American Peasantry

Wehrwolfen

Senior Member
May 22, 2012
2,750
340
48
American Peasantry​


By Tom Trinko
December 19, 2012

For there to be a king there must be peasants. Peasants aren't defined by their wealth but by their belief that others should rule them.

Generally speaking peasants believe as they do either because they have been taught since birth that the King is better than they are or because without the King they feel they would not survive in a dangerous world. While America was founded by the antithesis of peasants, liberals have been working to reestablish the peasant class because liberals view themselves as the modern nobility; wiser, kinder, more knowing than the folk in flyover country and obligated by their superiority to rule over others. We see this when Obama complains about having to deal with Congress, even a Congress run by his own party, or when Obama says he's envious of how the Chinese leader rules China.

The DNA of Americans is such that any attempt to produce a peasant class by convincing folks that liberals are superior to the average Joe or Jane is doomed to failure. As a result, liberals have taken the second path -- frighten the people to the extent that they feel the government is the only source of safety. The liberal social experiment began with Obama's icon FDR. Like Obama, FDR inherited a very bad economy, and like Obama FDR made the situation worse through poorly-formulated government plans. But both men realized that the more that people depended on the government for their daily bread, the more power the government could wield.

A bad economy worked in both FDR and Obama's favor because it put fear into Americans; sufficient fear that they would turn to government largess as a seemingly safe haven in a time of economic despair. Any candidate who tried to point out that welfare only works until you run out of other people's money stands little chance of getting the votes of people convinced that lavish government spending is their only chance to survive.

The reelection of Obama is not surprising. FDR was reelected even though the U.S. economy didn't recover until, and because of, WWII. Even FDR's support of England -- which was very unpopular in the days before Pearl Harbor -- couldn't get FDR thrown out of office. In the same way, Obama's continued support for the war in Afghanistan and the Gitmo detention facility didn't adversely impact Obama's reelection.

What kept both men in office was the fear of Americans who believed that without the massive government spending on welfare, jobs programs and so on that Obama and FDR supported, they would starve.


Read more:
Articles: American Peasantry
 
Considering what a monster FDR turned out to be, we'd best be vigilant.
 
President Obama will be President untill 20Jan17. And then, given what we see the GOP and Conservatives are still saying, there will be another Democratic President.
 
You absolutely worship America's aristocracy and it isn't the government. You also call people like me commies for just expecting something to actually trickle down as advertised.
 
The only addition that needs mention is that of the progressive movement, of which FDR was a student, which was adopted and employed by that of W Wilson. In a sense, the American populace has replaced monarchy with oligarchy, composed of those liberal progressive indoctrinated chosen few ascending from the ivory towers of academia to government. As I like point out, the failings of the travail of the liberal philosophy are not content but rather implementation and financial model employed to fund such endeavors. Some of the ideas, such as social security, safety nets, a national health plan, are worthy, however the structure requires limits and at the same time greater control and freedom of choice by the beneficiaries. Their concept of a strong centralized government that eclipses the rights and governing responsibilities of the communities, counties, and states detracts from local control and sense of responsibility the citizens are entitled. To many this argument may sound vaguely familiar, read the federalist papers, correspondence between the founding fathers, and you will soon learn why the final constitution and bill of rights established checks and balances for a limited federal government with greater responsibilities and rights in the hands of the states.
 
You absolutely worship America's aristocracy and it isn't the government. You also call people like me commies for just expecting something to actually trickle down as advertised.

Why should it trickle down for no other reason than that of you wanting it? try earning it!
 
You absolutely worship America's aristocracy and it isn't the government. You also call people like me commies for just expecting something to actually trickle down as advertised.

Why should it trickle down for no other reason than that of you wanting it? try earning it!

Why should prosperity trickle down? It's only been the sole domestic economic policy of the United States for thirty fucking years and the stated rationale behind cutting taxes on the wealthy, that's why. Do you think we have no right to expect a thing for our national generosity to the Chinese job creators?
 
American Peasantry​


By Tom Trinko
December 19, 2012

For there to be a king there must be peasants. Peasants aren't defined by their wealth but by their belief that others should rule them.


Really? Then what WERE all those revolutions in Europe about? Peasants wanting to change masters? What was OUR revolution about?

What a complete load!
 
American Peasantry​


By Tom Trinko
December 19, 2012

For there to be a king there must be peasants. Peasants aren't defined by their wealth but by their belief that others should rule them.


Really? Then what WERE all those revolutions in Europe about? Peasants wanting to change masters? What was OUR revolution about?

What a complete load!

Every populist revolution in modern times has been "leftist", rightist revolutions are military coups and do not turn out well for regular folks. Conservatives only like their conservative values because they have been around long enough to become traditional, they were once radical concepts and were fought for and died for by populists struggling to wrest power from conservative monarchists loyal to a king. We see a clear parallel these days in how they close ranks around the billionaire aristocracy in our own country as the rest of us fight to regain a little working class economic power.
 
Well said. The billionaires want it all. They have a huge grudge and outright hatred for those middle class working americans who are barely making ends meet. They want those people to work longer, harder, and for less. The blantant attack on those who work hard for a living is appalling. Its purely hypocrisy. Those at the top say dont be envious and leave us alone. Those same whiners are after the benefits, pay, and well being of their workers. How did it ever get this way?
 
Well said. The billionaires want it all. They have a huge grudge and outright hatred for those middle class working americans who are barely making ends meet. They want those people to work longer, harder, and for less. The blantant attack on those who work hard for a living is appalling. Its purely hypocrisy. Those at the top say dont be envious and leave us alone. Those same whiners are after the benefits, pay, and well being of their workers. How did it ever get this way?


How did you get this way? You were probably another faceless, empty-headed college kid who was all too easy to indoctrinate, and then you spent several years watching MSNBC and NOT thinking.
 
You absolutely worship America's aristocracy and it isn't the government. You also call people like me commies for just expecting something to actually trickle down as advertised.

No we call you a commie because of your adherence to communist idealogy and support for revolutionary movements who open advocate for the violent overthrow of the nation, as per your handle.
 
The disconnect, between trickle down and reality, is that private sector job creation only benefits those that are willing and have the skills to work. Prosperity results from dedication, hard work , and sacrifice. It is safe to say a great many people fail to understand the concept that opportunity is in the eyes of the beholder and requires sacrifice to realize. So many today are unwilling to accept an entry level position and work up the ladder. They feel that opportunity should be afforded without sacrifice. Maybe that's the problem in Chicago, Detroit, Newark, Philadelphia, and others, the political machines and education system have programed young people to expect and receive rather than to work and earn. As for this hatred of the middle class statement, sorry, but you have that one turned upside down, in part due to the liberal babbling mantra of the left, for the hate is between those that want it to trickle down and those that work, which I should say is promoted by those that embrace and support greater taxation.
 
Don't you just love it? If we don't accept what the OP believes, we're peasants! Look at it another way. If we let the the system go laissez-faire as the economic consrvatives/libertarians want, the overwhelming majority will be become peasants as more and more wealth is concentrated in the hands of the few. Not everyone is going to be a Captain of Industry, but there are those who will look at those that don't with contempt and say "it's all their own fault". The sad thing is that many who give lip service to that "ism" will undoubtedly end up down there with the peasants.
 
American Peasantry​


By Tom Trinko
December 19, 2012

For there to be a king there must be peasants. Peasants aren't defined by their wealth but by their belief that others should rule them.


Really? Then what WERE all those revolutions in Europe about? Peasants wanting to change masters? What was OUR revolution about?

What a complete load!

Every populist revolution in modern times has been "leftist", rightist revolutions are military coups and do not turn out well for regular folks. Conservatives only like their conservative values because they have been around long enough to become traditional, they were once radical concepts and were fought for and died for by populists struggling to wrest power from conservative monarchists loyal to a king. We see a clear parallel these days in how they close ranks around the billionaire aristocracy in our own country as the rest of us fight to regain a little working class economic power.


So, it is THEY who "wish that others should rule them!"

The only difference that they're not fighting to be ruled by a king or lord, but by the aristocracy and corporations. Yet, they've convinced themselves that raging against The People is the same as freeing themselves.

How sad that anybody could be that stupid.
 
Last edited:
Don't you just love it? If we don't accept what the OP believes, we're peasants! Look at it another way. If we let the the system go laissez-faire as the economic consrvatives/libertarians want, the overwhelming majority will be become peasants as more and more wealth is concentrated in the hands of the few. Not everyone is going to be a Captain of Industry, but there are those who will look at those that don't with contempt and say "it's all their own fault". The sad thing is that many who give lip service to that "ism" will undoubtedly end up down there with the peasants.

The real test of freedom in this far too materialistic country is not speech or guns or anything like that, it is the economic freedom to make all those other rights worthwhile. We all hear about rags-to-riches success stories but the norm is more rags-to-rags-and-debt. When I was kid, working class people could expect to afford school for their kids and those kids could expect a comfortable middle-class life style and retirement but no more, the economic classes have become generationally permanent. Social mobility is as dead as Elvis and all these people can say is "must be the terrible quality of poor people these days", an incredibly snobbish view that Americans used to be practically incapable of.
 
American Peasantry​


By Tom Trinko
December 19, 2012

For there to be a king there must be peasants. Peasants aren't defined by their wealth but by their belief that others should rule them.


Really? Then what WERE all those revolutions in Europe about? Peasants wanting to change masters? What was OUR revolution about?

What a complete load!

Then I guess America has come full circle. We've moved from a monarchy to FREEDOM, to Socialist Marxism. Just another form of enslavement. Russia and China have proven that in the 20th and 21st Centuries.
 
Don't you just love it? If we don't accept what the OP believes, we're peasants! Look at it another way. If we let the the system go laissez-faire as the economic consrvatives/libertarians want, the overwhelming majority will be become peasants as more and more wealth is concentrated in the hands of the few. Not everyone is going to be a Captain of Industry, but there are those who will look at those that don't with contempt and say "it's all their own fault". The sad thing is that many who give lip service to that "ism" will undoubtedly end up down there with the peasants.

The real test of freedom in this far too materialistic country ....



"far too materialistic" according to whom?
 
"How did you get this way? You were probably another faceless, empty-headed college kid who was all too easy to indoctrinate, and then you spent several years watching MSNBC and NOT thinking.

Nope. Actually I have owned my own business for 25 years now. I see the people who call on my business having less and less as their employers are simply bad. Thats the fact. Take that and learn from it. My advice to them is to walk out on their jobs, no notice. That is SOUND advice. Find a better job and dont work for the low wages your lousy ill begotten boss is paying you. Why people settle for low wages is beyond me.
 
American Peasantry​


By Tom Trinko
December 19, 2012

For there to be a king there must be peasants. Peasants aren't defined by their wealth but by their belief that others should rule them.


Really? Then what WERE all those revolutions in Europe about? Peasants wanting to change masters? What was OUR revolution about?

What a complete load!

Then I guess America has come full circle. We've moved from a monarchy to FREEDOM, to Socialist Marxism. Just another form of enslavement. Russia and China have proven that in the 20th and 21st Centuries.

We moved from Monarchy to Timocracy to Plutocracy to Mesocracy to Democracy and now back to Plutocracy. Aren't you happy? Things really are going back to the bad old days libertarians dream of.
 

Forum List

Back
Top