FLAG Burning Campaign!

[Valley Oak]

Let's have a flag burning campaign!

How about if we organize a place and a time to burn the american flag publicly?

Where would be a good spot? Downtown Santa Rosa?

When would be a good time? Halloween?

How do we finance buying the flag? Shall order it online? Rip one off? Pitch in equally?

Other ideas?

Edward

[paulrankin]

Why do you want to burn a flag?




Let's have a flag burning campaign!

How about if we organize a place and a time to burn the american flag publicly?

Where would be a good spot? Downtown Santa Rosa?

When would be a good time? Halloween?

How do we finance buying the flag? Shall order it online? Rip one off? Pitch in equally?

Other ideas?

Edward

[mykil]

Hmmm; as a child growing up in Caz, we often burnt our flags and scattered the ashes once a year, once the flag hit the ground or when it was getting worn down from flying proudly over the school. We were taught to do this and I will still do it out of respect. Just as one would cremate a loved one I will continue this trait till I die. I will also teach every child I can to respect our flag and salute our country no matter whom tries to screw it all to hell.!! Even you Edward! You really think you are doing good by this acting this way? Preaching to the quire doesn’t become you, jump on a bus and spread your word around the countryside, run for office or get off the pot dude!

[Valley Oak]

I posted this message largely as a rebuttal to the earlier "Fly the Flag Campaign" post, which practically made me puke all over my computer. I couldn't stand idly by while some folks here preached flying our imperialist flag and being proud of the U.S. mass murdering civilians around the world, namely, Iraq and Afghanistan!

Burning the flag is a Constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech, so get used to it. Republicans on more than one occasion have tried, unsuccessfully, to amend the Constitution to make flag burning illegal. And I'm with those who like to express themselves by BURNING IT!

As far as participating in the obsolete and controlled electoral system of this country by running for office, I will NEVER participate in some charade like that, especially considering the Electoral College, which is profoundly undemocratic and firmly in the grip of the two major parties, in particular, the wealthy Republicans. Remember Bush "winning" in 2000?

If I participate in this pathetic, corrupt system of ours, Mykil, it will be to transform the electoral laws and the political institutions themselves. My participation is to make fundamental systemic changes, which are nearly impossible to achieve precisely because of how our political system is designed.

Yes, local and state offices don't have the electoral college but the political culture is essentially the same because we use "First-Past-the-Post" to elect our leaders and this is extremely primitive and hugely undemocratic. People with FPtP get elected through what is called a "plurality," which means that someone with as little as 25% of the vote, for example, can be elected to office because none of the other candidates in a single member district got 25% or more of the vote.

The system is essentially rigged and in the safe hands of the wealthy and reactionaries. Look at Sam T. Crump, for example. He was a very conservative politician from Sebastopol in the 90s, if you can believe that, and he still got elected.

We can't have a fair and truly democratic system if people can't burn the flag (heck, I've never actually the fucking american flag! I'm merely posting this message on Wacco) and if public officers are not elected with 50% + 1 vote in single member districts. Furthermore, in multi-member districts (several offices up for election in the same jurisdiction) is much more representative of the general public and should be conducted through Proportional Representation!

So there,

Edward


Hmmm; as a child growing up in Caz, we often burnt our flags and scattered the ashes once a year, once the flag hit the ground or when it was getting worn down from flying proudly over the school. We were taught to do this and I will still do it out of respect. Just as one would cremate a loved one I will continue this trait till I die. I will also teach every child I can to respect our flag and salute our country no matter whom tries to screw it all to hell.!! Even you Edward! You really think you are doing good by this acting this way? Preaching to the quire doesn’t become you, jump on a bus and spread your word around the countryside, run for office or get off the pot dude!

[mykil]

YES HERE HERE NOW EDWARD, let me hold your little hand, Now I know I left this open to your ego and kinda egged you on just so I may say “You should move dude”, if you think whining about it helps you are wrong, move to another country, this will show them all!!! LMAO!!! IF preaching to the chior is what you are all about than I have pegged you all along. Please try to become troll on the NRA web blog or somewhere were you might do some good and I might learn to respect your opinion deeper and appreciate your talents as a true king OR queen troll!<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p>


I posted this message largely as a rebuttal to the earlier "Fly the Flag Campaign" post, which practically made me puke all over my computer. ...

[Valley Oak]

Are you offended? It was not my intention and I apologize if I came off too strong. I always like your input because you are insightful and intelligent.

Preaching to the choir, well, maybe that's what I'm doing. You say that I should go to a non-choir site, such as the NRA, well, maybe I should. I'm open to the idea.

Would you be willing to go the NRA or another site as a team?

Please let me know,

Edward


YES HERE HERE NOW EDWARD, let me hold your little hand, Now I know I left this open to your ego and kinda egged you on just so I may say “You should move dude”, if you think whining about it helps you are wrong, move to another country, this will show them all!!! LMAO!!! IF preaching to the quire is what you are all about than I have pegged you all along. Please try to become troll on the NRA web blog or somewhere were you might do some good and I might learn to respect your opinion deeper and appreciate your talents as a true king OR queen troll!<o:p></o:p>

[mykil]

Edward, I like your input also, you are just a little over the top at times. I think you might want to go read what I have wrote on the vote for troll tread and get back to me on it!<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
In order to do this properly we are going to need a little discipline, can you discipline yourself enough to save a country? Can you work on a technique that could work to evolve an entire community? Can we work as a team to pull people top our side?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Lets say your in a bar in Mississippi on the other side of the tracks, where all the good ole boyz hang out with their gas guzzling trucks preaching about how much they hate blacks. How would you approach the situation and make them see the light? Lets work on a strategy before we go off half cocked to save the world, maybe a strategy meeting to begin with? See if we MAY work as a team to do more good than harm, getting people out of harms way that can’t handle the heat, be there to back one another up when the heads up comes a crawling our way, be there to console the peeps we are out to enlighten ect…

[AnnaLisaW]

Let's have a flag burning campaign!

Edward

I should hope that no one takes you seriously. Isn't there enough anger and pain in this world already? Flag burning is a direct insult to those who cling to a sence of national pride. While I believe that patriotism falls in the same category as fundamentalist religion, I believe it is wrong to blatently insult some else's beliefs.
Peace, AnnaLisa

[Valley Oak]

Mykil, I'm a busy guy. If I do something right now regarding what we are talking about then I don't have much else in mind other than the two of us subscribing to an NRA, John Birch Society, KKK, Republican Party, Nazi Party, Fundamentalist Christian, etc website or email list and challenging small minds on their atrocious "belief" system or attitudes.

I would also like to invite you as well as others to seriously consider electoral reform activism to fundamentally change our system in this country. I am the Sonoma County Chapter Coordinator for Californians for Electoral Reform (CfER, www.cfer.org).

Why should anyone care? Because, for starters, if we elect office holders in single member districts using a voting method called: "Instant Run-off Voting" then we will assure ourselves that elected candidates win 50% + 1 vote. Why is this critically important? Because now we elect people to political power using a "plurality" voting method called "first past the post" and this allows well funded candidates that only represent a minority of the public but especially powerful interest groups such as business and other wealthy and conservative sectors of society to be elected with only 20% to 45% of the popular vote, which is easy to buy if you have the bucks.

Furthermore, if we further reform our electoral process to create multi-member districts (voting jurisdictions with more than one seat up for grabs) then this would allow our communities to elect candidates in proportion to the different interests of the general public. In other words, if the Greens get 33% of the vote then Greens will get 33% of the seats in that jurisdiction. If the Democrats get 40% of the votes then they will 40% of the seats. If the Republicans get 20% of the votes then they will get 20% of the seats, and so on with other political formations with their percentages and corresponding seats.

Electoral reform through IRV and PR would truly be the gift that keeps on giving--big time! Our representative political institutions would be infinitely more representative of the citizenry and infinitely more democratic than the two-party system is now. People and entire groups, such as minorities, the poor, and many others, will have a voice in all elected bodies, and therefore have their needs and demands met much, much more than now. Indeed, many marginalized groups throughout the U.S. are hardly represented or serviced, if at all!

Passage of these reforms at a nation-wide level would create a tidal wave of social change across the country. So far, we (CfER) have legislated IRV in San Francisco, Berkeley, Oakland, Davis, and other places with enormous success.

If you want to participate in serious, permanent, and fundamental change for our society, then I strongly urge you to join us in our continued success. Join CfER and become active! Join today.

Sincerely,

Edward



Edward, I like your input also, you are just a little over the top at times. I think you might want to go read what I have wrote on the vote for troll tread and get back to me on it!<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
In order to do this properly we are going to need a little discipline, can you discipline yourself enough to save a country? Can you work on a technique that could work to evolve an entire community? Can we work as a team to pull people top our side?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Lets say your in a bar in Mississippi on the other side of the tracks, where all the good ole boyz hang out with their gas guzzling trucks preaching about how much they hate blacks. How would you approach the situation and make them see the light? Lets work on a strategy before we go off half cocked to save the world, maybe a strategy meeting to begin with? See if we MAY work as a team to do more good than harm, getting people out of harms way that can’t handle the heat, be there to back one another up when the heads up comes a crawling our way, be there to console the peeps we are out to enlighten ect…

[Valley Oak]

Mykil, I'm sorry to see that my being busy is not acceptable. Also, I honestly thought that my expressing the strategy of electoral reform would seem like a good idea to you. I guess I made a mistake. Electoral reform would be far more effective than going group by group challenging their bigoted ways.

Best Regards,

Edward

[ThePhiant]

50% +1 is still no reform, just a different way of calculating
it still leaves 49% without representation,
49 % still has to put up with somebody else's BS
that's why nobody cares



Why should anyone care? Because, for starters, if we elect office holders in single member districts using a voting method called: "Instant Run-off Voting" then we will assure ourselves that elected candidates win 50% + 1 vote. ...

[Valley Oak]

Astute observation, The Phiant!

That's why Proportional Representation (PR), (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation) is a far better system than Instant Run-off Voting for single member districts. If an electoral jurisdiction, such as our Congressional district from which Lynn Woolsey is elected from, were to have several seats up for election instead of just Woolsey's then and only then would we be able to carry out PR.

But in the manner that we elect our public office holders today, which is "first past the post" in single member districts, then PR is impossible. Therefore, IRV is the next best thing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_runoff_voting). At least with IRV, 51% (if not many more voters, and probably so) is better than only 20% to 49% of the population being represented and more than likely the wealthier, more conservative sector of society (e.g. hates gays, hates African-Americans, hates women, hates Jewish people, hates Muslims, the poor, and just about anyone who is not white, Anglo Saxon protestant, well to do).

IRV is certainly not perfect but it is enormously better than the system we have now! In the future, we will have plenty of time to work towards PR.

Edward


50% +1 is still no reform, just a different way of calculating
it still leaves 49% without representation,
49 % still has to put up with somebody else's BS
that's why nobody cares

[mixmaster]

I guess it goes to show us the power of symbols to affect our reality, and to stir feelings.... Something the "powers that be" understand well.

I'm sure nobody wanted to start a shit-storm.. but the flag campaign sure turned into one..

It is safe to say that feeling, thinking people, in this country and elsewhere, are very raw about what is happening in the political arena, and on the ground..

For my part, i am sorry for whatever sarcasm, and anger i contributed to the conversation.. What i am not sorry about is that i learned a lot about the extent of my own feelings around the events of 9/11.

These events are a lot to process, for everybody...

Thanks to all who contributed to this conversation..

Mixmaster


Let's have a flag burning campaign!

How about if we organize a place and a time to burn the american flag publicly?

Where would be a good spot? Downtown Santa Rosa?

When would be a good time? Halloween?

How do we finance buying the flag? Shall order it online? Rip one off? Pitch in equally?

Other ideas?

Edward

[Valley Oak]

Furthermore, I have this to say

[mykil]

Spoken like a true troll, I think you may have my vote!



Furthermore, I have this to say

[Valley Oak]

Thank you, Mykil. I have worked very hard for the title. I appreciate your support and that of others as well.

Edward
(The King)


Spoken like a true troll, I think you may have my vote!

[Willie Lumplump]

I should hope that no one takes you seriously. Isn't there enough anger and pain in this world already? Flag burning is a direct insult to those who cling to a sence of national pride. While I believe that patriotism falls in the same category as fundamentalist religion, I believe it is wrong to blatently insult some else's beliefs.
Peace, AnnaLisa

My solution is to make a new flag and fly it. The flag of the West Sonoma Free Republlic. It could have an image of T. Lobsang

[Willie Lumplump]

What the . . . !? Either my computer is getting squirrely or my fingers are flying out of control. I think I just posted a message I hadn't finished.

[ThePhiant]

eddie, you haven't gotten a single vote, not even your own and already you tooting your horn.
when Mykil gets the 'save the usa posse' together, you might not even be on it.
everybody knows who the real king is!
but I am getting worried about Dixie, I don't want the Queen to get more votes than the King,
West County Trolls For America!




Thank you, Mykil. I have worked very hard for the title. I appreciate your support and that of others as well.

Edward
(The King)

[Valley Oak]

Hold on a second here, Phiant. Let me try to get clear on some of this. I made the assumption (dangerous word to use) that it was already understood that YOU, the Phiant, were the queen? Wrong, right, what?

Edward



eddie, you haven't gotten a single vote, not even your own and already you tooting your horn.
when Mykil gets the 'save the usa posse' together, you might not even be on it.
everybody knows who the real king is!
but I am getting worried about Dixie, I don't want the Queen to get more votes than the King,
West County Trolls For America!

[ThePhiant]

you got to hold on to the info, Roble,
trolls do things backwards, you of all people should know that
I am the king, and Dixie was going to be my queen
but I am ditching Dixon, he is getting to popular,
he's probably paying people to vote for him
I am going with AguaGyrl
wet, moist and slippery
yummmmmmmmmmmy


Hold on a second here, Phiant. Let me try to get clear on some of this. I made the assumption (dangerous word to use) that it was already understood that YOU, the Phiant, were the queen? Wrong, right, what?

Edward

[Valley Oak]

Well, then, maybe I should consider withdrawing from the race. At this point, I'm beginning to seriously doubt that I have any chances of winning at all.

Sniffle, sniffle,

Edward


you got to hold on to the info, Roble,
trolls do things backwards, you of all people should know that
I am the king, and Dixie was going to be my queen
but I am ditching Dixon, he is getting to popular,
he's probably paying people to vote for him
I am going with AguaGyrl
wet, moist and slippery
yummmmmmmmmmmy

[AquaGyrl]

Oh edwardo. Don't get so worked up about it. Do you realize that you meet most of the following criteria for "troll hood"?

A tendency to make the most useful, interesting comments.
A charisma (https://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/D%26D)that draws the attention of users toward you.
The ability to create ideas that flow from person to person nonstop until you have made everyone spend their time in your valuable communique.
High intelligence (16 or higher)
High degree of social skills

You're still a troll and that truly counts for something, doesn't it?




Well, then, maybe I should consider withdrawing from the race. At this point, I'm beginning to seriously doubt that I have any chances of winning at all.

Sniffle, sniffle,

Edward

[Valley Oak]

Thank you, AquaGyrl! I really appreciate your words of encouragement and I now feel 100% better. I can stride down the road with a very proud smile and my chin up. Your reply has made my self-esteem soar like an eagle.

It gives me a deep feeling of satisfaction knowing, as well as being recognized as a True Troll, a real achievement in life.

Edward
Proud Authentic Internet Troll



Oh edwardo. Don't get so worked up about it. Do you realize that you meet most of the following criteria for "troll hood"?
A tendency to make the most useful, interesting comments.
A charisma (https://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/D%26D)that draws the attention of users toward you.
The ability to create ideas that flow from person to person nonstop until you have made everyone spend their time in your valuable communique.
High intelligence (16 or higher)
High degree of social skills
You're still a troll and that truly counts for something, doesn't it?

[Valley Oak]

So, how about it, folks? Shall we launch a public flag burning ritual or not?

Edward

[mykil]

NO DUDE

[Neshamah]

Burning the flag will ensure that most people ignore the substance of whatever you have to say. So if what you have to say is important, I'd recommend doing something more constructive.


~ Neshamah

[Valley Oak]

So "something more constructive" might be strengthening the U.N.? But that giving the UN more power will be permanent? Hmmm...

Well, let's see. Let me play devil's advocate here (if you don't mind, of course). What is a worse scenario:

A. The U.S. is the most powerful entity in the world and abuses its power (as it is doing now).

B. The U.N. is the most powerful entity in the world and abuses its power.

Is it possible to choose the lesser of two evils?

Edward


Burning the flag will ensure that most people ignore the substance of whatever you have to say. So if what you have to say is important, I'd recommend doing something more constructive.


~ Neshamah

[mykil]

Something more constructive? HMMMM How about you be the one to challenge the money system, open the Bank of California and start issuing new money only make from products from California. WE can stop our country right here by stopping the food supply. We are in control you just need to see this and use it to your advantage! Can you imagine what the rest of the country would do to get the food California produces? Talk about a war going on, starting our own country, kinda like Quebec is trying to do, and then completely separating ourselves from the rest of the world? Staring our own country would put an end to most everything this country is trying and getting away with I might add destroying and taking control of. By at least attempting to gain access to our own world will slow our government down to a trickle and show the rest of the world where they can go to try to obtain there own freedom. Get them started on the right track? If California has had enough there is hope! You can be the one to change the whole wide world Roble/Edward?

[AnnaLisaW]

I read a book back in the early eighties called Ecotopia based on the scenario you describe. It is an interesting proposition which is probably why the military has moved so many of its bases out of California. -ALW<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

[Neshamah]

Roble,

If you read my post on the Flag Flying Campaign thread, you'd guess my answer to your question, but here it is anyway:

The U.S. has ~300 million people and maybe half the power in all the world.
The U.N. would like to have 6 billion people and all of the world's power. In the long run, the U.N. has the capacity for much greater evil, and given the record of very large governments from Roman times through today, it's a safe bet that power will be abused.

Benevolent super governments can solve lots of problems, but sooner or later, that power is abused. That is why most government power should be local, and the power of the central government should be limited to the barest minimum necessary to prevent any local government or individual from becoming a super government.

If you want to rally the followers of the super government, and maybe get a few more laws restricting free speech, burn their flag.

~ Neshamah

[Willie Lumplump]

most government power should be local, and the power of the central government should be limited to the barest minimum necessary to prevent any local government or individual from becoming a super government.

I've slowly come around to the same point of view, and the coming end of Big Oil may push change in the direction of local control. The federal goverment and the corporations that control it have become a threat to the Republic. I believe that we are already living in a quasi-fascist state, and it is sure to get worse. It is communities like those in Sonoma County that will take the lead in re-organizing American society along sustainable and equitable lines.

[Valley Oak]

Bravo!


I've slowly come around to the same point of view, and the coming end of Big Oil may push change in the direction of local control. The federal goverment and the corporations that control it have become a threat to the Republic. I believe that we are already living in a quasi-fascist state, and it is sure to get worse. It is communities like those in Sonoma County that will take the lead in re-organizing American society along sustainable and equitable lines.

[Valley Oak]

Ecotopia is a good book. I'm not so sure, however, that it was the reason why the Bush Sr. admin and the Clinton admin decided to close bases in California.

Edward

<hr>{ In WaccoBB.net, AnnaLisaW wrote:}

I read a book back in the early eighties called Ecotopia based on the scenario you describe. It is an interesting proposition which is probably why the military has moved so many of its bases out of California. -ALW

[Valley Oak]

This is one of the most classic of American obsessions and also one of the biggest and longest running lies in U.S. history and culture.

The lie is that any government that encompasses authority over a large territory and a large population, etc, will inevitably lead to a totalitarian state of some kind or even approach it.

The funny thing is that precisely the folks who are the greatest fear mongers in perpetuating this lie are pretty much the same group that created the kind of repressive government we have in the U.S. today, namely conservatives and Republican voters who helped put Bush Jr. get into power. What a contradiction!

Edward


Roble,

If you read my post on the Flag Flying Campaign thread, you'd guess my answer to your question, but here it is anyway:

The U.S. has ~300 million people and maybe half the power in all the world.
The U.N. would like to have 6 billion people and all of the world's power. In the long run, the U.N. has the capacity for much greater evil, and given the record of very large governments from Roman times through today, it's a safe bet that power will be abused.

Benevolent super governments can solve lots of problems, but sooner or later, that power is abused. That is why most government power should be local, and the power of the central government should be limited to the barest minimum necessary to prevent any local government or individual from becoming a super government.

If you want to rally the followers of the super government, and maybe get a few more laws restricting free speech, burn their flag.

~ Neshamah

[Willie Lumplump]

This is one of the most classic of American obsessions and also one of the biggest and longest running lies in U.S. history and culture. The lie is that any government that encompasses authority over a large territory and a large population, etc, will inevitably lead to a totalitarian state of some kind or even approach it.Edward

While Neshama's proposition may be debatable in its generalized form, I think that it applies well to the specific case of the United States. Certainly the founding fathers feared dictatorship and believed that governments tend in that direction. Thomas Paine reflected this belief when he said, "The duty of a patriot is to protect the people against the government." It was this fear that prompted the founding fathers to establish a system of checks and balances. And when that system begins breaking down, as it has during the Bush administration, we are in real trouble. To take but one example, Americans have given up, or rather their government has stolen, their right of habeus corpus, a right that has been at the very heart of democratic government since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215. We have lost a right that was gained almost eight hundred years ago. And once rights are lost, it is a great mistake to merely assume that we will recover them.

The forces of fascism have taken over our government through the corrupt system of institutionalized bribery that we call "campaign finance." Politicians are no more than puppets whose strings are pulled by giant corporations. Fascists have taken over most of the media and now regularly publish lies, half-truths, and national myths. We are already close to Orwell's prediction of a state of permanent war that is fought with constantly shifting alliances.

As oil resources dry up, as global warming causes widespread droughts and a dramatic rise in ocean levels, and as the super rich become even richer at the expense of the middle and lower classes, we can expect the forces of fascism to tighten their grip. Neshama's fears should be taken seriously.

[Valley Oak]

Willie, this is a great commentary of yours, below, but there is an overarching fact when it comes to this idea of the U.S. totalitarian state, etc. Correct me if I have misinterpreted what you are saying but I get the impression that "once upon a time" we did have a pastoral and idyllic democracy where everything was perfect, etc. Nothing could be further from the truth.

At any previous point in U.S. history (previous to today) there is an abundance of fundamental flaws in our society. If you want to talk about the Great Depression and how 'horrible' FDR was in implementing his New Deal then you and I are on opposite sides. FDR did the right things and the New Deal was just a major component of his strategy to save the ass of Capitalism here in the U.S.

If you want to talk about...any point in history so that you can pretty please offer me a clear example of how things were more democratic (and I staunchly believe in a substantive democracy, no just a formal one) or 'better' somehow than they are now, I would really appreciate it.

A couple more things. I don't think that the country we live in here in the U.S. is great, other than its ability to launch an enormous military strike anywhere in the world in record speeds and with awesome destructive force. The U.S. Armed Forces are numero uno!

But what about everything else? The United States is a low quality democracy, objectively inferior to our Western European counterparts. The United States has a lower standard of living than those same European counterparts. If my present circumstances would permit, my family would move over to Europe right now to live better.

So please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that things are necessarily better today than yesterday and certainly not the other way around. U.S. history has always been a dark history. Things are less bad today than yesterday.

Edward


While Neshama's proposition may be debatable in its generalized form, I think that it applies well to the specific case of the United States. Certainly the founding fathers feared dictatorship and believed that governments tend in that direction. Thomas Paine reflected this belief when he said, "The duty of a patriot is to protect the people against the government." It was this fear that prompted the founding fathers to establish a system of checks and balances. And when that system begins breaking down, as it has during the Bush administration, we are in real trouble. To take but one example, Americans have given up, or rather their government has stolen, their right of habeus corpus, a right that has been at the very heart of democratic government since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215. We have lost a right that was gained almost eight hundred years ago. And once rights are lost, it is a great mistake to merely assume that we will recover them.

The forces of fascism have taken over our government through the corrupt system of institutionalized bribery that we call "campaign finance." Politicians are no more than puppets whose strings are pulled by giant corporations. Fascists have taken over most of the media and now regularly publish lies, half-truths, and national myths. We are already close to Orwell's prediction of a state of permanent war that is fought with constantly shifting alliances.

As oil resources dry up, as global warming causes widespread droughts and a dramatic rise in ocean levels, and as the super rich become even richer at the expense of the middle and lower classes, we can expect the forces of fascism to tighten their grip. Neshama's fears should be taken seriously.

[Frederick M. Dolan]

If having fundamental flaws disqualifies you from being a legitimate nation, then no nation is legitimate. If all nations have fundamental flaws, there's no reason to single out the United States for being fundamentally flawed. They are all flawed. If you look closely at the histories of only the current victims, you'll find that they too a pretty flawed. Comparative flawlessness is not a good way to approach the history of peoples of nations, except insofar as everyone turns out to be equally culpable and we agree to bracket the question of which nations are most moral.

If you don't love your country, and truly believe that its greatness consists only in having a powerful military, a pity you. That America's greatness consists only in her military power is certainly not the opinion of my European friends and relations, even after the re-election of Bush. This is a bad time. We've been through bad times and the republic has survived. Even if it doesn't survive Bush, it will have been an extraordinary thing and a great contribution to world history.

I sometimes think that getting rid of the sovereign was a real mistake of the Founders. It must have seemed the right thing to do at the time. But the British strategy of stripping the sovereign of all political power while maintaining him as the symbol of the people has turned out to be quite useful. On the one hand, the spectacle of a living sovereign with no real power is a constant reminder of who the British are, namely the people who beheaded Charles I. On the other hand, the British have a symbol of the people that enables them not to confuse their feelings for the nation with their feelings for the current political regime. Our president is elected and is partisan, but because he somehow also stands for the state people feel awkward about criticizing him, as if it were unpatriotic. In England you can celebrate the Queen as a symbol of everything you love about being English, but still hate Blair or Thatcher. It's not so easy for us.



Willie, this is a great commentary of yours, below, but there is an overarching fact when it comes to this idea of the U.S. totalitarian state, etc. Correct me if I have misinterpreted what you are saying but I get the impression that "once upon a time" we did have a pastoral and idyllic democracy where everything was perfect, etc. Nothing could be further from the truth.

At any previous point in U.S. history (previous to today) there is an abundance of fundamental flaws in our society. If you want to talk about the Great Depression and how 'horrible' FDR was in implementing his New Deal then you and I are on opposite sides. FDR did the right things and the New Deal was just a major component of his strategy to save the ass of Capitalism here in the U.S.

If you want to talk about...any point in history so that you can pretty please offer me a clear example of how things were more democratic (and I staunchly believe in a substantive democracy, no just a formal one) or 'better' somehow than they are now, I would really appreciate it.

A couple more things. I don't think that the country we live in here in the U.S. is great, other than its ability to launch an enormous military strike anywhere in the world in record speeds and with awesome destructive force. The U.S. Armed Forces are numero uno!

But what about everything else? The United States is a low quality democracy, objectively inferior to our Western European counterparts. The United States has a lower standard of living than those same European counterparts. If my present circumstances would permit, my family would move over to Europe right now to live better.

So please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that things are necessarily better today than yesterday and certainly not the other way around. U.S. history has always been a dark history. Things are less bad today than yesterday.

Edward

[Valley Oak]

You are right, Fred. The United States and its people have made many great contributions to the humanities, sciences, history, and other areas of modern civilization. I was not thoughtful when I posted my message.
<!----> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
There are no flawless societies out there; some are less barbaric than others. Nazi Germany was still a nation under Hitler and so on. And victim nations have their flaws too, of course. Being a victim isn’t a requirement for a country to become great or perfect.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Comparative flawlessness, an interpretation you made from my post, is an interesting way of putting things but that doesn’t accurately reflect what I’m trying to say. Although I need to elaborate, looking at a country’s present-day shortcomings is important. Otherwise, what’s the point in having freedom of expression if we can’t also be critical or tell the truth, even when it’s inconvenient. I’m sorry if I stepped on your patriotic pride but I don’t exactly see you as being a flag-waving nut, binging on patriotism either.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Do you feel that Americans who made the effort to go out on street demonstrations and other activities to energetically protest the war in Iraq are equally culpable as the Bush administration? I would really like to hear your answer on that one. Are Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, and Dennis Kucinich as equally culpable as George Bush, Dick Cheney, their supporters (and bosses)? Please let me know.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
One thing is to look at the political institutions of a country, let’s say, to take a present-day snapshot of a given nation, its constitution (if it has one), its legal system, its social classes, etc, which is what I was trying to do, although not very effectively. Another thing entirely is to throw in the American people into the same group as the dominant social classes and the institutions of power that they lord over, both public and private. Try reading Howard Zinn’s “History of the American People” to get an idea of what I am trying to say. I suspect that you have probably already read it so I will at least use his book as a reference.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Regarding the views of Europeans on the U.S, well, I would be a little more careful about what you are saying. Sure, Europeans appreciate the good things about the United States and its people but you need to know that they are also very critical and angry with the U.S. Europeans do not only see U.S. military might, stealing and killing in other countries. But to some degree or another, Fred, where does the culpability lay? Don’t at least some of the American people need to bear the burden of responsibility of what the U.S. does domestically as well as internationally?
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
I sojourned in Europe for ten (10) years (Spain and Denmark) and I have an excellent idea of what they opine of the United States. My wife is a Spanish citizen and our daughter was born in Copenhagen.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Do you feel that a person must “love their country?” Please explain. I don’t love the United States. I hate this fucking country and I don’t need your pity. The U.S. as a nation, including large numbers of its people (including the rich, the religious fanatics, and reactionaries) leave [I]a lot to be desired as human beings. Today, in 2008, the US government and a significant portion of its citizens are almost completely without any defense at all. If anyone, they are the ones who need to be pitied, like the Germans under Hitler.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
The Constitution of the United States, for example is obsolete, old, antiquated, and grossly inadequate. We use a small group of nine (9) old people to act as if they were soothsayers who, with the magic of their convoluted legal language, conduct a daily ritual of ‘interpretation.’ And the conservatives and reactionaries want to implement ‘strict constructionsim,’ which would boot that small piece of paper into absolute uselessness once and for all.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
If you want to start talking about other countries then that’s another discussion.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Edward


If having fundamental flaws disqualifies you from being a legitimate nation, then no nation is legitimate. If all nations have fundamental flaws, there's no reason to single out the United States for being fundamentally flawed. They are all flawed. If you look closely at the histories of only the current victims, you'll find that they too a pretty flawed. Comparative flawlessness is not a good way to approach the history of peoples of nations, except insofar as everyone turns out to be equally culpable and we agree to bracket the question of which nations are most moral.

If you don't love your country, and truly believe that its greatness consists only in having a powerful military, a pity you. That America's greatness consists only in her military power is certainly not the opinion of my European friends and relations, even after the re-election of Bush. This is a bad time. We've been through bad times and the republic has survived. Even if it doesn't survive Bush, it will have been an extraordinary thing and a great contribution to world history.

I sometimes think that getting rid of the sovereign was a real mistake of the Founders. It must have seemed the right thing to do at the time. But the later British strategy of stripping the sovereign of all political power while maintaining him as the symbol of the people has turned out to be quite useful. On the one hand, the spectacle of a living sovereign with no real power is a constant reminder of who the British are, namely the people who beheaded Charles I. On the other hand, the British have a symbol of the people that enables them not to confuse their feelings for the nation with their feelings for the current political regime. Our president is elected and is partisan, but because he somehow also stands for the state people feel awkward about criticizing him, as if it were unpatriotic. In England you can celebrate the Queen as a symbol of everything you love about being English, but still hate Blair or Thatcher. It's not so easy for us.

[Frederick M. Dolan]

I don't know whether one needs to love one's country, but I do believe it's a pity if one can't. However, I'm not sure I understand what Americans who say they hate their country mean. The idea just doesn't make sense to me. Yes, I am disappointed by what people who have run the government have done. But to hate the country, the people whose language you speak and affairs you care about, whose territory you share, whose music and literature you respond to? That's an extreme reaction. And, pragmatically, it's not a starting point for political change. When you say you hate our country, I suspect you mean that you hate what the interest groups who have manipulated our government have done to the country (and to other parts of the world). I too hate them for that. But that seems very different from hating one's country.

As far as national self-criticism goes, America has it over any other nation I've got to know. Americans are constantly castigating their leaders for failing to live up to (what they regard as) American standards. It's a national pastime and has animated American politics over my lifetime. I've not encountered anything similar in England, France, or Germany. Europeans are regularly astonished by the extent to which Americans are critical and suspicious of their government. An example is Sacvan Bercovitch, who wrote a great book on the discourse of American self-criticism, tracing it to its puritan roots, called THE AMERICAN JEREMIAD.

The solidarity between Europe and America, despite Bush's idiocy, remains very strong. Over the last couple of weeks people from three or four European countries passed through my house. We hardly touched on Bush, probably because everyone shared the assumption of his idiocy. We discussed global warming, Islamic fascism, and neo-Nazism. We discussed factions and political tendencies in Europe and America. We expressed impatience with existing leaders and hope for better ones, and fear of the reactionary elements in both continents. The idea of hating our countries, though, never came up.

With regard to culpability I completely agree with you. There aren't any political problems in our country that can't be solved by more political participation and there is no excuse not to be informed. The reason there's so much lobbying going on in Washington is because you have to go there to get things done. We should stop complaining about lobbyists and start lobbying. This makes me disappointed in my fellow Americans, but it doesn't make me hate them and it certainly doesn't make me hate my country.


You are right, Fred. The United States and its people have made many great contributions to the humanities, sciences, history, and other areas of modern civilization. I was not thoughtful when I posted my message.
<!----> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
There are no flawless societies out there; some are less barbaric than others. Nazi Germany was still a nation under Hitler and so on. And victim nations have their flaws too, of course. Being a victim isn’t a requirement for a country to become great or perfect.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Comparative flawlessness, an interpretation you made from my post, is an interesting way of putting things but that doesn’t accurately reflect what I’m trying to say. Although I need to elaborate, looking at a country’s present-day shortcomings is important. Otherwise, what’s the point in having freedom of expression if we can’t also be critical or tell the truth, even when it’s inconvenient. I’m sorry if I stepped on your patriotic pride but I don’t exactly see you as being a flag-waving nut, binging on patriotism either.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Do you feel that Americans who made the effort to go out on street demonstrations and other activities to energetically protest the war in Iraq are equally culpable as the Bush administration? I would really like to hear your answer on that one. Are Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, and Dennis Kucinich as equally culpable as George Bush, Dick Cheney, their supporters (and bosses)? Please let me know.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
One thing is to look at the political institutions of a country, let’s say, to take a present-day snapshot of a given nation, its constitution (if it has one), its legal system, its social classes, etc, which is what I was trying to do, although not very effectively. Another thing entirely is to throw in the American people into the same group as the dominant social classes and the institutions of power that they lord over, both public and private. Try reading Howard Zinn’s “History of the American People” to get an idea of what I am trying to say. I suspect that you have probably already read it so I will at least use his book as a reference.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Regarding the views of Europeans on the U.S, well, I would be a little more careful about what you are saying. Sure, Europeans appreciate the good things about the United States and its people but you need to know that they are also very critical and angry with the U.S. Europeans do not only see U.S. military might, stealing and killing in other countries. But to some degree or another, Fred, where does the culpability lay? Don’t at least some of the American people need to bear the burden of responsibility of what the U.S. does domestically as well as internationally?
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
I sojourned in Europe for ten (10) years (Spain and Denmark) and I have an excellent idea of what they opine of the United States. My wife is a Spanish citizen and our daughter was born in Copenhagen.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Do you feel that a person must “love their country?” Please explain. I don’t love the United States. I hate this fucking country and I don’t need your pity. The U.S. as a nation, including large numbers of its people (including the rich, the religious fanatics, and reactionaries) leave [I]a lot to be desired as human beings. Today, in 2008, the US government and a significant portion of its citizens are almost completely without any defense at all. If anyone, they are the ones who need to be pitied, like the Germans under Hitler.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
The Constitution of the United States, for example is obsolete, old, antiquated, and grossly inadequate. We use a small group of nine (9) old people to act as if they were soothsayers who, with the magic of their convoluted legal language, conduct a daily ritual of ‘interpretation.’ And the conservatives and reactionaries want to implement ‘strict constructionsim,’ which would boot that small piece of paper into absolute uselessness once and for all.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
If you want to start talking about other countries then that’s another discussion.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>
Edward

[Valley Oak]

Can you think of a single unlovable country in the world today? How about ever in world history, such as Nazi Germany or the U.S. with slavery?

Edward



I don't know whether one needs to love one's country, but I do believe it's a pity if one can't. However, I'm not sure I understand what Americans who say they hate their country mean. The idea just doesn't make sense to me. Yes, I am disappointed by what people who have run the government have done. But to hate the country, the people whose language you speak and affairs you care about, whose territory you share, whose music and literature you respond to? That's an extreme reaction. And, pragmatically, it's not a starting point for political change. When you say you hate our country, I suspect you mean that you hate what the interest groups who have manipulated our government have done to the country (and to other parts of the world). I too hate them for that. But that seems very different from hating one's country.

As far as national self-criticism goes, America has it over any other nation I've got to know. Americans are constantly castigating their leaders for failing to live up to (what they regard as) American standards. It's a national pastime and has animated American politics over my lifetime. I've not encountered anything similar in England, France, or Germany. Europeans are regularly astonished by the extent to which Americans are critical and suspicious of their government. An example is Sacvan Bercovitch, who wrote a great book on the discourse of American self-criticism, tracing it to its puritan roots, called THE AMERICAN JEREMIAD.

The solidarity between Europe and America, despite Bush's idiocy, remains very strong. Over the last couple of weeks people from three or four European countries passed through my house. We hardly touched on Bush, probably because everyone shared the assumption of his idiocy. We discussed global warming, Islamic fascism, and neo-Nazism. We discussed factions and political tendencies in Europe and America. We expressed impatience with existing leaders and hope for better ones, and fear of the reactionary elements in both continents. The idea of hating our countries, though, never came up.

With regard to culpability I completely agree with you. There aren't any political problems in our country that can't be solved by more political participation and there is no excuse not to be informed. The reason there's so much lobbying going on in Washington is because you have to go there to get things done. We should stop complaining about lobbyists and start lobbying. This makes me disappointed in my fellow Americans, but it doesn't make me hate them and it certainly doesn't make me hate my country.

[Frederick M. Dolan]

Can you think of a single unlovable country in the world today? How about ever in world history, such as Nazi Germany or the U.S. with slavery?

Edward

I should think you would hate the regime or the state, not the country. Clearly things can sour to the point where one simply can't take it anymore. I don't deny that can happen, I just feel, as I said, that it's a pity.

[Valley Oak]

What I'm surmising from what you are saying is that, for example, it's a pity that Jews could not love the country of Germany when Hitler was in power. Is that right? In my opinion, chasing a detail like that one is missing the greater point that Jews were being arrested, imprisoned, and mass murdered. It goes without saying that Jews did not love the country of Germany when this was going on, not to mention that many Jews probably don't love the country of Germany today because of what happened and they are not unreasonable for their disdain. There are millions of Germans today who deny the holocaust, proudly and publicly identify themselves as Nazis, and continue to hate Jews simply because they are Jewish.

I think that insisting on the lesser point that it's a pity that a person or an entire people cannot love a country is really missing the central issue at stake. As a matter of fact, it's is irrelevant in many situations, not just Nazi Germany. What needs to be focused on is understanding what the hell happened in Germany that gave rise to the 3rd Reich and not pout about the Jews not being able to love the country of Germany; this appears to be very small minded. To this day, we still do not completely understand exactly how and why one of the most horrific acts of genocide in history occurred.

For that matter, we need to take a look at how the great United States of America and its freedom loving people have come about to practice torture on a large scale as a corner stone of foreign policy. And that's just one big one. There are many other serious issues that strip the 'country' of the United States and its people of being lovable.

By the way, do you care to define 'country' in the way that you are applying it here? It's a little confusing to ascribe such specific definitions to such common and versatile words like 'country.' Which definition?

Thanks,

Edward


I should think you would hate the regime or the state, not the country. Clearly things can sour to the point where one simply can't take it anymore. I don't deny that can happen, I just feel, as I said, that it's a pity.

[MsTerry]

Roble be Noble

how about Russia under Stalin
China under Mao
how about Idi Amin
how about Israel, right now???


Can you think of a single unlovable country in the world today? How about ever in world history, such as Nazi Germany or the U.S. with slavery?

Edward

[Valley Oak]

I think those are all good examples!

Another point that I would like to underline regarding Fred's opinion on 'pity if you can't love the unlovable country' is that he makes the manifold and grotesque social injustices in the U.S. look as if they are little more than a couple of mosquito bites. His statements imply that our society is, for the most part, sublimely idyllic and pastoral, when in reality it is light years away from what it should be.

There is such a long list of repression, exploitation, and social, economic, and political injustices in the United States that the entire social fabric is infected as if by a fully metastasized cancer. The American people themselves are at fault, not just the politicians or 'regimes' as Fred says. The majority of the American people are despicable human beings and the wealthy in this country are the most responsible. The bulk of the laws, the U.S. Constitution, and the prevailing 'ethics,' 'morality,' 'values,' and general attitudes of the American people are reason enough to invest in a vomitorium like the Romans used to have.

Edward



Roble be Noble

how about Russia under Stalin
China under Mao
how about Idi Amin
how about Israel, right now???

[MsTerry]

Roble you ARE too noble
adversaries are not here or there for us to eliminate or solve, they give us opportunities to overcome them.
unfortunately just because YOU have overcome them, that doesn't mean everyone else will follow suit. There are a lot of people waiting for opportunities right now.............
It is kind of one of those things that make you wonder if we will ever evolve, or if we have evolved. Ever.


I think those are all good examples!

Another point that I would like to underline regarding Fred's opinion on 'pity if you can't love the unlovable country' is that he makes the manifold and grotesque social injustices in the U.S. look as if they are little more than a couple of mosquito bites. His statements imply that our society is, for the most part, sublimely idyllic and pastoral, when in reality it is light years away from what it should be.

There is such a long list of repression, exploitation, and social, economic, and political injustices in the United States that the entire social fabric is infected as if by a fully metastasized cancer. The American people themselves are at fault, not just the politicians or 'regimes' as Fred says. The majority of the American people are despicable human beings and the wealthy in this country are the most responsible. The bulk of the laws, the U.S. Constitution, and the prevailing 'ethics,' 'morality,' 'values,' and general attitudes of the American people are reason enough to invest in a vomitorium like the Romans used to have.

Edward

[MsTerry]

Edward,this came just in

Humans Crave Violence Just Like Sex

<!-- BEGIN STORY BODY --> Jeanna Bryner (https://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/byline/humanscraveviolencejustlikesex/25946751/SIG=11nsdukp6/*https://www.space.com/php/contactus/feedback.php?r=jbr)
LiveScience Staff Writer
LiveScience.com (https://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/byline/humanscraveviolencejustlikesex/25946751/SIG=10sog4vj6/*https://www.livescience.com) Thu Jan 17, 10:16 AM ET

<!-- end storyhdr --> New research on mice shows the brain processes aggressive behavior as it does other rewards. Mice sought violence, in fact, picking fights for no apparent reason other than the rewarding feeling.
<table class="ad_slug_table" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center">
</td></tr></tbody></table>
The mouse brain is thought to be analogous to the human brain in this study, which could shed light on our fascination with brutal sports (https://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/storytext/humanscraveviolencejustlikesex/25946751/SIG=11sn1aeqc/*https://www.livescience.com/health/070209_boxing_model.html) as well as our own penchant for the classic bar brawl.
In fact, the researcher say, humans seem to crave violence (https://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/storytext/humanscraveviolencejustlikesex/25946751/SIG=11r4482v8/*https://www.livescience.com/health/071116-bad-pledges.html) just like they do sex, food or drugs.
Love to fight
Scientists have known that mice and other animals are drawn to fights. Until now, they didn't know how the brain (https://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/storytext/humanscraveviolencejustlikesex/25946751/SIG=121j2sla8/*https://www.livescience.com/health/top10_mysteriesofthemind.html) was involved.
The new study, detailed online this week in the journal Psychopharmacology, reveals the same clusters of brain cells involved in other rewards are also behind the craving for violence.
"Aggression occurs among virtually all vertebrates and is necessary to get and keep important resources such as mates, territory and food," said study team member Craig Kennedy, professor of special education and pediatrics at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee. "We have found that the reward pathway in the brain becomes engaged in response to an aggressive event and that dopamine is involved."
Mouse brawl
For the experiments, the researchers placed a pair of mice, one male and one female, in a cage. Then, the female was removed and a so-called male intruder mouse entered the cage. That triggered aggressive behavior in the resident male. The tell-tale signs of aggression (https://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/livescience/sc_livescience/storytext/humanscraveviolencejustlikesex/25946751/SIG=11t1ie04q/*https://www.livescience.com/health/050203_finger_length.html) included tail rattle, an aggressive sideways stance, boxing and biting.
After the initial scuffle ended, the resident male mouse was trained to nose-poke a target to get the intruder to return. Results showed the home mouse consistently poked the target and fought with the introduced mouse, indicating, the researchers say, that the aggressive encounter was seen as a reward.
"We learned from these experiments that an individual will intentionally seek out an aggressive encounter solely because they experience a rewarding sensation from it," Kennedy said.
To figure out whether the brain's reward pathway was involved, the scientists treated the home mice with a drug to block dopamine in certain parts of the brain known to be involved in rewards like food and drugs.
The treated mice were less likely to instigate the intruder's entry. “This shows for the first time that aggression, on its own, is motivating, and that the well-known positive reinforcer dopamine plays a critical role," Kennedy said.
Human violence
Kennedy explained that the experiments have implications for humans. The reward pathway in the brains of humans and mice are very similar, he said.
"Aggression is highly conserved in vertebrates in general and particularly in mammals," Kennedy told LiveScience. "Almost all mammals are aggressive in some way or another."
He added, "It serves a really useful evolutionary role probably, which is you defend territory; you defend your mate; if you're a female, you defend your offspring."
Even though it served a purpose for other animals, in modern human societies, Kennedy said, a propensity toward aggression is not beneficial and can be a problem.

[Frederick M. Dolan]

By the country or nation as opposed to the state, regime, or government of the day, I mean the personalities, the traditions, the land, the speech, the literature, poetry, music, art, architecture, fashion, laws, pursuits, enterprises, and institutions of a people. Of course, one does tend to hate one's enemies and needless to say I can't speak for German Jews but I assume reactions vary. Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer left comfortable lives in California to return to Germany after the war and contribute to its reconstruction, I presume because they felt an attachment to it. Thomas Mann, on the other hand, did not -- and he wasn't even Jewish.

The larger point here, I think, is the spirit that animates our politics. I prefer expanding bonds of affection, identity, and solidarity to demonization.



What I'm surmising from what you are saying is that, for example, it's a pity that Jews could not love the country of Germany when Hitler was in power. Is that right? In my opinion, ...

[Frederick M. Dolan]

I don't see how what I wrote could remotely be seen to imply any minimization of injustice or that I could be thought to have said that affection for one's country entails thinking it to be perfect.

As for most Americans being despicable, nauseating, etc., I guess I just don't know what to say! It strikes me as a bizarre view, for nothing in my fairly wide experience confirms it. Here I reach the limit of my ability to to engage. My spade is turned.


I think those are all good examples!

Another point that I would like to underline regarding Fred's opinion on 'pity if you can't love the unlovable country' is that he makes the manifold and grotesque social injustices in the U.S. look as if they are little more than a couple of mosquito bites. His statements imply that our society is, for the most part, sublimely idyllic and pastoral, when in reality it is light years away from what it should be.

There is such a long list of repression, exploitation, and social, economic, and political injustices in the United States that the entire social fabric is infected as if by a fully metastasized cancer. The American people themselves are at fault, not just the politicians or 'regimes' as Fred says. The majority of the American people are despicable human beings and the wealthy in this country are the most responsible. The bulk of the laws, the U.S. Constitution, and the prevailing 'ethics,' 'morality,' 'values,' and general attitudes of the American people are reason enough to invest in a vomitorium like the Romans used to have.

Edward

[Braggi]

...
There is such a long list of repression, exploitation, and social, economic, and political injustices in the United States that the entire social fabric is infected as if by a fully metastasized cancer. The American people themselves are at fault, not just the politicians or 'regimes' as Fred says. The majority of the American people are despicable human beings and the wealthy in this country are the most responsible. The bulk of the laws, the U.S. Constitution, and the prevailing 'ethics,' 'morality,' 'values,' and general attitudes of the American people are reason enough to invest in a vomitorium like the Romans used to have.
Edward

Gee Edward, that's kind of harsh and a bit unfair. I think the bulk of the US citizenry is merely ignorant and too busy and distracted to even worry about how their government(s) screws other countries and its own citizens. Give 'em football games, pro "wrestling", Nascar, high-def TV and junk food. People love it.

Here's a good book for ya: https://www.amazon.com/Free-Lunch-Wealthiest-Themselves-Government/dp/1591841917/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200672177&sr=1-1

It will restore your faith in our system. :wink:

-Jeff

[Valley Oak]

Jeff, I am duly impressed with your recommendation of this book, 'Free Lunch,' because I just saw his interview on Democracy Now:

www.democracynow.org/2008/1/18/free_lunch_how_the_wealthiest_americans (https://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/18/free_lunch_how_the_wealthiest_americans)

Excellent piece!

Edward


Gee Edward, that's kind of harsh and a bit unfair. I think the bulk of the US citizenry is merely ignorant and too busy and distracted to even worry about how their government(s) screws other countries and its own citizens. Give 'em football games, pro "wrestling", Nascar, high-def TV and junk food. People love it.

Here's a good book for ya: https://www.amazon.com/Free-Lunch-Wealthiest-Themselves-Government/dp/1591841917/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200672177&sr=1-1

It will restore your faith in our system. :wink:

-Jeff