Zone1 I kid you not Left wing and far Right

[Libby von H]

When I absorb information, I kinda get niggly feelings inside. I like psychology and get quite in-depth from the normal path when I'm bugged.

One such thing was the orientation of the left. So I did a little researching -

Study: Left-wing authoritarians share key psychological traits with far right

People with extreme political views that favor authoritarianism—whether they are on the far left or the far right—have surprisingly similar behaviors and psychological characteristics, a new study finds.

phys.org

Now, I always thought Republicans were not Far Right, but Democrats kinda ring alarm bells.

Your thoughts on the link?

Well, politically the most authoritarian regimes were LEFTIST !!!!!

Jonah Goldberg answeed this quite a while ago

This book is not attempting, as many seem to think, to say that all liberals are closet Nazis, but rather that, contrary to popular misconception, it is not conservatism, but liberalism, that traces its roots to the fascists. In some ways it is a book-length extension of the question conservatives sometimes pose to liberals: "If you leave out the parts about killing all the Jews and invading Poland, what specifically about the Nazi political platform do you disagree with?" (That platform is handily provided in the appendix.) After Goldberg's book, this question is much harder to simply shrug off."

 

[Libby von H]

Just look around this forum and tell me I am wrong. Most of those that are on what constitute the political right in our country are all for strong central government lead by an authoritarian. They are no less so than the folks that make up the political left, the only differences between them is in what they think the Govt should have control over.

I looked around but you didn't Most are leftist dimwits. And you can't be too bright if this escapes you.
So your point is really , you are smarter than all the people on earth

 

[Harpy Eagle]

When you bend to the will of leftists, you become a leftist.
And most people are fucking stupid. What they think doesnt affect reality.

But that is just it, this is reality.

They are what makes up the political right in our country, and in most of the world.

You can say they are not really right, but it is meaningless, as they are what is "right" today.

Like it or not

 

[TNHarley]

But that is just it, this is reality.

They are what makes up the political right in our country, and in most of the world.

You can say they are not really right, but it is meaningless, as they are what is "right" today.

Like it or not

Because stupid people say so?
If stupid people started overwhelmingly saying rape was consensual, does that mean rape is no longer rape?
No, it doesnt. There are already terms for it. They are just ashamed of them. I dont give in to their BS.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Because stupid people say so?

Because it is reality. They are what makes up the Right in this country, you cannot deny it.

 

[TNHarley]

Because it is reality. They are what makes up the Right in this country, you cannot deny it.

I can. The majority of this country are middle to left. There are only a few righties.
A man can call himself a female, but he isnt. A female can call herself a fox, but she isnt. An authoritarian can call himself a righty, but he isnt.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I can. The majority of this country are middle to left. There are only a few righties.
A man can call himself a female, but he isnt. A female can call herself a fox, but she isnt. An authoritarian can call himself a righty, but he isnt.

And yet, they make up the political right in this country.

All of your foot stomping will not change this simple fact.

 

[gipper]

View attachment 936305

The statist posts.

 

[TNHarley]

And yet, they make up the political right in this country.

All of your foot stomping will not change this simple fact.

No they dont. They make up a party.

 

[MisterBeale]

Josiah Warren. The first labor for labor store

Yep. He was influenced by Owenism.

I believe he may have lived in New Community for a time, but now that history is hard to find, just like the relationship between he and Spooner.

Labor Note Theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren​

Labor Note Theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren

This chapter elucidates the “forgotten” relationship of the ideas on labor notes in the theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren. Although Warren participated in New Harmony, which influenced the development of his unique theory, most studies that have...

link.springer.com

Owenism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

New Harmony, Indiana - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Eric Foner - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

One of the most highly-regarded historians of 19th-century America gives his contribution to the Literature of Liberty.

https://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/radical-individualism-america-revolution-civil-war

Republican Solidarity and Republican Individualism​

". . . . This transition from communal harmony to competitive individualism was hastened by the influence in America of the third generation of opposition thinkers in eighteenth-century England. As Staughton Lynd has emphasized, such writers as James Burgh, Richard Price, and Joseph Priestley expanded the long-standing demand by Protestant Dissenters for religious liberty, into a call for complete freedom of conscience and a warning of the dangers posed to personal liberty by powerful governments. Therefore, side by side with the classical republican definition of liberty (as that attainable only through self-denial and active citizenship), there also emerged a newer conception of freedom as simply a collection of rights belonging to the people. In this conception the key to liberty was not “virtue” and public spiritedness, but the setting of limits to the exercise of authority. Such a view drew on traditions lying deep within English and American political culture. The heritage of the “free-born Englishman,” that sense of hostility to authoritarianism and an assertion of the right to resist arbitrary power, is not sufficiently emphasized by students of Country Party thought, but as E. P. Thompson has shown, it played an extremely important role in popular politics in the eighteenth century.

The individualist definition of freedom obviously possessed strong affinities for the view of economic life Adam Smith was proposing at precisely this time. In laissez-faire economics, as in Madisonian politics, the public good emerged from free competition and the private pursuit of gain. As the Dissenters demanded that government give up its traditional supervision of the religious realm, classical economists called for a separation of government from the economy. It is easy to forget the radical implications of this demand in the context of the eighteenth century. The call for success based on individual merit was a powerful weapon of assault against the aristocratic world. In effect, it demanded the dismantling of hereditary privilege, of government-granted favors, and of all artificial distinctions among individuals. Competitive individualism was eagerly embraced by the emerging bourgeoisie, since that class possessed the qualities presumably required for success in what came to be called “the race of life”—frugality, self-discipline, and the ability to postpone immediate gratification. The losers in the “race” would be the profligate and unproductive aristocracy, and the undisciplined lower orders. But the call for rewards to talent and an end to privilege also generated an enthusiastic response among other classes, such as artisans and yeoman farmers, to whom “aristocracy” represented a threat to the very meaning of the American Revolution.

Paine: Dissent Tradition and Radical Individualism​

No figure of the American Revolution is more closely associated with the history of American radicalism, or reflects more clearly its complex intellectual origins, than Thomas Paine. Born in England in 1737, the son of a staymaker, Paine emigrated to America in 1774. He won fame as the author of Common Sense, that brilliant call for American independence, and thenceforth devoted himself to promoting the national war effort. In addition, Paine became intimately involved in the complex struggle in Pennsylvania, which saw the Revolution broaden into a debate over the fruits of independence. The highly democratic Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, with its broad suffrage, unicameral legislature, and annual elections, reflected a process occuring in virtually every colony as part of the Revolution: the expansion of political participation and the decline in deferential politics. In Pennsylvania and areas like western Massachusetts, backcountry North Carolina, and the Hudson Valley of New York, “equality” became the great rallying cry of those who sought to restructure the political life of the colonies. The demand for “equality” was, as Franco Venturi has written, a “protest ideal,” a critique of a society based on hierarchy and privilege, rather than a demand for massive social levelling. While remaining firmly within the republican tradition which linked individual autonomy to the possession of productive property, some Pennsylvania radicals proposed that the state discourage large concentrations of wealth, since “an enormous Proportion of Property vested in a few Individuals is dangerous to the Rights, and destructive of the Common Happiness of Mankind.. . . ”

<snip>

". . . Communitarian Experiments​

The expression of radicalism which diverged most completely from the liberal, individualist ideology of the emerging order were the numerous communitarian experiments created in these years. Between 1800 and 1860 over one hundred such communities were founded. They varied greatly in their internal structure. At one extreme stood Oneida in New York State, whose regimen of mutual self-criticism and dictatorial direction by John Humphrey Noyes left little room for individual initiative. And at the other was the communitarian anarchism of Josiah Warren, which blended extreme individualism with labor radicalism in a unique amalgam. Warren accused most utopian socialists of reproducing on a small scale the arbitrary authority typical of the larger society. The true policy of a community, he believed, was “allowing each individual to be absolute despot or sovereign” over himself. At Modern Times community on Long Island, there were virtually no rules or laws. “A man may have two wives, or a woman, two husbands, or a dozen each, for ought I care,” said Warren. “Everybody has a perfect right to do everything.” (Warren’s remark points up the central importance of the family in the history of communitarian experiments. Many utopians challenged the nuclear family and proposed alternatives ranging from the celibacy practiced by the Shakers to the polygamy of the Mormons, the “free love” advocated by some Owenites, and the system of “complex marriage” devised by Noyes at Oneida.) Warren’s radicalism also extended to labor relations: he insisted Americans needed to be freed from the coercion of the marketplace as well as that of the state. In Cincinnati, Warren organized a “time store” and a currency, “labor notes,” so that goods could be exchanged for their value in human labor, and middlemen and nonproducers would be eliminated entirely, thereby allowing the worker to receive the full product of his labor.

Historians have devoted more attention to the Owenite communities of the early nineteenth century than any other variant. As Arthur Bestor shows in his classic study, Owenism embodied a plan for social reform blending communitarianism, a critique of the competitive ideology of the emerging capitalist order, and a science of society based on an environmentalist conception of human nature. J.F.C. Harrison has emphasized the millennial aspect of Robert Owen’s aim—nothing less than the creation of a “new moral world” in which social harmony would reign supreme. Although Owen’s famous experiment at New Harmony was short-lived and torn by dissention, Owenism exerted a powerful influence on the early labor movement. Two themes of Owen’s thought, the labor theory of value and his stress on education as a means of social improvement and character-molding, were especially influential. The ideal of cooperation, moreover, remained a strong element in labor ideology well into this century, as did the conviction that men could shape a more equitable society through a conscious rebuilding of their local institutions.. . . . "

 

[DudleySmith]

The statist posts.

Says the muffin who thinks we all should just let foreign imperialists run over us whi;e he hides under the bed babbling hippie slogans and assorted dumb platitudes.

Like, Peace Now, Dudes! lol

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The most consistent traits among authoritarians of all stripes are hubris and an unquestioning nature.

 

[gipper]

Yet another dumb statist who STILL believes his lying government, even though they’ve lied about every war.


CRAZY!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

A man can call himself a female, but he isnt. A female can call herself a fox, but she isnt. An authoritarian can call himself a righty, but he isnt.

and a poster can call himself a libertarian when he is really just a died in the wool Democrat.

 

[DudleySmith]

Yep. He was influenced by Owenism.

I believe he may have lived in New Community for a time, but now that history is hard to find, just like the relationship between he and Spooner.

Labor Note Theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren​

Labor Note Theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren

This chapter elucidates the “forgotten” relationship of the ideas on labor notes in the theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren. Although Warren participated in New Harmony, which influenced the development of his unique theory, most studies that have...

link.springer.com

Owenism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

New Harmony, Indiana - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Eric Foner - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

One of the most highly-regarded historians of 19th-century America gives his contribution to the Literature of Liberty.
View attachment 936540

https://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/radical-individualism-america-revolution-civil-war

Republican Solidarity and Republican Individualism​

". . . . This transition from communal harmony to competitive individualism was hastened by the influence in America of the third generation of opposition thinkers in eighteenth-century England. As Staughton Lynd has emphasized, such writers as James Burgh, Richard Price, and Joseph Priestley expanded the long-standing demand by Protestant Dissenters for religious liberty, into a call for complete freedom of conscience and a warning of the dangers posed to personal liberty by powerful governments. Therefore, side by side with the classical republican definition of liberty (as that attainable only through self-denial and active citizenship), there also emerged a newer conception of freedom as simply a collection of rights belonging to the people. In this conception the key to liberty was not “virtue” and public spiritedness, but the setting of limits to the exercise of authority. Such a view drew on traditions lying deep within English and American political culture. The heritage of the “free-born Englishman,” that sense of hostility to authoritarianism and an assertion of the right to resist arbitrary power, is not sufficiently emphasized by students of Country Party thought, but as E. P. Thompson has shown, it played an extremely important role in popular politics in the eighteenth century.

The individualist definition of freedom obviously possessed strong affinities for the view of economic life Adam Smith was proposing at precisely this time. In laissez-faire economics, as in Madisonian politics, the public good emerged from free competition and the private pursuit of gain. As the Dissenters demanded that government give up its traditional supervision of the religious realm, classical economists called for a separation of government from the economy. It is easy to forget the radical implications of this demand in the context of the eighteenth century. The call for success based on individual merit was a powerful weapon of assault against the aristocratic world. In effect, it demanded the dismantling of hereditary privilege, of government-granted favors, and of all artificial distinctions among individuals. Competitive individualism was eagerly embraced by the emerging bourgeoisie, since that class possessed the qualities presumably required for success in what came to be called “the race of life”—frugality, self-discipline, and the ability to postpone immediate gratification. The losers in the “race” would be the profligate and unproductive aristocracy, and the undisciplined lower orders. But the call for rewards to talent and an end to privilege also generated an enthusiastic response among other classes, such as artisans and yeoman farmers, to whom “aristocracy” represented a threat to the very meaning of the American Revolution.

Paine: Dissent Tradition and Radical Individualism​

No figure of the American Revolution is more closely associated with the history of American radicalism, or reflects more clearly its complex intellectual origins, than Thomas Paine. Born in England in 1737, the son of a staymaker, Paine emigrated to America in 1774. He won fame as the author of Common Sense, that brilliant call for American independence, and thenceforth devoted himself to promoting the national war effort. In addition, Paine became intimately involved in the complex struggle in Pennsylvania, which saw the Revolution broaden into a debate over the fruits of independence. The highly democratic Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, with its broad suffrage, unicameral legislature, and annual elections, reflected a process occuring in virtually every colony as part of the Revolution: the expansion of political participation and the decline in deferential politics. In Pennsylvania and areas like western Massachusetts, backcountry North Carolina, and the Hudson Valley of New York, “equality” became the great rallying cry of those who sought to restructure the political life of the colonies. The demand for “equality” was, as Franco Venturi has written, a “protest ideal,” a critique of a society based on hierarchy and privilege, rather than a demand for massive social levelling. While remaining firmly within the republican tradition which linked individual autonomy to the possession of productive property, some Pennsylvania radicals proposed that the state discourage large concentrations of wealth, since “an enormous Proportion of Property vested in a few Individuals is dangerous to the Rights, and destructive of the Common Happiness of Mankind.. . . ”

<snip>

". . . Communitarian Experiments​

The expression of radicalism which diverged most completely from the liberal, individualist ideology of the emerging order were the numerous communitarian experiments created in these years. Between 1800 and 1860 over one hundred such communities were founded. They varied greatly in their internal structure. At one extreme stood Oneida in New York State, whose regimen of mutual self-criticism and dictatorial direction by John Humphrey Noyes left little room for individual initiative. And at the other was the communitarian anarchism of Josiah Warren, which blended extreme individualism with labor radicalism in a unique amalgam. Warren accused most utopian socialists of reproducing on a small scale the arbitrary authority typical of the larger society. The true policy of a community, he believed, was “allowing each individual to be absolute despot or sovereign” over himself. At Modern Times community on Long Island, there were virtually no rules or laws. “A man may have two wives, or a woman, two husbands, or a dozen each, for ought I care,” said Warren. “Everybody has a perfect right to do everything.” (Warren’s remark points up the central importance of the family in the history of communitarian experiments. Many utopians challenged the nuclear family and proposed alternatives ranging from the celibacy practiced by the Shakers to the polygamy of the Mormons, the “free love” advocated by some Owenites, and the system of “complex marriage” devised by Noyes at Oneida.) Warren’s radicalism also extended to labor relations: he insisted Americans needed to be freed from the coercion of the marketplace as well as that of the state. In Cincinnati, Warren organized a “time store” and a currency, “labor notes,” so that goods could be exchanged for their value in human labor, and middlemen and nonproducers would be eliminated entirely, thereby allowing the worker to receive the full product of his labor.

Historians have devoted more attention to the Owenite communities of the early nineteenth century than any other variant. As Arthur Bestor shows in his classic study, Owenism embodied a plan for social reform blending communitarianism, a critique of the competitive ideology of the emerging capitalist order, and a science of society based on an environmentalist conception of human nature. J.F.C. Harrison has emphasized the millennial aspect of Robert Owen’s aim—nothing less than the creation of a “new moral world” in which social harmony would reign supreme. Although Owen’s famous experiment at New Harmony was short-lived and torn by dissention, Owenism exerted a powerful influence on the early labor movement. Two themes of Owen’s thought, the labor theory of value and his stress on education as a means of social improvement and character-molding, were especially influential. The ideal of cooperation, moreover, remained a strong element in labor ideology well into this century, as did the conviction that men could shape a more equitable society through a conscious rebuilding of their local institutions.. . . . "

The modern versions were updated in the 1940's and 1950's, when the big corporations were paying the Freidmans and Borks and Galbraiths and funding Chairs in the economics depts. of the major universities to sell the Big Is Better scams. Those New Deals bank regs made it tough to peddle the usual Ponzi schemes popular in the 1920's and take over corporations using junk bonds and other inflated 'equity' scams.

 

[Libby von H]

Yep. He was influenced by Owenism.

I believe he may have lived in New Community for a time, but now that history is hard to find, just like the relationship between he and Spooner.

Labor Note Theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren​

Labor Note Theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren

This chapter elucidates the “forgotten” relationship of the ideas on labor notes in the theories of Robert Owen and Josiah Warren. Although Warren participated in New Harmony, which influenced the development of his unique theory, most studies that have...

link.springer.com

Owenism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

New Harmony, Indiana - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Eric Foner - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

One of the most highly-regarded historians of 19th-century America gives his contribution to the Literature of Liberty.
View attachment 936540

https://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/radical-individualism-america-revolution-civil-war

Republican Solidarity and Republican Individualism​

". . . . This transition from communal harmony to competitive individualism was hastened by the influence in America of the third generation of opposition thinkers in eighteenth-century England. As Staughton Lynd has emphasized, such writers as James Burgh, Richard Price, and Joseph Priestley expanded the long-standing demand by Protestant Dissenters for religious liberty, into a call for complete freedom of conscience and a warning of the dangers posed to personal liberty by powerful governments. Therefore, side by side with the classical republican definition of liberty (as that attainable only through self-denial and active citizenship), there also emerged a newer conception of freedom as simply a collection of rights belonging to the people. In this conception the key to liberty was not “virtue” and public spiritedness, but the setting of limits to the exercise of authority. Such a view drew on traditions lying deep within English and American political culture. The heritage of the “free-born Englishman,” that sense of hostility to authoritarianism and an assertion of the right to resist arbitrary power, is not sufficiently emphasized by students of Country Party thought, but as E. P. Thompson has shown, it played an extremely important role in popular politics in the eighteenth century.

The individualist definition of freedom obviously possessed strong affinities for the view of economic life Adam Smith was proposing at precisely this time. In laissez-faire economics, as in Madisonian politics, the public good emerged from free competition and the private pursuit of gain. As the Dissenters demanded that government give up its traditional supervision of the religious realm, classical economists called for a separation of government from the economy. It is easy to forget the radical implications of this demand in the context of the eighteenth century. The call for success based on individual merit was a powerful weapon of assault against the aristocratic world. In effect, it demanded the dismantling of hereditary privilege, of government-granted favors, and of all artificial distinctions among individuals. Competitive individualism was eagerly embraced by the emerging bourgeoisie, since that class possessed the qualities presumably required for success in what came to be called “the race of life”—frugality, self-discipline, and the ability to postpone immediate gratification. The losers in the “race” would be the profligate and unproductive aristocracy, and the undisciplined lower orders. But the call for rewards to talent and an end to privilege also generated an enthusiastic response among other classes, such as artisans and yeoman farmers, to whom “aristocracy” represented a threat to the very meaning of the American Revolution.

Paine: Dissent Tradition and Radical Individualism​

No figure of the American Revolution is more closely associated with the history of American radicalism, or reflects more clearly its complex intellectual origins, than Thomas Paine. Born in England in 1737, the son of a staymaker, Paine emigrated to America in 1774. He won fame as the author of Common Sense, that brilliant call for American independence, and thenceforth devoted himself to promoting the national war effort. In addition, Paine became intimately involved in the complex struggle in Pennsylvania, which saw the Revolution broaden into a debate over the fruits of independence. The highly democratic Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, with its broad suffrage, unicameral legislature, and annual elections, reflected a process occuring in virtually every colony as part of the Revolution: the expansion of political participation and the decline in deferential politics. In Pennsylvania and areas like western Massachusetts, backcountry North Carolina, and the Hudson Valley of New York, “equality” became the great rallying cry of those who sought to restructure the political life of the colonies. The demand for “equality” was, as Franco Venturi has written, a “protest ideal,” a critique of a society based on hierarchy and privilege, rather than a demand for massive social levelling. While remaining firmly within the republican tradition which linked individual autonomy to the possession of productive property, some Pennsylvania radicals proposed that the state discourage large concentrations of wealth, since “an enormous Proportion of Property vested in a few Individuals is dangerous to the Rights, and destructive of the Common Happiness of Mankind.. . . ”

<snip>

". . . Communitarian Experiments​

The expression of radicalism which diverged most completely from the liberal, individualist ideology of the emerging order were the numerous communitarian experiments created in these years. Between 1800 and 1860 over one hundred such communities were founded. They varied greatly in their internal structure. At one extreme stood Oneida in New York State, whose regimen of mutual self-criticism and dictatorial direction by John Humphrey Noyes left little room for individual initiative. And at the other was the communitarian anarchism of Josiah Warren, which blended extreme individualism with labor radicalism in a unique amalgam. Warren accused most utopian socialists of reproducing on a small scale the arbitrary authority typical of the larger society. The true policy of a community, he believed, was “allowing each individual to be absolute despot or sovereign” over himself. At Modern Times community on Long Island, there were virtually no rules or laws. “A man may have two wives, or a woman, two husbands, or a dozen each, for ought I care,” said Warren. “Everybody has a perfect right to do everything.” (Warren’s remark points up the central importance of the family in the history of communitarian experiments. Many utopians challenged the nuclear family and proposed alternatives ranging from the celibacy practiced by the Shakers to the polygamy of the Mormons, the “free love” advocated by some Owenites, and the system of “complex marriage” devised by Noyes at Oneida.) Warren’s radicalism also extended to labor relations: he insisted Americans needed to be freed from the coercion of the marketplace as well as that of the state. In Cincinnati, Warren organized a “time store” and a currency, “labor notes,” so that goods could be exchanged for their value in human labor, and middlemen and nonproducers would be eliminated entirely, thereby allowing the worker to receive the full product of his labor.

Historians have devoted more attention to the Owenite communities of the early nineteenth century than any other variant. As Arthur Bestor shows in his classic study, Owenism embodied a plan for social reform blending communitarianism, a critique of the competitive ideology of the emerging capitalist order, and a science of society based on an environmentalist conception of human nature. J.F.C. Harrison has emphasized the millennial aspect of Robert Owen’s aim—nothing less than the creation of a “new moral world” in which social harmony would reign supreme. Although Owen’s famous experiment at New Harmony was short-lived and torn by dissention, Owenism exerted a powerful influence on the early labor movement. Two themes of Owen’s thought, the labor theory of value and his stress on education as a means of social improvement and character-molding, were especially influential. The ideal of cooperation, moreover, remained a strong element in labor ideology well into this century, as did the conviction that men could shape a more equitable society through a conscious rebuilding of their local institutions.. . . . "

and if you do your homework that was all brought down by Nathanael Hawthorne's expose

THE BLITHEDALE ROMANCE
"Abjuring the city for a pastoral life, a group of utopians set out to reform a dissipated America. But the group is a powerful mix of competing ambitions and its idealism finds little satisfaction in farmwork. Instead, of changing the world, the members of the Blithedale community individually pursue egotistical paths that ultimately lead to tragedy."

HIs daughter became a Catholic nun and founded a real community. She is now up for SAINTHOOD.

See where I am going with this ?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Says the muffin who thinks we all should just let foreign imperialists run over us whi;e he hides under the bed babbling hippie slogans and assorted dumb platitudes.

Like, Peace Now, Dudes! lol

Since he evidently opposes the very idea of nation states and a sense of national sovereignty associated with them, that really only leaves globalism or Mad Max as the alternatives, doesn't it?

 

[DudleySmith]

Yet another dumb statist who STILL believes his lying government, even though they’ve lied about every war.


CRAZY!

You know you're dealing with a parrot when they run around babbling 'STATIST!!!' whenever they can't refute a point or real history.

 

[gipper]

You know you're dealing with a parrot when they run around babbling 'STATIST!!!' whenever they can't refute a point or real history.

Read the following and tell me your “thoughts?” If you have any.

Dwight David Eisenhower, the Prophet-President of the United States, sixty-four years ago warned of the ascension of the military-industrial state, presently morphed into the military-industrial-intelligence complex, which, fully in control of our government, induces and manipulates our fears, creating serial enemies, justifying endless war for profit, openly canceling long-cherished constitutional rights, within the hoary rubric of “National Security,” read: Plunder of the American taxpayer.
Congress, as an Article One creation is in the thrall of murderous interest groups which are actively driving mass killings, assassinations, famine and ethnic cleansing, the progeny of genocide, in plain sight, recycling U.S. taxpayers’ hard-earned money to tighten its grip on American politics, all the while using its media influence to deny any of this is happening, denying even the existence of a people, or how they died, as bodies pile up by the tens of thousands in Gaza.
The extent to which patriotic Americans are being cynically manipulated is exemplified by events of the past week. Congress forfeited, by single votes in the House and Senate, our Fourth Amendment right to unreasonable search and seizure, passing the FISA extension and setting the stage for an official police state.

 

[DudleySmith]

Because it is reality. They are what makes up the Right in this country, you cannot deny it.

Too bad for you the Democrats are their frat bros and at the end of the day they're all on same side, and it isn't yours. Read this book for a good solid history of the post WW II agendas of both Parties.

Goliath: The 100-Year War Between Monopoly Power and De…

A startling look at how concentrated financial power an…

www.goodreads.com