RANGER AGAINST WAR: Business as Usual <

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Business as Usual


--Growing New Terrorists, Arend Van Dam
__________________

It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part

of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate

and highsounding promise of release from penalty

--95 Theses
, Martin Luther

To worry, worry, super-scurry

Call the troops out in a hurry

This is what we've waited for

This is it boys, this is war

--99 Luftballoons
, Nena


A government big enough to give you everything

you want is a government big enough

to take from you everything you have

--President Gerald Ford

____________________


What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

--
They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45, Mayer, Milton

_________________________

More thoughts on (non-) representative democracy:


We have come to reflect the Afghan and Iraqi reality when we have elections for representatives that fail to implement the will of the people through policy and doctrinal changes. Elections are not the yardsticks of democracy, but rather a simple tool for effecting democracy.


How can we talk of a two-party system when both parties are opposite sides of the same coin? Democracy is not working for the benefit of the common man, hardly a newsflash. Many of our Founders were suspicious of the party system for the very real reason we are suffering today -- the polarization of the nation. For that reason, George Washington never declared a party affiliation. He was the president of the entire United States.

Not only are we polarized, but we are so to no good effect. Neither party seems capable of defining fiscal responsibility. Though neither party can balance the budget or reduce unemployment, both parties favor tax reduction while conducting two wars, and allowing predatory mortgages and credit card rules.

Obama's policies differ little from Bush's, aside from his vaunted Obamacare -- a supposed insurance reformation in which the insurance companies rather than the citizenry are the actual beneficiaries of a mandatory windfall. Ditto the Medicare Drug Program under George Bush. Ditto the Homeland Security apparatus gaining windfalls from the Phony Wars on Terror (PWOT ©) With both parties, the winners are the corporations.

The erosion of our personal liberties continues in the name of fear and incompetence, and neither party will try in a court of law (or release) prisoners held without any provable offense. Both parties agree on the question of assassination and dropping missiles on suspected terrorists. Both parties fail to afford presumption of innocence when considering extrajudicial death sentences upon U.S. citizens.

Why do we vote and persist in the illusion that we are a representative democracy?

We are too big for representative democracy, and representative democracy is not too big too fail.

5 Comments:

Blogger Brooklyn Red Leg said...

Yeppers, that pretty much nails it. I love how someone willing to say what the hell our problems REALLY are is called 'quixotic' and/or 'fringe', such as Dr. Ron Paul, yet the same old, same old dipsticks like Lindsey Graham, Nancy Pelosi and their ilk are 'Statesmen'.

Ron Paul speech to Tea Party uncensored (Russia Today)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJEbFI03BNA

The only one seriously talking about the financial drain our undeclared wars in the last election (2: Afghanistan & Iraq, now Somalia and Yemen) was Dr. Paul.

Friday, October 22, 2010 at 10:50:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

BRL,
How neat- today's yahoo news shown on the same page as this essay indicates that the US wants to give PAK another 2 bil$ foreign aid.
Meanwhile back at the ranch.....!!!?

Have we gone insane?

The key question to me is-why does neither party have an anti-war faction of responsible advocates?
And more troubling -why do all the fraternal vet groups not speak out collectively against the nonproductive expenditure of DOD assets?

To me the cosmic joke is having a Nobel peace prize winning POTUS who ramped up a war AND puts contracts out on peoples lives.
WOW!
jim

Friday, October 22, 2010 at 11:28:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

TO all,
Correction to my previous cmt.
THE US HAS GIVEN PAK AN ADDITIONAL 2 Bil$ foreign aid.
My question is- what does this money buy for America?
jim

Friday, October 22, 2010 at 11:58:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Underground Carpenter said...

Hi Jim,

That $2 Billion is specifically for Pakistan's military, on top of $7.5 Billion the US already sent in the last year. And as you noted, no candidate even mentions the wars, even though they fall all over themselves in praise for veterans.

Dave

Friday, October 22, 2010 at 9:22:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Brooklyn Red Leg said...

The key question to me is-why does neither party have an anti-war faction of responsible advocates?

Even though I'm a Libertarian, I am among those that is trying to bring the Republican Party back to its non-interventionist roots such as expounded by Senator Robert Taft and Congressman Ron Paul.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism

At the moment, the anti-war movement is fractured, with most of the left and/or Democrat leaning advocates having been tossed overboard by Obama, Moveon.org, HuffingtonPost et al. Those of us considered to be on the right have had the movement we spawned (the modern Tea Party) hijacked by the NeoCons who are using Sarah-frakking-Palin and scuzzball Newt Gingrich to attempt to push US out.

Again, you read smear pieces that call us 'fringe' and it makes you want to vomit. Moderation in defense of liberty is no virtue (to turn the phrase on its head). That even includes the liberty to do stupid things (as long as you have not committed fraud or violated The Non-Aggression Principle).

Friday, October 22, 2010 at 9:55:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home