The United States of Hysteria

[holston]

During the early and mid 1960's, we had hysteria from the left, that was coexisting with the Weathermen, the anti-war movement, and certain elements of the civil rights movement. Then, around 1970, the right wing hard hats took over the hysteria, and have not relinquished it since. In fact, they have elevated it into a permenant art form, with people like Beck, Coulter, and Rush making a handsome living out of it. Then, the libertarians all discovered that they were better attorneys than the Supreme Court justices, and have joined hands with conservatives, the religious nuts and the tea party. All the meterors that we have been seeing lately is a result of some sort of vortex affecting the cosmos from the Right, by their never ending, "The sky is falling!!!" mantra.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Don't tell me you haven't noticed the rise of the Neo-Cons coinciding with the Slick Willie and Yomamma Marxist administrations.

Bill Ayers | The Jewish Week

Israel loved on talk radio,
WABC buffs up ratings and Zionist lineup
04/27/2010
Jonathan Mark
Associate Editor

If Israel is getting roughed up lately, that’s never the case at WABC-Radio (770 AM). Its conservative hosts — Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Mark Levin, among others — can sound as if they’re broadcasting from Israel. Aaron Klein, their newest on-air host, actually is broadcasting from microphones in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. What was once “W-A-Beatles-C” might as well be “W-A-Bibi-C.”

Neoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Irving Kristol was called "godfather" of neoconservatism

Kristol was born in Brooklyn, New York, the son of non-observant Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe.[4][5] He received his B.A. from the City College of New York in 1940, which was free to attend until the 1970s, where he majored in history and was part of a small but vocal Trotskyist anti-Soviet group who eventually became the New York Intellectuals.

(Stalin supplanted the Jews and they didn't like it.)

The term "neoconservative" was the subject of increased media coverage during the presidency of George W. Bush,[12][13] with particular emphasis on a perceived neoconservative influence on American foreign policy, as part of the Bush Doctrine.[14] The term neocon is often used as pejorative in this context.

Perjoratives are permissible when used to reference Goyim and other fall guys. (How do you think Dufus got to be Prez. Big Daddy? Don't bet on it.)

Through the 1950s and early 1960s the future neoconservatives had endorsed the American Civil Rights Movement, racial integration, and Martin Luther King, Jr..

From the 1950s to the 1960s, there was general endorsement among liberals for military action to prevent a communist victory in Vietnam.[16]

Neoconservatism was initiated by the repudiation of coalition politics by the American New Left: Black Power, which denounced coalition-politics and racial integration as "selling out" and "Uncle Tomism" and which frequently generated anti-semitic slogans; "anti-anticommunism", which seemed indifferent to the fate of South Vietnam, and which during the late 1960s included substantial endorsement of Marxist Leninist politics; and the "new politics" of the New left, which considered students and alienated minorities as the main agents of social change (replacing the majority of the population and labor activists).[17] Irving Kristol edited the journal The Public Interest (1965–2005), featuring economists and political scientists, which emphasized ways that government planning in the liberal state had produced unintended harmful consequences.[18]

Norman Podhoretz's magazine Commentary of the American Jewish Committee, originally a journal of liberalism, became a major publication for neoconservatives during the 1970s. Commentary published an article by Jeane Kirkpatrick, an early and prototypical neoconservative, albeit not a New Yorker.

Senator Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson, inspiration for neoconservative foreign policy during 1970s. The political philosophies and positions of Jackson, a Cold War anti-Communist Democrat, have been cited as an influence on a number of key figures associated with neoconservatism, including Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle.[1] The Henry Jackson Society is named in his honor.

They always find a Goy to deflect off of.

Jewish Neocons: Covert Enemies of the U.S.A.


Since you mentioned the Supreme Court:

Pat Buchanan: Too Many Jews On The Supreme Court [UPDATE]

Indeed, of the last seven justices nominated by Democrats JFK, LBJ, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, one was black, Marshall; one was Puerto Rican, Sonia Sotomayor. The other five were Jews: Arthur Goldberg, Abe Fortas, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan.


If Kagan is confirmed, Jews, who represent less than 2 percent of the U.S. population, will have 33 percent of the Supreme Court seats.

Is this the Democrats' idea of diversity?

This left/right paradigm we have going is a good example of what is called "playing both ends against the middle" or, "having all your bases covered".


Never mind the sky falling. Think about the dollar. Better yet, think about "the Republic for which it stands".

 

[LoudMcCloud]

Im freaking out man!

 

[midcan5]

Hysteria as the motivation of all that is, all that we do and have become. Interesting perspective even if wrong. Consider the idea that unless we are hysterical we are somehow not American and then consider yourself and those that you know. Doesn't fit. While Americans may watch too much 24 or CSI today, 'Leave it to Beaver' was hardly hysterical. Having lived a bit I think there are times when life has been kinda calm and rather nice (now even). The times before 24 hour news and the sky always falling were some wonderful times in America. Just a bunch of kids, a bat a ball a football basketball and Eisenhower, a soldier who knew war was hell and life was good. Of course if I were then a minority, a woman, a pregnant girl, out of work, gay, I may have had other thoughts - but hysterical nah? Actually I am half minority but that's another story. Take only Vietnam, our fathers served, we would serve, seemed kinda simple. Many figured out ways to avoid service, but until the war became a known in all its ramifications most thought it an honorable action. Terrorism has now replaced Communism (for all except a few republicans). Maybe the dichotomy of foe is a better metaphor. What does the foe do for us? It may have been more relevant if the subject were the hysterical moments in American history. Sorta like Hofstadter's 'Paranoid Style in America.' Or today the bizarre dislike (fear?) of government for some.

A few book suggestions to broaden the discussion. The first is an excellent narrative history of America from the GD till Nixon. Not sure hysteria fits any of its moments in time.

'Glory and the Dream' William Manchester
'The Modern Mind: An Intellectual History of the 20Th Century' Peter Watson
'The Age of Reform' Richard Hofstadter
'A Necessary Evil: A History of American Distrust of Government' Garry Wills

Lots here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/reviews/85148-reading-that-opens-the-mind-books.html

 

[editec]

'
GETTING BACK TO THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD :

Well I certainly agree that the American Revolution was as much about what the ELITE in the Colonies wanted than it was fighting for freedom, justice or relief from oppressive taxes.

Doubt that?

Shay's Whiskey rebellion

That started DURING the revolutionary war.

Then too let us see what the one of the first military actions was AFTER USA was free shall we?

The Whiskey Rebellion, or Whiskey Insurrection, was a tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791, during the presidency of George Washington.

Oh yes, those Founding Fathers..really lovers of the common man and justice for all ...(rich people)

They were basically nothing but the new bosses replacing the old bosses.

There were no oppressive taxes. That is just a red herring that thoughtless people blindly believe.

Actually the Whiskey rebellion was exactly about taxation, taxation DESIGNED to benefit the RUM/SLAVE/SUGAR industry by making it impossible for small American farmers to turn their produce into alcohol.

This event was, I think, the first and best example of CLASS WAR that started immediately after we won our freedom from England.

Of course, as you pointed out American also SCREWED many of the veterans, too. They were promised land for having served that many of them never got.

Meanwhile check out the name KNOX and see what he got for his service?

Knox returned to Massachusetts, where the family established a home in Dorchester. Knox worked to reassemble a large parcel of land in Maine (parts of what are sometimes called the Waldo Patent and the Bingham Purchase) that had been confiscated from his Loyalist in-laws. He was able to assemble a vast multi-million acre real estate empire in Maine, including almost all of the old Flucker holdings, in part by getting appointed the state's official for disposing of seized lands, and then rigging the sale of his in-laws' lands to a straw buyer acting on his behalf.[65] He was also appointed to a state commission responsible for negotiating treaty provisions with the Penobscot Indians of central Maine.[66] This commission also became involved in investigating issues surrounding the eastern border with Nova Scotia (now New Brunswick), a matter that would not be resolved until the 1842 Webster-Ashburton Treaty.[67]

You are certainly right about "new bosses replacing the old bosses" -- and, as usual in these violent, chaotic overturnings of government, the new bosses were much worse than the old bosses.

Much worse, I don't know, Much the same, probably.

My favorite swindle by the Founding Terrorists was the one about "honoring" the debts of the Criminal Uprising of 1776.

When the Constitution was framed, The Founding Wolves came into their own as the guardians of the sheep. The looting of America began.

The first act of pillage was enshrined in the Constitution. During the Terrorist Insurrection, and later during the period of the Articles of Confederation, the rebel regime forced people to take worthless paper money as payment for their mounting, war-profiteering debts. People knew that they had been cheated by the rebels and sold off the junk money to speculators for pennies on the dollar.

Surprise! Surprise! The speculators turned out to be the "noble and wise Founding Fathers" and their henchmen, and they carefully wrote into the Constitution itself [Article VI, section 1] that the junk money was to be redeemed by the new federal government at full face value! What a clever scheme of double taxation!

That will show those British oppressors!

 

[Intense]

Hysteria as the motivation of all that is, all that we do and have become. Interesting perspective even if wrong. Consider the idea that unless we are hysterical we are somehow not American and then consider yourself and those that you know. Doesn't fit. While Americans may watch too much 24 or CSI today, 'Leave it to Beaver' was hardly hysterical. Having lived a bit I think there are times when life has been kinda calm and rather nice (now even). The times before 24 hour news and the sky always falling were some wonderful times in America. Just a bunch of kids, a bat a ball a football basketball and Eisenhower, a soldier who knew war was hell and life was good. Of course if I were then a minority, a woman, a pregnant girl, out of work, gay, I may have had other thoughts - but hysterical nah? Actually I am half minority but that's another story. Take only Vietnam, our fathers served, we would serve, seemed kinda simple. Many figured out ways to avoid service, but until the war became a known in all its ramifications most thought it an honorable action. Terrorism has now replaced Communism (for all except a few republicans). Maybe the dichotomy of foe is a better metaphor. What does the foe do for us? It may have been more relevant if the subject were the hysterical moments in American history. Sorta like Hofstadter's 'Paranoid Style in America.' Or today the bizarre dislike (fear?) of government for some.

A few book suggestions to broaden the discussion. The first is an excellent narrative history of America from the GD till Nixon. Not sure hysteria fits any of its moments in time.

'Glory and the Dream' William Manchester
'The Modern Mind: An Intellectual History of the 20Th Century' Peter Watson
'The Age of Reform' Richard Hofstadter
'A Necessary Evil: A History of American Distrust of Government' Garry Wills

Lots here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/reviews/85148-reading-that-opens-the-mind-books.html

The focus on Justice V.S. Injustice is timeless. The balance does determine the level of extreme, now and Forever. There are matters, be they Intellectual or Instinctive, Conscious or Sub-Conscious, that support Individual Conscience, by design. That's a good thing.

 

[numan]

'
Norman Podhoretz! I always get a chuckle when I re-read Gore Vidal's essay, "A Cheerful Response":

Quote:
Significantly, the one Yiddish word that has gained universal acceptance in this country is "chutzpah". Example: In 1960, Mr. and Mrs. Podhoretz were in upstate New York where I used to live. I was trying out a play at the Hyde Park Playhouse; the play was set during the Civil War. "Why," asked Poddy, "are your writing a play about, of all things, the Civil War?" I explained to him that my mother's family had fought for the Confederacy and my father's for the Union, and that the Civil War was -- and is -- to the United States what the Trojan War was to the Greeks, the great single tragic event that continues to give resonance to our Republic.

"Well, to me," said Poddy, "the Civil War is as remote and as irrelevant as the War of the Roses." I realized then that he was not planning to become an "assimilated American," to use the old-fashioned terminology; but, rather, his first loyalty would always be to Israel. Yet he and MIdge stay on among us, in order to make propaganda and raise money for Israel -- a country they don't seem eager to live in. Jewish joke, circa 1900: A Zionist is someone who wants to ship other people off to Palestine.

Of course, if hysterical Americans had resisted being suckered by the Terrorists of 1776, there would not have been a Civil War, and the slaves would have been freed in a sensible fashion. Educated Southerners understand this very well -- as for the Rednecks, there is no hope for them.

Just think! The United States could have developed as peacefully and intelligently as Canada! When I contrast Canada the Good with Lunatic America, I am filled with horror and despair!
.

 

[numan]

My favorite swindle by the Founding Terrorists was the one about "honoring" the debts of the Criminal Uprising of 1776.

When the Constitution was framed, The Founding Wolves came into their own as the guardians of the sheep. The looting of America began.

The first act of pillage was enshrined in the Constitution. During the Terrorist Insurrection, and later during the period of the Articles of Confederation, the rebel regime forced people to take worthless paper money as payment for their mounting, war-profiteering debts. People knew that they had been cheated by the rebels and sold off the junk money to speculators for pennies on the dollar.

Surprise! Surprise! The speculators turned out to be the "noble and wise Founding Fathers" and their henchmen, and they carefully wrote into the Constitution itself [Article VI, section 1] that the junk money was to be redeemed by the new federal government at full face value! What a clever scheme of double taxation!

That will show those British oppressors!

The first person to explore this matter in a scholarly fashion was the eminent historian Charles A. Beard -- whom the Encyclopaedia Britannica called "one of the most influential U.S. historians of the 20th century."
In his 1913 masterwork, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, his exhaustive researches into the records of the Treasury Department revealed, by implication, the devious dealings of the Founding Swindlers.
.

 

[holston]

The first person to explore this matter in a scholarly fashion was the eminent historian Charles A. Beard -- whom the Encyclopaedia Britannica called "one of the most influential U.S. historians of the 20th century."
In his 1913 masterwork, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, his exhaustive researches into the records of the Treasury Department revealed, by implication, the devious dealings of the Founding Swindlers.
.

Charles A. Beard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Beginning about 1950, however, historians started to argue that the progressive interpretation was factually incorrect because it was not true that the voters were polarized along two economic lines. These historians were led by Charles A. Barker, Philip Crowl, Richard P. McCormick, William Pool, Robert Thomas, John Munroe, Robert E. Brown and B. Kathryn Brown, and above all Forrest McDonald.[15]

Forrest McDonald in We The People: The Economic Origins of the Constitution (1958) argued that Charles Beard had misinterpreted the economic interests involved in writing the Constitution. Instead of two interests, landed and mercantile, which conflicted, McDonald identified some three dozen identifiable interests that forced the delegates to bargain.

Evaluating the historiographical debate, Peter Novick concluded:

“By the early 1960s it was generally accepted within the historical profession that ...Beard’s Progressive version of the ...framing of the Constitution had been decisively refuted. American historians came to see ....the framers of the Constitution, rather than having self-interested motives, were led by concern for political unity, national economic development, and diplomatic security.”

Beard's economic determinism was largely replaced by the intellectual history approach, which stressed the power of ideas, especially republicanism, in stimulating the Revolution.

Financing the War - American Revolution

Paying for the war was a profound challenge for Congress. American society was cash poor. There were no banks or other financial institutions that could easily raise money or extend credit. Congress lacked the power to tax; the states reserved that sensitive function for themselves. American finances would be in a state of disorder throughout the war.

Both Congress and the states aggravated the problem by printing new issues of currency. By 1779, Congress had issued $191,552,380 in paper. The states had printed $200,000,000 more. This, and the inevitable economic dislocations caused by the war, led to a disastrous inflation. American money dwindled in value. People began to describe useless things as being “not worth a Continental.”

Sound familiar?

Farmers and merchants found ways to deal with the inflation. Many prospered during the war. The government and those on its payroll, especially the soldiers, suffered the most. Congress was concerned about inflation. At various times it and state governments experimented with wage and price controls, with no success.

Congress raised some money by selling bonds to wealthy investors. This source of revenue was limited by congressional credit. Infusions of money from France helped bolster the value of the bonds. Ultimately these bonds became another variation of the glut of paper currency in the country as the bonds became a means of exchange in business transactions.

In 1781, Robert Morris was appointed the first Superintendent of Finance. Morris was a Philadelphia merchant who had prospered greatly during the war, running ships past the British blockade, outfitting privateers, and selling supplies to the army. Morris had served in Congress, and through this experience fully understood the challenge of funding the American war effort.

Robert Morris (financier) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As the central civilian in the government, Morris was, next to General George Washington, "the most powerful man in America."[1] His successful administration led to the sobriquet, "Financier of the Revolution." At the same time he was Agent of Marine, a position he took without pay, and from which he controlled the Continental Navy.

He was one of Pennsylvania's original pair of US senators, serving from 1789 to 1795. Unwise land speculation right before the Panic of 1796–1797 led to his bankruptcy in 1798, and he spent several years in debtors' prison. After his release in 1801 he lived a quiet, private life in a modest home in Philadelphia, until 1806 when he died.

I started to paste many excerpts from the Wiki article but was there were too many I felt that needed to be included to explain a few.
People can read the entire article themselves and hopefully gain a better insight to the financial problems that the were encountered by the fledgling US.

Giving credit where credit is due I think it is only fair to include this individual who was also involved in the financing of the American Revolution.

HAYM SALOMON: THE REST OF THE STORY

When war broke out in 1776, Salomon got a contract to supply American troops in central New York. In 1777, he married Rachel Franks, whose brother Isaac was a lieutenant colonel on George Washington's staff. Their ketubah resides at the American Jewish Historical Society.

In Philadelphia, Salomon resumed his brokerage business. The French Minister appointed him paymaster general of the French forces fighting for the American cause. The Dutch, and Spanish governments also engaged him to sell the securities that supported their loans to the Continental Congress.

In 1781, Congress established the Office of Finance to save the United States from fiscal ruin. Salomon allied himself with Superintendent of Finance William Morris and became one of the most effective brokers of bills of exchange to meet federal government expenses. Salomon also personally advanced funds to members of the Continental Congress and other federal officers, charging interest and commissions well below the market rates. James Madison confessed that "I have for some time ... been a pensioner on the favor of Haym Salomon, a Jew broker."

While supporting the national cause, Salomon also played a prominent role in the Philadelphia and national Jewish community affairs. He served as a member of he governing council of Philadelphia's Congregation Mikveh Israel. He was treasurer of Philadelphia's society for indigent travelers, and participated in the nation's first known rabbinic court of arbitration. Salomon helped lead the successful fight to repeal the test oath which barred Jews and other non-Christians from holding public office in Pennsylvania.

He operated within the context of a society, and an age, that considered all Jews as Shylocks and money grubbers. In 1784, writing as "A Jew Broker,' Salomon protested charges that Jewish merchants were profiteering. Salomon thought it unjust that such charges were "cast so indiscriminately on the Jews of this city at large . . . for the faults of a few." His impassioned defense of his fellow Jews brought him national approbation.

There were no doubt many scoundrels involved in the American Revolution on both sides of the conflict, just as there is throughout the rest of the world and at all times.

What's a body to do?

 

[numan]

There were no doubt many scoundrels involved in the American Revolution on both sides of the conflict, just as there is throughout the rest of the world and at all times.

What's a body to do?

Not fall for the bilge spouted by self-serving terrorists and swindlers -- especially if they are "patriots"

When Dr. Johnson defined "patriotism" as the last refuge of a scoundrel, he ignored the enormous possibilities of the word "reform".
---Roscoe Conkling, New York Senator and swindler ( perhaps that is redundant? · )

Above all, employ a little critical thinking. Don't accept the myths injected into your brain just because everybody else is mindlessly repeating them.

If you see a lot of people going one way, walk in the opposite direction. If you see everybody going one way, run in the opposite direction!!

Americans are pathetic about believing things just because everybody else believes them!!

Not on this forum, of course!! · ·

.

 

[whitehall]

There were no doubt many scoundrels involved in the American Revolution on both sides of the conflict, just as there is throughout the rest of the world and at all times.

What's a body to do?

Not fall for the bilge spouted by self-serving terrorists and swindlers -- especially if they are "patriots"!!! · ·

When Dr. Johnson defined "patriotism" as the last refuge of a scoundrel, he ignored the enormous possibilities of the word "reform".
---Roscoe Conkling, New York Senator and swindler [perhaps that is redundant? · ]

Above all, employ a little critical thinking. Don't accept the myths injected into your brain just because everybody else is mindlessly repeating them.

Americans are pathetic about believing things just because everybody else believes them!!

Not on this forum, of course!! · ·

One of the mistakes foreign born haters and domestic America haters make is to confuse pop-history with real history. It's not unlikely for sub-standard educated current generation to stumble across the the truth about an isolated incident and assume that they invented history. Arrogant under-educated kids often think they discovered the truth that nobody has ever seen. The truth is always out there in the freest democracy on the globe but sometimes you have to look for it. Don't pat yourself on the back when you stumble across senator Conkling's quote. Think about it instead of assuming that you discovered a treasure. Scoundrels might have hidden behind patriotism but patriots were more often heroes. Pop history calls Harry Truman a "feisty little give 'em hell president" but in reality he was a timid little bean counter. Pop history portrays MacArthur as the savior of the Philippines but in reality he was a disgraced general who lost his entire army and saved himself. Shit happens but when an arrogant little shit blames America it's a sign of a sub-standard education.

 

[midcan5]

The focus on Justice V.S. Injustice is timeless. The balance does determine the level of extreme, now and Forever. There are matters, be they Intellectual or Instinctive, Conscious or Sub-Conscious, that support Individual Conscience, by design. That's a good thing.

I agree I think. This thread belongs in a category of 'myopic history brought to you by history made simple.'

One of the mistakes foreign born haters and domestic America haters make is to confuse pop-history with real history. It's not unlikely for sub-standard educated current generation to stumble across the the truth about an isolated incident and assume that they invented history. Arrogant under-educated kids often think they discovered the truth that nobody has ever seen. The truth is always out there in the freest democracy on the globe but sometimes you have to look for it. Don't pat yourself on the back when you stumble across senator Conkling's quote. Think about it instead of assuming that you discovered a treasure. Scoundrels might have hidden behind patriotism but patriots were more often heroes. Pop history calls Harry Truman a "feisty little give 'em hell president" but in reality he was a timid little bean counter. Pop history portrays MacArthur as the savior of the Philippines but in reality he was a disgraced general who lost his entire army and saved himself. Shit happens but when an arrogant little shit blames America it's a sign of a sub-standard education.

Odd that your comment starts on a reasonable note and ends on unreason. Truman was a 'bean counter' huh? Nothing I have ever read of Truman would limit him to so simple a put-down. I especially liked how even as president he would defend those he cared for.

"I believe in brotherhood….of all men before the law….if any (one) class or race can be permanently set apart from, or pushed down below the rest in politics and civil rights, so may any other class or race……and we say farewell to the principles on which we count our safety…….The majority of our Negro people find but cold comfort in our shanties and tenements. Surely, as free men, they are entitled to something better than this." Harry Truman and Civil Rights

"Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home -but not for housing. They are strong for labor - but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage - the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all - but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine - for people who can afford them. They consider electrical power a great blessing - but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They think American standard of living is a fine thing - so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it." Harry S. Truman

 

[numan]

'
Another book from the same period as de Tocqueville's is that of Mrs. Frances Trollope (the mother of the famous novelist), Domestic Manners of the Americans, in which she exposes the harmful effects of the American dependence on trashy newspapers and other forms of unworthy media.

QUOTE:
In truth, there are many reasons which render a very general diffusion of literature impossible in America. I can scarcely class the universal reading of newspapers as an exception to this remark; if I could, my statement would be exactly the reverse, and I should say that America beat the world in letters. The fact is, that throughout all ranks of society, from the successful merchant, which is the highest, to the domestic serving man, which is the lowest, they are all too actively employed to read, except at such broken moments as may suffice for a peep at a newspaper. It is for this reason, I presume, that every American newspaper is more or less a magazine, wherein the merchant may scan while he holds out his hand for an invoice....
If you buy a yard of ribbon, the shopkeeper lays down his newspaper, perhaps two or three, to measure it. I have seen a brewer's drayman perched on the shaft of his dray and reading one newspaper, while another was tucked under his arm....
This, I presume, is what is meant by the "general diffusion of knowledge", so boasted of in the United States; such as it is, the diffusion of it is general enough, certainly; but I greatly doubt its being advantageous to the population....
The only reading men I met with were those who made letters their profession; and of these, there were some who would hold a higher rank in the great Republic (not of America, but of letters), did they write for persons less given to the study of magazines and newspapers; and they might hold a higher rank still, did they write for the few and not for the many....

The character of the American literature is, generally speaking, pretty justly appreciated in Europe. The immense exhalation of periodical trash, which penetrates into every cot and corner of the country, and which is greedily sucked in by all ranks, is unquestionably one great cause of its inferiority. Where newspapers are the principal vehicles of the wit and wisdom of a people, the higher graces of composition can hardly be looked for....
As far as I could judge, their best writers are far from being the most popular. The general taste is decidedly bad; this is obvious, not only from the mass of slip-slop poured forth by the daily and weekly press, but from the inflated tone of eulogy in which their insect authors are lauded.

Mrs. Trollope is far too kind. It was just the sort of trashy propaganda as she describes that did so much to promote the disaster of the Terrorist Uprising of 1776 -- and which has continued to promote American hysteria all through its history.

Where a society's knowledge derives from the nonsense and lies and self-serving trash of commercial media, what results may be expected to derive, other than the ones which we regret to see surrounding us?
.

 

[holston]

Not fall for the bilge spouted by self-serving terrorists and swindlers -- especially if they are "patriots"

This is like giving a move toward martial law a name like "Patriot" Act, then later following it up with a name like "National Defense Authorization Act", which essentially changes the President into the King. The Tories would luv that one.

When Dr. Johnson defined "patriotism" as the last refuge of a scoundrel, he ignored the enormous possibilities of the word "reform".
---Roscoe Conkling, New York Senator and swindler ( perhaps that is redundant? · )

Indeed. "Reform" is the name that NeoCons called "Progressive Judaism". The alteration of this label has led to a great deal of trouble, not only for the Jews but for the US and numerous mideastern countries. I
t's a shame that our trashy news media doesn't tell of it. It would shed a lot of light on several major current events.

"Reform" Judaism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progres...m_(Israel)


Quote:
Reform Judaism is a phrase that refers to various beliefs, practices and organizations associated with the Reform Jewish movement in North America, the United Kingdom and elsewhere.
Quote:
The headquarters of the World Union for Progressive Judaism (Reform Judaism is generally referred to as Progressive Judaism in Israel) were moved to Jerusalem in 1973, establishing Progressive Judaism’s international presence in Zion and reflecting its intention to form a strong indigenous movement.



Quote:
Progressive Judaism (Hebrew: יהדות רפורמית*) (Yiddish: רעפאָרם יידישקייַ&#1496, is an umbrella term used by strands of Judaism which affiliate to the World Union for Progressive Judaism (WUPJ). They embrace pluralism, modernity, equality and social justice as core values and believe that such values are consistent with a committed Jewish life. The movement includes more than 1.7 million members spread across 42 countries
Quote:
Zionists within the progressive movement are represented by Arzenu, a Brit Olamit (political party) within the World Zionist Organization. A Zionist Youth movement, Netzer Olami has affiliations with both the WUPJ and Arzenu.
Quote:
The World Union for Progressive Judaism (WUPJ) describes itself as the "international umbrella organization for the Reform, Liberal, Progressive and Reconstructionist movements."[1] This overall Jewish religious movement is based in about 40 countries with more than 1,000 affiliated synagogues.

Quote:
Religious Zionists explained in terms acceptable to the Halakha, the secular, mainly socialist, existentialist Zionist vision where material needs of the people are addressed through practical and realistic solutions, reflected by secular philosophers such as Ahad Ha'am.

In 1862, German Orthodox Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Kalischer published his tractate Derishat Zion, positing that the salvation of the Jews, promised by the Prophets, can come about only by self-help.

The main ideologue of modern religious Zionism was Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, who justified Zionism according Jewish law and urged young religious Jews to support efforts to settle the land, and the mainsteam, majority, secular and socialist Labour Zionists to give more consideration to Judaism.

Rav Kook saw Zionism as a part of a divine scheme which would result in the resettlement of the Jewish people in its homeland. This would bring salvation (Geula) to Jews, and then to the entire world. After world harmony is achieved by the refoundation of the Jewish homeland, the Messiah will come.

Above all, employ a little critical thinking. Don't accept the myths injected into your brain just because everybody else is mindlessly repeating them.

Like the 9/11 Commissions Report.

If you see a lot of people going one way, walk in the opposite direction. If you see everybody going one way, run in the opposite direction!!

That's a good way to get trampled.

Americans are pathetic about believing things just because everybody else believes them!!

They're pathetic about letting Hollywood set the standards for what's in, what's out, what's right, what's wrong, and believing half the propaganda that comes from the main stream media.

 

[numan]

Not fall for the bilge spouted by self-serving terrorists and swindlers -- especially if they are "patriots"

This is like giving a move toward martial law a name like "Patriot" Act, then later following it up with a name like "National Defense Authorization Act", which essentially changes the President into the King. The Tories would luv that one.

I might begin to feel that there is some hope for America if they would change the name of the "Department of Defense" back to the original "War Department". They even lie about that!!

And please!! The name "Tory" is pejorative and definitely not Politically Correct!! We prefer the name "Loyalists"!!
Compared to the totalitarian-minded "Neo-Conservatives" of today, the Loyalists were models of Republican Virtue and respect for law and good government. Remember, the Terrorists of the Continental Congress were not rebelling against the King -- they were rebelling against Parliament!!

Americans are pathetic about believing things just because everybody else believes them!!

They're pathetic about letting Hollywood set the standards for what's in, what's out, what's right, what's wrong, and believing half the propaganda that comes from the main stream media.

I certainly agree with that -- except that I would put it closer to 100% rather than to "half"!! · ·
.

 

[numan]

'
Here is another gem of wisdom from de Tocqueville!

Definitely a contributing factor to the hysterical tendencies so prevalent in America.

WHY THE NATIONAL VANITY OF THE AMERICANS IS MORE RESTLESS AND CAPTIOUS THAN THAT OF THE ENGLISH

"All free nations are vainglorious, but national pride is not displayed by all in the same manner. The Americans, in their intercourse with strangers, appear impatient of the smallest censure and insatiable of praise. The most slender eulogy is acceptable to them, the most exalted seldom contents them; they unceasingly harass you to extort praise, and if you resist their entreaties, they fall to praising themselves. It would seem as if, doubting their own merit, they wished to have it constantly exhibited before their eyes. Their vanity is not only greedy, but restless and jealous; it will grant nothing, while it demands everything, but is ready to beg and to quarrel at the same time. If I say to an American that the country he lives in is a fine one, "Ay," he replies, "there is not its equal in the world." If I applaud the freedom that its inhabitants enjoy, he answers: "Freedom is a fine thing, but few nations are worthy to enjoy it." If I remark on the purity of morals that distinguishes the United States, "I can imagine," says he, "that a stranger, who has witnessed the corruption that prevails in other nations, would be astonished at the difference." At length I leave him to the contemplation of himself; but he returns to the charge and does not desist till he has got me to repeat all I had just been saying. It is impossible to conceive a more troublesome or more garrulous patriotism; it wearies even those who are disposed to respect it.

"Such is not the case with the English. An Englishman calmly enjoys the real or imaginary advantages which, in his opinion, his country possesses. If he grants nothing to other nations, neither does he solicit anything for his own. The censure of foreigners does not affect him, and their praise hardly flatters him; his position with regard to the rest of the world is one of disdainful and ignorant reserve: his pride requires no sustenance; it nourishes itself. It is remarkable that two nations so recently sprung from the same stock should be so opposite to each other in their manner of feeling and conversing."
.
[emphasis added]

 

[Sunshine]

Well studies in 'hysteria' DID bring about the invention of the vibrator which guarantees a woman will have a 'paroxysm' each and every time.

 

[holston]

Well studies in 'hysteria' DID bring about the invention of the vibrator which guarantees a woman will have a 'paroxysm' each and every time.

Do you find numan's writings paroxymatic?

 

[Toro]

'
People seem to ignore the importance of hysteria in American life. Of course, one can find examples of hysteria in the life of all nations, but what is peculiar about the psychology of Americans is the repeated recurrence of hysteria, and the regularity of the recurrence. I don't see how one can make sense of the American Experience without taking it into consideration.

Leaving aside the hysteria of the Terrorist Uprising of 1776, there was the hysteria associated with the Alien and Sedition Acts at the end of the 1790's. There was a revival of hysteria at the time of the War of 1812, then a period of quiescence until the election of Andrew Jackson. That repulsive demagogue initiated an almost uninterrupted period of hysteria for more than a decade: the destruction of the Bank of the United States, the first great economic depression, the ethnic cleansing and genocide of the Five Nations, the anti-foreign, anti-Catholic, anti-Mason hysteria of the Know-Nothing Party, and, of course, the Manifest Destiny hysteria that led to the Mexican-American War.

That war, with barely a pause for breath, initiated the ever-growing hysteria of the 1850's which brought on the Civil War. That war was the most useless and unnecessary war of modern times; more than two per-cent of the American population died because of the war -- about the same number and percentage of deaths in Iraq for which America bears such responsibility. If both sides, North and South, had just sat on their hands for thirty years, slavery would have ended anyway -- serfdom in Russia and slavery in Brazil were long gone by 1890, or was the United States so much more backward than Russia and Brazil that slavery would have hung on until the twentieth century? All that misery and death could have been avoided, and all the wounds and bitterness and injustice that lasted so long. But, Oh no, Americans must have their hysterical fits; by the late 1850's each side had so worked itself into a passion, so convinced itself that it was agrieved and wronged, so filled itself with righteous indignation, self-pity and intransigence that a paroxysm of gibbering, murderous rage could not be avoided.

Then there was the peace of exhaustion for thirty-odd years until the nonsense of Free Silver and "You shall not crucify Mankind upon a cross of gold" primed the pump for the "Maine Incident" and the Spanish-American War. By this time the hysteria was being much more consciously directed.

Next was the war hysteria of the First World War, the Ku Klux Klan hysteria of the early twenties, not forgetting the hysteria that led to Prohibition, which made the world safe for the Mafia and the FBI.

Take another hop and a skip to the Second World War, when hysteria made it seem perfectly acceptable to throw American citizens into concentration camps, mass-murder civilians in bombing raids, and rain atomic destruction down upon a defeated Japan.

Then there was the hysteria of the McCarthyite communist witch-hunts which fastened the oppressive Military-Industrial Complex upon the American people ever after. People should have paid attention to Eisenhower's warnings !!

Next, the coup of the Kennedy Assassination set the stage for the prolonged hysteria of the Vietnam War.

Then there was a longer than usual period of relative quiet---just constant, low-level hysteria -- until Monika Lewinski, 2000 election fraud, hysterical over-reaction to the 9-11 attacks, the Iraq War and "Homeland Security" -- in other words our present bout of general mayhem, hysteria and ever increasing totalitarian tyranny.

We still have the collapse of the dollar to look forward to, and the somewhat slower collapse of the American military. And when the six percent of the world's population which is represented by the citizens of the US find it necessary to live on six percent of the world's resources rather than the present twenty-five percent -- that should be quite adequate to fuel another round of perfectly futile hysteria.
.

I disagree.

 

[MHunterB]

Well studies in 'hysteria' DID bring about the invention of the vibrator which guarantees a woman will have a 'paroxysm' each and every time.

Do you find numan's writings paroxymatic?

Paroxysms of laughter, certainly. Yours as well.

 

[holston]

'

WHY THE NATIONAL VANITY OF THE AMERICANS IS MORE RESTLESS AND CAPTIOUS THAN THAT OF THE ENGLISH
"
"

"Such is not the case with the English. An Englishman calmly enjoys the real or imaginary advantages which, in his opinion, his country possesses. If he grants nothing to other nations, neither does he solicit anything for his own. The censure of foreigners does not affect him, and their praise hardly flatters him; his position with regard to the rest of the world is one of disdainful and ignorant reserve: his pride requires no sustenance; it nourishes itself. It is remarkable that two nations so recently sprung from the same stock should be so opposite to each other in their manner of feeling and conversing."[/b]
.
[emphasis added]

The English might well do with a little more national pride. It might help stem the tide of the Muslim invasion which has swarmed over London as I've been told.

I also hear tell that you also have a little nation located somewhere plop in the middle of Olde London town which pretty much belongs to the Rothschild (Bauer) dynasty and all the Globalist banksters they are in cahoots with.

Rothschild Group

It looks very British on the surface doesn't it?

From what I hear, socialism in England hasn't done England much good. We in the US don't expect it to do us any better. That's why so many of us are so upset over who has hijacked our government and usurped the Stars and Stripes. They used to stand for a nobler set of ideals. Now they are pretty much accepted world wide unanimously as the symbol for Imperialist Zion and corporate greed run amuck.


Here is a link to a site that is sponsored by some people who are not terribly enthralled with the State of the Union.
I wouldn't describe that as braggadocio. The main body of them I believe has been hijacked by the same faction that they're trying to resist. How can you cut the head off the snake if you don't know where it is?



home page

As Ben Franklin stated, the Revolution was just as much a movement against British taxation as it was a cause against the fact that the colonies were not allowed to print their own money. Ultimately, the Revolution was about who controlled the banks and the money supply.

I don't mind critics of the US. I am one myself, now more than ever. But the pot calling the kettle black all the time sort of grates on my nerves at times.

I haven't quite reached the point where I am ready to surrender the flag to a bunch of imposters.