(I am not going to do a long or well put together post on this topic as it is very broad and could be tied into the "Stupid Frenchman's" book "Democracy in America" and other books. A proper post on this topic would be too long and would not be read.) This is a good post to follow the previous post about Scott Brown voting on more than one occasion with the Democrats and goes into why the Republican party is not different than the Democrat party as the two parties are the same at the core. I got this article off of Rush Limbaugh dot com. This article is six pages long, but is worth the read if you have time. The title is "America's Ruling Class" or aristocracy. The article shows how America is ruled by a small ruling class who look down upon the average American with disdain and whose power and wealth depends on an every increasing government, "Never has there been so little diversity within America's upper crust.[...]Nor had the schools and universities that formed yesterday's upper crust imposed a single orthodoxy about the origins of man, about American history, and about how America should be governed. All that has changed." This ruling class gets in its position not by merit or ability but by who they know and being part of the "in crowd".
"Today's ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters -- speaking the 'in' language -- serves as a badge of identity."
On your retirement accounts that some of us are saving for in hopes of living a well-to-do retirement--our generation will not be able to retire, the ruling class has and is floating the ideal of taking that over, "Similarly, in 2008 the House Ways and Means Committee began considering a plan to force citizens who own Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) to transfer those funds into government-run 'guaranteed retirement accounts.'"
A good article that will help one understand what is wrong with America and where America is headed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is time to reach down and grab hold. We need some balls around here. We need to transcend the limits imposed upon us by the world. John Dewey!
ReplyDeleteThere was a time when men physically deformed men. Now it is mentally: In the head. Not know to most.
"At the age of three, when his mind is almost as plastic as his bones, when his need and desire to know are more intense than they will ever be again, a child is delivered--by a Progressive nursery school--into the midst of a pack of children as helplessly ignorant as himself. He is made to understand--by the emotional vibrations permeating the atmosphere of the place, by every crude or subtle means available to the adults whom he cannot understand--that the most important thing in this peculiar world is not to know, but to get along with the pack. Why? No answer is given."
"The thinking youth has been frustrated in his longing to find people who take ideas seriously; but he believes that the will find them in college--in the alleged citadel of reason and wisdom.[...]For both of them, college is the last hope. They lose it in their freshman year."
"The conditioning phase of the comprachicos' task is completed.The students' development is arrested, their minds are set to respond to slogans, as animals respond to a trainer's whistle, their brains are embalmed in the syrup of altruism as an automatic substitute for self-esteem--they have nothing left but the terror of chronic anxiety, the blind urge to act, to strike out at whoever caused it, and a boiling hostility against the whole of the universe. They would obey anyone, they need a master, they need to be told what to do. They are ready now to be used as cannon fodder--to attack, to bomb, to burn, to murder, to fight in the streets and die in the gutters. They are a trained pack of miserably impotent freaks, ready to be unleashed against anyone. The Comprachicos unleash them against the 'system'."
"'He thought of all the living species that train their young in the art of survival, the cats who teach their kittens to hunt, the birds who spend such strident effort on teaching their fledglings to fly--yet man, whose tool of survival is the mind, does not merely fail to teach a child to think, bu devotes the child's education to the purpose of destroying his brain, of convincing him that thought is futile and evil, before he has started to think..."
ReplyDelete"Men would shudder, he thought, if they saw a mother bird plucking the feathers from the wings of her young, then pushing him out of the nest to struggle for survival--yet that was what they did to their children."
I could go get a bunch of quotes if I wanted to too.
ReplyDeleteWell, my quotes are far better than yours and more pertinent to the situation at hand.
ReplyDeleteJust learn to be part of the in crowd and you can achieve your dreams of amassing great wealth.
Very good article. Professor Codevilla makes a lot of great comments, though I do have a few issues with what he says. Well worth the read though.
ReplyDeleteA number of points he makes that I agree with:
“Consensus among the right people is the only standard of truth. Facts and logic matter only insofar as proper authority acknowledges them.”
We saw that blatantly in the Global Warming Scam which the Ruling Class wholeheartedly pushed, and continues to do so, though it has been discredited with great effot.
“Though they cannot make Americans wish they were Europeans, they continue to press upon this nation of refugees from the rest of the world the notion that Americans ought to live by "world standards." - no comment needed
This is a long quote, but it is very important to me, and I believe is even more important than Codevilla makes it out to be:
“Since marriage is the family's fertile seed, government at all levels, along with "mainstream" academics and media, have waged war on it. They legislate, regulate, and exhort in support not of "the family" -- meaning married parents raising children -- but rather of "families," meaning mostly households based on something other than marriage. The institution of no-fault divorce diminished the distinction between cohabitation and marriage -- except that husbands are held financially responsible for the children they father, while out-of-wedlock fathers are not. The tax code penalizes marriage and forces those married couples who raise their own children to subsidize "child care" for those who do not. Top Republicans and Democrats have also led society away from the very notion of marital fidelity by precept as well as by parading their affairs. For example, in 1997 the Democratic administration's secretary of defense and the Republican Senate's majority leader (joined by the New York Times et al.) condemned the military's practice of punishing officers who had extramarital affairs. While the military had assumed that honoring marital vows is as fundamental to the integrity of its units as it is to that of society, consensus at the top declared that insistence on fidelity is "contrary to societal norms." Not surprisingly, rates of marriage in America have decreased as out-of-wedlock births have increased. The biggest demographic consequence has been that about one in five of all households are women alone or with children, in which case they have about a four in 10 chance of living in poverty. Since unmarried mothers often are or expect to be clients of government services, it is not surprising that they are among the Democratic Party's most faithful voters.“
Another good one:
“Describing America's country class is problematic because it is so heterogeneous. It has no privileged podiums, and speaks with many voices, often inharmonious. It shares above all the desire to be rid of rulers it regards inept and haughty. It defines itself practically in terms of reflexive reaction against the rulers' defining ideas and proclivities -- e.g., ever higher taxes and expanding government, subsidizing political favorites, social engineering, approval of abortion, etc. Many want to restore a way of life largely superseded. Demographically, the country class is the other side of the ruling class's coin: its most distinguishing characteristics are marriage, children, and religious practice.”
OK, too many characters in response. Next comment will say what I disliked.
On the other hand, there are things I disagree with, including the thing that you promote most Jeff, and that is the futility of even the Republicans to be the answer. He makes this comment:
ReplyDelete"Important as they are, our political divisions are the iceberg's tip. When pollsters ask the American people whether they are likely to vote Republican or Democrat in the next presidential election, Republicans win growing pluralities. But whenever pollsters add the preferences "undecided," "none of the above," or "tea party," these win handily, the Democrats come in second, and the Republicans trail far behind."
and then he doesn't pursue this point. In the rest of the article, including his summarizing paragraphs, he doesn't even mention the Tea Party. My point is, is that his "Country Party" already exists as the Tea Party, and the Tea Party is already taking the tack he is recommending: taking over the Republican party from the inside, rather than developing into a futile 3rd party that just hands elections to Democrats.
I also strongly disagree with his overall view that intelligence is shown by having a college degree, or by doing well on standardized testing. Sharp people make it on their own. Maybe with a little college, maybe with a degree, maybe with no college. But, it's what you do after college, not what you do in college that matters as to whether you are a success or not. Standardized tests ONLY matter in academia or the government, where true evaluation of the quality of a candidate is not allowed because a)since it's not really a free enterprise system, there's no consequence of making a bad choice, which b) enables easy abuse, and c) forces the standardized tests to GUARANTEE the choice is unbiased.
In the Real World, doing well on standardized tests means jack. I can tell you that your grade point average will not get you anywhere past your initial hiring in any company. Your boss knowing that you show the initiative and intelligence and personality to do your job well means everything. And if you choose to be your own boss, your grade point average will mean even less than jack, and those things I mentioned above will mean even more.
The author, being from the belly of the beast himself, puts too much emphasis on college itself and standardized testing.
Having said all that, it's still an outstanding article and worth linking as required reading.
Marriage and the family unit are the building block of society. To destroy a society or bring about a revolution, the this building block must be destroyed. One might say that there is no attempt to destroy the capitalist system here in America or there is no connection between the attempts to destroy it through culture--it is all just happen chance, but if one read the writings of Marx and read "The Closing of The American Mind" one would see that there has been a systematic and actual attempt to bring revolution about here in America by using culture. This happened in the sixties and these very people are in charge of our Country.
ReplyDeleteThe Republican party is part of the Washington establishment. The difference between politicians diminishes as the number of years they spend there increases. I look at the Republican party's track record and I see no difference in terms of where their policies are taking America in the long run, especially with people like Scott Brown.
I would agree that college is over rated as a means or guarantee of success. Usually one learns to hate America there. Grade inflation is another big problem. Depending on the degree one gets and the work ethic ones has, it could be meaningless to go. College is like any other consumer item: the rich consume more of it. I have read articles stating that well over half of college graduates are moving back to live with their parents due to the economy. I have also read that from a purely financial perspective, college is most often a waste of money. Of course if one gets paid to go then this does not matter.
I see a new welfare class being created: Veterans. The GI bill is basically welfare and most Veterans feel entitled or special. I am willingly to bet that everyone on this blog except one person has been a net consumer of America's capital over the course of their life.
Net consumer of America's capital...hmmmm, I hope you mean Bud-D and not yourself. But your point with this comment is kind of irrelevant. Bud-D did his time and earned his master's degree at a relatively expensive school all on uncle sam's dime. He has easily paid it back in taxes. Everyone in your group of net consumers is in their twenties still and hasnt had their chance to pay back what they earned. And I know I will.
ReplyDeletePolitics have always been a part of human relations. I bet the harriest neanderthals got to make the decisions in their clans. Politics play a huge role in the writing of the Bible. Look at the composition of the books of the Bible. Writers from Northern Israel made small side commments or notions that showed God's favor toward them (Elohist author of the Torah) and authors from Judah did the same for the southern tribes. Politics play a role throughout all history. This makes me think that having "the in" may not be as drastically bad as people who worship Ayn Rand might want to believe. Its just reality. Its how we are designed to function. We can obviously go overboard with it and we probably do more often then we should.
Yeah, though you can certainly look at the military as a Jobs Program, the people in it, or those that have served, did a job, and swore to give everything for the country if asked to. That's quite a bit different than a welfare leach. The GI Bill is an additional benefit from the base pay that the veteran receives. Just like a 401k is a benefit in addition to pay that you get in the real world.
ReplyDeleteThis can be tied into the Intelligence Contractor issue that the Washington Post is doing an expose on as well as military contractors like Haliburton. Hired guns get paid much better, at least in cash, than US servicemen do. This would make for a very interesting article for an enterprising RTP&GGer.
Are servicemen part of the bloated federal government? Yes. However, at least the military is one federal job that is explicitly laid out as a requirement of the federal government. Unlike the majority of current federal jobs.
So, let's do an article on the question "should the Federal Gov't contract out soldiering to private enterprise". It's got to get done one way or another; it is a constitutional responsibility of the federal government. It's quite possible private enterprise could get it done much more efficiently. Does that make it the right thing to do? Is there a difference between a soldier working for Haliburton giving up his life on the job in Iraq as opposed to a US military serviceman? Interesting question.
Sorry for drifting way off topic here, but the idea of private enterprise military vs govt military is intriguing to me. An interesting area of study for an Anglophile like me is answering this question:
ReplyDeleteWho did more to expand British power and influence in the world, the British Army/Navy or the semi-private companies: Hudson Bay Company/East Indian Company/West Indian Company (not sure what other Companies they had)?
Toejamm, this blog is a secular one about politics. I would love to talk about the Bible and religious topics. Maybe you should start a religious blog for us to do that. I have many questions about the Bible, but this Elohoist author argument makes no sense to me. On favoring one people over another, reality favors certain people over another: those who abide by the laws of nature including the more obscure ones of interactions among people/peoples and ethics and philosophies. History is written by the conquers. If they conquer then that means they are following reality's laws. Should God have favored both people who acted in different ways?
ReplyDeleteIt is true that government has been a part of human history and if one can "get in good" with a government that will have a long lifespan is a good way to make a safe and secure living. I did title the post "For those who aspire to work in government". I don't think working for the government is not a bad decision from the financial and job security aspect of it. But if one works for an overlarge government, then one might have to forget some of their principles or have none. I don't worship Ayn Rand as I have told you several times before. I may sound like I think government is evil, which it is a necessary one, but that doesn't mean I am completely against all forms of government. My main point on government is to point out where excessive government leads to: usually not a good thing for freedom. I think central banking is bad but it is a reality and that it can't just be done away with all at one time. I think in FINREG the government's involvement/bill only expands the power of government and politicians. There does need to be some type of government regulation but not what they passed. On government I realize that it is a reality of life and I only want to point out where it leads to. There is a difference between the way things are and the way they should ideally be. We live in an imperfect world.
On net consumers this is a fact. I for one have consumed far more of America's resources than I have produced. You will probably pay the government back in taxes.
I don't think the government should contract out the military to any great extent. That would only work in a perfect society. Just because providing for defense is in the Constitution does not mean that the Armed Forces need to be overpaid or over compensated.
ReplyDeleteWhen the government partners up with big businesses, what that is in effect is an extension of the government. It is not free enterprise.