View Full Version : Looks like it might be an interesting book...
Mtnjim
01-24-2006, 05:07 PM
(Emphasis mine!) :type:
GOSPEL OF WORK VS. GOSPEL OF WEALTH
By Russell Mokhiber and Robert
Weissman
It was a company town.
A company region, actually.
The Mohawk Valley in upstate New York.
The
Remington boys had started a gun company.
And they had come to dominate the region.
There was even company
scrip.
Scrip you could use like money to buy food, and clothes.
Get a haircut.
Even donate to the local
church.
And when you went to church, Mr. Remington was there.
So, if you had a complaint, you could tap him on
the shoulder.
And talk about it.
People were generally happy.
Then the gun trust came to town.
And
sabotaged the whole deal.
And down it went.
That's the story line of Worked Over: The Corporate Sabotage
of An
American Community by Dimitra Doukas (Cornell University Press).
Doukas, who is now a professor at
Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova
Scotia, says that in the late 1800s, corporations, once they took
control of
production, tried to change the culture of the United States.
From the gospel of work to what Andrew Carnegie
called the gospel of
wealth.
"If we look at the United States in the 19th century, we see a popular
culture
that was, in a word, anti-capitalist," Doukas said. "And this
was reflected very much in the political scene of the
time. You had to
be in favor of the working man. You had to support and praise the common
man. The basic idea is
that work is what dignifies a person. It is an
anti-aristocratic ideology. It goes way back, really. Aristocrats
were
characterized as parasites, as people who lived off the work of others.
Whereas good, virtuous American
people worked hard and were expected to
enjoy the fruits of their labor."
So, for example, Abraham Lincoln, in
his first annual message to
Congress in 1861, makes his statement about capital and labor: "Capital
is only the
fruit of labor. Labor is the superior of capital and
deserves much the higher consideration."
But when the
corporations came in and took over, the major message was
-- no, it's capital, not labor, that produces the wealth
of society --
it's capital that deserves the greater consideration."
And this is what Doukas means by "the
sabotage of an American community."
"Sabotage in the sense of undermining or continually poking at it,
first
with very little sophistication, poking at the basic value set of the
society," she says. "And the reason
they poked at it is because the
corporate value system could not co-exist with the American value system."
On
the whole, working for the Remingtons was a positive thing. There
were no strikes. The Knights of Labor were
influential at the time. And
people look back with fond memories of the time.
"To work for the Remingtons was
not to have a job in our sense," Doukas
told us. "The people worked as contractors. They sold what they made
to
the company. They were organized into departments under a senior highly
skilled craftsperson or artisan. Each
of these persons could conceive
themselves as working independently."
Working people took offense at being wage
slaves -- what most of us are
now. They had a sense of independence from the man. And the man was
right there in
the community. You ran into the man -- on the street. You
could talk with the man.
Now, the man sits atop a
giant corporation, unreachable, unknowable.
"A whole way of life was organized around working for the
Remingtons,"
Doukas says. "People looked at it as being wholesome -- American,
virtuous, dignified -- and still
today they look back at that period.
Even today, there is a tremendous sense of history among local
working
people. They are tremendously critical of the present day situation."
So, there was economic democracy
under the Remington family?
"In this very particular sense -- back then, you had local ownership,"
Doukas said."
The biggest boss sits in a pew next to you in church and
was there to be buttonholed after church. There was direct
access. You
can think of it as economic democracy, maybe, in the broadest sense. But
locally, it is more like a
ranked system where skilled workers saw
themselves in some sense as ranking lower than the Remingtons. And yet
the
high ranking person was accessible to them. At the same time, there
was a sense of the tremendous dignity of being
a working person and
creating the wealth of the country. And this is how people spoke of it
for better than a
century. So, it is democratic in the basic sense that
if you had a grievance, you could get some sort of action on
it, and
fairly directly. You had a voice -- ground to stand on."
Anyone who is from upstate New York knows that
it's one of the most
beautiful regions of this country.
And for years it has been battered by big corporations
that don't give a
damn about the region.
Doukas says there was a time when the man cared.
Hard to
believe.
But it's worth taking a peek at her book and making your own judgment
tim929
01-25-2006, 05:02 AM
Ya know something? You would be
shocked if you knew how much time my friends and I have spent imersed in the very discussion about the undermining
of the american way of life.The hard work that our grandparents did that paid off in the end has given way to a
culture where slavery to wages has become the norm.I could write volumes on the subject as it has been bantered back
an forth over coffee in my circle of people.The sad part is...thats how the masters have set things up and short of
an all out bloody revolution...thats what we are stuck with to the end.
Mtnjim
01-25-2006, 12:44 PM
I'm convinced that we are
regressing back to feudal times and the "middle class" are becoming "serfs" to the wealthy.
belgareth
01-25-2006, 04:06 PM
I'm convinced
that we are regressing back to feudal times and the "middle class" are becoming "serfs" to the wealthy.
It
sure looks that way, doesn't it? You ever wonder how people can be such sheep and allow that crap to happen?
Mtnjim
01-25-2006, 05:09 PM
It sure looks that
way, doesn't it? You ever wonder how people can be such sheep and allow that crap to happen?
I believe
they are refered to as "sheeple"!
belgareth
01-25-2006, 08:29 PM
I believe they
are refered to as "sheeple"!
//RANT=On// Yup! Never question authority. Never buck the system. Believe
whatever the government and corporations tell you. Be a nice little guy and do as your told. We'll tell you what to
do and believe. Remember that daddy knows what is best for you. //RANT=OFF//
tim929
01-26-2006, 12:35 PM
Okay...unless I miss my guess...I
have been on and on about this for years:type: There has been a consistant effort over the last half century to turn
the people into a productive and docile herd of money producing cattle for harvest.The shrinking minimum
wage,dramatic increase in media induced apathy,general increase in drug use and apathy in the younger
generations...etc etc.
I cant count the number of times I have said it,but the masters have gone to great
lengths to make sure that the herd doesnt buck in thier pens too much.Its sort of like milking cows.Bribe the herd
into the milk pens with alittle bit of grain,milk them for all they are worth and then drive them out the other side
with a cattle prod for the next wave to take thier place to be milked.As long as they are happy when they enter the
milk pen,you have it made.Who gives a crap how they feel when they go out the other side? As long as they have given
all they are worth.And if they stop giving milk...what then? Nursing home baby! Sort of like sending the cows out to
slaughter when they stop giving.The average family is working far to hard and has far too little time to spend any
of it taking care of thier elderly parents.So they are processed into nursing homes and left to rot.
I saw a
great example of this the other day when I dropped a package of pharmacuticals off at the local nursing home.A half
a dozen old people sitting around a radio listening to soft,soothing music and wasting away.No conversation,no loved
ones surrounding them and making them feel loved,no grand children or great grand children to ask them things about
what it was like when they were young...NOTHING!! The look that these people gave me when I bounced in all fresh
faced and energentic said "please just shoot me,this realy sucks!" WHERE THE FU#@ ARE THESE PEOPLES FAMILIES!!?
Thanks to a system that keeps the rest of us running around spending the little bit of money we do make on
consumer goods and bull shit.A system that makes sure that nobody can afford to stretch forth thier arm,extend thier
middle finger to thier boss and simply go get another job! In europe they laugh at us and our
forty,fifty,sixty,seventy hour work weeks,barely livable pay checks, meeger two weeks vacation,unpaid holidays,no
health coverage,etc etc...Everyone in this country is afraid to thell thier boss to "take this job and shove it!" As
a result,employers have been able to herd us into the milk pens with very little fuss and milk us till we bleed and
then cast us asside like yesterdays news paper at the slightest hint that we might actualy want to take a few days
extra off or have some extra time with our families.
Why do you suppose maternity and family leave bills had to
be passed?
EMPLOYEE:Can I have a couple days off to be with my wife and new baby please?
EMPLOYER: You're
fired! You worthless sack of putrifying shit!!
That story was played and replayed for a long time befor the herd
finaly got wise and said enough is enough.How much more of this crap is going to have to happen befor the herd
finaly wakes up and says "NO MORE!" The next time you see a transit bus taking folks to work,or listen to a traffic
report on the radio about a rush hour traffic jam,think of the cowboys...men on horses with whips...herding the
cattle into the corral for processing and disposition and eventual harvest.
We have a "rush hour." What the fu@#
is everybody "rushing" too? A cubicle farm? And for what? Your corperate employer is going to make many many times
more money on you today than you get paid in a week!And if he doesnt...your job goes to some hadji in India where
they can make them work ninety five hours a week and pay less than you make in a hour!Saddly,with tax structures and
regulation the way it has been set up...small employers are shoved into a position where they cant pay employees
enough to keep them and have a hard time just keeping the doors open.As a result,the small business either gets
pushed out or bought up because they just cant match the productivity of a corperate farm.
The next time you
drive on a major interstate highway and see a state trooper with his ticket book...think of a cow hand whos job is
to make sure the herd stays on the trail and gets to the stock yard on time for auction.Because thats his job and
the state...thats us...pays him to keep us on the trail to the stock yard where we will be sold off and
harvested.Its beautiful in its simplicity,make the herd pay all the expenses of keeping the cattle barons in
business.
I could draw paralelles with Nazi Germany in the structuring of this system of business...but I wont
because it would be an insult to the people who suffered and died for that hidiouse philosophy.But if you want to do
alittle history reading about groups like Einsatzgruppen...you can see how many of the practices are very,very
simmilar.Herd them in,work them to death and then...well...we havent gone that far yet but it wont be too much
longer.
And until the rest of the herd wakes up and kicks and bucks in the pens and starts kicking down a few
fences,the rest of us are stuck with the inevitable.
Okay...the nurse is here with my meds...I'll stop
now....:blink:
belgareth
01-27-2006, 11:31 AM
Study Finds Rich-Poor Income Gap Growing By MARK JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jan 27, 2006
ALBANY, N.Y. - The disparity between rich and poor is growing in
America as the federal minimum wage has remained flat for years, union membership has declined and industries have
faced global competition, according to a study released Thursday.
The report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Economic Policy Institute, both
liberal-leaning think tanks, found the incomes of the poorest 20 percent of families nationally grew by an average
of $2,660, or 19 percent, over the past 20 years. Meanwhile, the incomes of the richest fifth of families grew by
$45,100, or nearly 59 percent, the study by the Washington-based groups said.
Families in the middle fifth saw their incomes rise 28 percent, or
$10,218.
The figures, based on U.S. Census data, compare the average
growth from 1980-82 to 2001-03, after adjusting for inflation.
The
poorest one-fifth of families, the report said, had an average income of $16,780 from 2000-03, while the top fifth
of families had an average income of $122,150 — more than seven times as much. Middle-income families' average
income was $46,875.
Trudi Renwick, an economist with the union-backed
Fiscal Policy Institute in New York, said globalization, the decline of manufacturing jobs, the expansion of
low-wage service jobs, immigration and the weakening of unions have hurt those on the lower end of the economic
scale.
In 38 states, the incomes of high-income families grew by a
higher percentage than those of the lowest-income families; Alaska was the only state in which the reverse was true.
The 11 states where the high and low incomes increased at about the same rate were mostly in the West and
Midwest.
The greatest disparity between rich and poor was in New
York, where the top 20 percent of wage earners had average incomes 8.1 times larger than the poorest 20 percent in
the early 2000s. Texas had only a slightly smaller gap; Wyoming had the smallest disparity at a 5.2 to 1
ratio.
Matthew Maguire, a spokesman for the Business Council of New
York state, said the money earned by the state's wealthiest residents is "something that everybody who cares about
New York should be pleased about."
"New York's wealthy pay huge sums
in taxes and those wealthy people and their taxes make it possible for New York to provide the nation's most
generous social service programs to less fortunate New Yorkers," he said. "It also reflects the fact the state is a
magnet for immigrants who come from the four corners of the globe to a state they see as symbol of economic
activity."
Renwick said the government "needs to continue its
commitment to correcting the natural outcomes of the marketplace" by raising the minimum wage with inflation and by
tax policies like the earned income tax credit.
Renwick also
suggested that governments, when giving tax breaks to companies, insist those companies provide jobs that pay higher
wages.
tim929
01-27-2006, 05:59 PM
belgareth...how dare you post
something that shines such an unfavorable light on the masters of our scociety!? Report back to your milking stall
at once!That goes double for the rest of you over paid,under worked layabouts!
koolking1
03-04-2006, 03:29 PM
nursing
homes in your future. I'm thinking the next step is to raise the retirement age to 85 so that you can just work
till you keel over. 401Ks were introduced years ago with the supposed idea that people would save money that way,
in reality, it's meant to let corporations off the hook with pension plans. And now, the new health care savings
plan, a way for people without health insurance to save up in case of an emergency health problem, fooled again -
this is meant to let corporations of the hook for health insurance which is projected to take 1 of every 5 dollars a
person makes.
I remember back in the early 70s when I was stationed in Italy. I was making 6K a year by
then (thanks to Nixon who finally raised our pay). I was a somewhat highly trained technician who had pledged to
fight, kill, lose my own life if need be, for the defense of the USA. An Italian acquaintance, who worked for us
(the US Govt.)driving a school bus, made 18K a year, he was always loaded with cash for partying etc..
During the mid 80s we military folks at headquarters everywhere were quite excited about the downfall of the
Soviet Union and what we expected to be a "very generous" peace dividend (believe me, we have a much lower standard
of living as the "world's protector" than we should have due to the enormous defense costs we routinely approve
of). Did things get better? Hardly. We have to face facts, we have a fairly good standard of living compared to
the 3rd world, not so when compared to much of Western Europe. But, I guess that's ok cause we are "free".
belgareth
03-04-2006, 04:03 PM
We're free? Where'd you ever
get that idea? We're in bonded servitude to our government. You haven't even paid off your debt for this year yet,
you have about three more months to go. And look at all you get for those huge taxes. People telling you how to
live, people telling you you can't worship as you willl, people using your tax money to fight the voter's
decisions in court, wars in foriegn lands, billions spent to pay off dictators who would as soon bomb us out of
existance. You get to subsidize major coporations as they move jobs overseas and you get to pay for elected
representatives to go on 'fact finding' vacations to exotic places.
You get a lot for your servitude. What
does it matter that senoir citizens can't afford to eat or buy the medicines they need? Or that our children
aren't being educated? Or that money iis poured into a sysetm that encourages staying on the public dole? Or that
you can be sent to jail for disciplining or failing to discipline your child while an elected representative can
help rob half a million people if their savings and walk away from it rich. Or that The State can force people out
of their homes so the land can be given to businesses to raise taxe revenues.
When are people going to get the
idea that OUR GOVERNMENT IS A FAILURE! Get a clue people. Taxes are never going to go down under the current system.
They keep thinking up new ways to increase revenues, that's a nice way of saying RAISE TAXES. And services are
never going to improve. They keep talking about new ways to reduce costs, that translates to CUT SERVICES. It ain't
about party or any single elected representative. The system, the entire system, is broken! So long as the powers
that be can keep us divided and bickering over stupid party ideologies they can be sure we'll never get together
and start demanding something better than what we are getting from OUR government.
DrSmellThis
03-04-2006, 05:09 PM
I like most of the points just
made, and agree that the system is broken. We do not currently live in a democracy, and our leaders are not
accountable to the people, including in how they spend our tax dollars. But to me the idea that it's more about
government (e.g., taxes, the size of government; please correct me if I'm wrong) and not who is running it is
itself an ideology, and a fairly common one, especially among disenfranchized conservatives/anti-liberals (not to
pigeon-hole anyone). To me there are positives and negatives to that ideology, like others. My point isn't about
whether this ideology is the best one, but just that it is an ideology. I have an ideology too (Though I try as hard
as I can to make it holistic, evidence-based, and flexible, my ideology has negatives too, which I try to
elimenate when possible). So ultimately we still all have the problem of disagreement about why government is
failing.
That doesn't mean that people can't find areas of agreement. I don't think many citizens, with the
exception of the wealthy and powerful, are satisfied that their interests are being represented.
But when you
have a democratic process that is so broken that the party in power can rig elections to stay in power, increase
power, and squash dissent; you have a serious problem.
Though the preponderance of evidence suggests loudly that
we have a historically unprecedented neo-fascist crime family in charge of the U.S., there is a system that allowed
that crime family to gain power. Neocon Republicans (I have little quarrel with old school Republicans and believe
their insights necessary in the balance of things) achieved power due to their own efforts within that system, due
to a multi-decade effort. They have exposed the system in a florid way. My sincere hope is that this results in
increased public consciousness.
The question is what to do about it. To me the first step is to get rid of the
neocons, because they are currently blocking every attempt by some decent people in Congress to restore a bit of
democracy. Our country is being run into the ground at a rapidly accelerated pace, and we have a horrible standing
in the world all of a sudden, not that is was great before.
On the other hand, all but 10 or 13 Senate
democrats just voted for the Patriot Act.
So we really do have to get rid of a lot of Democrats too. There are
too many hypocrites and cowards. But people like Joe Lieberman and Hilary are the last thing we need. Middle of the
road status quo won't cut it. But where are the candidates that are committed to deep reform? I'm not sure
it's in our culture at the moment. We have to pull ouselves up by the bootstraps.
belgareth
03-04-2006, 08:32 PM
I do hope you are not trying to
imply I am either a conservative or specifically anti liberal. I tried several times before to dispel that rather
silly generalization made about me. I sincerely believe the democratic party is as dirty, as greedy and as worthless
as the republican party. I have no use for either group. Like I said, and I quote "stupid party ideologies". It was
directed at all parties as a whole. I do believe the liberal ideology has more inherent flaws but that doesn't in
any way mean I support the republicans. That would be black and white thinking to assume that. I try very hard to
look at each and every issue on a case by case basis and determine my stand on the merits of the issue itself.
Another misconception I see is the notion that the wealthy don't feel as disenfranchised as the less so. Mostly
they do, from what I've seen and heard. I regard statements like that as primarily intended to deepen the rift
between people of various walks of life. Implying they are somehow different or see the world differently is the
same approach as party politics. We are all in this together and the only way we can make it work, that we can fix
the terrible sickness that is eating at our country is by recognizing that we are all part of the whole and all part
of the problem and part of the solution. Divisive statements and stands can only make matters worse.
Like you, I
am for reform. But I don't believe the democrats have any better idea or would be any better at managing our
country than the republicans. They've both failed miserably time and again as is demonstrated by the last fifty or
so years of recent history. So, my first suggestion is for people to start looking at the individual issues, not the
party and to vote their concience rather than their wallet. My second is to enact strict term limits and find a way
to get big money out of the election process. Possibly revise it completely to finance the entire thing with tax
money. It would be a drop in the bucket of the national budget and might very well have far greater returns. It
would certainly give every real candidate a fighting chance and help break the strangle hold two very bad groups
have on this country's politics now.
DrSmellThis
03-05-2006, 04:54 AM
You are whatever you choose to
be at this moment, and I'd never want to presume anything else. Multiple times in the past you've come across as
anti "liberal", to use your term; not in the sense of against liberals as people, but against their philosophy as
you see it (I'm against "tax and spend" as a guiding philosophy myself, for that matter, but don't personally know
anyone who adheres to that these days.). That's all fine, of course, and I appreciate that we need a variety of
perspectives. The stand you're articulating here seems slightly softer regarding "liberalism", whatever that is (a
perjorative label, usually); but in no way do I want to belabor that point or waste energy trying to stick a label
on anyone. Clearly, even if you were to take my statements personally, in no way did I suggest you support the
Republican party, so I guess I'm not at risk for black and white thinking.
Though I could have been interpreted
as such, I didn't mean to say that all rich people are fine with the government; only to make the obvious point
that only the very few are benefitting by today's policies, on the face of it. If a rich person has depth and
smarts he or she will indeed realize we are all in this together; that justice for any requires it for all. But
please don't suggest I "intend" to be divisive or "deepen the rift between walks of life". It doesn't come across
in a positive manner to be unnecessarily aggressive and presumptuous.
I agree with most all your ideas in the
last paragraph, but strongly disagree that both parties are the same. My jaw drops at even considering that to be
the case; though I certainly recognize many problems with party politics in general, and agree both parties are
screwed. Currently the Republicans in power are far worse than the Democrats, though there are some Republicans
taking a stand for some good things too. All this stuff is on their watch, and it's far worse than it ever was.
Having said that, I am quite angry with Democrats in Congress right now, and would like to throw most of them on
their asses. Like virtually everything else, it's not black and white.
Campaign finance reform and term limits
are a minimal but important start to what we need to do. There are lots of changes we need to make along those
lines.
One idea is to make anything said in public while functioning as a politician on duty be under oath. That
would enable people to hold politicians accountable for lying. Lying to the people while on duty as a politician,
with the flag flying behind you, should be against the law, IMO. But it's not.
People do need to consider issues
individually, but of course not at the expense of having a holistic and deep philosophy; a basis of fundamental
wisdom that reaches across issues. Ideally, a successful political movement would be based in that wisdom, and help
people see the interrelations among issues.
belgareth
03-05-2006, 06:05 AM
Doc,
To be blunt, I
responded to Koolking in the hopes of having a discussion with him regarding his viewpoints. In no way was I
addressing anything I said to you. I'm not interested in playing what I percieve as word games, for example the
comment about ideology. Of course its an ideology! How could it not be?
The American Heritage®
Stedman's Medical Dictionary
Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton
Mifflin Company.
Main Entry: ide·ol·o·gy
1 : a systematic body of concepts
especially about human life or culture
2 : a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an
individual, group, or culture
Ennuendo such as a statement in reply to some thing I said followed by
"Not to pigeon hole anybody" is no more than a means of doing exactly that. I'm not interested in word games and am
not going to play them.
We do seem to agree fairly well about the fact that things need to change and seem
to agree on some or all the changes. Where to take the changes is another area that I don't believe we can agree
because I think your core values and mine are very far apart. That's fine, so long as one does not force their core
values or beliefs on another I have no problem with it. My beliefs do not require anybody ever agree with them as
personal beliefs are for the individual alone to determine.
DrSmellThis
03-05-2006, 06:04 PM
Misunderstandings sometimes
arise. Your perception of "word games" is your perception. When I said "not to pigeon hole anyone," it meant exactly
that -- this was my impression of the politics of a lot of people who have this view who I have met. I was leaving
room for myself to be wrong and be corrected in your case, because I can't speak for anyone else's viewpoint. I
thought you were anti-liberal, because you said that under no circumstances would you vote for a liberal, and that
liberal policies fail time and again. Now I hear you, that you're not "anti-liberal"; that you just believe liberal
policies have more flaws than conservative policies.
We definitely have some value differences, but I'm glad we
agree on the changes to the political system that need to be made.
tim929
03-06-2006, 04:59 AM
The unfortunate problem that we
run into when we define "liberal" and "conservative" is that the nice folks who run for office are niether.The
policies that are stated in press conferences and campagne speeches and meetings with various "concerned citizens"
groups have absolutly nothing to do with what elected officials plan on doing.They make the noises that thier
constituents want to hear and then go on about thier mary way.
I will give you a wonderful example,and please
forgive me for the religious nature of what I am about to say...I try not to foist religious viewpoints off on
anyone but this realy says alot.
In the book of Revelations(The last book of the Bible) we are warned of a time
when durring the reign of the anti-christ, men and women will be required to take a mark on the hand or
forehead.This is reffered to as "the mark of the beast." That no one will be allowed to buy or sell without this
mark.It will...in effect determine if you are authorised to be a citizen.Christians have been on and on about this
for years,wringing thier hands and worrying that the end is near and that the democrats are trying to usher in the
anti-christ and the end of days.
Funny thing...this mark has always been dependant on the technology and the
infrastructure to make it a feasable method of controlling the general population and insuring obediance to the
anti-christ.
George W. Bush,as a foundational element to the war on terror and the patriot act,signed into law a
provision that would require RFID chips in ALL drivers licenses nation wide by 2008.In addition,since a drivers
licence can be lost or stolen,wouldnt it be easier to do what they do with pets and alzhimers patients and simply
implant it?Thats on the board for implemntation by 2012 under the bill that George W. Bush signed.Considering the
sensativity of christians to the concept...you would think that the various right wing christian groups would be
outraged.But because George says he believes in Jesus as his lord and savior,they remain silent.He is,after all a
good christian man.
When this happened I almost died with shock.I was stunned that so many people would simply
turn a blind eye to the very thing they have most dreaded and reviled.But because George said the right thing in
front of the cameras to a christian group,nobody even seemed to notice.If you believe that what the bible says is
true,it would stand to reason that the very man that christians support just sold them out to satan.But this stands
as a classic example of the american voting public.As long as the politician says the right things,what he does is
completely irrelevent.
So liberals support certain people based on thier so called stand on abortion or gay
rights...the words they have used however mean nothing when they are confronted by a lobbyist or special interest
group with a big check in hand...Sad...but thats the way it works.
Mtnjim
03-06-2006, 01:33 PM
In addition,since a
drivers licence can be lost or stolen,wouldnt it be easier to do what they do with pets and alzhimers patients and
simply implant it?Thats on the board for implemntation by 2012 under the bill that George W. Bush signed.Considering
the sensativity of christians to the concept...you would think that the various right wing christian groups would be
outraged.But because George says he believes in Jesus as his lord and savior,they remain silent.He is,after all a
good christian man.
There have been suggestions that the right wing radical "Christians" have been
pushing the agenda to speed the "end times" along so Jesus would return sooner. This "Mark of the beast" would fit
right in.
DrSmellThis
03-06-2006, 01:50 PM
The unfortunate
problem that we run into when we define "liberal" and "conservative" is that the nice folks who run for office are
niether.The policies that are stated in press conferences and campagne speeches and meetings with various "concerned
citizens" groups have absolutly nothing to do with what elected officials plan on doing.They make the noises that
thier constituents want to hear and then go on about thier mary way.It's strange because I really think
this is a good point, and I'm thankful you made it; and yet I still believe there are some fairly genuine
people in government. If we think strictly in the cynical way, we also paint ourselves into a corner. Though it's
not hip to say this, I still believe there is a meaningful relation between the words, or articulated platforms, and
how leaders act, even though concrete acts ultimately determine service. This is based on personal experience.
Philosophies and platforms still are important in choosing a candidate. Ideas still preceed actions on this
planet.
But it's possible for us as citizens to do a much better job of screaming and making their life
difficult when they sell out. I sort of see that happening now in the Democratic party, where people are getting
called out, though this citizen process failed when it came to the Patriot Act. Old school conservatives who believe
in Federalism, effective national defense, personal responsibility, government off your back, ethics, and fiscal
responsibility have been totally screwed over by their supposed party; and are also increasingly angry. I have
enough hope to keep working within the system we have for now.
We definitely need to support candidates who are
aware of the systemic issues (e.g., need for campaign finance reform, term limits, laws against politicians lying)
as well as demonstrating philosophical wisdom in their words. To me a big part of the problem has been in going
backwards on the idea level (e.g., fundamentalism, the idea that we can impose our will on the Middle East
militarily, a lack of understanding of democracy).
DrSmellThis
03-06-2006, 02:09 PM
There have been
suggestions that the right wing radical "Christians" have been pushing the agenda to speed the "end times" along so
Jesus would return sooner. This "Mark of the beast" would fit right in.This is a scary prospect, of course.
I think what we're seeing now is a combination of actual extreme ideology; and cynical, phony manipulation of
people vulnerable to extreme ideology, by people who want only power and money (e.g., Bush pandering to
fundamentalists and overly fearful people, while actually not caring about many of their concerns).
tim929
03-07-2006, 04:41 AM
There have been
suggestions that the right wing radical "Christians" have been pushing the agenda to speed the "end times" along so
Jesus would return sooner. This "Mark of the beast" would fit right in.
While this is a possibility in
terms of radicals behind closed doors,the christians I reffer to are the average pew warmers who attend church on
sundays.These folks,weather you agree or disagree with them and thier religion(Im such a crappy christian that I
seperate myself from them so as not to embarras them or God) are for the most part very sincere in thier beliefs and
very likely to voice concernes over any form of attack on those beliefs.
It's strange because I really
think this is a good point, and I'm thankful you made it; and yet I still believe there are some fairly
genuine people in government. If we think strictly in the cynical way, we also paint ourselves into a corner. Though
it's not hip to say this, I still believe there is a meaningful relation between the words, or articulated
platforms, and how leaders act, even though concrete acts ultimately determine service. This is based on personal
experience. Philosophies and platforms still are important in choosing a candidate. Ideas still preceed actions on
this planet.
The genuine people in government are NOT elected.I have a friend who has be active in
politics and has run for office twice.Durring those runs for state office we found out that the game that has to be
played in order to be elected means being a sell out from day one.If you dont sell out you will get nowhere at the
speed of light.The only folks in government that have any sincerety are hired by the various agencies.Saddly,they
rather quickly find out that the only way to keep thier job is to shut up and play along.There are an aweful lot of
very disenfranchised folks working in government right now who feel that there is nothing they can do about it but
keep thier heads down and not make eye contact.They dont dare risk saying anything because to loose a state or
federal job and be forced to work in the private sector would mean giving up a standard of living and bennefits that
private sector employees could only dream of having at this point.
belgareth
03-07-2006, 05:34 AM
Tim,
I've warned you
about heresy before. They're going to burn you at the stake in the town square one day if you aren't careful.
You can't ever convince anybody of anything or even hope they'll listen because they have already determined the
outcome and only seek thoughts or ideas that reinforce them. As my dad used to tell me, "Never try to teach a pig to
sing. It's a waste of time and annoys the pig."
Mtnjim
03-07-2006, 10:46 AM
While this is a
possibility in terms of radicals behind closed doors,the christians I reffer to are the average pew warmers who
attend church on sundays.These folks,weather you agree or disagree with them and thier religion(Im such a crappy
christian that I seperate myself from them so as not to embarras them or God) are for the most part very sincere in
thier beliefs and very likely to voice concernes over any form of attack on those beliefs.
You are right,
it's not the nice normal Christians. I was refering to the whack job radicals who have the ear of "W", like Pat
Robertson and his ilk.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.