Editor:
As I said earlier, I'd be uncomfortable with burdening cyberjournal with
this thread as an ongoing diet. This kind of mud-slinging across
ideological divides seems inevitably to tend towards sterile repitition and
increased polarization. My initial judgement would be to only publish new
threadlets if they have something new or interesting to say.
Feel free to drop me a note about this policy if you're concerned about it.
-rkm
<•••@••.•••>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996
Sender: Francisco Lopez <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: cj#395> re: a right wing viewpoint
You've read nothing yet. Just subscribe to the elitism list at
"•••@••.•••" and you'll see the biggest and may be more
fanatical ideological soup ever written. And these guys serioulsy want to
gain power.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996
Sender: •••@••.••• (John Lowry)
Subject: Re: cj#397> an exit interview
>Long live the Republican Revolution!
>
>Bob Knauer
>
> GUN CONTROL IS A TROJAN HORSE HIDING TYRANNY
IMHO, the "Republican Revolution" will be over by the next election and long
forgotten by 2000. This is because Newt Gingrich and his followers are
half-wits who are only half-right. Since they are half-right, their message
resonates in the political vacuum, and it seems the space is empty but for
their words.
But they are half-wits. They are "academics" from the era of
specialization, an era characterized by Marshall McLuhan, who said, "a
specialist is someone who never makes small mistakes while moving toward the
grand fallacy." They were born when "political economy" was separated into
the disciplines of "economics," and "political science," creating a time in
which politics was emptied of substance and the economy went out of control.
These academic men, who would lead us in their "revolution," come from a
world that is topsy-turvy, so we are skeptical of their orientation and
intentions. In their world, science is "hard" and social studies are "soft"
or "easy." Yet if you look at the facts, we are enourmously successful at
the "hard" stuff and glaringly unsuccessful at what they think of as "soft,"
or "easy." How can that be? How can we be good at what's hard and lousy at
what's easy? Are we quite sure these definitions are accurate. And, if
they cannot tell what's hard and what's easy, why should we trust them at all?
But they do present the facade of self-assurance, and in the vacuum created
by the crisis in our system of authority, they have gained some following --
the '94 election gave them a slim majority of 38% of the electorate, which
was good enough in an off-year.
But '96 is another matter, and the symbolism of 2000 is irresistible. We
are a progressive people. The promise of opportunity, which is America, is
egalitarian in nature, and our politics has always been consistent with that
promise. On the one hand the contest we now face with the forces of fascism
seems momumental and earth-shattering, on the other hand it is no contest at
all, for we have faced it many times before, and we always win.
John Lowry
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Earth to John:
Can you offer any evidence for such grandiose optimism? How can
you say fascism is "no contest at all" and "we always win"? Fascism gave
us more than a trivial contest in WWII, and it wasn't even defeated -- look
at how it's been employed systematically in the Third World ever since.
And what evidence do you have that the era of specialization is in any way
under challenge? Do you count Tofflerisms as evidence? What about the
enshrinement of specialist financial "experts" in supra-national
institutions such as the WTO and IMF?
-rkm
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996
Sender: •••@••.••• (El Tiburon)
Subject: Re: cj#397> an exit interview
>Now with a simple majority, things are finally going our way. Next year,
>when we have a supermajority in both houses, things will finally change for
>the better, after 60 years of Socialism.
You certainly must not realize that the obvious point your missing is that
the R-party (where R=Republican Reich or Regime) has failed to successfully
live up to their Contract on America. They put their head on the chopping
block in order to gain some seats and it will most definitely cause
backlash. I strongly advise against ever hoping to seriously [hope] that
they will have the power to override a veto on strict party lines. R's have
proven
they are as much rhetoric and PANDERING (like a mutha) like D-clones (where
D=Dem).
Your style of politics is to merely perpetuate the most minute forms of
change tolerable within a system that vehemently resists change. So far
rhetoric can lure the shallower thinkers, but to really stimulate the
thoughts of the nation it will require MORE than a majority of 37% of
America for this 'R-Mandate'. Neither party want significant change or
significant freedom. When you're in power, you don't want to make major
changes that could disrupt the power balance that keeps you on top. Think
about it.
R=D. They are exactly the same (With the obvious exception of the Reps
being controlled by the Christian 'Nazi' Coalition). Other than that, I
think change isn't going to happen unless people get direct control over ALL
allocations of money. Not simply lawmakers that dissociate from us all. It
requires direct approval of departmental budgets and their very existence.
Without that-congress (regardless of who controls it) is as helpless as we
are against some of these departments. To eliminate and trim them. They need to
turn the power over to the American people. Then watch the budget mess
decrease.
>The Far Left Wing has been trying to pin the run up on Reagan for years now,
>but it does not wash - the facts speak otherwise. Want proof - who is doing
>what right now to bring the deficit under control?
More rhetoric.
>Long live the Republican Revolution!
They said that about Hitler too. But after WW2, everyone wondered what the
hell they were thinking.
M
______________________________________________________
Activism - Isnt it just participation?
Internet Users Consortium
7031 E. Camelback Suite 102-515
Scottsdale, AZ 85251
IUC URL: http://www.iuc.org/www/molsen/
NorthStar URL: http://www.iuc.org/www/proteios/northstar.html
Proteios URL: http://www.iuc.org/www/proteios/
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
From: •••@••.•••
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996
Subject: Re: cj#397> an exit interview
>Long live the Republican Revolution....
Not to worry, it won't last much longer. It's the insidious Democrats that we
need to fear. They do the same things, only they do it at a slow and
unrecognizable pace.
We need some real alternatives here.
WS
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland
•••@••.••• | Cyberlib=http://www.internet-eireann.ie/cyberlib
Materials may be reposted in their entirety for non-commercial use.
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Share: