"The wealthy, not only by private fraud but also by common laws, do every day pluck and snatch away from the people some part of their daily living. Therefore, when I consider and weigh in my mind these commonwealths which nowadays do flourish, I perceive nothing but a certain conspiracy of rich men in procuring their own commodities under the name and authority of the commonwealth.

They invent and devise all means and crafts, first how to keep safely without fear of losing that which they have unjustly gathered together, and next how to hire and abuse the work and labor of the people for as little money and effort as possible."

Thomas More, Utopia

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Shit From A Mile High...

... can hurt.

I made a promise to myself that I wouldn't invest a great deal of time shouting at my t/v over the sham in Denver and, for the most part, I've been faithful to that commitment. Besides, Dennis Perrin and Barry Crimmins have it pretty well covered as far as I'm concerned. This is not to say that I haven't been paying attention to developments mind you, it's just that I've found the whole sordid spectacle marginally more palatable when I've filtered most of the white noise from Mile High through the lenses of a relative handful of writers whose instincts I've come to trust. I don't have the patience I once had for political theater anymore, of this I'm certain.

So while I've watched some of the bullshit from Denver It's rarely for any extended amount of time for the hackneyed clichés became tiresome rather quickly. I swear, I could almost finish some of Hillary's sentences. The only breath of fresh air was of course Dennis Kucinich whose speech, predictably enough, was prominently displayed... on YouTube. DK in prime-time offering fundamental criticism of US political culture? Please. Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids.

On a more promising note, however, I happened upon this gem of political analysis courtesy of American Leftist, hereafter to be known as Werther's Law...


Anonymous said...

Once again, thank you, Coldie, for those pieces.

As stated U.S. government is more of an oligarchy than a republic. When arguing with comrades at work, and as I have blogged at several places, it is CLASS WARFARE, CLASS WARFARE, CLASS WARFARE.

The choice of Biden is done to reach out to big business and so-called progressives at the same time. I suspect Big Joe, before the end of September, will become enraged at some question from the press and make some type of gaffe.

Rue-y, Detective Longcock, and The Other Guy all look at Obama as a Marxist when he is just another tool of the Democratic Party, only a little less boring or plain.


Coldtype said...

Unfortunately they are not the only Americans who are so ill-informed and indoctrinated that they cannot recognize a committed corporate-centrist when he stands before them and all but announces himself as such with virtually every public utterance and policy position.

Anonymous said...

Mcsame picks a woman Sarah Palin hmmmm nice looking too. LET THE GAMES BEGIN!!! HAAHA

Rue St. Michel said...

"Hackneyed cliches" during the Democratic national convention? I'm appalled! Appalled I tell you!

This was a celebration of Hope and Change - of Change and Hope - of more Hope and more Change.

On a serious note, can you and Left-y please spend a few moments and describe your ideal type of government?

You are both pretty far Left (dare I say "students of Lenin"?), and I was wondering if the historic Leftist governments and their demise had any impression on you.

Anonymous said...

Rue you need to get a clue. Your lack of understanding in the difference between leninism, stalism, communism, socialism and the far left, liberalism is troubling. Lenin was not far left by any means. Try going outside your comfort zone of rush and hannity read study learn !!!

Rue St. Michel said...

If Lenin wasn't far left then how do you account for the fact thatt from about the turn of the century through the 30's, Wilson, Roosevelt, Stalin and Mussolini were idolized as "progressives" and were seen as heroic ground-breakers to a new type of democracy; one that was modeled on Marxs' paradigm? Thus the word 'totalitarian' entered our vernacular. It wasn't a dirty word back then - it meant that the state was the 'total' answer to everything.

Come on now, I really asked my previous question in all sincerity.

What is your ideal system of governance? I don't want a 100 page thesis, just a thumb-nail sketch would do.

Educate me!

Coldtype said...

Rue, your question is a fair one. My ideal society would not necessarily be described as one of the "isims". At MINIMUM such a society would be participatory in the sense that citizens would have actual influence upon the institutions that control their lives. That's simply not the case in contemporary America. Congress, for example, is fully owned by the special interests of capital not the American public. Witness its response to the crisis in our financial sector.

Rue, I read your latest post on Obama and much of what I think you get wrong there ties into what I'll address in greater detail in a response I'm preparing and will post in the comments section of your blog in the thread I refer to. There's just too much ground to cover right now. Look for my response at your site in a day or two.

Rue St. Michel said...

I agree that special interests play too much of a part in what gets passed through our legislature.

I understand what you're saying Coldie. Don't we have a participatory government now? America does have problems but don't you think the Free Markets are good at regulating themselves?

If we start tampering with the system by regulating the ins and outs, that will only create shortages and outages. When the corn subsidies were put in place to help with ethanol production, the downside the the Dems didn't foresee was a spike in prices (lower production/supply). Whenever gov't gets involved with such commerce issues, it ends up screwing up the process.

I don't see how inserting more gov't into our lives will make things better.

Life is unfair, right? The government that is powerful enough to give you everything you want, is also powerful enough to take it all away. Do we really want to go down that path?

Anonymous said...

Rue-y, a more than fair question.

Like Coldie I would not point to a particular "ism," but perhaps a mixture of several. What's that old political science joke? What this country needs is a benevolent dictator. LOLOL

Communism and Socialism have many good points. Unlike Marx or Engels I think religion can be a good thing. Heck, one of my heroes, Dorothy Day (founder of the Catholic Worker movement) wrote for Socialist publications before she turned to a hatred of Communism.

Free enterprise can be a good thing, but government regulation is necessary. Look at government de-regulation in recent years of the radio industry. A few corporations own a majority of the radio stations and radio pretty much sucks these days.

Governmental control, to benefit the masses, is necessary to control the evils of the oligarchy that wish to control workers. Think we P/O's would be making the same money if three decades ago some brave officers did not push for representation?

Sharing of the wealth is needed because it allows all peoples to have an equal share in the government, not just those groups who control our alleged representatives in Congress.

This is much too long, sorry. More later.


Coldtype said...

Part 1 of my response is in your "Nobama" thread Rue. Part 2 in a day or two.

Coldtype said...

Very good points Lefty.

Rue St. Michel said...

Hi Coldy -
I read your post. No hurry but I'm waiting on the second half.

Thanks and have a great day!



Coldtype said...

It should be ready by tomorrow Rue.