Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiRonald Reagan: Vengeful, Score-Settling, Hard Left Ideologue
This is a perfect illustration of how severely our political spectrum has shifted in the last two decades and how depraved and extremist our political and media classes have become:
Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post, today: "When to Torture":
Torture is an impermissible evil. Except under two circumstances. The first is the ticking time bomb. . . . The second exception to the no-torture rule is the extraction of information from a high-value enemy in possession of high-value information likely to save lives. . . .
Some people, however, believe you never torture. Ever. They are akin to conscientious objectors who will never fight in any war under any circumstances, and for whom we correctly show respect by exempting them from war duty. But we would never make one of them Centcom commander. Private principles are fine, but you don't entrust such a person with the military decisions upon which hinges the safety of the nation. It is similarly imprudent to have a person who would abjure torture in all circumstances making national security decisions upon which depends the protection of 300 million countrymen.
The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention. It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.
The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called "universal jurisdiction." Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution.
Convention Against Torture, signed and championed by Ronald Reagan, Article II/IV:
No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. . . Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law.
Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, April 29, 2009:
More than half of people who attend services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is "often" or "sometimes" justified.
The views that Ronald Reagan not only advocated, but signed a treaty compelling the U.S. to adhere to, are ones that are now -- in the view of our dominant media narrative -- the hallmarks of The Hard Left: torture is never justified; there are "no exceptional circumstances" justifying it; it must be declared to be a serious criminal offense ; and -- most of all -- the U.S., as Ronald Regan put it, "is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution." Reagan's explicit view that the concept of "universal jurisdiction" permits signatory nations (such as Spain) to prosecute torturers from other countries (such as the U.S.) is now considered so fringe that it's almost impossible to find someone in mainstream American debates willing to advocate it.
If you now believe about torture and prosecutions exactly what Ronald Reagan advocated in 1988 -- or what Israel today advocates -- then, according to our establishment narrative, you are, by definition, a member of the Hard Left. And nobody who believes what Reagan advocated could possibly, in Krauthammer's words today, be entrusted with national security decisions. We've gone from Reagan's "no exceptional circumstances whatsoever . . . may be invoked as a justification of torture" and "Each State Party is required [] to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory" to the moral depravity of the Charles Krauthammers' explicit endorsement of torture and the virtually unanimous view of political and media elites that advocating criminal prosecutions for those who torture is confined to the vengeful, leftist masses.
It's certainly true, of course, that Ronald Reagan was very pre-9/11, but the concept of uniquely scary Islamic Terrorists was hardly unknown. Our client-tyrant in Iran was overthrown by them in 1979; we funded and supported them in Afghanistan in the early 1980s; U.S. Marines occupying Lebanon were attacked by them in 1982; Jewish community centers in Argentina were exploded by them in1984; and Reagan himself invoked their Grave Threat in order to justify the American bombing of Libya in 1986 and the killing of the adopted infant daughter of its leader. We were bombing, occupying, interfering in and trying to control Muslim countries way back then, too. Yet even with all those Islamic Terrorists running around, Reagan insisted that torture could never be justified under any circumstances and that those who do it must be criminally prosecuted.
It's certainly true that Reagan, like most leaders, regularly violated the principles he espoused and sought to impose on others, but still, there is an important difference between (a) affirming core principles of the civilized world but then violating them and (b) explicitly rejecting those principles. Doing (a) makes you a hypocrite; doing (b) makes you a morally depraved barbarian. We're now a country where the leading "intellectuals" of the conservative movement expressly advocate torture on the pages of The Washington Post, and where most of the political and media class mocks as Far Leftism what Ronald Reagan explicitly advocated and bound the U.S. by treaty to do: namely, "prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution."
It's literally true that if you say today verbatim what Ronald Reagan said in 1988 about torture and the need to prosecute those who do it, then you are immediately and by definition a rabid score-settler from the Hard Left who is unfit to be trusted with national security decisions. Conversely, the views that Reagan vehemently rejected by words and by treaty -- that torture can be justified in some circumstances; that torturers should be shielded from prosecution; that other countries have no right to prosecute the torturers from other countries under "universal jurisdiction" -- are now not merely acceptable, but are required views in order to be not only a conservative, but to be a centrist. That's how severely the political spectrum and our elite consensus on these questions have shifted -- descended -- even from the time of the right-wing Reagan era when American exceptionalism and military aggression thrived.
* * * * *
Why do they hate us? For Our Freedoms:
50 Comments so far
Show AllI just love those church-goers who think it is ok. What would Jesus say about torture?
There is a...mind-set amongst many church-goers that aligns with those who side with torture. Not all, but the polls indicate that the majority of them align.
It is a world-view shaped by fear and a need to control others. It is not strictly religious or conservative in ideology, but they do align with each other. This world-view is what has kept this world from flourishing into what it could be. Not perfect, but certainly much better and healthier than it is.
Pity.
The church-goers (fundies and a few who are not as radical as the fundies) would argue that Jesus will be torturing all of the unbelievers who don't worship him as if he were god. After this life, Jesus is the one who sends those deserving of eternal torment (torture) to hell, and lets the pious church-goer into heaven and their blissful reward for following their priests and for not thinking for themselves.
As for what Jesus would actually say about torture, who knows what the fictional charactor would have said...
jesus would pull the needles from your eyes and the rezor wire dildo from your ass and sing a song of love. what else would the barbarian do? Praise the lord and all that cheep gin he/she drinks which makes all this human suffering so much fun!
What would He say about Hell?
Would the Christian endorsement of humanity were clearer.
Better put, "Who would Jesus torture?"
Himself, for our sins
Jesus would probably be more than a little appalled, but it's worth mentioning that most of the classic torture techniques were invented by the Catholic church, so it's not such a departure for the God-fearing to get behind this.
Not only was Ronald Reagan a hard-left moonbat, so are 71% of the American people, because they think that waterboarding is torture:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/28/poll-waterboarding-torture/
Moonbats everywhere! Thank goodness for the 29% in the mainstream!
BREAKING NEWS: The hard-left moonbat Reagan actually practiced what he preached, and prosecuted Texas law enforcement officers for so-called "torture":
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-would-ronnie-do-by-digby-oh-my.html
Oh my. Reagan's DOJ Prosecuted Texas Sheriff For Waterboarding Prisoners?
George W. Bush's Justice Department said subjecting a person to the near drowning of waterboarding was not a crime and didn't even cause pain, but Ronald Reagan's Justice Department thought otherwise, prosecuting a Texas sheriff and three deputies for using the practice to get confessions.
Federal prosecutors secured a 10-year sentence against the sheriff and four years in prison for the deputies. But that 1983 case - which would seem to be directly on point for a legal analysis on waterboarding two decades later - was never mentioned in the four Bush administration opinions released last week.
Thank you, ___ G L E N N __ G R E E N W A L D ___,
It's no longer a line of demarkation between Liberal and conservatives,
it has become a ______ C I R C L E ______.
Once one goes too far one way, one ends up "reversing" reality, once again. More proof at how fungible and relative everything is, and that the harder we attempt to label things, the less that they mean ( w/o context ).
It is not that the words are elastic, even though they are -- it's that reality is constantly changing and our world views and semantics ( meaning ) have an inherent need for attempting a matching "change" -- that is hardly ever consistent, caught up to date, nor necessarily real.
The cardboard menu is much different than the sumptuous meal, one is only an approximation while the other is real.
It's truly sad that many people chew convincedly upon the cardboard, and fake the sounds and delights of eating -- as if it were sustaining them and pleasureful, all the time lying to themselves and swallowing dry tasteless chunks of unreality.
I like the discernment GG makes about the choice to be principled as Reagan ( illusionary and a facade ), to pass the human rights Treaty ( law ) and then often hypocritically to subvert it -- as terribly in contrast with current affairs of mendacity and deceit that torture is ever justifiable.
U P D A T E D
Reagan's twisting under the load stone of significant and massive criminal conspiracies, was the beginning of the re-vamping of America's moral compasses -- he was the chunk of dull iron pulled around the edge of our collective conscious compasses -- eventually moving an entire 180 degrees of 1984 truth ( = lie ) over decades of purposeful deceit.
Remember convincingly lying Dean Martin bamboozling that smartass kid watching the familiar stars and constellations out the "AIRPLANE" window, the kid absolutely knew that the plane had reversed course -- but the authoritative bu$h!ter was able to convince him.
( Dean Martin as Ronald Reagan -- turning us around, and lying convincedly ).
Namaste
What about Ronnie's "freedom fighters" in Nicaragua? They Tortured and terrorized the people into turning on Ortega and the Sandanistas...
Trying to use a Reagan quote against a Republican as a counter-arguement is trite... Since he wasn't really in charge during his presidency... Poppy Bush was running the show...
Reagan was an actor... He was a charismatic face for the empire, who had some good one-liners, and soothed the public mind with declarations that "we don't torture" (sound familiar?)... All the while... The CIA jackals are running wild in Africa and the middle east... And the SOA graduates are carrying out torture and violence on their fellow countrymen in Latin America...
I know you don't like Reagan, GoldenMean, and the US and others did do terrible things, but...
The point here, isn't it, is that Bush has normalized corruption, codified human rights abuses and made treaty violations, official policy?
J O E
¿ Perhaps the gradual insertion and ambiguation of 'anti-viral truth' was initiated under Reagan's ruin ?
¿ Perhaps bu$h!t would have had no handhold or toe-hold to grip America's heart strings, otherwise ?
I doubt that bu$h!t could have "normalized corruption, codified human rights abuses and made treaty violations, official policy," without massive pre-support and the foundations built over decades of concentrated PSYOPS and deceitful media propaganda.
We do ourselves a major disservice to demonize bu$h!t, while ignoring the long established trends and history of moral turpitude.
Were not the blatant abuses of the Japanese interred ( Gitmo'd ) during WW II much as today, culturally justified by nationalistic histrionics -- as has been used to manipulate the people, for thousands of years, to wit :
"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind.
And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar." ( Julius Caesar )
-Perhaps the gradual insertion and ambiguation of 'anti-viral truth' was initiated under Reagan's ruin
agreed!...but "he started it!!" should not be a get out of jail card. Like a frog in gradually heating water, at some point you have to jump or get cooked.
Blaming dead people will do America's future no good when the next dictator comes to town on the coat-tails of "let's not criminalize policy differences" as if there are not already anti-torture and anti-war of agression treaties.
BLAME is just egoic nonsense to deflect ever having to stand responsibly in the present.
There is no "get out of jail card" as I see it, each person and generation makes there own best choices, stymied in their limited perceptual threshold, beliefs,s and contradictions.
Getting clear about history's truth, is all about our getting clear today about what is actually true NOW, and what to do about it.
I agree that dead persons are no more than worm food and dusts today, but the legacy of their human societal impact has a life of its own. We are all interdependent upon each other, even if the wisps of subtlety veiled connection are ignored -- there is nonetheless influence there even today.
Namaste
Do you think Bush ever read this, powerfully_true:
----------------------------
But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath
a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and
arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join
together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at
such a place;' some swearing, some crying for a
surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind
them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their
children rawly left. I am afeard there are few die
well that die in a battle; for how can they
charitably dispose of any thing, when blood is their
argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it
will be a black matter for the king that led them to
it; whom to disobey were against all proportion of
subjection.
-------------------
If so, likely only the parts of about suffering and blood, skipping over anything tainted with the idea of morality and war ever possibly being a shameful practice.
Psychopaths are quite predictable in their inability to deeply understand and empathize anything about others -- their skills are grown primarily about their innate charismatic traits, to hide their lack of emotions and shame, my adept subterfuge ( playing up to people's weaknesses ) and adroit mimicry ( shallow card board cut-out attempts to fit in ).
Et te Caesar ?
[What about Ronnie's "freedom fighters" in Nicaragua? They Tortured and terrorized the people into turning on Ortega and the Sandanistas...]
That's point 'a' of his arguement above; Reagan was a hypocrit.
Greenwald is pointing out that the modern conservatives, by approving of torture, are a pack of unwashed barbarians (as well as being hypocrits.)
Now, you have the someone who was just recently vice president of the US publicly pretty much justifying torture. You have polls showing a pretty large amount of American believing torture is justified.
You really don't see a difference? What is happening now is the attempt to make torture first publicly acceptable, then later on, legal. What is happening now is the attempt to shift the moral and ethical views on torture, to argue that it is justifiable, and then codify that in law.
Writing as someone who immigrated to California while Grandpa Caligula was governor and who's first participation in a presidential election was a ballot cast against him, I find it quite odd that his actions are contrary to the perverted quasi-fascist (that image has a lot of S & M overtones) cult that the current GOP has devolved into. This despite the fact that this crowd fetishes Grandpa Caligula with a fervor that any follower of Santeria or Voodoo would find familiar. Thus should any progressive need potent ammunition for water cooler of conservative relative &/or acquaintance debate about torture, use the ammunition that Glenn Greenwald so kindly provided. The resultant stammering will be delicious to observe in a schadenfreude sort of way.
glen makes a good point about how the words of politics are rather meaningless
to have the fascist gop call the dems fascist is redundant
both are
america is
as chomsky says - the words are meaningless but are offered as code words to impart hatred and contempt
hatred and contempt pretty much summarizes what politics has become in the states
the two parties are in fact two factions of the same party with minimal differences as witnessed by obama's policies which - we thought - were going to be different
laugh's on us fellow suckers
like charlie brown we have tried to kick the football and lucy has snatched it away at the last moment as she always does
welcome to the chump club
Oh-okay, I guess because Ronnie Raygun said the US doesn't torture means all that happened under CIA and DOD handlers in Central America during Raygun's Era didn't happen?! Oh, and Iran-Contra didn't happen too....
Glenn is overloaded by his BS attempt to make some broad sweeping example of where the GOP and Christian population in general were and now where they are today. How silly.
Raygun should be the example of how the government unleashed and conducted death squads and was never prosecuted for the crimes! My God, man.
The primary difference between then and now is that the Bush Era pulled the curtain back and said, "we are going to do it" whereas, Raygun said "Oh, no we would never do that.... I don't recall"....
and BTW. UN treaties the US is signature to are routinely overlooked by the Executive, especially when it comes to invading (overtly or covertly) other countries....even Obama says he reserves the right to unilateral, preemptive war(fare).
anyway... .
Did Krauthammer ever serve in the military?
the hammer of the krauts is a bitter wheel-chair bound would be torquemada that would inflict upon us all his brand of "morality". he's a slave to authority, his highest virtue is obedience.
uh, no, never in the military, but certainly a military fetishist (though if i recall, he suddenly got all principled about warfare during the clinton/nato serbia campaign circa '99. you know, blind loyalty to his tribe, kind of like david michael green ;)
"Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post, today: 'When to Torture':"
Observe the literary devices used here:
1) "Except under two circumstances." A statement without justification. It appears that Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 6 times per day for a month. So as long as the time-bomb has a fuse of a month, then torture is OK?
2) "...abjure torture ... [to protect] 300 million countrymen". Is utter hyperbole. To consider that a single organization could threaten almost every single occupant of the US is pure sensationalism.
There is a reason why newspapers are folding; their complete lack of adherence to truth and honest reporting. WaPo needs to die soon.
Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in their moccasins - Native American proverb.
I am not familiar with Krauthamer's military record, but, following the pattern of the reich-wingnut blowhards, he most likely had several draft-deferments, for papercuts, hangnails, pimples on his butt, etc.-i.e., a chickenhawk.
As for Ronnie 'Bonzo' Ray-gun, he was a faithful follower of McCarthyism(and probably a John Bircher) into the 60s, 70s, & 80s. He should have stayed in Hollywood & B-movies.
Uncle Ho,
Krauthammer was born in 1950 in New York City and grew up in Montreal, Canada. He later moved to the United States, where he attended Harvard Medical School. Suffering a paralyzing diving accident in his first year of medical school, he was hospitalized for a year, during which time he continued his medical studies. He graduated with his class, earning an M.D. from Harvard Medical School in 1975.
Krauthammer is generally considered a conservative; he has also been called a neoconservative. However, on domestic issues, Krauthammer is a supporter of legalized abortion; an opponent of the death penalty; an intelligent design critic and an advocate for the scientific consensus on evolution, calling the religion-science controversy a "false conflict;" a supporter of embryonic stem cell research using embryos discarded by fertility clinics with restrictions in its applications; and a longtime advocate of radically higher energy taxes to induce conservation.
Excerpted from his biography from Wikipedia. Much as I disagree with him, which I do intensely on many issues, he doesn't appear to be a chickenhawk. I would also guess he's not very popular with the right wing Christian fringe.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
the hammer of the krauts opposes the death penalty? i find that really hard to believe (the other stuff doesn't actually surprise me). i live in the d.c. area, would never subscribe to WaPo, but occasionally wander over to the website, and in my salad days, i read him w/more regularity (i've since discovered other ways to make myself vomit, like drinking too much). i think (don't quote me) his position on the death penalty, and probably abortion/etc., is "personally opposed but it's a states' rights position." i'm pretty sure i read an article by him back in the day advocating that position. he lives in MD, no death penalty, and he's fine w/that. but DC should not be able to tell VA (or any other state) not to kill its minorities in their death chambers (though again, brave soul that he is, he's "personally against it").
i don't think that qualifies him as "anti-death penalty". i think if you probed a little deeper, you'd find the same "logic" on abortion, etc.
anyway.....
does being a blind, rabid supporter of chicken hawks make you one? i don't know, birds of a feather and all that....
Greenwald provides here one of many windows into the new national security state, one modelled on the general design of fascism. Krauthammer has long been a strict proponent of the American fascist paradigm, even before 9/11, so his remarks in service to it now are no surprise. The WaPo editorial board obviously concurs, being the establishment curs that they are. What is more chilling is the 54% of churchgoers who condone the practice, telling us more than we want to know about the depravity now masquerading as Christianity being taught to the aliterate masses. Morally and intellectually speaking, we're pretty much in the crapper.
"you don't entrust such a person with the military decisions upon which hinges the safety of the nation"
Here, warlock Charles Krauthammer is referring to the pacifist, while the pacifist might say the very same thing about the warlock. If you consider 9/11 as imperial blowback, then the pacifist has it right. Only the warlock disputes imperial blowback or tries to obscure it with crap propaganda while the sheeple seem to welcome any idea that offloads their responsibility.
Reagan lied.
Krauthammer is officially off his f@#king rocker:
"They are akin to conscientious objectors who will never fight in any war under any circumstances... you don't entrust such a person with the military decisions upon which hinges the safety of the nation."
But we do catapult pussies to Commander In Chief and VP in this nation who lie their way out of, hide from, or use daddy's influence to avoid, fighting in a war. AKA, conscience-less avoiders.
I'll take a CO over those sadistic little girly men any day...
Ronnie Raygun's main goals were economic conservatism. He could care less about the social issues but in fact would put a smile on the social liberals. See, by pretending to appease the liberals on social issues while putting them in tears on issues such as the economy and the environment, he led the way to slowly weakening them to today's status and he could happily count on the Conservative Democrats to do his dirty work for him. Let us also not forget that people still think Ronnie brought down the USSR when in fact the USSR was already crumbling in the 1970s long before Ronnie took office. If only John Anderson were president in the 1980s. Then again, if only Walter Mondale had won in 1984 or at least Carter had won in 1980 would we not be stuck with utterly embarassing lame brained "leadership" such as triangulating "centrism" and "make me do it" stupidity. Go right ahead Obama ! Just keep those torture policies going and put us all in tears ! The Middle East and even our future generations will HATE us all !
Carter was a fiscal conservative.
The views that Ronald Reagan not only advocated, but signed a treaty compelling the U.S. to adhere to, are ones that are now -- in the view of our dominant media narrative -- the hallmarks of The Hard Left:
--------------------------
The "dominant media" is owned by psychopaths who'd napalm their grandma for increased quarterly earnings.
come on g.g. didn't FDR preach to us the 4 freedoms? aren't we signatories to the UN charter, NPT, etc., etc.? isn't non-defensive war illegal under US law, annd has been for quite some time? the US says and signs all kinds of stuff all the time, and just as easily discards them (don't look now, they just tossed "a goddammed piece of paper" into the waste basket, the founding document of our country!)
raygun signed the convention against torture principally as a way of beating up on the USSR and other regimes, the only use the US gov't has for "human rights". there was no commitment to human rights in that act. it was far worse than hypocrisy, b/c the US never believed in those standards in the 1st place. the gov't just believes in manipulating them.
consensus on the issue is impossible, otherwise we wouldn't have torture in the first place /some countries has been torturing for ever preventing democracy to occur/ / men house both,goodness and evil in him and ones in power it shows up to everybody to see
as for regan i m old enough to remember him being as bloody as the little bush
The CIA has been assassinating and torturing under every president for decades. I don't know when they added the "active" section to the information gathering section, but probably pretty early on. So, yeah, we've been torturing all along. And kidnapping. And killing. But all the way back to the beginning, the history of this country is ugly. However, we're not alone. The same can be said of much of the world. The human race has a lot of growing up to do. It's like a bunch of 2 year olds who have gotten into the gun closet.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
This is all true, but remember that Glen is making a point about public discourse and its effect on politics.
There was a time in living memory (mine at least) when only our enemies (Nazis, Japanese, N.Koreans, Communist Chinese, Soviets) tortured -- that is, our media uniformly claimed that only the most heinous regimes did this. Whatever the CIA and its predecessors perpetrated was still quite secret, and nobody in the mainstream press could have possibly written what Krauthammer just did -- it was unthinkable.
We have clearly degenerated so far as to be unrecognizable to some Rip Van Winkle who fell asleep in the late '50s and is just now waking up. We have become an overtly bloodthirsty and amoral nation, and nobody can claim any longer not to know it.
bonepeople --- for 3500 yrs we have always created 'enemies' du jour and they were always the 'Antichrist', horrible nasty subhuman creatures who must be annihilated so that we could rule with the 'light of Yahweh' forever and ever amen. WE have been torturing people since 1609 and it continues in the basements of our cop shops from NY to Lost Angels and all points in between to this day. One of our first 'raids' was on Manahatta - we went out, we massacred the village and we came back triumphant with the heads of men, women, and children on pikes (American Experience: New York, episode 1).
bonepeople, we are not degenerated, we are merely 'revealed'. That's a big difference. We are social, moral, and ethical brutals. Left to our own devices we would shit our own nest, fuck our children, and wear human body parts and intestines as trophies. The Real Americans.
B O N E P E O P L E _&_ L U C K Y L E F T Y,
Although I agree with LL that "we are merely 'revealed,'" I believe that BP's point is valid that :
"We have clearly degenerated so far as to be unrecognizable … "
Similar to my posing earlier at timestamp powerfully_true May 1st, 2009 11:50 am ( RE. moral compass re-direction ), it is also my experience as is BP's that :"There was a time in living memory (mine at least) when only our enemies (Nazis, Japanese, N.Koreans, Communist Chinese, Soviets) tortured"
For illustration, consider two loosely defined although significant categories of Americana, related to there receptivity to propaganda : The weakly minded strongly dominated ones, often lead by nationalistic baiting
The strongly minded little dominated ones, generally increasingly progressive
TREND_I._ My idea is that group 2 has been growing in relative and absolute numbers throughout our country's history, which consist of essentially a confident, integral, and highly moral cross-section of Americans.
TREND_II._ Going along with this is the postulate that the elites have been shaping collective thinking, and that their adaptive propaganda has been carefully crafted ( each year increasingly so ) to compensate for the inherent trend of increasing volatility ( chances of them loosing control of group 1 ), to attempt to dampen the rising tide of consciousness and independent thinking.
LL's key idea of REVEALING the truth of popular morality, is therefore coupled tightly to the increasingly powerful impacts of the influence, persuasion and outright propaganda from the jacka$$ $ewer Main $tream Media ( M$M ) -- which also couples into the group dynamics between people in sub-populations 1 and 2.
This then leads to the conclusion that therefore we have a raw mixture of both Americans with: falsely pumped up and variable pseudo-morality
a true principled morality, and increasingly perceived awareness of gov't evil done in our names
My deeper reflection indicates that what is being revealed is the fluidity of American perception, with some people happy to be subtly lead along and told what to think ( although they would deny it ), while others rebel and increasing turn to independent news sources while abandoning the M$M.
My strong belief is that the truly morally inclined are posed to become the majority of Americans, and that they intrinsically are increasingly revealing the secrets long hidden,. As our economic security sinks, and every aspect of our lives becomes more volatile around us, we begin to see and perceive much much more clearly.
§ - § - § - § - § -§ - § - § - § - § -§ - § - § - § - § -§ - § - § - § - §
Our memories are true, 30 years ago Americans didn't generally believe that we torture, although some did realize that. Group 2 was smaller and less impactful, so group 2 was closer to
Today, with the massive onslaught of increasingly more powerful PSYOPS propaganda, the American moral compasses have been twisted harder to attempt to minimize the popular expression of outrage ( of 2s ) and to maintain the status quo's lock on the easily lead group 1.
What is revealed more distinctly,
is that our collective die is cast and the trends trajectory is locked in and can only go to completion now.
Societal volatility is destined to explode as our collective and truly moral increasingly aware consciousness tips the balance away from overall passivity, pseudo-morality, ignorance, fear and hate -- toward our unprecedented future of overall activity, true morality, knowledge, peace, and love
Now that's something to smile about, and to be proud of being part of !
Namaste
Sioux Rose
B-Inspired: Interesting post. As you know I believe that time is embedded with a series of thematic "purposes." As the great wheel of time turns, so slowly does mass consciousness, and the time of a new awakening has come.
It's possible that the same ones righteously arguing that the earth was flat are the ones today who believe in END times. The circle turns, and the horizon alters, and as it changes, it takes our understanding along for the ride.
Why do the evils persist? I believe part of the answer comes from religions that only teach that the MALE is holy, and have left women out of decision-making roles for centuries. As some have pointed out in this forum, there are women who have risen to the top and yet part of the reason they were able to do so was that their ideas ran in synch with the dominant culture. And it IS a culture of domination, not agreement, not shared power, not a circle, but a hierarchy.
I believe mankind was given a model, one based on the circle, that establishes a different basis for a society and its governing structures (or ideals). Until such time as this more inclusive model is recognized and hopefully implemented, the dark impulses of those given to power, and the species of power that corrupts absolutely, will find new ways to get to the TOP of the heap.
The problem is only tangential to human nature. Other models have been had among tribes... the problem is the way societies have been organized of late, and the beliefs that have been inculcated into the masses. These turn person ON or against person... America has been an attempt at sharing benefits and privileges. It has run up against the old ways, the religious authorities who want women subjected to male dominance; the fiscal elites, who want to keep the poor disempowered; and the masses who are taught warped ideas but believe these carry the badge of authority, and so grapple with them until their own minds and bodies get twisted. (Note the levels of depression, obesity, violence, alcoholism, etc in this "free" society.)
So I agree, the consciousness is altering, and the old elites ARE working hard to hold on... but they cannot turn back the dial of time. Amen to that! Though the process may not be a pretty one.
I'll quit here... I could add examples ad infinitim.
Yes, may we mend the unbroken circles' expression,
by sharing this abundant Earth amongst all peoples, especially among the vital ( all ) women who maintain the hearth fires, and engender youth's continued innocence.
Altered consciousness is like entropy -- and has a force of it's own -- incommensurate with mere men attempting to put humtpy dumpty together again.
Namaste
homo sapiens sapiens -
are we evolved matter or devolved spirit aspiring to return to a less physical realm ?
or, is the process of life - living and dying simultaniously - the expression of the full circle, the wheel of life?
i'll accept either premise as the base of a conversation, but am unwilling to say w/ certainty either is true.
for example, one concept i want to believe is - panspermia.
a simple idea, basic building blocks of life in the form of a seed or spore (perhaps 3.5 billion years ago) possibly embedded in a piece of rock (protected inside the meteriote) fell to earth 'spawning' life. human consciousness (life on earth) is merely an expression of this growth, and as humans we tend to eviscerate our species from the web of life. life on earth will unfold and transform in ways that we can barely fathom. the unknown - source of both joy and suffering.
the anthropomorphizing of life tries to make life intelligible, but it seems shallow and always misses the essence (as it can't be expressed).
-----------------------
{tao #1
the tao that can be told - is not the eternal tao.
the name that can be named - is not the eternal name.
the unnamable is the eternally real -
naming is the orgin of all particular things.
free from desire - you realize the mystery
caught in desire - you see only the manifestations
yet the mystert and manifestations arise from the same source.
this source is called darkness.
darkness w/in darkness - the gateway to all understanding.}
...peace...
A new ABC poll shows that a majority of Americans favor investigating whether Bush administration officials broke the law regarding torture. An independent investigation would reaffirm the basic American principle that no one is above the law.
Join GreenChange.org in calling on Attorney General Holder to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate whether Bush administration officials violated laws prohibiting torture:
http://tinyurl.com/NoMoreTorture
Well, this is the problem with genocidal psychotics - the truth is whatever serves their interests today, right now, and the truth is whatever they say it is, today, right now, and if you point out the contradictions they will ritually defame you, falsely imprison you, or extra judicially execute you after they rip out your intestines to discover if you are concealing any ticking time bombs. And that's just the regular American white folk - their leaders are much much worse.
L U C K Y L E F T Y
Actually all psychopaths are intrinsically capable of genocide, while it is the trappings of unlimited power and unbridled greed that opens the flood gates of terror upon the peoples of this Earth.
All serial killers are psychopaths, but
not all psychopaths are serial killers.
It's the combination of politics and psychopaths that is our biggest problem,
as that is where genocidal tendencies and actions emerge.
Namaste
greenwald makes a good point ...
{"It's certainly true that Reagan, like most leaders, regularly violated the principles he espoused and sought to impose on others, but still, there is an important difference between (a) affirming core principles of the civilized world but then violating them and (b) explicitly rejecting those principles. Doing (a) makes you a hypocrite; doing (b) makes you a morally depraved barbarian.}
how do we as citizens/people violate our own principles ?
orwell had some insights.. (from 1984)
---------------------------------
http://www.mahalo.com/1984_Quotes
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -Book 3, Ch. 2
"And when memory failed and written records were falsified—when that happened, the claim of the Party to have improved the conditions of human life had got to be accepted, because there did not exist, and never again could exist, any standard against which it could be tested." -Book 1, Ch. VIII
"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'" —pg 32
"Power is tearing human minds apart and putting them back together in new shapes of your own choosing." -O'Brien
------------------------------------
the writers of the film 'the wizard of oz' were a little more playful but essentially said the same thing..
“Auntie Em: For twenty-three years I've been dying to tell you what I thought of you! And now... well, being a Christian woman, I can't say it!”
if the world is overpowering - we can always retreat into our dreams (like kundera).
http://thinkexist.com/quotes/the_wizard_of_oz/
“Close you eyes and tap your heels together three times. And think to yourself, there's no place like home.”
i think george bush I (the real RR) is probably very satisfied with the state of the left and the nature of contemporary media control - (the control of thought). sadly.
Ephraim (5/1/9 1:17) thank you, good post - especially your conclusion.
{"What is more chilling is the 54% of churchgoers who condone the practice, telling us more than we want to know about the depravity now masquerading as Christianity being taught to the aliterate masses. Morally and intellectually speaking, we're pretty much in the crapper.'}
...peace...