a real conservative in November, we are looking at a brief four-year respite from a potential Marxist overhaul of the nation. If we do not take into consideration what steps may need to be taken in the event that our rights and freedoms are being completely stripped from us, or what we can do to prevent the establishment of a Marxist regime by our current electoral system, we may be too late.

Excerpts from previous posts are below:

For those accustomed to Universal Suffrage as an institution, and we have taken it as a given for a long time, it is a difficult thing to give any thought to the possibility that there may be certain individuals who cannot be considered part of the Body Politic. We have not given any thought to whether or not a person who reaches his majority (Archaic term), upon reaching the age of 18, should automatically be allowed to exercise the same political power as does an individual who pays income and/or property tax, receives no government benefits such as welfare, has served in the military or other institution that would constitute a sacrifice of one's liberties for service to the nation, or taken any step that would recognize that he or she has entered into the Social Compact as described by John Locke. Note that voter requirements were a part of our nation from the beginning and that these do not need to single out anyone due to race, religion, etc.

Most are aware that Locke, particularly in his First and Second Treatises on Government, was a tremendous influence on the thought processes of our Founding Fathers. Our Declaration of Independence could not have been written in the form that we know had ideas promulgated by Locke not been around. I will not go into detail but on Locke's ideas but stick to his idea of the Social Contract. Note that his Treatises can be purchased for around $3.99 on E-readers.

Locke described the manner in which a person leaves the sphere of parental authority and joins society. I doing so, he, by choosing to in fact remain in the nation of his birth, accepts and engages in the Social Compact. This entails, among other things, an acceptance of the basic framework of that society. It does not mean that he cannot work to excise natural wrongs such as slavery, but it does mean that he should refrain from working to remove things that are part of the basic framework of that society. In the case of the US, one would, upon leaving the authority of one's parents and entering society, implicitly have to accept rights such as private property, the right to be free of oppressive taxation, to live where one chooses and can afford to live, to be free of governmental regulation that reaches into the minutiae of one's life, the right of that Nation itself to remain free and sovereign, etc.

We have for too long held back from admitting to ourselves that there is a significant subset of out population who are, beyond a shadow of a doubt, actually in a State of War with our nation and its society. We have been non-participants in this conflict. We can no longer, though remain idle. Not only are these people, who are at war against us, allowed reside here, they are allowed to constitute a part of the body politic. They can vote, hold office and gradually (Right now they are not gradually doing anything) bring us step-by-step to a point from which we will not be able to extricate ourselves without a catastrophic conflict. The Left pretends to be against all war. This is a complete falsehood. They will eagerly enter into armed conflict with any nation, State, or free people that refuses to be swallowed up by the Leftist tide.

My position is that Leftist doctrine must be legally defined as completely contrary to the structure and fabric of nations such as the US. Those who advocate the end of private property, the very reason why people enter into Social Compacts and institute governments in the first place, (Again, Locke), must be treated as dangerous enemies of the nation and society. This is not an issue of free speech as it does not concern the mere free expression of thought.Those who remain outside our Social Compact declare themselves to be our enemies ipso facto their stated goals of destroying the very concept and right of private property. We don't even have to fight them. They can simply leave. Those who refuse to leave would have to be removed from all but the smallest pockets of the nation's land mass. They must be denied the right to vote, hold office, or teach. Any who decides to jump on the Leftist bandwagon can join their brethren in the enclaves, free of the rights they so despised. Hopefully, those who grow weary of being restricted from their choice of place of residence or voting will apply to live somewhere else. Anyone who gets fed up with the horror show that these enclaves will become may apply to rejoin, or, if he or she is a new adult, voluntarily enter into the Social Compact. In short, those who put themselves in a State of War against us must be treated as full-fledged enemies.

As the primary reason that people create governments for the preservation of property, and those who remain outside of the Social Compact have placed themselves in a State of War with those who desire to retain their property rights, the Left has chosen to place both sides in opposition to each other with no civil body to arbitrate our differences. This is what Locke refers to as the State of Nature, our primordial state in which any injured party to could punish another who wronged him. The State of War is a natural and common occurrence in the State of Nature.

The secondary reason for creating a government was to provide a process by which to parties could seek justice. Our problem is that one of the parties has never had any intention of adhering or entering into the Social Compact, in doing so, they have returned us to a State of Nature. Indeed, they seek to transform the civil power into the very body that they would need to crush any resistance, thus bring the civil power into their camp to prosecute the State of War they wage against us. If that occurs, then the only option of the injured/oppressed is "An appeal to Heaven".(Locke). This refers to the days of the Judges in Israel, when Jephthah, unable to obtain peace with the Ammonites, was left with no other option but to appeal to God for justice and fight. Maybe you can recall the early "An Appeal to Heaven" flag with the tree that was a symbol of our resistance to Great Britain.

Men will not accept truth at the hands of their enemies, and truth is seldom offered to them by their friends: for this reason I have spoken it. - Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

No comments:

Post a Comment