Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

The Nihilism of the “Progressive” Left

(A recent comment by pparets equating leftwing policy proposals to nihilism, got my attention, and with some able referential assistance from Sparkie, our resident if quirky philosophical guru, we have jointly penned the following.

FYI: Nihilism is a philosophical position that argues that life itself is without any discernible purpose or value, that there is no reasonable or scientific argument for the existence of God, and that no objective morality or code of behavior is intrinsically possible.  A corollary belief advocates that society is sufficiently “bad” or “unfair” as to warrant its destruction for its own sake, absent any constructive alternative.)

The modern liberal movement’s flirtation with self-destruction in America began with the publication of a single song, BLOWIN’ IN THE WIND by Bob Dylan in 1962.  It quickly became the anthem of the anti-war, anti-authority movement and it’s enigmatic, nihilistic lyrics struck a chord in the minds and hearts of liberals which resonates to this day.

Yes, ‘n’ how many times must the cannonballs fly?
How many years can a mountain exist
before it is washed to the sea?
The answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind.

Dylan’s opus speaks directly and uniquely to a little-recognized motif in the contemporary Leftwing ethos: The belief that there is virtue in destruction - even self-destruction - and joy in chaos over order.  The tantrum had begun.

Nine years later, the enigmatic crusade toward self-destruction adopted yet another, more powerful anthem, John Lennon’s “Imagine.” The paradox of a man worth well over $150 million advocating a world with “no possessions” was largely ignored.  The Woodstock generation had found adulthood… and its own secular version of religion.

As an example of the “dance-with-death” dynamic consider that in the 1980’s when the HIV/AIDS virus began to spread and its unforgiving scythe began to mow down first hundreds and then thousands of victims, scientists quickly identified the cause.  AIDS was a lethal, self-replicating virus spread by the choice of avoidable behaviors, which could be prevented by the simplest of means – abstinence from homosexual sex and intravenous drug use..  The response of the gay bathhouse community and their liberal cheerleaders was instant, irrational and ultimately self-destructive.  This, they said, was an effort by conservatives to control human sexuality!  And so began a political struggle which raised the death toll into the millions.  Within 24 months, AIDS victims were literally being anointed as martyrs in the struggle against oppression.  Being ‘gay’ became a noble cause and today gay-marriage and gay culture threatens to rend the very fabric of our culture.  That so many have died so needlessly is of little concern to those whose politics condemned them.  They were, after all, martyrs.  And today, while AIDS continues to ravage the American Black community, a community still largely in denial, nationally prominent “men of God” decry not the behavior that kills, but the “white power structure” that purportedly created the epidemic to kill off black Americans.  The Left, meanwhile, stands mute in politically correct assent.

In the 1990’s, energy experts began to warn that in the next 20 years the American economy and way of life could be damaged or destroyed by a looming international oil crisis.  They called on congress and the president to take steps to prevent what has today become a reality.  Among the recommendations were tapping our vast supply of coal, drilling for ample oil off our coasts and in ANWR, invest in nuclear energy and begin a crash program to build modern refineries.  Again the response of the Left - allied this time with environmentalists - was swift, irrational and nihilistic. ANWR, they cried, was a pristine wilderness which would be destroyed by oil companies driven by profit and - anyway - meaningful supplies of oil from ANWR would take 10 years to come on line, and would never be of any real significance anyway.  Defeatism masked as environmental orthodoxy.

Today, the classic liberal argument goes like this:  Somewhere, somehow, sometime we will run out of oil.  Better to stop drilling for it now, tax those who produce it and use it, and spend the money on stuff like wind-farms.

Translating that view to the personal human experience, one could just as easily argue that somewhere, somehow, sometime, your life is going to run out. Why not end it now and supplement the death-tax.

Taxes and the economy are another area of public policy where the Left views self-destruction as salvation.  America’s population grows at an average rate of two percent per year.  And that’s just the “legal” population.  But where a rational optimist would pursue policies that encourage economic growth and the creation of more productive employment opportunities, those on the Left prefer increasing taxes and increasing government regulation, the very actions which stifle creative economic growth and lead to a stagnant economic malaise.

Perhaps the most pertinent, and irrational example of Leftist nihilism is in the area of national defense… the single most basic function of any government.  For more than 20 years the same Leftists who screamed that government was not spending enough money to save those whose own self-destructive behavior cost them their lives to the AIDS virus, decried plans for a strategic missile shield which would quite possibly save us all, Ballistic missile defense was unworkable and a waste of resources.  Better to accommodate those who threaten us and maybe they’ll leave us in peace.  Kum-ba-yah!

Similarly, the West’s current struggle against radical Islamists and corresponding attempts to enforce the non-proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical weaponry, are met with bored disparagement from the “progressive” Left.  We must reason with those who would destroy or subjugate us, goes the surreal and seductive mantra.

Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace…

Comments

Avatar for syn

Excellent analysis.

syn on July 2, 2008 at 03:09 pm

Syn:  Thanks! .. from all of us!


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on July 2, 2008 at 03:29 pm

As an example of the “dance-with-death” dynamic consider that in the 1980’s when the HIV/AIDS virus began to spread and its unforgiving scythe began to mow down first hundreds and then thousands of victims, scientists quickly identified the cause.

And Reagan delayed letting the public know until 35-40,000 people were infected. Grassroots efforts were mounted to let the public know about the problem in lieu of any appropriate efforts to inform the public by the government. One of the posters that Gran Fury ran in NYC read simply, “When was the last time you cried?” The poster campaign also used the Fleur-De-Lis and Quebequois regionalism in the Montreal campaign. Far from nihilism, this effort was directed at informing and preventing the spread of this disease when public officials dropped the ball.

Being ‘gay’ became a noble cause and today gay-marriage and gay culture threatens to rend the very fabric of our culture.

I would counter that gay culture is part of the fabric of our culture. That is the strength of our culture. We have many nationalities and many varieties of citizens. The strength of the US and the superiority of our system is derived from our tolerance and acceptance. Claims to the contrary not only attempt to turn back the clock, they ignore reality and invite internal divisions which only weaken our society. This country was founded on the ideals of epistemic pluralism. Many feel otherwise, but they ignore reality.

Liberalism holds that the flourishing of human beings taken one by one is both analytically and normatively prior to the flourishing of the state or the nation or the religious group; analytically, because such entities do not really efface the separate reality of individual lives; normatively because the recognition of that separateness is held to be a fundamental fact for ethics, which should recognize each separate entity as an end and not as a means to the ends of others.

That is why our country is strong, because each of these people is an end in themselves, not a means to motivating your political views, as you have treated them. That treatment, it strikes me, is much more nihilistic than treating these people as ends-in-themselves (H/t to Martha Nussbaum and Immanuel Kant).

Again the response of the Left - allied this time with environmentalists - was swift, irrational and nihilistic. ANWR, they cried, was a pristine wilderness which would be destroyed

The above quote is a non sequitur. A nihilist wouldn’t care either way about ANWR, let alone voice that drilling there has negative moral valence, as you have indicated their argument says. Also, please note that if ANWR were tapped back then our situation now could be even worse. Counterfactuals are a shaky, if not bogus, means to motivate your argument (So are analogies, IMO).

Taxes and the economy are another area of public policy where the Left views self-destruction as salvation.

Self-destruction as salvation? Now I think you are just putting words in the strawman’s mouth.

And that’s just the “legal” population.

You should be indicting the business owners who seek the most affordable possible labor. Clearly their capitalism is one of the aspects that fuels this problem, not merely lefty policy.

decried plans for a strategic missile shield which would quite possibly save us all, Ballistic missile defense was unworkable and a waste of resources.  Better to accommodate those who threaten us and maybe they’ll leave us in peace

I beg your pardon, but wasn’t it the lefty elitists at Harvard who ended the cold war? Wasn’t it their economic moves (and capital) that was deployed to corrupt Gorbachev’s local leaders, allowing us to effectively loot their economy?
Also, we now know that all the little pamphlets from that time period describing the Russians capabilities were pure bullshit. Lying in a democracy is a grave offense. Again, its the use of humans as a means to an end and not an end in themselves… a very nihilistic way to treat other humans, IMO.


rasberry

Sparkie Arbuckle on July 3, 2008 at 06:43 am
Avatar for yonason

over, and over and over he repeats the mantra…

Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too

...and his devoted followers abandon morality Hey, it WAS for the sake of “peace” after all, so that makes it ok.

...then one day G-d said, “Imagine no John Lennon.
(It wasn’t very hard for Him to do.)

Is anyone paying attention?

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 03:54 pm
Avatar for yonason

Again the response of the Left - allied this time with environmentalists - was swift, irrational and nihilistic. ANWR, they cried, was a pristine wilderness which would be destroyed

The above quote is a non sequitur[sic]. A nihilist WOULDN’T CARE either way about ANWR, let alone voice that drilling there has negative moral valence,

PRECISELY.  He does NOT care about that at all, or any of his other seemingly lofty “ideals.”

As we see from the definition of “nihilist” he is a fraud,…

. . .
3. The belief that destruction of existing political or social institutions is necessary for future improvement.
4.  also Nihilism A diffuse, revolutionary movement of mid 19th-century Russia that scorned authority and tradition and believed in reason, materialism, and radical change in society and government through terrorism and assassination.

. . .

All that the nihilist does is designed to take power away from others, and impose whatever idiotic Leftist notions he has on everybody else.  The only value they have is power, and they sell their pig vomit to the unsuspecting on a platter of “hope” and “change.”

I have just analyzed one example of their dishonesty, how they tell only a small part of the truth, something they can then hang their lies on in a way that makes the lies seem true.

Here’s a great illustration of their “thought” process in action.

Also, if you haven’t heard it yet, this analysis of the way the “think” is dynamite!

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 04:35 pm

Bat One, scientists and engineers tend to be liberal (as are the majority of the highly educated). So people working to improve society through better, and more accessible, technology are nihilists who want to destroy the world? The people inventing new cures to disease are nihilists?

I cannot see how that makes sense.

Without us liberals you dumbass conservatives would still be living in caves, butchering eachother because you disagree with the others’ primitive beliefs (sounds a little like Afghanistan).

Of all the liberals I know, only one would fit your stupid stereotype, and his Pol Pot-type rhetoric does get annoying, so I just ridicule him when he starts up.

But even him, despite his foolish rhetoric, his actions are still constructive, for example, he’s a researcher and just two days ago, he and I were discussing a new technology to help people with back problems.


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 06:20 pm
Avatar for yonason

31,000 EXCEPTIONS TO “ANARCHIST VEGETARIAN’S” IDIOTIC UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIM.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/education/beneficial-natural-warming-31000-scientists/

The nihilists are destructive fascists, the extreme Left wing, who pretend that they only want to destroy what is in order to make room for something better that never materializes [see above definition] as are anarchists [ Anarchist, noun ... 2. a person who causes disorder or upheaval], ...you know, like the idiots George Orwell was referring to: ...like yourself, for example.

Scientists, and especially engineers are predominantly “liberal” in the way that the founding fathers were “liberal” which is nothing like the socialist leftists of today.

Another example of making up the “facts” to suit their agenda.

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 07:54 pm

Clearly “yonason” is a mental midget with a poor education. For a start, proper nouns, like a name for example, are supposed to be capitalized you idiot.

Any idea what percentage of science graduates (including social sciences) the 31,000 you quote is? It is a fraction of a single percent. And your quote is irrelevant and off-topic anyway.

Also, fascism is a right-wing movement (as Cheney and gang demonstrate). And your cherry picking of definitions of anarchist that fit with your agenda is dishonest. Anarchy literally means “against archons”.


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 08:16 pm

Oops, yet another small typo above, $5 to the first that finds it.  smile


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 08:17 pm

Yeah, no one can be a fascist and a nihilist at the same time.  Pick your poison on that one.

Fascists are leftwingers however (nazis being national socialists, for example) and plenty of leftwing regimes such as Vietnam’s, China’s and Mother Russia’s are as nationalist as anyone else.

Ken McCracken on July 3, 2008 at 08:25 pm

Fascists are leftwingers...nazis being national socialists—Ken McCracken

With that awesome logic you possess, next you’ll be claiming that the German Democratic Republic (GDR, also known as East Germany) and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, also known as North Korea) were/are democratic too. A label isn’t proof. I am constantly amazed by the lack of education and objectivity right-wing types have.

To claim the Nazis were socialists is either stupid or dishonest. The core of socialist belief is public ownership of capital, therefore Nazi Germany was clearly not socialist. Even China and Vietnam are becoming less socialist, totalitarian capitalism would be a more accurate description for a lot of the east coast of China.


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 08:40 pm

The core of socialist belief is public ownership of capital, therefore Nazi Germany was clearly not socialist.

I don’t know where you get this from. Mussolini got his start as a socialist, and never renounced those views. The Nazis were not pro-capitalists, and only one German industrialist, the senile Fritz Thyssen, actually supported the Nazis. Ernst Roehm, for example, was frustrated with Hitler for not implementing the full socialist regime in Germany.

The fascists and nazis just simply were not enamored with the markets and capitalism, leftwing propaganda to the contrary.

Ken McCracken on July 3, 2008 at 08:47 pm
Avatar for yonason

EVERYTHING THEY KNOW IS WRONG

...but they can’t see it, and here is why.

“Substitute almost any talking point of today’s political left for “Manmade Global Warming Debate”. and you (have) their tried and true recipe for “winning” debates: ignore reality, truth, and reason.”

ps., bat one, you might want to add DrSanity to your blogroll.

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 08:53 pm

Well actually Ken, they had a private contracting setup for the military much the same as is fashionable today. A particular Messerschmidt fighter-bomber, for example, had over 1100 unique types fastening to hold the damn thing together, all supplied through tenders to private companies.

Compare that to the Soviet model, massive standardization, pretty much by decree. If memory serves me correct, I think the comparable Soviet fighter-bomber had less than 100 types, and were shared amongst the entire aircraft fleet too.


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 08:57 pm

heh, my favorite saying from Stalin is “quantity has a quality all its own.”

Right up there with “fuck the pope. I have more divisions than he does.”

Ken McCracken on July 3, 2008 at 09:01 pm
Avatar for yonason

Ken McKracken

Here are a couple of links you might find interesting…

Hitler WAS a leftist. And yes, they DID have public ownership, like all good socialists.

Mussolini got his Fascism from the American “Progressives” that the Demokrats have been praising of late, even adopting that moniker for themselves. (see also here)

Sure, the Lefties will tell you Hitler was “Right Wing”, but that’s just to deflect your attention away from them.

EVERYTHING THEY KNOW IS WRONG.

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 09:03 pm

Look “yonason”, of course they had some public ownership, so does the good ol’ USA, like roads and USPS. You calling America socialist you retard?


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 09:11 pm
Avatar for yonason

Any idea what percentage of science graduates (including social sciences) the 31,000 you quote is?

It appears to be 100%, with 29% of them at the PhD level.  I doubt there were many social “scientists” on the list, but it would be interesting to know.

And your quote is irrelevant and off-topic anyway.

You only want it to be because it disproves the unsubstantiated assertion that scientists are “liberal” because opposition to AGW is generally considered ultra-conservative.

And, no, Fascism is NOT “far Right Wing” - see my note of July 3, 2008 at 09:03 pm to Ken.

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 09:21 pm

Look, I meant of the millions of science graduates, only 31,000 signed up to that list, ie less than 1%.


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 09:27 pm

I have provided references that scientists and engineers tend to be liberal on this website earlier. I obtained the references from Richard Dawkins’ book, “The God Delusion”, which I currently don’t have lying about.

This website has a search function if you don’t believe me.


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 09:34 pm
Avatar for yonason

"Look, I meant of the millions of science graduates, only 31,000 signed up to that list, ie less than 1%.”

That’s a silly objection, when all the Left is running around claiming (falsely) that there are 2500 IPCC scientists who support AGW.  Many of those 2500 who are scientists don’t support it, and many aren’t even scientists, just bureaucratic “policy makers” who refuse to change their spin even when the real scientists object.

Here are a few “deniers” some of whom were on the IPCC, and all of whom are tops in their field.

And this is relevant because the pretense of “solving” a non-problem that is being used to try to impose draconian controls that would ruin USA and World economies fits the definition of “nihilist” to a tee.

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 09:48 pm
Avatar for yonason

Here’s another link for Ken.  The government didn’t actually “own” private property, but it forbade them any freedom whatever in running their businesses.

What made it difficult for many people to grasp the very nature of the Nazi economic system was the fact that the Nazis did not expropriate the entrepreneurs and capitalists openly and that they did not adopt the principle of income equality which the Bolshevists espoused in the first years of Soviet rule and discarded only later. Yet the Nazis removed the bourgeois completely from control. Those entrepreneurs who were neither Jewish nor suspect of liberal and pacifist leanings retained their positions in the economic structure. But they were virtually merely salaried civil servants bound to comply unconditionally with the orders of their superiors, the bureaucrats of the Reich and the Nazi party.

It’s amazing how wrong they are.  And when you give them facts, they pretend that they never saw them, and continue to spew nonsense that better fits the world view they couldn’t change if their lives depended on it - which it very well may.

And, I’m afraid you are going to have to better than Dawkins for a reference. I want to see primary source data on that, since I don’t trust Dawkins.

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 09:57 pm

I doubt you have read much of the research relating to global warming, I know I haven’t, so I don’t know why you are pretending to know that it’s wrong.

Why would coming up with alternative technologies to reduce CO2 emissions ruin the USA?


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 09:58 pm

As I mentioned, I obtained the references to the studies from Dawkins’ book. The references are to studies performed by others, and haven’t been disproved. One of the studies was done by the Royal Society, for example.

Those entrepreneurs who were neither Jewish nor suspect of liberal and pacifist leanings retained their positions in the economic structure.—yonason

Your own quote pretty much shoots down your Nazi leftist argument. Nazis weren’t socialist, they weren’t liberal, what’s your argument again?


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 10:06 pm

That’s good stuff Yonason.

Ken McCracken on July 3, 2008 at 10:07 pm

Ken, the guy’s a blog-quoting moron who just shot himself in the foot, so yeah, I agree:

That’s good stuff Yonason.—Ken


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 10:11 pm

AV, he didn’t shoot down his own argument.

The idea that liberals are somehow immune from sociopathic leftists just isn’t borne out by history.

The Bolsheviks too went after ‘liberals’ because they weren’t left wing enough. Mao did the same thing.

There is no solidarity on the left when only one viewpoint is allowed.

Ken McCracken on July 3, 2008 at 10:20 pm

Yeah, he demonstrated that they were neither socialists (because of private ownership of capital) nor liberals within the same paragraph. Hard to claim that the Nazis were leftists if they don’t fall within either camp.


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 10:23 pm

Wait AV, you as an anarchist should know all about what the commies did to the anarchists in the Spanish Civil War.

How in the hell could you ever think the hard left isn’t dangerous to a person such as yourself?

Ken McCracken on July 3, 2008 at 10:25 pm

Hard to claim that the Nazis were leftists if they don’t fall within either camp.

I actually don’t think they are really in either camp either, but it is so goddamed hard to break you lefties of that inane argument that the Nazis are ‘rightwing’.

As a rightwinger standing proudly for the Rule of Law, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, I cry ‘foul’.

Ken McCracken on July 3, 2008 at 10:27 pm

Anarchists are liberals, since liberty is (supposed to be) the primary political goal of a liberal, as with an anarchist.


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 3, 2008 at 10:28 pm

Oddly enough, in Germany, working with Engineers, it seemed they were probably the most laid-back and apolitical of all the groups.  They focused on the problems they had immediately before them. 

On the other hand, the most rabid Leftists seemed to be the psuedo- and self-proclaimed intellectuals, who didn’t deal with hard science or math at all, except for to argue who paid for what on the coffee house bill.

My overall impression was not that they were terribly bright people.  They just thought they were terribly bright and indeed, brighter than everyone else.

Now what was that word?  Oh yes…

arrogance.


...for great justice

egpzpj.jpg

Move_Zig on July 3, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Avatar for yonason

Your own quote pretty much shoots down your Nazi leftist argument. Nazis weren’t socialist, they weren’t liberal, what’s your argument again?

I thought you might think that. But, again, you are completely wrong.  What Dr. Ray is referring to there is real Liberals, who share what are today called “Conservative” values. What the Left is doing when it calls itself “Liberal” is just one example of “[t]he distortion of language and meaning to undermine the individual’s perception of reality”

Congratulations, you are a perfectly brainwashed little socialist.

Finally, “coming up with alternative technologies” isn’t something we can do on demand.  We don’t even know if they exist, let alone if we could develop them once they are found, if ever.  The current plan would end up costing trillions, and the reduction in CO2 would not even be measurable! We would be required to make enormous sacrifices, and get absolutely nothing in return.  THAT’S JUST STUPID AND WASTEFUL!

Both the Energy Information Administration (EIA) and Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates analyzed the costs of Kyoto when it was signed, and the costs were staggering. For instance, EIA found the annual cost would be up to $283 billion a year, and that’s in 1992 constant dollars. Wharton put the cost even higher, at more than $300 billion annually, or more than $2,700 per family of four each year.

The estimated costs to comply with carbon legislative proposals in the U.S. would also be unreasonable. The NCEP approach would do nothing to lessen global warming even according to the alarmists, but according to EIA, it would still cost more than 118,000 American jobs simply to make a symbolic gesture.

The problem is you have been programmed not to think, but to group-think.  It’s not your fault.  That’s apparently how our schools are “training” kids these days.  Too bad, because our survival as a nation is seriously at risk when no one can act independently.

But do try to read and think about some of what I’ve referenced.  Who knows, maybe something will click.

G’night.

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Avatar for yonason

Anarchists are liberals, since liberty is (supposed to be) the primary political goal of a liberal, as with an anarchist.

OK, I can’t let that pass.  It is nonsense, ...mental spew.  Real liberals are responsible people who realize their freedom is dependent on their respect for the freedoms of others.  Anarchists, Nihilists, and other Leftist sociopaths are only concerned about themselves.  There is NOTHING even remotely similar between selfish brats and real Liberals.

That again proves that no one is taught how to “discriminate” between good and bad anymore.  Listen to the Evan Sayet audio entitled “Regurgitating The Apple” to find out why that’s a problem.  (I know you won’t, because that would require you to think outside your Leftist imposed invisable mental fence, and that would just hurt you too much.  So you’ll make up some new off the cuff nonsense, like that sensless garbage above, and pretend you have “won” the argument - dream on.)

yonason on July 3, 2008 at 11:04 pm

Anarchists are liberals, since liberty is (supposed to be) the primary political goal of a liberal, as with an anarchist.

Wrong.  The goal of real anarchists(not phonies like you, AV) is chaos and destruction.  Real anarchists are humans who got stuck at the “rebellious teenager” stage of emotional development.


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on July 3, 2008 at 11:06 pm

You should be indicting the business owners who seek the most affordable possible labor. Clearly their capitalism is one of the aspects that fuels this problem, not merely lefty policy.

Pure bullshit. If you can prove that any business owners are funding the invasion, bring it.  The reality is that it’s a failure govt, which is charged with defending our borders against this sort of invasion.  Due to the corruption and misery spawned by totalitarian socialism to the South of the US, the invaders pay good money and risk death to invade our country.  They are seeking the prosperity the US has created.  They are a long term economic liability.
You lefties look at the illegals, and see a large population of ignorant socialists, all of whose votes you can buy with more of your social engineering pyramid schemes, funded by productive Americans.
This is seen by you power-hungry lefties as a voter windfall.


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on July 3, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Rob
Rob
17901 comments
Send a private message

I think that retards who spout off about anarchy should be forced to live in a state of actual anarchy for a while.

I’d be more than happy to live there with them for while.  One day maybe I’d decide that I like their house and/or their car.

They don’t like it?  Call the cops...oops, there are none.

Not sure where to take a crap?  Kind of a tough issue with now public works department to maintain a sewage system.

Want to go for a drive?  Kind of tough when the roads are dangerous because there’s nobody to enforce basic traffic laws.

Anarchists, who undoubtedly fancy themselves as enlightened tough guys, would live through actual anarchy in cardboard boxes when they aren’t defecating in the woods, waiting until the day when some nation that isn’t in anarchy invades and takes us over.

Because, again, in an anarchy there’s no military filled with citizen volunteers who keep our enemies in check and protect us while we’re asleep.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 3, 2008 at 11:17 pm

Want to go for a drive? Kind of tough when the roads are dangerous because there’s nobody to enforce basic traffic laws.

No new cars, no new roads, no car repairs, no road repairs.  As soon as the achievements of the previous productive society are cannibalized, it’s back to the Stone Age.  The wet dream of the enviros.  The weakest will be killed in the competition for food and territory, of course.


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on July 3, 2008 at 11:25 pm

2w4wr48.jpg

Don’t forget that the Left Wing - Right Wing is lingo taken from the original Communist worldview.

Inside the chamber where the National Assembly met, members of the Third Estate, the commoners, sat on the left side and members of the First Estate, the clergy, and the Second Estate, the nobility, sat on the right. The Third Estate consisted of revolutionaries, while the First Estate and Second Estate consisted of the nobles and clergy. Thus, the left wing of the room was more liberal seeking change, and the right wing was more conservative seeking to maintain the status quo.

Communist comes from the Paris Commune

Evidently, France, and particularly the bloody upheavals that wracked Paris in 1789, 1848 and 1871 became the examples that Marx, Engels and other commies would look to:

Communists, left-wing socialists, anarchists and others have seen the Commune as a model for, or a prefiguration of, a liberated society, with a political system based on participatory democracy from the grass roots up. Marx and Engels, Bakunin, and later Lenin and Trotsky along with Mao tried to draw major theoretical lessons (in particular as regards the ”dictatorship of the proletariat” and the ”withering away of the state” ) from the limited experience of the Commune. ....

Karl Marx, in his important pamphlet The Civil War in France (1871), written during the Commune, touted the Commune’s achievements, and described it as the prototype for a revolutionary government of the future,

It was in those bloody actions that Commies picked up their lingo and symbology, such as the color red for banners and distinctive Phrygian caps.

During the 1848 Revolution, Socialists and radical republicans demanded that the red flag be adopted as France’s national flag. Led by poet-politician Alphonse de Lamartine, the government rejected the mob’s demand: “[T]he red flag that you have brought back here has done nothing but being trailed around the Champ-de-Mars in the people’s blood in [17]91 and [17]93, whereas the Tricolore flag went round the world along with the name, the glory and the liberty of the homeland!"[10]

The banner of the Paris Commune of 1871 was red and it was at this time that the red flag became a symbol of communism.

The Hammer and Sickle were symbols of the working class, or proletariat, from the city (hammers, or factory workers) and peasants (sickles) .

34qoftu.jpg

Contrary to what commies would have you believe, they made sure to make their appeal to the least-educated folks, as they were most easily led as mobs, and bribed with promises of things stolen from those more wealthy. 

The intelligentsia, on the other hand, professions, those with education, the bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie were to be killed and their possessions seized, or stolen, for redistribution.  Oddly enough, on the way to re-distribution, the stolen property most often seemed to get stuck at the commie party leadership—or cadre—level and never quite trickled down into the hands of the People.

But do not forget that Leftist methodology is all about deception.  They say Liberal yet want to micromanage your life to the smallest details, right down into the correctness of your most private thoughts. (ThoughtCrime anyone? ) Thus, like Orwell’s pointing out PEACE IS WAR and Winston’s employment, telling officials lies in the MINISTRY OF TRUTH or the Soviet Party’s official paper: PRAVDA (Truth) Liberals know nothing of liberty. Likewise, be careful to find out what Progress means when used by Progressives.

In truth, the Left is an imported societal disease.  Those who they call Right-Wingers, or even Reactionaries are, in truth, Americans, or perhaps more accurately, Constitutionalists.

We have as much need for Leftists in America as a body has need of the AIDs virus.


...for great justice

egpzpj.jpg

Move_Zig on July 3, 2008 at 11:50 pm

No new cars, no new roads, no car repairs, no road repairs.

Don’t you mean...?

No heat
No light
No motorcars
Not a single luxury....


...for great justice

egpzpj.jpg

Move_Zig on July 3, 2008 at 11:56 pm

You’re being dishonest Rob, no-one in this thread is advocating what you called “anarchy”. Got you’re period and felt the need to rant?


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 4, 2008 at 12:40 am

AV: Stop the bullshit!

an·ar·chy Listen to the pronunciation of anarchy Listen to the pronunciation of anarchy
Pronunciation:
\ˈa-nər-kē, -ˌnär-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek, from anarchos having no ruler, from an- + archos ruler — more at arch-
Date:
1539

1 a: absence of government
b: a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority

c: a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

2 a: absence or denial of any authority or established order b: absence of order : disorder

Rob was being honest; it is you who are being dishonest, AV.


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on July 4, 2008 at 01:28 am

yonason, welcome. You have also made the connection with progressives-socialism and then communism, which is evil.  They hide their evil murders behind physical barriers like the iron curtain and in our times, PC words, then actions.  The AVH will not be far behind.  One can be arrested for uttering certain words now even in the USA. 

I beg your pardon, but wasn’t it the lefty elitists at Harvard who ended the cold war?

No, it was the great communicator.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on July 4, 2008 at 05:28 am

One can be arrested for uttering certain words now even in the USA. 


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on July 4, 2008 at 05:44 am

One can be arrested for uttering certain words now even in the USA. 


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on July 4, 2008 at 05:45 am

One can be arrested for uttering certain words now even in the USA. 


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on July 4, 2008 at 05:46 am

One can be arrested for uttering certain words now even in the USA. 


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on July 4, 2008 at 05:47 am

Spaz.

Ken McCracken on July 4, 2008 at 05:57 am

No, it was the great communicator.

Gee I wonder if the great communicator ever communicated with our enemies who actually had nukes instead of committing our troops and our country to a misguided preemptive war?

If there only was someway to see into the past....


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on July 4, 2008 at 05:59 am

Image and video hosting by TinyPicImage and video hosting by TinyPic

Certain people call it appeasement, that whole talking with your enemy thing.


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on July 4, 2008 at 06:06 am

For those without knowledge of FAA rules and secret service granted powers,
here is one I have been saving.  There is a certain person in Columbia, SC who reminds me of some here like Tom Hayden.  Druggie, anarchist, anit-patriotic and stuck-in-his-child.  He too did not regard the security zone around our President.  He took it to the SC, was affirmed as violating the zone and fined.

Here is a good one for him the next time we meet.  I wonder if he will scale the fence and challenge the Democrat/socialists?

He knows full well as do certain others that some restrictions are placed on free speech in public (9words) (fire in a movie theater) (fighting words)
There are also some restrictions on 2nd amendment (no armed tanks) (no guns in courthouses—unless you are a criminal gang member or illegal alien)
People like Mr. Bursey can have their day in court.  People like the millions of people in communist countries rounded up by AVH police (speech and thought police) did not and will not.  Those who can not comprehend the vast divide between these two examples are unable to communicate with adults.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on July 4, 2008 at 06:08 am

In a very real sense, anarchy is an inevitable step toward liberal nihilism; the absence of government being the ultimate goal in the process of inihilation.

Liberals will, of course, scoff and deny that any such dynamic is at work in their world-view. Indeed, on the surface, they would seem to be the adherents of big government. But a closer analysis reveals that their mindset views government only as a tool to achieve nihilistic ends.

Redistribution of wealth is simply government-sponsored pillage. The use of government to regulate and even dismantle free enterprise speaks for itself. When Obama calls for judges who speak for the ‘little guy’, what he is actually saying is, use the courts to bring down those in authority; the “Man”.

“Workers of the world, Unite!” has been replaced with “Save The Planet!”

Nihilistic liberalism is driven to a large extent by rage. Is it any wonder then that one of the most popular bands of the 80’s was RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE?  [The message of the band’s Tee-shirt is popular to this day, worn even by those who never heard it.]

Well, rage against what machine? 

Order?  Ownership?  Power? Privilege? Military Strength?  The work ethic?  Profit? Industry?  Institutions?  Authority? Patriotism? Wealth? White men in suits? The church? Tradition? Marriage?Culture? Government itelf? God?

Across the broad spectrum of nihilistic liberalism, one will find - among their many groups - that each would answer Yes! to one or more or all of the items listed above.

When BatOne invited me to collaborate with him on THE NIHILISM OF THE PROGRESSIVE LEFT, it was this concept which we had in mind.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on July 4, 2008 at 06:35 am
Avatar for Jack

Rob was being honest; it is you who are being dishonest, AV

.

Honesty is important to you.

So I don’t understand why you are avoiding my challenge, bob.

You are soooooo honest and logical and factual that the challenge should be a walk in the park, and it’s an easy $200.

You’re not scared, are ya?

Jack on July 4, 2008 at 06:40 am

pparets

In a very real sense, anarchy is an inevitable step toward liberal nihilism; the absence of government being the ultimate goal in the process of inihilation.

What? Libs are big government remember? What the fuck are you ranting about? also, its ‘annihilation’. furthermore, you cannot equate anarchy with nihilism. not even for a second. a nihilist is irreverent to what sort of government or power structure is in place. an anarchist, on the other hand, probably has deeply held moral/natural rights beliefs that motivate her to feel the government is unjust, in whatever form. can you appreciate the distinction? anarchists are a lot closer to conservatives than they are to liberals. you are just a big party, pig govvy SOT so you are having internal conflicts and clearly it is affecting your ability to straighten out your vocabulary.

you might be advised that some of us in here are not as gullible as the high schoolers you are used to addressing.


rasberry

Sparkie Arbuckle on July 4, 2008 at 08:47 am

again, one cannot equate nihilism and anarchism. they are polar opposites in that anarchists feel we have such strong natural rights that any form of government is necessarily coercive to an unacceptable degree. natural, individual autonomy comes first and cannot be effaced, in their opinion.

a nihilist doesn’t give a shit. she’s out back shooting smack. who gives a eff about the government? get the difference? ITS A GIGANTIC DIFFERENCE AND UNLESS YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, STFU. Please. You are just making yourself look like an ass sounding off about things you are not clear on.

appreciate the difference.

also, AV is not an anarchist, so don’t think that AV’s views reflect any sort of anarchism. AV is a syndicalist, who probably would prefer barter to currency. not an anarchist.

still, no one has responded to my thought out response above. merely distraction and bullshit. give me a reply, i tried to engage you. apparently you’d rather just rant like an ass.


rasberry

Sparkie Arbuckle on July 4, 2008 at 08:54 am

The lie, from Sparkie: “again, one cannot equate nihilism and anarchism.”

The truth:

ni·hil·ism Listen to the pronunciation of nihilism Listen to the pronunciation of nihilism
Pronunciation:
\ˈnī-(h)ə-ˌli-zəm, ˈnē-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
German Nihilismus, from Latin nihil nothing — more at nil
Date:
circa 1817

1 a: a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless
b: a doctrine that denies any objective ground of truth and especially of moral truths
2 a: a doctrine or belief that conditions in the social organization are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive program or possibility bcapitalized : the program of a 19th century Russian party advocating revolutionary reform and using terrorism and assassination

an·ar·chy Listen to the pronunciation of anarchy Listen to the pronunciation of anarchy
Pronunciation:
\ˈa-nər-kē, -ˌnär-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek, from anarchos having no ruler, from an- + archos ruler — more at arch-
Date:
1539

1 a: absence of government
b: a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
c: a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

2 a: absence or denial of any authority or established order
b: absence of order : disorder

As any fool can see, they are quite similar; in fact, as pp so astutely pointed out, one leads to the other.

Summing up:  Sparkie is full of shit, as usual.
pp got it totally right.
AV is still a phony.
Anarchy, nihilism, socialism, etc., are destructive to a free society.
The utopianism of anarchy, nihilism and Marxism all require killing large numbers of people.


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on July 4, 2008 at 11:22 am
Avatar for Jack

Lies! Lies! Tell everybody the truth, bob---accept my challange.

Jack on July 4, 2008 at 11:42 am

pparets.  Correct.  Liberals will not identify or debate any of your questions directly.  They are past-masters at deception.

Well, rage against what machine?

Order?  Ownership?  Power? Privilege? Military Strength?  The work ethic?  Profit? Industry?  Institutions?  Authority? Patriotism? Wealth? White men in suits? The church? Tradition? Marriage?Culture? Government itelf? God?

I have seen certain peoples smear traditional marriage, the belief in God, call wealth privilege, but not hard work, the military as child-killers, institutions as bad, profit as a cuss word, work ethic as slavery or something to avoid, ownership as cooperative, order vs. anarchy and culture as something to reject because they are uncultured. 

But these are a tiny minority of brats who are unwilling or unable to work.
Elected officials, except for a small few will not address these issues honestly.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on July 4, 2008 at 01:59 pm

Libs are big government remember?

Once again, read the whole post before you start your rant.  I clearly addressed the whole subject of libs and big government.

You need to get over your, “Ready, fire, Aim!” approach to debate.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on July 4, 2008 at 02:11 pm

Chief RZ, didn’t you say once that you had a career in the military, and then a teacher? So ol’ nanny state has been supporting you the majority of your working life yet you claim “communism is evil”. You don’t see the irony of a commie (as demonstrated through your actions) saying that “communism is evil”.

still, no one has responded to my thought out response above. merely distraction and bullshit.—Sparkie

They were all valid points, so of course they ignored them. You’re writing has improved a lot too, you even use punctuation now!

Robert108: You’re cherry picking, naughty!

Ken: The Nazis were “right-wing” because they represented a lot “traditional” German values, authoritarian and militaristic leadership, “family values”, anti-homosexual, racist, and sexist. As an example, and luckily for us, women were barely utilized in the Nazi war effort prior 1943, because Nazi policy was that a woman’s role is staying at home.

The political right is typically associated “traditional” laws, culture, power structures (like the church, business, the military). That’s why you hear so many right-wing nutjobs crying about the constitution, the military, “religious freedom” (the brainwashing/indoctrination of young children), “small government” (private, inherited power instead of public democratic control).


“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Anarchist Vegetarian on July 4, 2008 at 07:58 pm

The political right is typically associated “traditional” laws, culture, power structures (like the church, business, the military). That’s why you
hear so many right-wing nutjobs crying about the constitution, the military, “religious freedom” (the brainwashing/indoctrination of young children),
“small government” (private, inherited power instead of public democratic control).

Your Big Lie is that American conservatism is “the political right”.  Both today’s right wing and left wing have the same agenda: totalitarian control of the population and suppression of any opposing view, along with individual independence.
Small govt is limitation of govt power and intrusion, not the method of succession.  Only a representative govt restrained by a Constitution can truly provide limited govt, and even then, it takes eternal vigilance, because govt always seeks to metastasize.
Pure democracy is mob rule by faction.


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on July 4, 2008 at 08:24 pm

So ol’ nanny state has been supporting you the majority of your working life yet you claim “communism is evil

This is a deliberately provocative statement, or at the very least, incredibly stupid.

Unlike the dregs of society, who simply sponge off the working members of society, sitting on their asses and collecting welfare, soldiers put their lives and limbs on the line for a ridiculously low salary.  Their task and function is invaluable, and for the lack of which we would quickly be overrun by foreign enemies.  That task is to provide us with safety and freedom.

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns.

Whose gonna do it? You?

You, Lt. Weinburg?

I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom.... You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And that my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall.
...
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

Whatever we pay our servicemen is well-earned.

Indeed, even useless SmellyHippies have the freedom to say stupid and obnoxious things due to the service of those who wear the nation’s uniform.

That SmellyHippy owes the Chief an apology and deep thanks for his service.


...for great justice

egpzpj.jpg

Move_Zig on July 4, 2008 at 08:33 pm

The Big Lie here from AV is that working for the govt automatically makes you a communist.  The administrators might be Marxists in their ideology, but the people who do the real work are simply honest workers.  I thought commies like AV respected the workers; guess not.


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on July 4, 2008 at 09:13 pm

A little defensive there Zig & Robert108?

Also Robert108, if you wanted to learn about conservatism, would you get all your knowledge about it from a dictionary?
Here’s one definition of “conservative”:
11.  a preservative.
I could go off on some tangent ridiculing conservatives because they are so stupid that they think they’re food additives. (Though if I was drunk, I might think it was pretty funny.)

Why do the same with anarchism? I know the answer, it’s because you get to choose, from a large range of possibilities, the definition that best suits your agenda. That’s why you’re dishonest (and as stupid as a preservative).

Normally I’d be surprised at someone being so foolish, but I have learned that there really are few statements too foolish for you to type.

Maybe an