OWS Echoes The French Revolution.

[Truthmatters]

Vilfredo Federico Damaso Pareto (Italian pronunciation: [vilˈfreːdo paˈreːto]; 15 July 1848 – 19 August 1923), born Wilfried Fritz Pareto, was an Italian engineer, sociologist, economist, political scientist and philosopher. He made several important contributions to economics, particularly in the study of income distribution and in the analysis of individuals' choices. "His legacy as an economist was profound. Partly because of him, the field evolved from a branch of moral philosophy as practiced by Adam Smith into a data intensive field of scientific research and mathematical equations. His books look more like modern economics than most other texts of that day: tables of statistics from across the world and ages, rows of integral signs and equations, intricate charts and graphs."[1] He introduced the concept of Pareto efficiency and helped develop the field of microeconomics. He also was the first to discover that income follows a Pareto distribution, which is a power law probability distribution. The Pareto principle was named after him and built on observations of his such as that 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the population. He also contributed to the fields of sociology and mathematics.

 

[Intense]

Vilfredo Pareto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Funny you should mention that it echo the French revolution.

It is these very types of historical facts like the French revolution that Pareto studied to discover that there is a breaking point of concentrated wealth in a society.


We have now proved pareto correct yet agin

Yeah, let's Execute everyone that can spell better than us, or can count past our fingers and toes, or uses soap when they bathe, so we can feel better about ourselves. Good plan.

If you are not serving Justice, you are as much a part of the problem./ Remember that when you are dictating to people what to do with their resources and personal property.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. The OWS movement reflects several aspects of the French Revolution.
Had they an actual education, we would have seen cardboard signs with
"Liberté, égalité, fraternité."

a. égalité..equality...is the demand that the so-called "1%" be brought down to their level.

2. The OWS folks certainly count as a mob.

a. Gustave Le Bon, in his groundbreaking 1896 book, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” was the first to identify the phenomenon of mass psychology. Both Hitler and Mussolini used his book to understand how to incite a mob.
The administration had hoped to harnass this mob as an ally.

3. In her book, "Demonic," Coulter illustrates how rumors and catch-phrases innervate a mob, and this is clear in that OWS and their supporters believe nonsense such as workers incomes stagnating, or falling, and only some bête noire called the "1%" is thriving, at their expense.

4. The man most identified with the French Revolution is Rousseau, who famously saw man sans government as 'the noble savage,' and some 'general will,' that the group expressed, as the right path. How did that work out in the OWS communes...? An anemic reflection of the French Revolution...without guillotines. Up to now.

a. In France, there was the development of an apparatus of ideological enforcement for ‘reason.’ But rather than necessitate liberty, Edmund Burke was prescient enough to predict that ‘enlightened despotism’ would be embodied in the general will, a formula for oppression as in ‘tyranny of popular opinion’ or even ‘a dictatorship of the proletariat.’

b. Although attributed to Rousseau, it was Diderot who gave the model for totalitarianism of reason: “We must reason about all things,” and anyone who ‘refuses to seek out the truth’ thereby renounces his human nature and “should be treated by the rest of his species as a wild beast.” So, once ‘truth’ is determined, anyone who doesn’t accept it was “either insane or wicked and morally evil.” It is not the individual who has the “ right to decide about the nature of right and wrong,” but only “the human race,” expressed as the general will. Himmelfarb, “The Roads to Modernity,” p. 167-68

c. Robespierre used Rousseau’s call for a “reign of virtue,’ proclaiming the Republic of Virtue, his euphemism for The Terror. In ‘The Social Contract’ Rousseau advocated death for anyone who did not uphold the common values of the community: the totalitarian view of reshaping of humanity, echoed in communism, Nazism, progressivism. Robespierre: “the necessity of bringing about a complete regeneration and, if I may express myself so, of creating a new people.” Himmefarb, Ibid.

d. In this particular idea of the Enlightenment, the need to change human nature, and to eliminate customs and traditions, to remake established institutions, to do away with all inequalities in order to bring man closer to the state, which was the expression of the general will. Talmon, “Origins of Totalitarian Democracy,” p. 3-7

And the conservative solution is what?

Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands.

Go for it.

See how it works out in the end.

Because historically..that's been the downfall of plenty of nations. But conservatives love to do the same stupid thing over and over and over and over again. Expecting different results.

So very glad to see us disagree again...whew!

See post #17 to be more informed.

I just love it when you expose the depth of your ignornce, as in "Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands."

1. Adam Smith, whose seminal work was, interestingly publishied the same year as the birth of this great nation, wrote:
"A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural."

2. The idea was advanced in the naicent nation by a gentleman you may have heard of, Thomas Jefferson.
"Entail" and "Primogeniture" was the age-old idea that one's land could only be passed to one's eldest son...
Jefferson wrote:
Some of the founders were not satisfied with curtailing entail and primogeniture; they advocated more radical measures for rectifying the imbalance in access to the intergenerational commons. Paine argued that the poor had in effect been wrongfully ousted and excluded from their natural legacy for many generations.
Thomas Jefferson and Entail

You said:
"Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands."

You sound more like an uneducated dunce, don't you?

3. From 1776 to 1779, Jefferson served as a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, where he successfully sought to abolish entail and primogeniture,...
http://millercenter.org/president/jefferson/essays/biography/2

 

[Intense]

I guess the people of France should have been satisfied with being poor, and just accepted that the lower classes faced most of the tax burden.

I guess our own founding fathers should have just been satisfied with what Great Britain was throwing at us too.

Time for some remediation.

The choice was not "...poor, and just accepted that the lower classes..." versus slaughering and maiming thousands of their countrymen...

The choice was the French Revolution and coextensive attack on Christianity, or

The American Revolution, infused with morality and religion.

1. While the American Revolution was created by and for ‘classical liberals,’ the French Revolution was by and for what those now called ‘liberals’ or progressives.

a. “The American intellectual class from the mid 19th century onward has disliked liberalism (which originally referred to individualism, private property, and limits on power) precisely because the liberal society has no overarching goal.” War Is the Health of the State

b. The French Revolution is the godless antithesis of the founding of America.

2. Unlike the American version, the French Revolution was a revolt by the mob, and was the primogenitor of the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler’s Nazi Party, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s killing fields, and the dirty waifs smashing Starbucks’ windows whenever bankers come town. Those with the gift of irony see similar actions in the ‘Cradle of Democracy,’ Greece.

3. Contrary to the assertions of Liberals, who wish our founding fathers were more like the godless French peasants, skipping around with human heads on a pike, our founding fathers were God-fearing descendants of Puritans and other colonial Christians.

4. The men behind the American Revolution- the Minutemen, the signers of the Declaration of Independence, the framers of the Constitution- were the very opposite of a mob. For the most part, educated, aristocratic property holders, doctors, lawyers, ministers and other respectable tradesmen with everything to lose should the revolution fail. These were the classical liberals, or, as we would address them today, the conservatives.

a. The modern Tea Party still abhors mob behavior. This from a rally in Boston: “The Obama Hitler sign. Let’s look out for those people, and make sure people know they’re not us.” A middle-aged, out-of-work Republican from Jamaica Plain agreed that it was crucial to police the line between the reasonable Tea Party people and party crashers: “We need to disabuse the public of some of the more exotic rumors out there.” Boston tea parties past and present : The New Yorker

b. A 26-year-old Tea Partier from MIT thought about throwing a copy of the 2000-page health care bill into Boston Harbor…but changed his mind when he found out it would be against the law. Ibid.
A far better exposition of the above can be found in "Demonic," by Coulter.


Wake up.
Wise up.
Grow up.

Oh bullshit.

The American Revolution was NOT a Christian movement. There is no god in the Constitution. Christian religions are intolerant of other religions.

Three Strikes! You are Out! You swing like a Sissy! Next Batter!

 

[Sallow]

I guess the people of France should have been satisfied with being poor, and just accepted that the lower classes faced most of the tax burden.

I guess our own founding fathers should have just been satisfied with what Great Britain was throwing at us too.

Unfortunately people will never be satisfied with the conservative forms of goverment like Fascism, Monarchy, Aristocracy, Theocracy and Dictatorships.

Why?

Because they suck.

Sallow, grow up. Totalitarianism under any brand sucks and you know it. The concept of Unalienable Rights, including Private Property Rights, foe Each of us, both Rich and Poor, a cornerstone in the Defense against Tyranny. You abandon Property Rights, and it's end game.

Grow up? I am quite on track here. Conservatism favors Totalitarism. Always. This whole "indivdual" liberty crap you guys spew falls apart when examined up close and personal. From torture, to suspending rights of those that are incarcerated, to women's reproductive rights, to the rights of regular citizens to advocate for their interests and a plethora of other issues.

I have no problem with "some" conservativism in a system of government. It empathizes careful consideration of implementing new things and it really does know how to profit from ideas..but like anything else..to much of it..really sucks.

 

[Sallow]

1. The OWS movement reflects several aspects of the French Revolution.
Had they an actual education, we would have seen cardboard signs with
"Liberté, égalité, fraternité."

a. égalité..equality...is the demand that the so-called "1%" be brought down to their level.

2. The OWS folks certainly count as a mob.

a. Gustave Le Bon, in his groundbreaking 1896 book, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” was the first to identify the phenomenon of mass psychology. Both Hitler and Mussolini used his book to understand how to incite a mob.
The administration had hoped to harnass this mob as an ally.

3. In her book, "Demonic," Coulter illustrates how rumors and catch-phrases innervate a mob, and this is clear in that OWS and their supporters believe nonsense such as workers incomes stagnating, or falling, and only some bête noire called the "1%" is thriving, at their expense.

4. The man most identified with the French Revolution is Rousseau, who famously saw man sans government as 'the noble savage,' and some 'general will,' that the group expressed, as the right path. How did that work out in the OWS communes...? An anemic reflection of the French Revolution...without guillotines. Up to now.

a. In France, there was the development of an apparatus of ideological enforcement for ‘reason.’ But rather than necessitate liberty, Edmund Burke was prescient enough to predict that ‘enlightened despotism’ would be embodied in the general will, a formula for oppression as in ‘tyranny of popular opinion’ or even ‘a dictatorship of the proletariat.’

b. Although attributed to Rousseau, it was Diderot who gave the model for totalitarianism of reason: “We must reason about all things,” and anyone who ‘refuses to seek out the truth’ thereby renounces his human nature and “should be treated by the rest of his species as a wild beast.” So, once ‘truth’ is determined, anyone who doesn’t accept it was “either insane or wicked and morally evil.” It is not the individual who has the “ right to decide about the nature of right and wrong,” but only “the human race,” expressed as the general will. Himmelfarb, “The Roads to Modernity,” p. 167-68

c. Robespierre used Rousseau’s call for a “reign of virtue,’ proclaiming the Republic of Virtue, his euphemism for The Terror. In ‘The Social Contract’ Rousseau advocated death for anyone who did not uphold the common values of the community: the totalitarian view of reshaping of humanity, echoed in communism, Nazism, progressivism. Robespierre: “the necessity of bringing about a complete regeneration and, if I may express myself so, of creating a new people.” Himmefarb, Ibid.

d. In this particular idea of the Enlightenment, the need to change human nature, and to eliminate customs and traditions, to remake established institutions, to do away with all inequalities in order to bring man closer to the state, which was the expression of the general will. Talmon, “Origins of Totalitarian Democracy,” p. 3-7

And the conservative solution is what?

Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands.

Go for it.

See how it works out in the end.

Because historically..that's been the downfall of plenty of nations. But conservatives love to do the same stupid thing over and over and over and over again. Expecting different results.

So very glad to see us disagree again...whew!

See post #17 to be more informed.

I just love it when you expose the depth of your ignornce, as in "Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands."

1. Adam Smith, whose seminal work was, interestingly publishied the same year as the birth of this great nation, wrote:
"A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural."

2. The idea was advanced in the naicent nation by a gentleman you may have heard of, Thomas Jefferson.
"Entail" and "Primogeniture" was the age-old idea that one's land could only be passed to one's eldest son...
Jefferson wrote:
Some of the founders were not satisfied with curtailing entail and primogeniture; they advocated more radical measures for rectifying the imbalance in access to the intergenerational commons. Paine argued that the poor had in effect been wrongfully ousted and excluded from their natural legacy for many generations.
Thomas Jefferson and Entail

You said:
"Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands."

You sound more like an uneducated dunce, don't you?

3. From 1776 to 1779, Jefferson served as a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, where he successfully sought to abolish entail and primogeniture,...
American President: Thomas Jefferson: Life Before the Presidency

The problem with you sweet cheeks is that you really can't be taken all that seriously. Insults, cut and paste and the like..really show a weak and lazy mind.

 

[Truthmatters]

Vilfredo Pareto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Funny you should mention that it echo the French revolution.

It is these very types of historical facts like the French revolution that Pareto studied to discover that there is a breaking point of concentrated wealth in a society.


We have now proved pareto correct yet agin

Yeah, let's Execute everyone that can spell better than us, or can count past our fingers and toes, or uses soap when they bathe, so we can feel better about ourselves. Good plan.

If you are not serving Justice, you are as much a part of the problem./ Remember that when you are dictating to people what to do with their resources and personal property.

The wealthy have us in a rigged game.

Your suggestion is to lie down and try to make yourself a better door mat for them.

you go ahead us people who have self respect and decent morals will take care of this mess for you.

Please just keep your doormat position and try to get better at it.

Do yourself a favor though, dont turn from a doormat into a suicide bomber for the wealthy though OK?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I guess the people of France should have been satisfied with being poor, and just accepted that the lower classes faced most of the tax burden.

I guess our own founding fathers should have just been satisfied with what Great Britain was throwing at us too.

Time for some remediation.

The choice was not "...poor, and just accepted that the lower classes..." versus slaughering and maiming thousands of their countrymen...

The choice was the French Revolution and coextensive attack on Christianity, or

The American Revolution, infused with morality and religion.

1. While the American Revolution was created by and for ‘classical liberals,’ the French Revolution was by and for what those now called ‘liberals’ or progressives.

a. “The American intellectual class from the mid 19th century onward has disliked liberalism (which originally referred to individualism, private property, and limits on power) precisely because the liberal society has no overarching goal.” War Is the Health of the State

b. The French Revolution is the godless antithesis of the founding of America.

2. Unlike the American version, the French Revolution was a revolt by the mob, and was the primogenitor of the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler’s Nazi Party, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s killing fields, and the dirty waifs smashing Starbucks’ windows whenever bankers come town. Those with the gift of irony see similar actions in the ‘Cradle of Democracy,’ Greece.

3. Contrary to the assertions of Liberals, who wish our founding fathers were more like the godless French peasants, skipping around with human heads on a pike, our founding fathers were God-fearing descendants of Puritans and other colonial Christians.

4. The men behind the American Revolution- the Minutemen, the signers of the Declaration of Independence, the framers of the Constitution- were the very opposite of a mob. For the most part, educated, aristocratic property holders, doctors, lawyers, ministers and other respectable tradesmen with everything to lose should the revolution fail. These were the classical liberals, or, as we would address them today, the conservatives.

a. The modern Tea Party still abhors mob behavior. This from a rally in Boston: “The Obama Hitler sign. Let’s look out for those people, and make sure people know they’re not us.” A middle-aged, out-of-work Republican from Jamaica Plain agreed that it was crucial to police the line between the reasonable Tea Party people and party crashers: “We need to disabuse the public of some of the more exotic rumors out there.” Boston tea parties past and present : The New Yorker

b. A 26-year-old Tea Partier from MIT thought about throwing a copy of the 2000-page health care bill into Boston Harbor…but changed his mind when he found out it would be against the law. Ibid.
A far better exposition of the above can be found in "Demonic," by Coulter.


Wake up.
Wise up.
Grow up.

Oh bullshit.

The American Revolution was NOT a Christian movement. There is no god in the Constitution. Christian religions are intolerant of other religions.

I someone paying you to play the fool today?

1. The most quoted source was the Bible. Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”. The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died.
Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7

 

[Intense]

Unfortunately people will never be satisfied with the conservative forms of goverment like Fascism, Monarchy, Aristocracy, Theocracy and Dictatorships.

Why?

Because they suck.

Sallow, grow up. Totalitarianism under any brand sucks and you know it. The concept of Unalienable Rights, including Private Property Rights, foe Each of us, both Rich and Poor, a cornerstone in the Defense against Tyranny. You abandon Property Rights, and it's end game.

Grow up? I am quite on track here. Conservatism favors Totalitarism. Always. This whole "indivdual" liberty crap you guys spew falls apart when examined up close and personal. From torture, to suspending rights of those that are incarcerated, to women's reproductive rights, to the rights of regular citizens to advocate for their interests and a plethora of other issues.

I have no problem with "some" conservativism in a system of government. It empathizes careful consideration of implementing new things and it really does know how to profit from ideas..but like anything else..to much of it..really sucks.

I feel sorry for you that you actually believe that Bullshit, Sallow. Bullshit to the Point that you Dictate what You think I believe, as if you even had a clue. Do you want to buy a Vowel?

Think on what you are doing here in your march to a Totalitarian Utopia. You are trying to deny me my own Principles, my own Conscience, which you will never have any Right to, nor the Right to speak for, without my consent. Separate yourself from what has you ensnared. I am not your enemy, nor do I seek to control, manipulate, or do you harm.

 

[Intense]

Time for some remediation.

The choice was not "...poor, and just accepted that the lower classes..." versus slaughering and maiming thousands of their countrymen...

The choice was the French Revolution and coextensive attack on Christianity, or

The American Revolution, infused with morality and religion.

1. While the American Revolution was created by and for ‘classical liberals,’ the French Revolution was by and for what those now called ‘liberals’ or progressives.

a. “The American intellectual class from the mid 19th century onward has disliked liberalism (which originally referred to individualism, private property, and limits on power) precisely because the liberal society has no overarching goal.” War Is the Health of the State

b. The French Revolution is the godless antithesis of the founding of America.

2. Unlike the American version, the French Revolution was a revolt by the mob, and was the primogenitor of the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler’s Nazi Party, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s killing fields, and the dirty waifs smashing Starbucks’ windows whenever bankers come town. Those with the gift of irony see similar actions in the ‘Cradle of Democracy,’ Greece.

3. Contrary to the assertions of Liberals, who wish our founding fathers were more like the godless French peasants, skipping around with human heads on a pike, our founding fathers were God-fearing descendants of Puritans and other colonial Christians.

4. The men behind the American Revolution- the Minutemen, the signers of the Declaration of Independence, the framers of the Constitution- were the very opposite of a mob. For the most part, educated, aristocratic property holders, doctors, lawyers, ministers and other respectable tradesmen with everything to lose should the revolution fail. These were the classical liberals, or, as we would address them today, the conservatives.

a. The modern Tea Party still abhors mob behavior. This from a rally in Boston: “The Obama Hitler sign. Let’s look out for those people, and make sure people know they’re not us.” A middle-aged, out-of-work Republican from Jamaica Plain agreed that it was crucial to police the line between the reasonable Tea Party people and party crashers: “We need to disabuse the public of some of the more exotic rumors out there.” Boston tea parties past and present : The New Yorker

b. A 26-year-old Tea Partier from MIT thought about throwing a copy of the 2000-page health care bill into Boston Harbor…but changed his mind when he found out it would be against the law. Ibid.
A far better exposition of the above can be found in "Demonic," by Coulter.


Wake up.
Wise up.
Grow up.

Oh bullshit.

The American Revolution was NOT a Christian movement. There is no god in the Constitution. Christian religions are intolerant of other religions.

I someone paying you to play the fool today?

1. The most quoted source was the Bible. Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”. The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died.
Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7

That has to be a twist on the Magna Carta too then, huh?

 

[Sallow]

I someone paying you to play the fool today?

"I someone"?

What does that even mean?

 

[PoliticalChic]

And the conservative solution is what?

Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands.

Go for it.

See how it works out in the end.

Because historically..that's been the downfall of plenty of nations. But conservatives love to do the same stupid thing over and over and over and over again. Expecting different results.

So very glad to see us disagree again...whew!

See post #17 to be more informed.

I just love it when you expose the depth of your ignornce, as in "Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands."

1. Adam Smith, whose seminal work was, interestingly publishied the same year as the birth of this great nation, wrote:
"A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural."

2. The idea was advanced in the naicent nation by a gentleman you may have heard of, Thomas Jefferson.
"Entail" and "Primogeniture" was the age-old idea that one's land could only be passed to one's eldest son...
Jefferson wrote:
Some of the founders were not satisfied with curtailing entail and primogeniture; they advocated more radical measures for rectifying the imbalance in access to the intergenerational commons. Paine argued that the poor had in effect been wrongfully ousted and excluded from their natural legacy for many generations.
Thomas Jefferson and Entail

You said:
"Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands."

You sound more like an uneducated dunce, don't you?

3. From 1776 to 1779, Jefferson served as a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, where he successfully sought to abolish entail and primogeniture,...
American President: Thomas Jefferson: Life Before the Presidency

The problem with you sweet cheeks is that you really can't be taken all that seriously. Insults, cut and paste and the like..really show a weak and lazy mind.

So...you agree that the post puts you in your place?

That place, of course, being the dumb row.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I someone paying you to play the fool today?

"I someone"?

What does that even mean?

I believe you know what it mean....

....and you seem not to have any answers today.

Coffee yet?

 

[Intense]

Vilfredo Pareto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Funny you should mention that it echo the French revolution.

It is these very types of historical facts like the French revolution that Pareto studied to discover that there is a breaking point of concentrated wealth in a society.


We have now proved pareto correct yet agin

Yeah, let's Execute everyone that can spell better than us, or can count past our fingers and toes, or uses soap when they bathe, so we can feel better about ourselves. Good plan.

If you are not serving Justice, you are as much a part of the problem./ Remember that when you are dictating to people what to do with their resources and personal property.

The wealthy have us in a rigged game.

Your suggestion is to lie down and try to make yourself a better door mat for them.

you go ahead us people who have self respect and decent morals will take care of this mess for you.

Please just keep your doormat position and try to get better at it.

Do yourself a favor though, dont turn from a doormat into a suicide bomber for the wealthy though OK?

The Game is always rigged by players in one way or another. It's a shame you don't see that. You don't want Justice, just control of the game. It's always been that way. Achievement Overcomes obstruction, it's always been that way too. Why is it that you always want to punish the very achievement that overcomes obstruction? Oh right, it challenges your control. Got it, thanks.

 

[Sallow]

So very glad to see us disagree again...whew!

See post #17 to be more informed.

I just love it when you expose the depth of your ignornce, as in "Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands."

1. Adam Smith, whose seminal work was, interestingly publishied the same year as the birth of this great nation, wrote:
"A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural."

2. The idea was advanced in the naicent nation by a gentleman you may have heard of, Thomas Jefferson.
"Entail" and "Primogeniture" was the age-old idea that one's land could only be passed to one's eldest son...
Jefferson wrote:
Some of the founders were not satisfied with curtailing entail and primogeniture; they advocated more radical measures for rectifying the imbalance in access to the intergenerational commons. Paine argued that the poor had in effect been wrongfully ousted and excluded from their natural legacy for many generations.
Thomas Jefferson and Entail

You said:
"Concentrate more wealth into fewer hands."

You sound more like an uneducated dunce, don't you?

3. From 1776 to 1779, Jefferson served as a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, where he successfully sought to abolish entail and primogeniture,...
American President: Thomas Jefferson: Life Before the Presidency

The problem with you sweet cheeks is that you really can't be taken all that seriously. Insults, cut and paste and the like..really show a weak and lazy mind.

So...you agree that the post puts you in your place?

That place, of course, being the dumb row.

If you say so sweet cheeks.

I've been saying something like this was going to happen for months on this board. And compared the situation we had..to the situation in France before the French Revolution.

Here it is. Happening now.

What's your solution?

The solution they are using in Syria? Iran?

Go for it.

 

[Intense]

Hey is this about the vendetta between Brooklyn North and South Brooklyn?
Forget about it!

 

[Intense]

Yeah, let's take the example of going from a Totalitarian Dictatorship to a more Brutal Totalitarian Dictatorship, and use that model for turning our Constitutional Federalist Republic into a Brutal Totalitarian Dictatorship where we can all share in no property rights, and equal misery. Good plan.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

The "wealthy" have us in a rigged game?

Still waiting on that definition of "wealthy"...

The distancing of America from a diety does have an end game. Our founding documents maintain that a "creator" has endowed each person with inalienable rights, among those to be life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Naturally, if you are progressive, then you can only have so much "pursuit of happiness." When you reach a certain point then that's too much and you have to "pay your fair share." And if you are a progressive, you can only be guaranteed life AFTER birth. Liberty, especially free speech if it is 'unapproved' (refer to conservatives and Evangelicals and the recent attack on Karl Rove by the OWS mob), is also negotiable to the progressive.

If our creator has given us those rights, then no government and no man can remove those rights from you. Those rights outlined in our Constitution, which I believe was divinely inspired, will NOT be infringed upon. IF the progressive can remove the creator from the founding documents, then they can alter those rights, because of course, man gave them to you, then man can take them away. Unfortunately for the progressives in our midst, most of us still believe that the rights outlined in the Constitution are not up for discussion. The right to keep and bear arms, freedom of speech, and the freedom of religion are not up for negotiation.

Look at the OWS crowd. Mobs without a goal, without a concious, without a real purpose. A wise man once said that you will see them by their works... crime, filth, and destruction. So far, I haven't seen any good things come from them...

 

[SAT]

Sallow and Truthmatters, you've done a good job educating on this thread.

The French Revolution is not a model for anyone, PC. It's an object lesson.

You're so busy trying to figure out a way to attack OWS that you completely miss the reasons for revolutions. You seem to believe that they are simply misbehavior by those who ought to know their place. You fail to realize that people reach a tipping point. You fail most spectacularly to realize that people-poor unnamed people-were dying from starvation before the revolution ever started.

The French Revolution, the Russian revolution, Gandhi's movement for India's independence, the Civil Rights movement, all of these have one thing in common-people had been pushed to their limit by tyranny. Real tyranny. Not "I don't want my taxes to pay for museums and schools" Tea Party tyranny. This is not to say that the French Revolution was good. It is to say that it was inevitable.

 

[SAT]

The Game is always rigged by players in one way or another. It's a shame you don't see that. You don't want Justice, just control of the game. It's always been that way. Achievement Overcomes obstruction, it's always been that way too. Why is it that you always want to punish the very achievement that overcomes obstruction? Oh right, it challenges your control. Got it, thanks.

No, we want justice.