Ayn Rand on neoconservatives...
"Conservative Sellout of Capitalism"
Ayn Rand's reasoning on Religious Conservatives (Social Conservatives), Liberals and Statism in this video from the 1950s is as current now as it was then. It explains why her philosophy is popular again today. Those calling themselves conservatives in favor of free markets and capitalism use three interrelated arguments based from faith, tradition and depravity. These are fallacies that contradict the fundamental principles of the United States.
http://youtu.be/vpp5EXZZrgA
http://www.youtube.com/user/LibertyPen
Showing posts with label liberals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label liberals. Show all posts
3/10/11
Economic, Social and Geopolitical
A brief history of the Federal government and unionism run amuck...
Or how we got into this mess now and why the country is divisive.
America is a big country with wide opinions as large as the population. We are at a moment in our history where our judgment and reasoning is diverse and our opinions are also divisive. In my lifetime the last time we were at this point was in the late sixties and early seventies in the "love it or leave it" period. In it's simplest form today it takes on the debate of libertarian conservative versus progressive liberal ideals.
Progressive Liberalism (as opposed to Classical Liberalism) as a movement started to take hold over a hundred years ago before the First World War. Theodore Roosevelt was the first President to push Progressivism. The consumerism of today is a result of the shift, at that time, in emphasis of managing the national economy from free market business to the regulation of business in favor of the consumer. The idea was that the consumer was more important than the producer. Consumers were the driver of the economy rather than the producers of goods and their rights to products were more important than those who invented, created, manufactured and marketed them.
In 1927 a group of elite academics, unionists, peace activists and radical leftists took a cruise to the then unrecognized Soviet Union to meet Stalin and tour Russia. Their mission was to be self-appointed unofficial envoys of the United States to document the marvels of the collectivist economy of the Soviets. They were given lavish guided tours to selected places that were successful planned economic enterprises and shielded from anything else. They documented their experiences and wrote papers, books and newspaper and magazine articles extolling the virtues of the collectivist society they witnessed. The importance of the trip and passengers is that many of these people become prominent in Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal administrations.
When the legacy became entrenched.
FDR tired of these people and their experiments by 1937 when the second wave of Depression hit from 1937 to 1939. He had been re-elected in 1936 in a landslide but it was becoming clear that the collectivists and their programs had not solved the problems of the economy. In fact, they made it worse, but the damage was done. The established major institutions we are stuck with today including Social Security and liberalized unionism. After the Second World War, the answer to converting from a wartime economy to a peaceful one was in promoting mass produced cookie cutter housing and consumer goods. The remnants of both Roosevelts, regulated monopolies, Social Security, federal government economic planning and unionism were accepted and tolerated as necessary evils.
Those were the seeds planted that the federal government and programs, as we know it today, mushroomed out of control. President Johnson exacerbated the situation by his Great Society programs. Later the Justice Department in law suits started in his administration resulted in Affirmative Action quotas forced onto private employers by consent decree. Public employee unionism also dramatically increased in this era.
To fully understand the consumerism mindset and sense of entitlement many Americans hold today it is important to see how long it took us to get here and how. In order to unravel it, which we must if we are to recover from our current economic crisis, cannot take a hundred years but must be unwound relatively quickly. If we are to recover from it, otherwise we really will spiral downward, a proposition I don't think most Americans are willing to accept.
Why we're divided today.
Due to the current administration, the ineffective political class of both parties in Washington, the divisiveness we are seeing today is a result of a growing movement that is getting stronger. The loose coalition of the Tea Party is the tip of the iceberg. The sentiment they represent is growing stronger among average Americans who don't necessarily align themselves with any political party of movement. The reason the unionists and supporters resistance, especially in the public sector, is so virulently strong (witness Wisconsin as an example) is they recognize the threat to their status quo. Whether they publicly acknowledge this or not, the Progressive Liberals of today realize they are losing the hearts and minds of the American people. In one election three years ago they won their last major victory and gradually they are losing more and more battles.
Some states, Arizona and Montana among them, are taking steps to buck the Federal government and loosen the grip. The process is called "nullification" and refers to state legislatures and elected officials passing bills and declaring that certain federal government edicts are "null and void" because these mandates violate the limits of authority as stated in the US Constitution. Some of their actions seem extreme to a number of people but they don't realize that some of these actions are literal and others are symbolic. Regardless, the trend is there and it is growing.
In Montana a state legislator, Krayton Kerns, is proposing a bill that would nullify the federal Endangered Species Act "null and void" in his state. According to an article in the Great Falls Tribune he argues that the federal government is in serious debt and the opponents to his bill, countering that this legislation would cost the state federal dollars, are arguing over money that isn't there.
"We may as well be arguing over pixie dust. It has as much intrinsic value, the federal government is going down, and you know when a republic dies, it's kind of an ugly thing. There will be no money in the future. Whether we argue about it or not is a nonissue."
On the federal level, Congressman Ron Paul is making the same argument he has for years. Since the US ended the convertibility of the dollar to gold we are using fiat money. Fiat money only has value because the government has laws that say it does. In other words, we keep printing more and more money that has no real intrinsic value to dig ourselves out of debt. Instead we are digging ourselves into a deeper hole.
What is going to happen.
Fear is a powerful thing and many people operate out of fear. The divisiveness of opinion today is driven by the fear of those who depend on the federal government to continue printing money, versus those who recognize that money has no real value and is leading to the inevitable collapse of the monetary system. Sides are forming up and soon there will be no middle of the road dilly dallying around it. The debate revolves around a number of issues but a few serve as focal points.
On the one side, are those who want to see the federal government get its grip off state and local governments and on the other side are those that want more federal control. There are many who want to be free of government interference in our personal lives and some who want the security of entitlement. It is not easily divided up by political parties but each side has organized representation. They are symbolized by the Tea Party movement and organized labor because they are the most visible. They are by no means the only brokers in this divisive war of opinions but it is becoming clearer, as our economic and social fabric dissolves, that we cannot go on this way.
My thought is that we will survive the increasing fights over how much federal government interference people will allow. At the core will be those who are against the status quo of a so-called planned economy and those who are proponents of it. To me the resolution, which will be a revolution in itself, will come when the bottom line is finally tallied. The government really has no money and we may as well be arguing over pixie dust. The system will break and fall and we the people, will have to pick up the pieces and put it back together.
When it's all over and the dust settles, we will be stronger people less dependent on a consumer economy, achievement oriented where accomplishing something matters, knowing things that are important, such as reading, writing, history, geography and math, working hard results in real reward. Above all we will be proud of our country all over again and what it stands for and what we have done for it and ourselves.
Or how we got into this mess now and why the country is divisive.
America is a big country with wide opinions as large as the population. We are at a moment in our history where our judgment and reasoning is diverse and our opinions are also divisive. In my lifetime the last time we were at this point was in the late sixties and early seventies in the "love it or leave it" period. In it's simplest form today it takes on the debate of libertarian conservative versus progressive liberal ideals.
Progressive Liberalism (as opposed to Classical Liberalism) as a movement started to take hold over a hundred years ago before the First World War. Theodore Roosevelt was the first President to push Progressivism. The consumerism of today is a result of the shift, at that time, in emphasis of managing the national economy from free market business to the regulation of business in favor of the consumer. The idea was that the consumer was more important than the producer. Consumers were the driver of the economy rather than the producers of goods and their rights to products were more important than those who invented, created, manufactured and marketed them.
In 1927 a group of elite academics, unionists, peace activists and radical leftists took a cruise to the then unrecognized Soviet Union to meet Stalin and tour Russia. Their mission was to be self-appointed unofficial envoys of the United States to document the marvels of the collectivist economy of the Soviets. They were given lavish guided tours to selected places that were successful planned economic enterprises and shielded from anything else. They documented their experiences and wrote papers, books and newspaper and magazine articles extolling the virtues of the collectivist society they witnessed. The importance of the trip and passengers is that many of these people become prominent in Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal administrations.
When the legacy became entrenched.
FDR tired of these people and their experiments by 1937 when the second wave of Depression hit from 1937 to 1939. He had been re-elected in 1936 in a landslide but it was becoming clear that the collectivists and their programs had not solved the problems of the economy. In fact, they made it worse, but the damage was done. The established major institutions we are stuck with today including Social Security and liberalized unionism. After the Second World War, the answer to converting from a wartime economy to a peaceful one was in promoting mass produced cookie cutter housing and consumer goods. The remnants of both Roosevelts, regulated monopolies, Social Security, federal government economic planning and unionism were accepted and tolerated as necessary evils.
Those were the seeds planted that the federal government and programs, as we know it today, mushroomed out of control. President Johnson exacerbated the situation by his Great Society programs. Later the Justice Department in law suits started in his administration resulted in Affirmative Action quotas forced onto private employers by consent decree. Public employee unionism also dramatically increased in this era.
To fully understand the consumerism mindset and sense of entitlement many Americans hold today it is important to see how long it took us to get here and how. In order to unravel it, which we must if we are to recover from our current economic crisis, cannot take a hundred years but must be unwound relatively quickly. If we are to recover from it, otherwise we really will spiral downward, a proposition I don't think most Americans are willing to accept.
Why we're divided today.
Due to the current administration, the ineffective political class of both parties in Washington, the divisiveness we are seeing today is a result of a growing movement that is getting stronger. The loose coalition of the Tea Party is the tip of the iceberg. The sentiment they represent is growing stronger among average Americans who don't necessarily align themselves with any political party of movement. The reason the unionists and supporters resistance, especially in the public sector, is so virulently strong (witness Wisconsin as an example) is they recognize the threat to their status quo. Whether they publicly acknowledge this or not, the Progressive Liberals of today realize they are losing the hearts and minds of the American people. In one election three years ago they won their last major victory and gradually they are losing more and more battles.
Some states, Arizona and Montana among them, are taking steps to buck the Federal government and loosen the grip. The process is called "nullification" and refers to state legislatures and elected officials passing bills and declaring that certain federal government edicts are "null and void" because these mandates violate the limits of authority as stated in the US Constitution. Some of their actions seem extreme to a number of people but they don't realize that some of these actions are literal and others are symbolic. Regardless, the trend is there and it is growing.
In Montana a state legislator, Krayton Kerns, is proposing a bill that would nullify the federal Endangered Species Act "null and void" in his state. According to an article in the Great Falls Tribune he argues that the federal government is in serious debt and the opponents to his bill, countering that this legislation would cost the state federal dollars, are arguing over money that isn't there.
"We may as well be arguing over pixie dust. It has as much intrinsic value, the federal government is going down, and you know when a republic dies, it's kind of an ugly thing. There will be no money in the future. Whether we argue about it or not is a nonissue."
On the federal level, Congressman Ron Paul is making the same argument he has for years. Since the US ended the convertibility of the dollar to gold we are using fiat money. Fiat money only has value because the government has laws that say it does. In other words, we keep printing more and more money that has no real intrinsic value to dig ourselves out of debt. Instead we are digging ourselves into a deeper hole.
What is going to happen.
Fear is a powerful thing and many people operate out of fear. The divisiveness of opinion today is driven by the fear of those who depend on the federal government to continue printing money, versus those who recognize that money has no real value and is leading to the inevitable collapse of the monetary system. Sides are forming up and soon there will be no middle of the road dilly dallying around it. The debate revolves around a number of issues but a few serve as focal points.
On the one side, are those who want to see the federal government get its grip off state and local governments and on the other side are those that want more federal control. There are many who want to be free of government interference in our personal lives and some who want the security of entitlement. It is not easily divided up by political parties but each side has organized representation. They are symbolized by the Tea Party movement and organized labor because they are the most visible. They are by no means the only brokers in this divisive war of opinions but it is becoming clearer, as our economic and social fabric dissolves, that we cannot go on this way.
My thought is that we will survive the increasing fights over how much federal government interference people will allow. At the core will be those who are against the status quo of a so-called planned economy and those who are proponents of it. To me the resolution, which will be a revolution in itself, will come when the bottom line is finally tallied. The government really has no money and we may as well be arguing over pixie dust. The system will break and fall and we the people, will have to pick up the pieces and put it back together.
When it's all over and the dust settles, we will be stronger people less dependent on a consumer economy, achievement oriented where accomplishing something matters, knowing things that are important, such as reading, writing, history, geography and math, working hard results in real reward. Above all we will be proud of our country all over again and what it stands for and what we have done for it and ourselves.
2/1/11
Economic, Social and Geopolitical
re: those of little faith in the ideals of America...
It's understandable to me the different attitudes and frame of mind that contrasting people have taken towards the current economic crisis across our society. There are those few that have been barely dented and just don't get it and insensitive to it all (if you're in Arizona think pretentious North Scottsdale or Oro Valley) but they will be hit, sooner or later. The majority of people have taken various viewpoints that I do understand, ranging from denial to "eat, drink and be merry," to recognizing there's nothing they can do about the macro but focus on the micro, to those who are devastated, to optimists and positive-thinkers to purposeful obliviousness and everything else in between.
One positional longitude that I don't understand strikes me as plain anti-American. It emanates from people who preach we are heading for a long term difficult economic era due to excessive capitalism, firmly believe it and spread a message that the "power elite" will control the markets, while the rest of us will suffer under these people's thumbs forever. Basically to them, truly free America is over. Ironically, I notice that these skeptics, who think we are stuck in the grip of a ruling elite of our own, have something in common. They tend to spring out from liberalism or the left, a gross generalization I realize but too noticeable to ignore. They are the legacy and descendants of the progressives from the period after the WWI. I'm supposing their answer is more government intervention and control.
I don't buy that frame of mind.
What makes this country different is we are not a European, Middle Eastern, Eurasian (Russia) or Asian country, where it is quite possible to be entrenched in a truly stratified society. Even so, I'm not sure it is possible in some of those countries, of those regions. As a recent example look to Tunisia, which ran its leader out and now Egypt which is on the verge of overthrowing their government, Jordan is likely next. They certainly have more obstacles to overcome to bring down their ruling class than we do in the United States. We may not care for or fear their culture but it is an example of the middle and lower classes bringing down a ruling class that has made life too difficult for the majority to live with.
I do believe we have a class of people who have gotten the notion that they know best and act as power brokers in government and business. Corporations are a large component of our economic distress due to their excessive access to government policymakers. The entire premise of America however, is based on our ability to overthrow our own government quite easily, without real bloodshed. That ideal is based on the Founding Fathers vision, the principles of the US Constitution and our kind of rule of law. Some argue that so much control has been taken by the so-called "power elite" of our country, defined as the corporate and business class and I would add, in collusion with trade unions (who fancy themselves as downtrodden members of the lower class) alongside the political and bureaucratic classes, that "they've" made it impossible to overthrow their control and power.
I don't believe that we've lost that much control.
It may be there are a lot of lazy, entitlement-minded, sheep-like people in this country but I don't think in the big picture, they're the majority. In the long view, when it comes down to brass tacks, I believe most Americans will do whatever it takes to rise above the power structure we have now when pushed too far. The current leadership and ruling structure is out of touch with the average person in this country but we still own that. We lulled ourselves asleep while they snuck in like thieves in the night and stole our stuff but they still didn't get our basic rights. It is a matter of us asserting those rights and overthrowing the current government in our own unique American way. What that way will be, I can't predict, I do think that we are heading towards a turning and a tipping point.
I have faith it will happen.
My thought is that the time is coming when we will have to make some bold moves, as a people, to rid ourselves of the current leading classes that do not have the rest of America's best interest in mind. The civil war of ideas that will occur within the country, when the time arrives for our own overthrowing of the status quo dominating classes, will be between those of us who believe in the ideals of the founders of this country and those schooled in liberalism and socialism. The conclusion I've reached is that those who think more government is the answer will lose that civil war and the overturning of a century's worth of their meddling will be undone.
We will then be rid of two things. The current ruling classes as well as the ideas of the left and liberalism. Both of them are twin evils that are equally responsible for the economic, social and geopolitical crunch we are in, due to the national power they've held. Momentum is building and a shift is coming, ready or not.
It's understandable to me the different attitudes and frame of mind that contrasting people have taken towards the current economic crisis across our society. There are those few that have been barely dented and just don't get it and insensitive to it all (if you're in Arizona think pretentious North Scottsdale or Oro Valley) but they will be hit, sooner or later. The majority of people have taken various viewpoints that I do understand, ranging from denial to "eat, drink and be merry," to recognizing there's nothing they can do about the macro but focus on the micro, to those who are devastated, to optimists and positive-thinkers to purposeful obliviousness and everything else in between.
One positional longitude that I don't understand strikes me as plain anti-American. It emanates from people who preach we are heading for a long term difficult economic era due to excessive capitalism, firmly believe it and spread a message that the "power elite" will control the markets, while the rest of us will suffer under these people's thumbs forever. Basically to them, truly free America is over. Ironically, I notice that these skeptics, who think we are stuck in the grip of a ruling elite of our own, have something in common. They tend to spring out from liberalism or the left, a gross generalization I realize but too noticeable to ignore. They are the legacy and descendants of the progressives from the period after the WWI. I'm supposing their answer is more government intervention and control.
I don't buy that frame of mind.
What makes this country different is we are not a European, Middle Eastern, Eurasian (Russia) or Asian country, where it is quite possible to be entrenched in a truly stratified society. Even so, I'm not sure it is possible in some of those countries, of those regions. As a recent example look to Tunisia, which ran its leader out and now Egypt which is on the verge of overthrowing their government, Jordan is likely next. They certainly have more obstacles to overcome to bring down their ruling class than we do in the United States. We may not care for or fear their culture but it is an example of the middle and lower classes bringing down a ruling class that has made life too difficult for the majority to live with.
I do believe we have a class of people who have gotten the notion that they know best and act as power brokers in government and business. Corporations are a large component of our economic distress due to their excessive access to government policymakers. The entire premise of America however, is based on our ability to overthrow our own government quite easily, without real bloodshed. That ideal is based on the Founding Fathers vision, the principles of the US Constitution and our kind of rule of law. Some argue that so much control has been taken by the so-called "power elite" of our country, defined as the corporate and business class and I would add, in collusion with trade unions (who fancy themselves as downtrodden members of the lower class) alongside the political and bureaucratic classes, that "they've" made it impossible to overthrow their control and power.
I don't believe that we've lost that much control.
It may be there are a lot of lazy, entitlement-minded, sheep-like people in this country but I don't think in the big picture, they're the majority. In the long view, when it comes down to brass tacks, I believe most Americans will do whatever it takes to rise above the power structure we have now when pushed too far. The current leadership and ruling structure is out of touch with the average person in this country but we still own that. We lulled ourselves asleep while they snuck in like thieves in the night and stole our stuff but they still didn't get our basic rights. It is a matter of us asserting those rights and overthrowing the current government in our own unique American way. What that way will be, I can't predict, I do think that we are heading towards a turning and a tipping point.
I have faith it will happen.
My thought is that the time is coming when we will have to make some bold moves, as a people, to rid ourselves of the current leading classes that do not have the rest of America's best interest in mind. The civil war of ideas that will occur within the country, when the time arrives for our own overthrowing of the status quo dominating classes, will be between those of us who believe in the ideals of the founders of this country and those schooled in liberalism and socialism. The conclusion I've reached is that those who think more government is the answer will lose that civil war and the overturning of a century's worth of their meddling will be undone.
We will then be rid of two things. The current ruling classes as well as the ideas of the left and liberalism. Both of them are twin evils that are equally responsible for the economic, social and geopolitical crunch we are in, due to the national power they've held. Momentum is building and a shift is coming, ready or not.
9/21/10
IMHO: Social Conservatives and Liberals
Social Conservatives are like Liberals...
Nunya business. Keep the government out of my life.
It occurs to me that Social Conservatives place as much demand on the government as Liberals do. They both want to use government intervention and money to forward their social behavior agenda and dictate to everyone their view of how people should behave.
Americans are basically centrist and lean to the right on fiscal issues, and most don't want the government interfering with peoples daily lives, even if they personally hold conservative views on individual behavior. It goes against the grain of their sense of fairness. There is something equally offensive about both Affirmative Action quotas and restriction of women's access to medical abortion by government edict.
Social Conservatives and Liberals need to repeat to themselves over and over again, that the economic crisis and the Great Disruption, overrides everything now. Americans can't afford and won't be distracted by social agendas until their economic concerns are resolved. It explains the Tea Party movement, which is based on one central theme: confronting politicians about taxes, spending, debt and government intervention and not about a myriad of pet grievances such as minority rights or abortion.
Nunya business. Keep the government out of my life.
It occurs to me that Social Conservatives place as much demand on the government as Liberals do. They both want to use government intervention and money to forward their social behavior agenda and dictate to everyone their view of how people should behave.
Americans are basically centrist and lean to the right on fiscal issues, and most don't want the government interfering with peoples daily lives, even if they personally hold conservative views on individual behavior. It goes against the grain of their sense of fairness. There is something equally offensive about both Affirmative Action quotas and restriction of women's access to medical abortion by government edict.
Social Conservatives and Liberals need to repeat to themselves over and over again, that the economic crisis and the Great Disruption, overrides everything now. Americans can't afford and won't be distracted by social agendas until their economic concerns are resolved. It explains the Tea Party movement, which is based on one central theme: confronting politicians about taxes, spending, debt and government intervention and not about a myriad of pet grievances such as minority rights or abortion.
7/27/10
Unfair Labor Practices
Non-union workers paid minimum wage by union organizers for shame on Walgreens campaign...
____________________________________________________________
Unions Protesting Churches in California
by Ryan P. Dixon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apmn4bXOVLU
http://www.youtube.com/ryanpdixon
Unions Protesting Churches in California
by Ryan P. Dixon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apmn4bXOVLU
http://www.youtube.com/ryanpdixon
7/15/10
Incorrect Assumptions
Civil rights diversity groups are also intolerant...
The NAACP condemnation of the Tea Party movement as racist reminds me again of what I've thought for a long time about groups such as the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), NOW (National Organization of Women) and HRC (Human Rights Campaign).
(Reference: "NAACP passes resolution blasting Tea Party 'Racism'" CNN.com)
All of these organizations have wasted countless hours and money on approaching legitimate problems regarding issues of discrimination with the wrong approach but also hypocritically. They have spent decades pushing for special legislation requesting special rights in the name of reversing discrimination using federal, state and local legislatures. In my mind these grievances should be redressed through legal challenges based on US Constitutional Rights. That, however, is for another blog.
What occurs to me with the NAACP resolution is what has bothered me about all the so-called civil rights groups. They're just as prejudiced as the people they claim to represent that are the subject of prejudice. There is no tolerance for diversity of political views or opinions within these groups, only one point of view is allowed: Liberal. The National Organization of Women claims to defend women against oppression but are oppressive to women who do not follow lockstep into the feminist agenda. You may or may not like Sarah Palin but she is treated by NOW in exactly the manner that organization claims all women are treated. The Human Rights Campaign Fund has no tolerance for any homosexual that does not sign up wholesale for the entire Gay Agenda from A to Z.
Another troublesome thing about the NAACP resolution, is it makes the assumption that the Media and the Political Class like to cast, that the Tea Party is one unified group of people on the fringe. The Tea Party is a movement that comprises many different groups with similar primary goals but differing ideas.
In any case Arizona Congressional District 3 candidate former Paradise Vally Mayor Vernon Parker states that this will backfire on the NAACP. It appears it already has with such old hat luminaries of civil rights days gone by as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson distancing themselves from the resolution. They've been around long enough to know that the black community itself is not unified under one political philosophy and that many African Americans are actually quite conservative.
My blog Paradise Valley Mayor Vernon Parker is Red from 05/21/10 has Vernon Parker discussing the myth that black and ethnic groups are assumed to be Social Democrats and Liberals.
Here is Vernon Parker's statement from yesterday that he has received the backing of Arizona's largest Tea Party group and about the potential for backlash.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70lFjeP7wXE
http://www.youtube.com/ParkerForCongress
The NAACP condemnation of the Tea Party movement as racist reminds me again of what I've thought for a long time about groups such as the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), NOW (National Organization of Women) and HRC (Human Rights Campaign).
(Reference: "NAACP passes resolution blasting Tea Party 'Racism'" CNN.com)
All of these organizations have wasted countless hours and money on approaching legitimate problems regarding issues of discrimination with the wrong approach but also hypocritically. They have spent decades pushing for special legislation requesting special rights in the name of reversing discrimination using federal, state and local legislatures. In my mind these grievances should be redressed through legal challenges based on US Constitutional Rights. That, however, is for another blog.
What occurs to me with the NAACP resolution is what has bothered me about all the so-called civil rights groups. They're just as prejudiced as the people they claim to represent that are the subject of prejudice. There is no tolerance for diversity of political views or opinions within these groups, only one point of view is allowed: Liberal. The National Organization of Women claims to defend women against oppression but are oppressive to women who do not follow lockstep into the feminist agenda. You may or may not like Sarah Palin but she is treated by NOW in exactly the manner that organization claims all women are treated. The Human Rights Campaign Fund has no tolerance for any homosexual that does not sign up wholesale for the entire Gay Agenda from A to Z.
Another troublesome thing about the NAACP resolution, is it makes the assumption that the Media and the Political Class like to cast, that the Tea Party is one unified group of people on the fringe. The Tea Party is a movement that comprises many different groups with similar primary goals but differing ideas.
In any case Arizona Congressional District 3 candidate former Paradise Vally Mayor Vernon Parker states that this will backfire on the NAACP. It appears it already has with such old hat luminaries of civil rights days gone by as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson distancing themselves from the resolution. They've been around long enough to know that the black community itself is not unified under one political philosophy and that many African Americans are actually quite conservative.
My blog Paradise Valley Mayor Vernon Parker is Red from 05/21/10 has Vernon Parker discussing the myth that black and ethnic groups are assumed to be Social Democrats and Liberals.
Here is Vernon Parker's statement from yesterday that he has received the backing of Arizona's largest Tea Party group and about the potential for backlash.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70lFjeP7wXE
http://www.youtube.com/ParkerForCongress
6/8/10
For What It's Worth
Red State, Brown People, Blue State Ideas...
"There's something happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear."
Arizona is on the leading edge of a national discussion on illegal immigration due to it's passage of legislation known as SB1070 or the Arizona Immigration Law. The original law was amended within a week after passage to specifically prohibit racial profiling and stipulate that the request to "show your papers" may only made in the course of enforcing any other law and not solely for the purpose of checking immigration status. This amendment is rarely cited when any mention of the law is made by the media or anyone speaking out against it.
The next step in the State of Arizona's process of attempting to stem the flow of illegal immigration through the porous border on the south, is to introduce into the legislature next year, proposals to deny birth certificates to children born in the state, of parents who are illegal immigrants. This idea is based on interpretation of the original US Constitution, various interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution and the intention of Congress, as well as court rulings. It remains to be seen how that will play out between now and the next Arizona Legislative Session.
Another piece of legislation afoot is to charge students of illegal immigrants tuition for attending public schools. Therein lies another legal conundrum due to the US Supreme Court decision in Plyler v. Doe (457 U.S. 202, 1982) which ruled against a State of Texas statute withholding funds to school districts that allowed the children of illegal immigrants to attend their schools. Over the years this ruling has been cause for much debate regarding the overreaching of the Supreme Court in interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment.
Regardless of what view anyone holds on any of these issues and what opinion someone may have of the motivations of the legislator instrumental in spearheading these pieces of legislation or supporters of them, one thing remains plain, simple and clear. You don't need to go very far back in history to see it either.
All of this is leading up to a confrontation between the State of Arizona (and probably other states who are following suit) and the Federal Government. The last confrontation of significance between states over States Rights and the Federal Government was over school desegregation by primarily Southern States and occurred over decades from the 1940s to the 1970s.
There are other factors involved this time around. We are likely beginning to fully enter an economic depression of a magnitude not seen since the 1930s. Additionally, after thirty years of Affirmative Action there is a resentment, rightly or wrongly, that is seething under the surface. In unfortunate concert we have the first black President of the United States, who seems to operate on the level of a Middle Manager at an ineffective Non-governmental organization (NGO), with his priorities out of order. We also have a Political Class in legislatures and executive branches and Bureaucratic Civil Servants, on all levels of government, who clearly are so entrenched they do not see the people they were originally intended to serve. And then there's that Oil Spill...
The General Population is not happy generally. Make of that what you will. Let me be clear, I am only stating what I observe after careful watching, doing my best to keep an open mind and giving every opportunity to all sides to prove me wrong.
I can only see one result from everything that is building to a crescendo:
Civil Unrest
This video was taken on the Friday of Memorial Day weekend at Alto Arizona, an anti-SB1070 protest. The following day a pro-SB1070 rally was held. I view both events as the last opportunity I will spend time on for several reasons. Mainly I'm not sure what good comes from my attending any of them and I have a sneaking suspicion that any subsequent demonstrations will rival the civil disturbances and riots of the 1960s and 1970s and I experienced some of those.
This video is my own personal social commentary of what I saw at one event.
http://www.vimeo.com/12522769
Red State, Brown People, Blue State Ideas... from JR Snyder Jr on Vimeo.
"There's something happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear."
Arizona is on the leading edge of a national discussion on illegal immigration due to it's passage of legislation known as SB1070 or the Arizona Immigration Law. The original law was amended within a week after passage to specifically prohibit racial profiling and stipulate that the request to "show your papers" may only made in the course of enforcing any other law and not solely for the purpose of checking immigration status. This amendment is rarely cited when any mention of the law is made by the media or anyone speaking out against it.
The next step in the State of Arizona's process of attempting to stem the flow of illegal immigration through the porous border on the south, is to introduce into the legislature next year, proposals to deny birth certificates to children born in the state, of parents who are illegal immigrants. This idea is based on interpretation of the original US Constitution, various interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution and the intention of Congress, as well as court rulings. It remains to be seen how that will play out between now and the next Arizona Legislative Session.
Regardless of what view anyone holds on any of these issues and what opinion someone may have of the motivations of the legislator instrumental in spearheading these pieces of legislation or supporters of them, one thing remains plain, simple and clear. You don't need to go very far back in history to see it either.
All of this is leading up to a confrontation between the State of Arizona (and probably other states who are following suit) and the Federal Government. The last confrontation of significance between states over States Rights and the Federal Government was over school desegregation by primarily Southern States and occurred over decades from the 1940s to the 1970s.There are other factors involved this time around. We are likely beginning to fully enter an economic depression of a magnitude not seen since the 1930s. Additionally, after thirty years of Affirmative Action there is a resentment, rightly or wrongly, that is seething under the surface. In unfortunate concert we have the first black President of the United States, who seems to operate on the level of a Middle Manager at an ineffective Non-governmental organization (NGO), with his priorities out of order. We also have a Political Class in legislatures and executive branches and Bureaucratic Civil Servants, on all levels of government, who clearly are so entrenched they do not see the people they were originally intended to serve. And then there's that Oil Spill...
The General Population is not happy generally. Make of that what you will. Let me be clear, I am only stating what I observe after careful watching, doing my best to keep an open mind and giving every opportunity to all sides to prove me wrong.
I can only see one result from everything that is building to a crescendo:
Civil Unrest
This video is my own personal social commentary of what I saw at one event.
http://www.vimeo.com/12522769
Red State, Brown People, Blue State Ideas... from JR Snyder Jr on Vimeo.
5/29/10
SB1070 Arizona Immigration Law Protest
A Cast of thousands...
Estimated 10,000 protesters against SB1070, many bused from out-of-state
Thousands take to Phoenix to protest Arizona's new immigration law (Arizona Capitol Times)
http://www.altoarizona.com/events.html (National organizers website)
Estimated 10,000 protesters against SB1070, many bused from out-of-state
Thousands take to Phoenix to protest Arizona's new immigration law (Arizona Capitol Times)
http://www.altoarizona.com/events.html (National organizers website)
4/26/10
Who Is John Galt?
Liberty vs Socialism...
Mike Wallace interview of Ayn Rand: 1959
"I am opposed to all forms of control...I am for the separation of state and economics."
In this segment of the interview a finger pointing Mike Wallace strikes an attitude common to most Liberals, that people who are achievers will by nature act in evil ways towards others taking a "devil take the hindmost, dog eat dog society and one of the main reasons for the growth of government controls is to fight robber barons...who perverted their use of power." Therefore it is up to good (liberal) people to lead in protecting people by government intervention and legislation. He speaks as if it is common sense and it never occurs to this mindset, that abuses of power inevitably fail when left to their own devices, since they are inherently evil. Achievement oriented people are smart enough to figure out ways to get people to follow (work) for them without force. Human nature will prevail and people won't work for "robber barons" if they are being abused and are not as weak willed and in need of the protection of government as people such as Wallace suggest. Liberals perpetuate the stereotype of weakness through fear in order to secure their own moral power. Ayn Rand deconstructs this notion in a firm logical, step by step, rational manner.
On labor and social welfare legislation: "It actually sprang out from the same source as the abuses, if by abuses you mean the legislation which originally had been established to help industrialists, which was already a breach of complete free enterprise...if then in reaction labor leaders get together to initiate legislation to help labor, that is only acting on the same principle, namely all parties agree that it is proper for the state to legislate in favor of one economic group over another. What I am saying is nobody should have the right to use, neither employers or employees, to use state compulsion and force."
In other words, the Political Class acquiesces to the will of Industrialists, in total disregard of the principles they were elected under the US Constitution, to protect the interests of the people who elected them and instead protect the industrialists. This creates a conspiratorial system where the Industrialists were the originators of collectivism and socialism by making a social contract through legislation. In turn the pattern is repeated by other members of the Political Class to protect Labor, reinforcing the disregard of the reason they were elected. This pattern is clearly evident today and largely the reason for the current social, economic and political disruption we are currently undergoing.
"This country was made not by robber barons but by independent men, by industrialists who succeeded on sheer ability. I mean without political force, help or compulsion but...at the same time there were men, industrialists, who did use government power as a club to help them against competitors. THEY WERE THE ORIGINAL COLLECTIVISTS. Today the Liberals believe that the same compulsion should be used against the industrialists for the sake of workers, but the basic principle there is...SHOULD there be any compulsion, and the regulations are creating Robber Barons, THEY (government intervention) ARE CREATING CAPITALISTS WITH GOVERNMENT HELP, which is the WORST OF ALL ECONOMIC PHENOMENON."
The result is we do not have true capitalism today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1RxKW-P5V8&feature=channel_video_title
____________________________________________________________
Mike Wallace interview of Ayn Rand: 1959
"I am opposed to all forms of control...I am for the separation of state and economics."
On labor and social welfare legislation: "It actually sprang out from the same source as the abuses, if by abuses you mean the legislation which originally had been established to help industrialists, which was already a breach of complete free enterprise...if then in reaction labor leaders get together to initiate legislation to help labor, that is only acting on the same principle, namely all parties agree that it is proper for the state to legislate in favor of one economic group over another. What I am saying is nobody should have the right to use, neither employers or employees, to use state compulsion and force."
In other words, the Political Class acquiesces to the will of Industrialists, in total disregard of the principles they were elected under the US Constitution, to protect the interests of the people who elected them and instead protect the industrialists. This creates a conspiratorial system where the Industrialists were the originators of collectivism and socialism by making a social contract through legislation. In turn the pattern is repeated by other members of the Political Class to protect Labor, reinforcing the disregard of the reason they were elected. This pattern is clearly evident today and largely the reason for the current social, economic and political disruption we are currently undergoing.
The result is we do not have true capitalism today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1RxKW-P5V8&feature=channel_video_title
____________________________________________________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)