“It was inevitable under a monarchy, however benevolent the monarch. The old virtues disappear. Independence and frankness are at a discount. Complacent anticipation of the monarch's wishes is then the greatest of all virtues. One must either be a good monarch like yourself, or a good courtier like myself—either an Emperor or an idiot.”
― Claudius the God and His Wife Messalina
I read this article in Crisis Magazine, President, for Life by Austin Ruse regarding a colleague and friend, Jonathan Last, executive editor of Bulwark, views on President Trump as a pro-life supporter. Long story short, Ruse feels Last's never-Trumper attitude colors his perception about the depth and sincerity of Trump's pro-life stance that in fact Trump is not pro-life insofar as Last's "seamless garment" all or nothing political interpretation would have it.
The article itself is good and in a way depicts the typical political never-Trumper view that Trump is the Orange Satan from whom absolutely nothing good comes. But what caught my attention more is the reactions in the comments section. Forget the never-Trumpers and the disdain of the mainstream moderate liberals but what I found interesting was the reaction of the moderate to moderate conservative normies. Many of them mostly support Trump but they find him to be coarse and uncouth which seems to weigh more heavily on them than Trump's competence or accomplishments.
This, I believe, is something I would call the television commercial effect.
As the prevalence of television in the American home increased since the 1950's and 60's, the method of advertisers changed from simply touting the superiority of a product as in radio to a more visual appeal. Form over function, style and slick, glossy image over the dry technical points. The look, optics and visual appeal also took root in advertising political candidates when not engaged in mud-slinging against their opponent. Kennedy was thought to have won a debate with Nixon simply because he looked more telegenic than a Nixon who was still recovering from an illness and looked pale. What viewer would have remembered the dry details of Soviet ICBMs versus U.S. ICBM's or how Castro's Cuba affects U.S. national security or which candidate was a stronger opponent of Soviet communist expansionism. John Lindsay was elected mayor of New York City in 1966 on the strength of his movie star good looks and re-elected on the same even if he was an incompetent mayor.
Gradually, the Madison Avenue Admen began marketing politicians as if they were advertising lite beer- weak, watery and flavorless. Even the mud-slinging began to be more moderated. Political candidates are now expected to be as watery and flavorless as lite beer, giving carefully worded speeches tailored to the audience's political preferences. If not answering direct questions with a yes, no and but on the other hand, politicians will either tell a particular group what they want to hear or keep the speech vague enough so like a blank screen, the audience will project their own desires onto it. Then came Donald J. Trump with his direct, in-your-face, pull no punches style more typical of Queens, NY natives than the usual polished milquetoast politician.
Now of course, there are exceptions to the rule that pop-culture views as acceptable. People of color candidates and honorary people of color such as homosexuals and Jewish candidates are permitted to be bombastic or obnoxious and make some outrageous statements because they are considered "victims" and have the right to "fight back" against their perceived oppressors. But of course not straight, white Christian males and absolutely not ever Republicans of any type. Republicans are not permitted to even respond to any Democrat's most outrageous attacks. Nor is it ever acceptable for any politician to criticize the mainstream media. This is what television has taught generations of Americans to expect as normal and proper political debate and discourse. This is the only acceptable way for politicians to behave. And Trump breaks every one of these rules and a few more unwritten rules besides. This flummoxes the normies and puts Trump beyond the pale of civilization itself.
Normie is aghast that Trump hits back when hit, uses twitter to do an end-run around of the mainstream media and contradicts and talks back to the talking heads on the TV news. But normie is not historically aware enough to understand that in the bygone age before TV, politicians were expected to answer questions directly, explain their platform plainly and in detail, to be forthright and to stand up for himself when criticized or in debate. And perhaps what would be considered today to be the worst sin of all, to be an unabashed nationalist and patriot supporting American interests over all others. Even up through the 1980's, giving vague yes, no and maybe answers and flip-flopping on issues was considered disingenuous and a sign of bad character. Nowadays, it's considered de rigueur for uniparty candidates and viewed as "nuanced" and somehow smart and "wonkish" by normies.
The worst part of this is that the average American is not even aware of how their perceptions of what constitutes a proper politician have been altered to suit the needs of the managerial state and to bow before the altar of globalism. All along, a slave's collar was fastened around their neck and they've been lead down the garden path into a system that works to their detriment that they're beginning to notice. For all his brashness and crudeness, Trump is the right man in the right place to break this illusion if he does nothing else. Now, if only normie would fully wake up.
Donald Cavaioli
Showing posts with label Elected Politicians. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Elected Politicians. Show all posts
Saturday, February 1, 2020
Thursday, January 23, 2020
What did I tell you- Illegals want the vote and sooner or later, New York will give it to them
First, it was New York State driver's licenses for illegals, then a bill passes in the New York State Assembly in which anyone who goes to NY Dept. of Motor Vehicles for any transaction will automatically be registered to vote, now illegals demonstrate for their right to vote in a country in which they do not have citizenship. Holding signs printed in Spanish and Bengali demanding the vote in the U.S. because most of them sort of pay taxes, sales taxes mostly, when they buy groceries, clothes, furniture and cars. Eventually, any and every non-citizen including every illegal alien and perhaps tourists as well will be able to vote here in our most magnificent People's Banana Empire of New York. Don't you just love it?
See here the latest atrocity in the cultural Marxist's dialectical materialism war on New Yorkers and in general, the American people from The Queens Daily Eagle: 'No taxation without representation'- noncitizens rally for NYC voting rights, by Emma Whitford, January 23, 2020
Daring to use such phrases as no taxation without representation in foreign languages to promote foreign influence in our elections, pissing on our history in pursuit of plunder and is an insufferable insult to the American colonists who bravely fought the British for our independence. Their cynical use of this phrase is a disgrace and an obscenity.
They don't even have the most minimum courtesy, the merest shred of respect, even a paper thin veneer of decency about how this looks in printing signs in their own languages demanding the vote. They demand and we Americans have no other choice than to give these people what they view as their absolute and unquestionable right. Or else.
But let's look for a moment at the completely insipid nonsense part. If legal permanent residents want the vote then they can apply for naturalization, problem solved. If they want to keep the citizenship of their country of origin, then no they cannot vote and why should they as they clearly evince no true loyalty to this country. Pay taxes? If they want to live and work here as a foreigner, a citizen of another country, they pay taxes for the privilege of living and working here. Then otherwise that's a fair exchange. Not happy about that? Nobody told them to come here in the first place nor do we need them. Then they should return to their home country where they may vote as early and as often as they wish. What government of any other country on earth would even dare to suggest non-citizens vote in their elections let alone foreigners who enter their country illegally. Certainly these people protesting would scream bloody murder if a law such as this was proposed in their own country. Hypocrites and obnoxious newcomers should not be welcomed here but asked to leave. But these newcomers are not the real prime movers behind this reprehensible proposed law, it is white liberals and leftist activists- our own people who would betray us.
However as with all things white liberal, progressive left, this isn't a sorry tale of poor immigrants wrongfully denied their sovereign right to vote in a country that is not their own. No sob story of racism and xenophobia by evil Americans. Not people of color cruelly wronged by an unjust, racist system. It is simply another one of their lies. It is one step more towards the end game of we-are-the-world cosmopolitanism in giving anyone from any country the right to vote for simply showing up on our door unannounced and uninvited and then helping themselves to the public purse. This law is just a way of getting the camel's nose in the tent so it can later enter fully, straddle the tent's legitimate resident and shit all over his face.
But for our betters who wholeheartedly endorse this claptrap, it's an amazing new twist on the old slave trade: The illegal immigrant slaves ship themselves in to work dirt cheap as sex workers or for elite corporate vassals and we the citizen taxpayers purchase the slaves and maintain them with free healthcare, welfare and other freestuff as a client voting bloc for the ruling class politicians. Sheer genius and oh, so progressive even if it is treason. And best of all: The slave owners don't pay a dime out of their own pocket for their chattel. Don't you just love it?
Worse still, this demolishes the rights of a people to self determination. New Yorkers will increasingly have their fate determined by people from other countries who have no stake in this city or state, nor any loyalty or love for it in refusing to seek citizenship, other than whatever wealth they can take from it in this new form of colonialism. The vote of the New Yorker as a U.S. citizen exercising the franchise of the vote is diluted and ultimately rendered null and void. This right as well as all others paid for by the blood of patriots who fought this nation's wars to defend them rendered ludicrous.
One might be tempted to gasp in outrage who the fuck do these people think they are but that is the wrong response. The correct response is what the fuck is wrong with us as New Yorkers to permit those odious cretins of the elected political class (hi Danny Dromm!) to even dare promote this abomination without fear of being thrown out of office if not bodily thrown out of this city.
Donald Cavaioli
See here the latest atrocity in the cultural Marxist's dialectical materialism war on New Yorkers and in general, the American people from The Queens Daily Eagle: 'No taxation without representation'- noncitizens rally for NYC voting rights, by Emma Whitford, January 23, 2020
Daring to use such phrases as no taxation without representation in foreign languages to promote foreign influence in our elections, pissing on our history in pursuit of plunder and is an insufferable insult to the American colonists who bravely fought the British for our independence. Their cynical use of this phrase is a disgrace and an obscenity.
They don't even have the most minimum courtesy, the merest shred of respect, even a paper thin veneer of decency about how this looks in printing signs in their own languages demanding the vote. They demand and we Americans have no other choice than to give these people what they view as their absolute and unquestionable right. Or else.
But let's look for a moment at the completely insipid nonsense part. If legal permanent residents want the vote then they can apply for naturalization, problem solved. If they want to keep the citizenship of their country of origin, then no they cannot vote and why should they as they clearly evince no true loyalty to this country. Pay taxes? If they want to live and work here as a foreigner, a citizen of another country, they pay taxes for the privilege of living and working here. Then otherwise that's a fair exchange. Not happy about that? Nobody told them to come here in the first place nor do we need them. Then they should return to their home country where they may vote as early and as often as they wish. What government of any other country on earth would even dare to suggest non-citizens vote in their elections let alone foreigners who enter their country illegally. Certainly these people protesting would scream bloody murder if a law such as this was proposed in their own country. Hypocrites and obnoxious newcomers should not be welcomed here but asked to leave. But these newcomers are not the real prime movers behind this reprehensible proposed law, it is white liberals and leftist activists- our own people who would betray us.
However as with all things white liberal, progressive left, this isn't a sorry tale of poor immigrants wrongfully denied their sovereign right to vote in a country that is not their own. No sob story of racism and xenophobia by evil Americans. Not people of color cruelly wronged by an unjust, racist system. It is simply another one of their lies. It is one step more towards the end game of we-are-the-world cosmopolitanism in giving anyone from any country the right to vote for simply showing up on our door unannounced and uninvited and then helping themselves to the public purse. This law is just a way of getting the camel's nose in the tent so it can later enter fully, straddle the tent's legitimate resident and shit all over his face.
But for our betters who wholeheartedly endorse this claptrap, it's an amazing new twist on the old slave trade: The illegal immigrant slaves ship themselves in to work dirt cheap as sex workers or for elite corporate vassals and we the citizen taxpayers purchase the slaves and maintain them with free healthcare, welfare and other freestuff as a client voting bloc for the ruling class politicians. Sheer genius and oh, so progressive even if it is treason. And best of all: The slave owners don't pay a dime out of their own pocket for their chattel. Don't you just love it?
Worse still, this demolishes the rights of a people to self determination. New Yorkers will increasingly have their fate determined by people from other countries who have no stake in this city or state, nor any loyalty or love for it in refusing to seek citizenship, other than whatever wealth they can take from it in this new form of colonialism. The vote of the New Yorker as a U.S. citizen exercising the franchise of the vote is diluted and ultimately rendered null and void. This right as well as all others paid for by the blood of patriots who fought this nation's wars to defend them rendered ludicrous.
One might be tempted to gasp in outrage who the fuck do these people think they are but that is the wrong response. The correct response is what the fuck is wrong with us as New Yorkers to permit those odious cretins of the elected political class (hi Danny Dromm!) to even dare promote this abomination without fear of being thrown out of office if not bodily thrown out of this city.
Donald Cavaioli
Friday, September 27, 2019
The Red/Blue Uniparty Opposes Foreign Aid Cuts
This has been sitting in draft for quite a while. It's an oldie but a goodie.
From: Yahoo News- Senators blast 'insane' Trump plan for aid cuts, seek Venezuela plan
Yet another dreary article about the bad Orange man and his latest outrage against the prerogatives established ruling order with the usual comments by the rabbity NPCs of their incessant bleats of "Orange Man bad" and "you is a Russian agent" to those who challenge them.
The ruling class of the supranational body that calls itself "the United States of America" now does not even bother to hide its contempt, if not outright hatred, for the loyal heritage and stock Americans whose labor provides the tax monies upon which these managerial parasites subsist.
It's bad enough that our betters view the money we earn not as our money, but the government's money that they grudgingly allow us to keep a portion of. Worse that politicians and bureaucrats get angry at us for not appreciating this but an intolerable hubris that these managerial creatures feel spending our money on foreign countries is of greater importance than either spending it on ourselves or saving the money. Gaia forbid that the government let us uppity peasants forget our lowly station and attempt to tell our betters what to do.
Besides, it would anger the lobbyists for foreign governments and the donors that our political class depend on for campaign cash, free trips and other goodies. Never let it be said that when you bribe an American politician that he does not come through on his end of the quid pro quo because that would be unethical.
Seriously though, since the end of world war 2, U.S. cold war foreign policy was predicated on what can only be called bribery to make friends and allies around the world. Giving other countries sweetheart trade deals and cold cash in foreign aid was how the U.S. kept those countries out of the Soviet sphere. But with managerial bureaucracy as large as the federal government, it develops a certain momentum from its tremendous mass that makes it next to impossible for the bureaucracy change direction as the situation changes. As there is no more Soviet Union to compete against in the world arena it should cause the State Department to re-asses its positions on trade policies and foreign aid grants but it doesn't. After more than three generations of older permanent bureaucrats telling the new, incoming bureaucrats how foreign policy is done, the reasoning behind the policies becomes lost in the mists of time. The policies are the way they are because that's how it was always done. It is time for the State Department to finally realize that the cold war is over and that in the new globalist order, the U.S. government must do the job it was hired by the people to do which is representing our best interests over the interests of foreign governments and foreign peoples.
One can only hope President Trump will be more resolute in addressing this matter.
Donald Cavaioli
From: Yahoo News- Senators blast 'insane' Trump plan for aid cuts, seek Venezuela plan
Yet another dreary article about the bad Orange man and his latest outrage against the prerogatives established ruling order with the usual comments by the rabbity NPCs of their incessant bleats of "Orange Man bad" and "you is a Russian agent" to those who challenge them.
The ruling class of the supranational body that calls itself "the United States of America" now does not even bother to hide its contempt, if not outright hatred, for the loyal heritage and stock Americans whose labor provides the tax monies upon which these managerial parasites subsist.
It's bad enough that our betters view the money we earn not as our money, but the government's money that they grudgingly allow us to keep a portion of. Worse that politicians and bureaucrats get angry at us for not appreciating this but an intolerable hubris that these managerial creatures feel spending our money on foreign countries is of greater importance than either spending it on ourselves or saving the money. Gaia forbid that the government let us uppity peasants forget our lowly station and attempt to tell our betters what to do.
Besides, it would anger the lobbyists for foreign governments and the donors that our political class depend on for campaign cash, free trips and other goodies. Never let it be said that when you bribe an American politician that he does not come through on his end of the quid pro quo because that would be unethical.
Seriously though, since the end of world war 2, U.S. cold war foreign policy was predicated on what can only be called bribery to make friends and allies around the world. Giving other countries sweetheart trade deals and cold cash in foreign aid was how the U.S. kept those countries out of the Soviet sphere. But with managerial bureaucracy as large as the federal government, it develops a certain momentum from its tremendous mass that makes it next to impossible for the bureaucracy change direction as the situation changes. As there is no more Soviet Union to compete against in the world arena it should cause the State Department to re-asses its positions on trade policies and foreign aid grants but it doesn't. After more than three generations of older permanent bureaucrats telling the new, incoming bureaucrats how foreign policy is done, the reasoning behind the policies becomes lost in the mists of time. The policies are the way they are because that's how it was always done. It is time for the State Department to finally realize that the cold war is over and that in the new globalist order, the U.S. government must do the job it was hired by the people to do which is representing our best interests over the interests of foreign governments and foreign peoples.
One can only hope President Trump will be more resolute in addressing this matter.
Donald Cavaioli
Monday, February 25, 2019
The Crime of Success
In Summary:
I've noted before that criminalizing success was a useful tool for the old order ruling class to prevent challenges from upstarts and the nouveau riche who slipped past the gatekeepers to kick the ladder down behind them. I've also noted the price the nouveau riche agree to pay for admittance not only in their sworn loyalty to the ruling class's objectives but as well in the form of playing the villain for the disgruntled prole masses. The evil robber baron villain figure is a necessary mythos to maintain a rigid class caste system with a place for everyone and everyone kept firmly in his place. This is manipulation of the masses plain and simple to achieve whatever goals and agenda the ruling class wants. It is done with the cooperation of the billionaires and corporations who, as loyal vassals play the role of the malevolent robber barons as an example of what the peasantry must never aspire to.
The message here is stated loud and clear: Don't be like that evil rich guy, start a business, succeed and then morph into demonic entity to be publicly flayed as a plague upon mankind. Staying poor or in the lower middle and working class is far more virtuous. Boo the villains and cheer the managerial state, NGO and Social Justice Warrior heroes who wage a holy war against the amorphous crimes of corporations and billionaires all for the sake of you, the virtuous "little guys". Now don't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Makes one proud to be an insignificant and utterly incompetent "little guy" who is not intelligent enough to make his own decisions or have his own opinions, doesn't it. Aren't you glad that your managerial betters along with self-appointed activist community leaders and NGOs are here to tell you what opinions to have and decide what is best for you? Master loves us and protects us from evil!
A Case in Point:
We can see this process at work with the recent Amazon HQ2 imbroglio with the heinous Jeff Bezos, although what evils he had done is not clear, being stopped in his wicked schemes to do some sort of bad stuff by our righteous local politicians, unions and self-appointed activist community leaders. In all of this, none of the aforementioned do-gooders focused on any real problems this Amazon HQ2 deal would have on the community. Oh, no. Instead they focused on incessant ad hominem attacks in the tired old cliches of mean, rich capitalists who by getting rich, somehow made everyone else poor and Amazon HQ2 would make us all poorer still somehow. That Amazon was some sort of 21st century version of a Dickensian slave labor sweatshop and torture chamber because no union. And the blatant lie of how a $3 billion tax cut was somehow the New York State treasury writing Bezos a $3 billion check from the taxpayers that Bezos would then put in his own pocket.
So why oppose Amazon on the basis of nonsense arguments, exaggerations and outright lies instead of actual issues? There are several reasons for this and chief among them is that the do-gooders did not really have the best interests of us, "the little guys" at heart. Theirs was tawdry self-interest cloaked in the mantle of the righteous champions of the common good. None of these actors gave a shit about the community because it was all about what they themselves wanted to get from the deal masked by a smarmy concern for the good of the community. This stifled legitimate debate and disregarded what we the people would have actually wanted. So aside from the elected politicians involved, who were the unions and malcontent left-wing activist to speak for the rest of us? Who elected these people? Nobody. However, they play a useful part as the cat's paw of the ruling class establishment and their goal was to shake Bezos down plain and simple.
Let's be clear. Jeff Bezos is a loyal vassal of the ruling class and its agenda as demonstrated in his Washington Post blog every day. If he has to play the malevolent billionaire in some leftist morality play once in a while, it's all good as he knows Phaemon's dog was right after all. In return for an occasional public beating, he gets to eat his fill. In the case of Amazon HQ2's location, the ruling class apparatchiks and their factotums were of low enough rank that he could safely conclude that New York needed him more than he needed New York so off he went. In the end, it was no skin off his ass but for us, maybe we shouldn't have been so hasty and let SJW activists talk for us and tell us what to think.
So despite the triumphal braying on a few other blogs, it was no awakening of the sleeping giant of 'we the people' speaking out here, Mitch. Just few demagogic politicians, union bosses and a gaggle of self-appointed "community leader" SJW leeches looking to wet their beaks in some corporation's wallet.
Absolutely nothing to be proud of and something to be ashamed of: Being led around by the nose for the benefit of others and possibly to our own detriment like a herd of dumb animals off to the abattoir.
In Conclusion:
In the end, whether the local political and activist establishment was right for all the wrong reasons or just plain wrong, it doesn't really matter. What does matter is that successful people are shown to be a maleficent force of greed and evil whose example of starting a business is one that the proles must never follow. Even without a big corporation for the ruling class to leech off of, life goes on and there are other sources of other people's money for them to feed on.
Even when our rulers lose, they win. An important lesson is still taught.
The ruling class and their minions will tell us what to think, give our opinions to us and we have no choice but to follow. Peasants must remain pure in their lowly station and live in the virtue of subservience or else face burning at the stake of negative public opinion. One is born a peasant whose life is dedicated to the state and one will die a peasant and the established social order is maintained.
Donald Cavaioli
I've noted before that criminalizing success was a useful tool for the old order ruling class to prevent challenges from upstarts and the nouveau riche who slipped past the gatekeepers to kick the ladder down behind them. I've also noted the price the nouveau riche agree to pay for admittance not only in their sworn loyalty to the ruling class's objectives but as well in the form of playing the villain for the disgruntled prole masses. The evil robber baron villain figure is a necessary mythos to maintain a rigid class caste system with a place for everyone and everyone kept firmly in his place. This is manipulation of the masses plain and simple to achieve whatever goals and agenda the ruling class wants. It is done with the cooperation of the billionaires and corporations who, as loyal vassals play the role of the malevolent robber barons as an example of what the peasantry must never aspire to.
The message here is stated loud and clear: Don't be like that evil rich guy, start a business, succeed and then morph into demonic entity to be publicly flayed as a plague upon mankind. Staying poor or in the lower middle and working class is far more virtuous. Boo the villains and cheer the managerial state, NGO and Social Justice Warrior heroes who wage a holy war against the amorphous crimes of corporations and billionaires all for the sake of you, the virtuous "little guys". Now don't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Makes one proud to be an insignificant and utterly incompetent "little guy" who is not intelligent enough to make his own decisions or have his own opinions, doesn't it. Aren't you glad that your managerial betters along with self-appointed activist community leaders and NGOs are here to tell you what opinions to have and decide what is best for you? Master loves us and protects us from evil!
A Case in Point:
We can see this process at work with the recent Amazon HQ2 imbroglio with the heinous Jeff Bezos, although what evils he had done is not clear, being stopped in his wicked schemes to do some sort of bad stuff by our righteous local politicians, unions and self-appointed activist community leaders. In all of this, none of the aforementioned do-gooders focused on any real problems this Amazon HQ2 deal would have on the community. Oh, no. Instead they focused on incessant ad hominem attacks in the tired old cliches of mean, rich capitalists who by getting rich, somehow made everyone else poor and Amazon HQ2 would make us all poorer still somehow. That Amazon was some sort of 21st century version of a Dickensian slave labor sweatshop and torture chamber because no union. And the blatant lie of how a $3 billion tax cut was somehow the New York State treasury writing Bezos a $3 billion check from the taxpayers that Bezos would then put in his own pocket.
So why oppose Amazon on the basis of nonsense arguments, exaggerations and outright lies instead of actual issues? There are several reasons for this and chief among them is that the do-gooders did not really have the best interests of us, "the little guys" at heart. Theirs was tawdry self-interest cloaked in the mantle of the righteous champions of the common good. None of these actors gave a shit about the community because it was all about what they themselves wanted to get from the deal masked by a smarmy concern for the good of the community. This stifled legitimate debate and disregarded what we the people would have actually wanted. So aside from the elected politicians involved, who were the unions and malcontent left-wing activist to speak for the rest of us? Who elected these people? Nobody. However, they play a useful part as the cat's paw of the ruling class establishment and their goal was to shake Bezos down plain and simple.
Let's be clear. Jeff Bezos is a loyal vassal of the ruling class and its agenda as demonstrated in his Washington Post blog every day. If he has to play the malevolent billionaire in some leftist morality play once in a while, it's all good as he knows Phaemon's dog was right after all. In return for an occasional public beating, he gets to eat his fill. In the case of Amazon HQ2's location, the ruling class apparatchiks and their factotums were of low enough rank that he could safely conclude that New York needed him more than he needed New York so off he went. In the end, it was no skin off his ass but for us, maybe we shouldn't have been so hasty and let SJW activists talk for us and tell us what to think.
So despite the triumphal braying on a few other blogs, it was no awakening of the sleeping giant of 'we the people' speaking out here, Mitch. Just few demagogic politicians, union bosses and a gaggle of self-appointed "community leader" SJW leeches looking to wet their beaks in some corporation's wallet.
Absolutely nothing to be proud of and something to be ashamed of: Being led around by the nose for the benefit of others and possibly to our own detriment like a herd of dumb animals off to the abattoir.
In Conclusion:
In the end, whether the local political and activist establishment was right for all the wrong reasons or just plain wrong, it doesn't really matter. What does matter is that successful people are shown to be a maleficent force of greed and evil whose example of starting a business is one that the proles must never follow. Even without a big corporation for the ruling class to leech off of, life goes on and there are other sources of other people's money for them to feed on.
Even when our rulers lose, they win. An important lesson is still taught.
The ruling class and their minions will tell us what to think, give our opinions to us and we have no choice but to follow. Peasants must remain pure in their lowly station and live in the virtue of subservience or else face burning at the stake of negative public opinion. One is born a peasant whose life is dedicated to the state and one will die a peasant and the established social order is maintained.
Donald Cavaioli
Tuesday, February 5, 2019
The Bi-Factional Big Government Party: Why the Government Does Not Change Part II
Another reason for why policy does not change in addition to what was posted in The Rule of the Managerial State and Why the Government Does Not Change. Now a look at the political parties and elected politicians and what part they play in the managerial state. Understand that the solution to this problem remains the same as in the previous post.
If you're honest about it, no matter who you vote for from either the Democrats or Republicans, over all, the direction of government policy never seems to change. From George H.W. Bush 39 through Bill Clinton, George W. Bush 41 to Barack Obama, it was the same globalist economic policy of off-shoring manufacturing jobs, importing cheap immigrant labor while turning a blind eye to illegal immigration and wars of intervention in Bosnia, the middle east among other places. The names change, the party affiliation changes, the rhetoric on the surface sounds different but the policies stay the same. I still can't find a dime's worth of difference between Mario Cuomo and George Pataki. Just the verbiage was different consisting largely of "I'm not the other guy". Whatever differences they do have in actual governance amounted to little more than changing the color of the curtains.
The reason for this is quite simple: Both parties fundamentally agree on the concept of the big government managerial state. Both parties are advised by people who were educated at the same Ivy, members of the same round table groups and did stints in the same tax exempt foundations and NGOs. Members of both parties pass their respective gatekeepers and adhere to the agendas formulated by the aforementioned foundations and NGOs. The only point of disagreement they have is how fast government should grow and how much should be spent on it. They are a de facto single party consisting of a blue faction and a slightly more moderate red faction.
In this bit of Kabuki theater, the blue faction Democrats play to their fans the role of the "good guys" who are all big warmhearted friends of the oppressed and "the little guy" against the "mean and coldhearted" red faction Republicans who are on the side of "evil, ruthless corporations" and "angry white supremacists". The red faction Republicans, on the other hand, play the part of the "good guys" friend of the middle class, low taxes and "free enterprise" to their fans against the insane "commie" Democrats who want to tax everyone to death and redistribute the money to their pet constituencies.
But it's all as theatrical and as rigged pro wrestling. The fans cheer their heroes and boo their villains then after the elections, wonder why their elected failed to deliver on their promises. Lame excuses are offered or the other party is blamed for blocking changes. It's all a game for the benefit of the party fan boys, fan girls and assorted rage heads who then get all fired up for the next election cycle, rinse and repeat. And they never learn.
The only real competition between the two factions is over who has more seats in the legislature or have the executive in order to have their hands on the levers of power as to benefit themselves and their friends. Like the upper level bureaucrats, the elected political class are members of the ruling class and are increasingly socially isolated from the people over which they govern as they move up from local offices through state and federal offices. What we the people want are of no concern to them as they, our rulers, know what's best for us and will implement their agenda whether we like it or not.
Samuel Francis wrote that in the managerial state, the citizens may have a vote but they have no power. Francis only got it half right as today we don't even have a real vote after all. Something that would appear to be understood well enough by my fellow New Yorkers considering the overwhelming percentage of voters who stayed home during the last two Mayoral elections.
Donald Cavaioli
If you're honest about it, no matter who you vote for from either the Democrats or Republicans, over all, the direction of government policy never seems to change. From George H.W. Bush 39 through Bill Clinton, George W. Bush 41 to Barack Obama, it was the same globalist economic policy of off-shoring manufacturing jobs, importing cheap immigrant labor while turning a blind eye to illegal immigration and wars of intervention in Bosnia, the middle east among other places. The names change, the party affiliation changes, the rhetoric on the surface sounds different but the policies stay the same. I still can't find a dime's worth of difference between Mario Cuomo and George Pataki. Just the verbiage was different consisting largely of "I'm not the other guy". Whatever differences they do have in actual governance amounted to little more than changing the color of the curtains.
The reason for this is quite simple: Both parties fundamentally agree on the concept of the big government managerial state. Both parties are advised by people who were educated at the same Ivy, members of the same round table groups and did stints in the same tax exempt foundations and NGOs. Members of both parties pass their respective gatekeepers and adhere to the agendas formulated by the aforementioned foundations and NGOs. The only point of disagreement they have is how fast government should grow and how much should be spent on it. They are a de facto single party consisting of a blue faction and a slightly more moderate red faction.
In this bit of Kabuki theater, the blue faction Democrats play to their fans the role of the "good guys" who are all big warmhearted friends of the oppressed and "the little guy" against the "mean and coldhearted" red faction Republicans who are on the side of "evil, ruthless corporations" and "angry white supremacists". The red faction Republicans, on the other hand, play the part of the "good guys" friend of the middle class, low taxes and "free enterprise" to their fans against the insane "commie" Democrats who want to tax everyone to death and redistribute the money to their pet constituencies.
But it's all as theatrical and as rigged pro wrestling. The fans cheer their heroes and boo their villains then after the elections, wonder why their elected failed to deliver on their promises. Lame excuses are offered or the other party is blamed for blocking changes. It's all a game for the benefit of the party fan boys, fan girls and assorted rage heads who then get all fired up for the next election cycle, rinse and repeat. And they never learn.
The only real competition between the two factions is over who has more seats in the legislature or have the executive in order to have their hands on the levers of power as to benefit themselves and their friends. Like the upper level bureaucrats, the elected political class are members of the ruling class and are increasingly socially isolated from the people over which they govern as they move up from local offices through state and federal offices. What we the people want are of no concern to them as they, our rulers, know what's best for us and will implement their agenda whether we like it or not.
Samuel Francis wrote that in the managerial state, the citizens may have a vote but they have no power. Francis only got it half right as today we don't even have a real vote after all. Something that would appear to be understood well enough by my fellow New Yorkers considering the overwhelming percentage of voters who stayed home during the last two Mayoral elections.
Donald Cavaioli
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)