Dear cj,
Below is a response from "the right" which I very much appreciate receiving.
I find more agreement than disagreement here; my comments are at the bottom
so as not to disrupt the flow of June's arguments.
rkm
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998
Sender: June Kite-a-holic <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: cj#761> WHO IS PUSHING CLINTON OUT?
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Richard K. Moore wrote:
> - They both end up thoroughly discredited at the final end of their
> terms (Carter: Iran hostage crisis; Clinton: scandals).
> - They both are followed, as a consequence of their "failure", by
> right-wing administrations.
I would say that Carter was followed by a PSEUDO 'rightwing'
administration...it was under Reagan/Bush that the FBI/BATF/IRS/ and
all manner of alphabet-soup agencies were unleashed against patriot
organizations...
Carter/Reagan, Clinton/????....different sides of the same coin....
Look to who's backing the only race in town, and NOT to the nags
actually running in the mud...
>The second thing I ask you to consider is how thoroughly discredited the
>right-wing and the Republican Party were following Watergate. The feeling
>in the country was that the Republican party would never rise again.
One could argue that it never has, at least not the Republican Party
that existed prior to 1968...
Again, I wouldn't describe Nixon/Agnew as TRULY 'rightwing', but as
men who were good at giving LIP SERVICE to it, to gain votes/
donations...
>Finally, I ask you to consider how radically things have shifted since
>then: liberalism is now thoroughly discredited in the "public mind" (at
>least according to media propaganda) - it has become associated with
>"bungling", "tax and spend", "corruption", "self aggrandizement", etc.
And 'conservatism', ie. 'rightwing politics' is ALSO getting the same
treatment...basically, both ends of the political spectrum which
don't trust the current power structure are subjected to a campaign of
disinformation intent on discrediting any and all who dare question
The Powers That Be...
Whomever is the 'conservative' choice to replace Clinton, rest assured
that those in the patriot community will actually find more common
ground with those on the 'far left' than with the pseudo-conservative
power structure put in place, post-Clinton...
>How did such a radical shift occur? How did we get from "liberalism is
>good" in '72 to "liberalism is bankrupt" today?
Considering McGovern's overwhelming defeat in 1972, 'liberalism is
good' definitely was NOT the attitude of the day...
>Carter was then picked to be the beneficiary of the anti-right political
>climate. There were many politicians of greater stature who would have
>made a much stronger President: people established in Washington, people
>better known nationally, people who could have pushed through thoroughgoing
>reform legislation. Carter was picked BECAUSE of his political weakness,
>to minimize the "damage" that would be done during the inevitable
>liberal-reaction administration.
And let's admit it...after the revelations of Nixon's power-mania, the
American public DESIRED a weak and ineffective president...of course,
come the 'Iranian Hostage Crisis' (which I believe was orchestrated),
the public suddenly 'needed' a 'strong' and 'effective' president,
which was conveniently 'supplied' in the image of Reagan (notice I
state 'image', and not 'reality'...)
>discredit liberalism generally. The Iran hostage crisis was eventually
>selected, and carefully engineered.
I see we agree...
>Thus in only four years they completely turned around the American
>political climate. The corpse of the Republican party was brought back to
>robust health,
No, it was not the corpse of the old Grand Old Party of the Republic,
but a doppleganger, an animated IMAGE of the old GOP, with a totally
DIFFERENT (and some may argue, evil) soul...
>We then had twelve years of rampant, destructive right-wing rampage. We
PSEUDO 'rightwing' rampage....
>didn't realize it at the time, but Reagan (and Thatcher) were launching
>GLOBALIZATION - the destabilization of the nation state, the bankrupting of
>government, the unleashing of corporate power, the transfer of sovereignty
>to a new-world-order bureaucracy, and the establishment of a Judge-Dredd
>version of international "law" (Grenada -> Panama -> Desert Storm).
Something the old, REAL Republican Party would never have done...
Think about it...for all the lip-service given to 'get government off
our backs', the Reagan/Bush legacy was in fact a more CENTRALIZED
power structure, with an elite at the controls....
>But in Clinton's case the depth of his (and liberalism's) discrediting has
>been much greater.
Just as Reagan/Bush were pseudo-conservatives, so too are Clinton and
his cronies pseudo-liberals...
June ;-)
- - -
"It's the action, not the fruit of the action, that's important. You
have to do the right thing. It may not be in your power, may not be
in your time, that there'll be any fruit. But that doesn't mean you
stop doing the right thing. You may never know what results come from
your action. But if you do nothing, there will be no result."
-Gandhi
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Dear June,
I wholeheartedly agree that the terms "liberal" and "conservative" are
employed deceitfully by most politicians, who exploit these traditional
categories to mislead and divide voters and to provide cover for their
hidden agendas. There are many admirable and sincere politicians, and we
shouldn't forget that, but as a general rule they represent a corporate
agenda and their rhetoric is nothing more than a sales pitch for themselves
and a cover-story for policies which serve corporate goals.
As you say:
>Look to who's backing the only race in town, and NOT to the nags
>actually running in the mud...
I wonder who _you_ believe is "backing the only race in town". Do you also
see it as being the corporate elite?
>I wouldn't describe Nixon/Agnew as TRULY 'rightwing', but as
>men who were good at giving LIP SERVICE to it, to gain votes/
>donations...
We both agree that politico talk is lip-service rhetoric. But I'd like to
hear more about your definition of genuine conservative/right-wing
sentiment.
I have generally found that "conservative", one way or another, seems to
always come down on the side of pro-business interests - perhaps because of
economic beliefs, or perhaps because of a general preference for less
government. To this extent, I see an alingment between Nixon/Reagan/Bush
and actual conservatism.
>And 'conservatism', ie. 'rightwing politics' is ALSO getting the same
>treatment...basically, both ends of the political spectrum which
>don't trust the current power structure are subjected to a campaign of
>disinformation
This gets tricky. What I _believe_ to be true, is that the most extreme
right-wing groups (militia, aryan nation, etc.) are subjected to propaganda
disinformation, but most government policy is closely aligned with the
_center_ of conservative thinking, and counter to _center_ of liberal
thinking.
If this is true, then the two sides are not getting balanced treatment.
Liberals are coming out worse.
In this regard, it is important to note that a lot of press attention has
gone to some liberal-sounding initiatives (gays in military, health care,
etc.) but that these have been publicity side shows - all sound and fury
signifying nothing. The beef of Clinton's administration has been NAFTA,
furtherance of globalization, Telecommunications Act, Anti-Terrorism Act
and a whole raft of other measures which are close to the center of
conservative thinking as I understand it.
>Whomever is the 'conservative' choice to replace Clinton, rest assured
>that those in the patriot community will actually find more common
>ground with those on the 'far left' than with the pseudo-conservative
>power structure put in place, post-Clinton...
Agreed. What kind of candidate and platform would you like to see?
>Considering McGovern's overwhelming defeat in 1972, 'liberalism is
>good' definitely was NOT the attitude of the day...
Sorry, I meant '76 - that was the election following Nixon's resignation.
(Irony: 1776-1976 200 years from Independence to Tyranny)
But as regards McGovern's "defeat", let us not forget Watergate: the '72
campaign was subjected to full-scale covert action by the FBI and other
intelligence services so as to engineer a Nixon victory. The true meaning
of Watergate was that the election was a fraud and by rights should have
been declared invalid. As far as I'm concerned all of Nixon's court
appointees should have been un-appointed, for example.
The media played down the bigger political implications of Watergate and
spun it as a personal-crook affair, where Nixon was seeking to stay in
office due to personal ambition. In fact it was a political coup, a
stealing of the election by the Republican party and its backers.
>And let's admit it...after the revelations of Nixon's power-mania, the
>American public DESIRED a weak and ineffective president
You could be right, but that's not my reading. I think people wanted an
honest president and one dedicated to democratic principles; I don't think
weakness or ineffectiveness was particularly desired.
>>We then had twelve years of rampant, destructive right-wing rampage.
>PSEUDO 'rightwing' rampage....
Again, I'd be interested in your definition of right-wing.
>Think about it...for all the lip-service given to 'get government off
>our backs', the Reagan/Bush legacy was in fact a more CENTRALIZED
>power structure, with an elite at the controls....
D'accord.
Hope to hear from you soon,
Richard
BTW> where'd you see the posting?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Posted by Richard K. Moore - •••@••.••• - PO Box 26, Wexford, Ireland
www.iol.ie/~rkmoore/cyberjournal (USA Citizen)
* Non-commercial republication encouraged - Please include this sig *
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
To leave cyberjournal, simply send (from the account at which you're
subscribed):
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: (ignored)
---
unsub cyberjournal
Share: