The Partisan Divide on Issues

[Classic-Xer]

(12-16-2019, 05:36 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Basically the Democratic party has gone conservative while the Republican party has gone reactionary, if not fascist. The GOP stands for an ethos among most the reactionary ever known: the concept that the common man has great responsibilities toward the economic elites and that those elites owe the common man nothing. In essence it is the lord telling the servant "Suffer for me, and make sure to show your recognition that you are so much a loser that you need to be exploited to keep you from going in some dissolute and destructive manner, and eventually you will get pie in the sky when you die". That is not capitalist; that is feudal!

Elites of all kinds have typically devolved into such an attitude that recognizes their own sybaritic excesses as the sole rightful object of all. So it has been with the Pharaohs, and so it is for some pampered pricks who sailed through life on the enterprise, toil, investment, and innovation of others yet are blind to the contributions of others. It is not a matter of ownership; so it was with shamans in primitive societies and so it has been with the administrative elite of "socialist" states. (One of the biggest blind spots of Karl Marx was his inability to recognize bureaucrats as potential exploiters, as capitalism and Marxism-Leninism have both shown likely.

In the end those elites preclude anyone having a chance to challenge their power even as a competitor. Those elites entrench power and ensure that they co-opt any bounties of innovation, that they alone make the decisions on investment. Toil of course is demanded, and under increasingly-onerous terms. Crony capitalism becomes a modern version of feudalism, and the rentier is king. 

In case anyone thinks that I see Donald Trump as a prime example of this depravity -- he is right. When we go in a bad direction we must typically return to where things last seemed to be going right, at least according to the wisdom of the time. I think of a community in America which is undeniably capitalist, honors work and enterprise, and has its head on straight about investment. It does not produce sybaritic opulence for any elite. You probably wouldn't like it: it is the Old Order Amish. On the other hand, people are valued at all stages of life from early childhood to senescence. There is no bureaucracy, so there are few white-collar occupations. In their world only capitalists get rich... but if you truly believe in capitalism, shouldn't genuine capitalists be the only ones to get rich? The Old Order Amish are decidedly primitive in their technology, especially if such technology devolves into entertainment. Television and radio, along with the potential for intellectual gain and exchange of ideas (never mind that most people who are addicted to television and radio in all their manifestations aren't using electronic devices for intellectual gain -- and they don't share ideas if they really have none!)  That Amish kids stop formal education at age sixteen appalls me as a prospect. Still, theirs is a sane society, however limited it may be. 

There's obviously a huge difference between using a television and video to see this:

 http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/group/birds/parrot/

...or pornography.

Hint...A hardcore American reactionary like myself requires visual confirmation/ proof before we start getting directly involved in politics and begin disrupting and begin inflicting all kinds of pain/fear and begin the process of dismantling and destroying the entire liberal system of preference that is currently in place from the top on down. The Republican party is a center right party or America's party today. How many liberal Democrats volunteered to pack up stuff and head south to secure the American southern border because the federal government seemed to be reluctant, uninterested and unwilling to do so for whatever reason near the end of Bush's term as President? How many liberal Democrats labelled them fascists, racists and so forth?

Now, I may not write so well as you've seen here and have openly criticized me about many times. However, you shouldn't be judging me strictly based on my writing skills here. You should be judging me on my amount of people skills and my direct communicating skills with American adults and so forth and you should be reading as if you were directly communicating with me in person as well. According to you,  you teach young school children because that's what you prefer to do now and what you only feel comfortable with doing now days. Me, I speak to/with adult people about all kinds of issues and things all the time. I answer their questions, address their concerns and do all kinds of other stuff with them as well. It goes with the territory in real life so to speak.