Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: ummm... Thoreau... deny the thoughts of a great thinker
OLD American Century / White Rose Society message boards > Political Discussion forums > Politics In General
Pages: 1, 2
seuss
http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001erb8Ux_mhEmAN_k...YjI3uxh8NxiAwhe

QUOTE
Henry Thoreau and the Patrons of Virtue

By Charles Sullivan

12/03/07 "ICH" --- - The form of government we have is anything but the democratic republic it purports to be. The more access to wealth a person has the more responsive to his or her needs the government is. Justice and equality cannot follow where access is denied or restricted. Far from a government of the people, for the people and by the people, we now have a government that is the exclusive domain of the rich and powerful and has the same level of exclusivity as an expensive country club or resort. The poor and disenfranchised are barred from entry and are thus marginalized.

Capital government is the equivalent of a bank’s automatic teller machine. Corporate lobbyists put their money into it and the machine prints out the legislation they paid for. It is a system in which the creator of the machines is no longer their master. We have become, as Thoreau said, “the tools of our tools.”

The people should not, and must not lend their material support to a government that so obviously works in the private corporate interest at the expense of the public well being. To do so is an exercise in self-deception and futility.

Material wealth is only rarely attracted to virtue. Voluntary poverty and simplicity is the usual domain of virtue, as history attests. Conversely, immense wealth is attracted to vice, to the mean-spirited, the selfish, the very aggressive and the morally depraved. The best people throughout history did not possess great material wealth. To paraphrase Charles Dickens, “Humanity was their business.”

What could be more incompatible than virtue and wealth, than business and morality? What could be more opposed to beauty, to truth, justice; to art and poetry, to life—than big business and capitalism? It is telling that our cultural icons are people like Donald Trump, Bill Gates, George Steinbrenner and other business tycoons, not virtuous men like Frederick Douglas and Henry David Thoreau or women like Mary Harris—the fiercely tenacious Mother Jones.

Corporate governance and plutocracy are manifestations of capitalism that invariably appeal to the worst in human nature. Expansive economic self interest is resulting in an ever expanding private domain and a shrinking public commons. The concentration of wealth and power into fewer and fewer hands is not in the public interest; nor is the wholesale exploitation of labor and ecosystems. A system in which means always justify the ends—a values neutral system of production and waste is contrary to the needs of the people, as well as the health of the planet.

The Holy Grail of mature capitalism is the belief that markets should be the final arbiter of all things, the greatest purity that can be attained by unleashing the ravenous dogs of greed upon the world. Free market capitalism does not account for anything that cannot be commodified and traded; and so it assigns them no weight. Hence morality, honesty, virtue, self-sacrifice and public service have no worth and no place in capitalism’s economic formulations because they impose restraints that limit growth. They are as ethereal as the ruddy glow of the morning sky and as unmarketable as the mist rising from a brook.

Any belief system that is not regulated by healthy societal values and the laws of nature is destined to degenerate into a monstrosity. In reality, ecological restraints always exist but they are ignored until catastrophe results and force them upon the public conscience—as in the case of global warming.

Capitalism, with its dependence on ever expanding markets and continuous growth behaves like a planetary malignancy that if left untreated, eventually consumes the host and results in mortality. It persists by virtue of its providing obscene wealth to a few through the exploitation of the many. In this country it is the few who own the political system, not the many. Capitalism would be quickly abolished in a truly democratic society as surely as darkness retreats before the light and ignorance yields to knowledge and understanding.

By participating in capitalism we have created a culture that over emphasizes competition and conquest; a culture that defines greed and lust as the highest expressions of success and as the most desirable symbols of status. It is a culture that feeds at the public trough and gorges itself on imperial wars; a system that pays favors to the legal fiction of corporations while rejecting social justice, the needs of the people and planetary health.

Thus we witness coal companies blowing majestic Appalachian Mountain tops to smithereens: destroying world class biodiversity, polluting streams and rivers and poisoning the air in quest of profits while disregarding the social and environmental damage they cause. The cost is always passed on to the public but the profits remain private. Without massive public welfare, what some might call socialism—capitalism could not exist. Capitalism is always on the public dole.

It is beyond bizarre that corporations enjoy the legal status of persons but without the social responsibility required of real citizenship and personhood. Corporations often serve as masks to hide the faces of criminals operating behind the scenes, just as the white hoods of Klansmen conceal the cowardly faces of those who burn crosses on black people’s lawns in the night. Any force that operates out of public view is liable to criminal intent, especially government.

Corporations routinely commit crimes against earth and humanity but are rarely held accountable. When was the last time that a corporation had its corporate charter revoked for malfeasance? When has a corporation ever been executed for murder?

Under capitalism, competitive advantage is sought at any cost and it is used as a weapon against the competition and the people. The status of the individual is thus elevated above the collective good. The purpose of competition is to rise above others and to lord power over them, rather than for everyone to rise together and share the bounty equally through cooperation. Ideologies that foster equality and fair play are dismissed as unattainable Utopian fantasy or socialist propaganda. We are told there is no alternative to capitalism, so we cease to look for them and make little effort to create something better.

In purely market driven economies—virtue, character and social justice have no use unless they can generate wealth for their owners. Imagine the life of Christ valued only by the income his carpentry brought to his employer; his teachings dismissed as worthless because they did not produce money in great enough abundance.

What remains of the Jewish carpenter’s essence exists outside of the socio-economic paradigm of today’s capitalism and in clear opposition to it. Betrayed by the religious institutions of our time, the prophets of religion have given way to the profits of religion, as documented by Upton Sinclair and others.

With the corporatization of the church, the teachings of Christ were discarded and cast to the four winds in order to give religious authority to capitalism, greed and exploitation. Rather than producing men of virtue like Jesus, who called for restraint and shared wealth, it has yielded a morally depraved leadership as exemplified by Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson; men who have risen to prominence to fleece their obedient flock, rather than to enlighten and save them from the ravages of unregulated greed.

Rather than imposing the moral restraints of Jesus upon an unjust society, Pat Roberson and his kind champion the cause of aggressive exploitation, effectively turning the teachings of Christ upside down and using them to justify everything that Jesus Christ railed against and died for. How ironic that the Christian church so often turns out an army of anti-Christs rather than Christians in the image of the man they so eagerly idolize but continuously dishonor.

And so it goes. Virtue, arguably the greatest of human traits, has no presence in the market place and it is slowly sinking into the oblivion of euphemisms and the boiling cauldron of corrupted language from which nothing emerges intact.

Due in part to our unquestioned acceptance of capitalism, we are a people who pay homage to concepts such as democracy, equality, social and environmental justice and freedom, even as we continually undermine them in nearly everything we do. Thus we bear a history of genocide, chattel slavery, racism, sexism, ethnic cleansing, imperial wars and occupation and manifest destiny that have flourished despite the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Henry Thoreau astutely observed: “There are nine hundred and ninety-nine patrons of virtue to one virtuous man.” Thoreau hit the nail squarely on the head, as he so often did. We Americans are patrons of virtue rather than virtuous people. It costs nothing to be a patron of virtue; but it requires character and effort to be a virtuous person. Apparently, we have yet to learn the distinction.

We know that Thoreau was a virtuous man rather than a patron of virtue, as demonstrated by certain events in his life. Like Christ, he found himself in formal opposition to the cultural orthodoxy; he lived apart from society—outside of the social and political mainstream, an oddity to his neighbors and often persecuted by them. Thoreau refused allegiance to money and wealth, understanding that the most important things in life could not be bought and sold. For him, property and possessions were burdens, not assets.

Thus Thoreau wisely refused to waste any more time than absolutely necessary in earning a modest living. He did not rent himself to factories and bosses or to any of the respectable professions; he worked sporadically and only when necessary—usually on his own terms. He was a man of principle who refused to pay taxes that he knew supported an unprovoked war on Mexico; a war that sought to expand the territory of slavery; and he went to jail for his beliefs. Thoreau was also a fierce abolitionist who, against the law, put many a run-away slave on board the Underground Railroad to Canada and to freedom.

Like all virtuous people, Thoreau lived by a higher law. He did what was right, not what was legal or considered respectable or expedient. Unlike today’s political leadership and contemporary Christians, he was guided by incorruptible conscience that could not be bribed.

Thoreau’s freedom from menial work also provided independence from possessions and debt. Thoreau was a minimalist. His freedom to explore Concord and vicinity gave birth to several literary masterpieces, including Walden and Civil Disobedience—works that sold poorly in his time and provided but little income; but are known worldwide today. World renowned moralists such as India’s Mohandas Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King were strongly influenced by Thoreau.

If Thoreau’s life could be summed up in three words they would be, “Simplify, simplify, simplify.” To simplify and reduce one’s wants is a paradigm in stark contrast to the ravenous consumption required by capitalism. It was a way of living that eschewed money and markets; a way of being that afforded opportunity for intellectual pursuits and life long learning. Above all, it was a spiritually enriching way of life that was in harmony with the planet; it was gentle, sustainable, and fulfilling.

In contrast to Thoreau, most of us unthinkingly support a system that is fundamentally unjust, unsustainable and superfluous. It is a system that has no room for virtue and character because these characteristics cannot be commodified and marketed; and they impose market restraints. Yet, these are the very traits that can save us from ourselves and make a better world possible. How ironic that the traits of character that are most valuable to our survival as a species are the ones appreciated the least by capitalism.

Markets unregulated by morality and governments unbounded by justice serve no useful purpose to anyone in the long run, even those who champion them. Planetary destruction is not in anyone’s interest. Sustainability is. Sustainability, unlike its economic counterpart—capitalism, requires virtuous people rather than mere patrons of virtue. Virtue requires people who not only understand what is going on but who have the courage to do something about it—a consciousness that knows the distinction between patronage to virtue and actual virtue.

Our current form of government is a spectacular failure because it is an arm of business and capitalism rather than an institution of democracy with powerful ethical moorings derived from the grass roots—a decentralized, non-hierarchal power that radiates equally from the people like the spokes of a wheel from a central hub. As such, it often attracts the worst kind of people rather than the principled and just. The interest of big business is now and always has been at odds with just causes and the public welfare. Corporate interests and the people’s interests must never be confused.

Charles Sullivan is a nature photographer, free-lance writer and community activist residing in the Ridge and Valley Province of geopolitical West Virginia. He welcomes your comments at csullivan@phreego.com .
gkh6
QUOTE
The form of government we have is anything but the democratic republic it purports to be. The more access to wealth a person has the more responsive to his or her needs the government is. Justice and equality cannot follow where access is denied or restricted. Far from a government of the people, for the people and by the people, we now have a government that is the exclusive domain of the rich and powerful and has the same level of exclusivity as an expensive country club or resort. The poor and disenfranchised are barred from entry and are thus marginalized.


When was it different?

QUOTE
Capital government is the equivalent of a bank’s automatic teller machine. Corporate lobbyists put their money into it and the machine prints out the legislation they paid for. It is a system in which the creator of the machines is no longer their master. We have become, as Thoreau said, “the tools of our tools.


As long as money is equated with free speech it will remain this way.

QUOTE
The people should not, and must not lend their material support to a government that so obviously works in the private corporate interest at the expense of the public well being. To do so is an exercise in self-deception and futility.


Amen.

QUOTE
A system in which means always justify the ends—a values neutral system of production and waste is contrary to the needs of the people, as well as the health of the planet.


I call it capitalism without conscience.

QUOTE
It is beyond bizarre that corporations enjoy the legal status of persons but without the social responsibility required of real citizenship and personhood.


Too true. I doubt I could get the "authorities" to look the other way while I rape and pillage publically owned land. Or get the "authorities" to sell me said land for peanuts. Not unless I can deliver them some looonnnngggg green of course.

QUOTE
Corporations routinely commit crimes against earth and humanity but are rarely held accountable. When was the last time that a corporation had its corporate charter revoked for malfeasance? When has a corporation ever been executed for murder?


I'm going to guess never. Do I win a prize?

QUOTE
With the corporatization of the church, the teachings of Christ were discarded and cast to the four winds in order to give religious authority to capitalism, greed and exploitation. Rather than producing men of virtue like Jesus, who called for restraint and shared wealth, it has yielded a morally depraved leadership as exemplified by Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson; men who have risen to prominence to fleece their obedient flock, rather than to enlighten and save them from the ravages of unregulated greed


OOOOhhhhh! He is gonna burn in HAIL for that one. eek.gif

QUOTE
Due in part to our unquestioned acceptance of capitalism, we are a people who pay homage to concepts such as democracy, equality, social and environmental justice and freedom, even as we continually undermine them in nearly everything we do. Thus we bear a history of genocide, chattel slavery, racism, sexism, ethnic cleansing, imperial wars and occupation and manifest destiny that have flourished despite the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.


It sucks but he is right.

QUOTE
Our current form of government is a spectacular failure because it is an arm of business and capitalism rather than an institution of democracy with powerful ethical moorings derived from the grass roots—a decentralized, non-hierarchal power that radiates equally from the people like the spokes of a wheel from a central hub. As such, it often attracts the worst kind of people rather than the principled and just. The interest of big business is now and always has been at odds with just causes and the public welfare. Corporate interests and the people’s interests must never be confused.


All he says is correct but what can we do about it?
seuss
nice to know someone read thiis.
Jubal
QUOTE(seuss @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 4:42 pm) *
nice to know someone read thiis.

I read it. I just don't have a very high opinion of a "thinker" who stands on a mountain of corpses and muses about simplifying his life.
Abell9
This writing wrote things that do pose truth in a unvarnished manner. GKH6 wrote a pretty interesting piece as well. The problem is momentum and conditioning. This country cannot untrack itself from itself. While all would like to see...no, not true, most would like to see a utopian Govt. that does work for it's people without Corporate interest first. Corporate interest will not allow it but to a token degree. And that will not change. Those same people who THINK they want to change things cannot let go of what they have, cannot sacrifice, and will not sacrifice. Even if they did, do we honestly believe those who have done with nothing for so long will not grab what they can and become what the others were? The people of this country do not have the committment to effect dramatic change. Im thinking...you would almost have to start a new country somewhere to even get close. And if you DID start a new country, some other country would come along and try to change the way you think.

People do like to bitch, like to say they want more equality, more voice, more this and more that. But in the end, we are a conditioned society that is more and more dependant on the Government to make it happen. And the momentum is on the side of an established system. Add in the fact that we are the fattest, laziest, I want mine now society in the world and tell me, do you or anyone believe that change will ever come to any meaningful degree? I dont.

No, we are not a democracy in its truest form. We can elect leaders but only those leaders that have the approval of the Corporate interests, media, and other factions. Think THAT is going to change?
gkh6
QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 3:58 pm) *
I read it. I just don't have a very high opinion of a "thinker" who stands on a mountain of corpses and muses about simplifying his life.



Since I'm quite ignorant about Thoreau I'm going to take your word for it.
gkh6
QUOTE(Abell9 @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 4:10 pm) *
This writing wrote things that do pose truth in a unvarnished manner. GKH6 wrote a pretty interesting piece as well. The problem is momentum and conditioning. This country cannot untrack itself from itself. While all would like to see...no, not true, most would like to see a utopian Govt. that does work for it's people without Corporate interest first. Corporate interest will not allow it but to a token degree. And that will not change. Those same people who THINK they want to change things cannot let go of what they have, cannot sacrifice, and will not sacrifice. Even if they did, do we honestly believe those who have done with nothing for so long will not grab what they can and become what the others were? The people of this country do not have the committment to effect dramatic change. Im thinking...you would almost have to start a new country somewhere to even get close. And if you DID start a new country, some other country would come along and try to change the way you think.

People do like to bitch, like to say they want more equality, more voice, more this and more that. But in the end, we are a conditioned society that is more and more dependant on the Government to make it happen. And the momentum is on the side of an established system. Add in the fact that we are the fattest, laziest, I want mine now society in the world and tell me, do you or anyone believe that change will ever come to any meaningful degree? I dont.

No, we are not a democracy in its truest form. We can elect leaders but only those leaders that have the approval of the Corporate interests, media, and other factions. Think THAT is going to change?



Gee thanks for banging me over the head with that truth Abell. dry.gif Just when I thought there was hope. I'm going to get drunk now. blink.gif
Jubal
QUOTE(gkh6 @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:12 pm) *
Since I'm quite ignorant about Thoreau I'm going to take your word for it.

Sorry. Bitter Indian thing. Pay it no mind. Carry on.
gkh6
QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 4:22 pm) *
Sorry. Bitter Indian thing. Pay it no mind. Carry on.


I wasn't being sarcastic. If I said that I'm not any happier about what happened to the true Americans than you are would you believe me or tell me to shut my ignorant trap? I will read up on Thoreau. I always root for the little guy and I believe in fairness and justice. No wonder I'm poor.
seuss
QUOTE(Abell9 @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:10 pm) *
This writing wrote things that do pose truth in a unvarnished manner. GKH6 wrote a pretty interesting piece as well. The problem is momentum and conditioning. This country cannot untrack itself from itself. While all would like to see...no, not true, most would like to see a utopian Govt. that does work for it's people without Corporate interest first. Corporate interest will not allow it but to a token degree. And that will not change. Those same people who THINK they want to change things cannot let go of what they have, cannot sacrifice, and will not sacrifice. Even if they did, do we honestly believe those who have done with nothing for so long will not grab what they can and become what the others were? The people of this country do not have the committment to effect dramatic change. Im thinking...you would almost have to start a new country somewhere to even get close. And if you DID start a new country, some other country would come along and try to change the way you think.

People do like to bitch, like to say they want more equality, more voice, more this and more that. But in the end, we are a conditioned society that is more and more dependant on the Government to make it happen. And the momentum is on the side of an established system. Add in the fact that we are the fattest, laziest, I want mine now society in the world and tell me, do you or anyone believe that change will ever come to any meaningful degree? I dont.

No, we are not a democracy in its truest form. We can elect leaders but only those leaders that have the approval of the Corporate interests, media, and other factions. Think THAT is going to change?

how pragmatically depressing...

so you're not really a conservative, just a cynic, huh?

iif you can't beat 'em, join 'em?

I know the feeliing.

Jubal
QUOTE(gkh6 @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:26 pm) *
I wasn't being sarcastic. If I said that I'm not any happier about what happened to the true Americans than you are would you believe me or tell me to shut my ignorant trap? I will read up on Thoreau. I always root for the little guy and I believe in fairness and justice. No wonder I'm poor.

No, I wasn't accusing you of anything. But Thoreau was alive at a time when some of us were still free and living our own way, and I have a poor opinion of most Shemanese of that era. Granted, Thoreau lived in an area where the Indians had been wiped out. I doubt he ever saw one in his life. Still, every once in a while I get a wild hair and just have to yell "It WAS simple until you came with your guns and your disease and your whiskey, you fucking prick!" I realize it's not helpful, and I try not to make an obsession of it. But every now and then...
Jubal
QUOTE(seuss @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:28 pm) *
how pragmatically depressing...

so you're not really a conservative, just a cynic, huh?

iif you can't beat 'em, join 'em?

I know the feeliing.

That's not what Abell's saying. He's not cynical, he's realistic. And his consistent advice to everyone is "If you can't beat 'em (and you can't), minimize the influence they have over your life and enjoy yourself."

That's pretty good advice in my book.
seuss
QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:31 pm) *
No, I wasn't accusing you of anything. But Thoreau was alive at a time when some of us were still free and living our own way, and I have a poor opinion of most Shemanese of that era. Granted, Thoreau lived in an area where the Indians had been wiped out. I doubt he ever saw one in his life. Still, every once in a while I get a wild hair and just have to yell "It WAS simple until you came with your guns and your disease and your whiskey, you fucking prick!" I realize it's not helpful, and I try not to make an obsession of it. But every now and then...


thanks for the clarification...
the concept of 'the enlightenment" doesn't really make any sense considering the three fifths compromise, or 95 % of the actions taken by early americans as far as native issues were concerned.

but as an early american, thoreau was pretty good wasn't he?
seuss
QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:34 pm) *
That's not what Abell's saying. He's not cynical, he's realistic. And his consistent advice to everyone is "If you can't beat 'em (and you can't), minimize the influence they have over your life and enjoy yourself."

That's pretty good advice in my book.


you're right, hence the pragmatic comment. and maybe I spoke incorrectly when I said "join 'em" - but realism is cynical at this time in the world.
Jubal
QUOTE(seuss @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:42 pm) *
you're right, hence the pragmatic comment. and maybe I spoke incorrectly when I said "join 'em" - but realism is cynical at this time in the world.

The smartest man I know owns a private airfield in the D.C. area. So you can imagine how much government he has to put up with day in, day out. He regards government regulation as a set of obstacles between him an his goal, and figures out the quickest, easiest way over, under, and/or around the obstacles. When they change the obstacles, he doesn't waste time or effort getting angry, he just replots his course. I admire him immensely.

But I also agree with you. Everybody should put some effort, and some people should put all their effort, into changing the system. There was this black preacher once...
seuss
QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:48 pm) *
There was this black preacher once...



god... that was... strange?
I once wrote a poem that's ending was almost exactly the same as that...

weird.

I'm assuming you mean Dr. King?
Jubal
QUOTE(seuss @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:54 pm) *
god... that was... strange?
I once wrote a poem that's ending was almost exactly the same as that...

weird.

I'm assuming you mean Dr. King?

Of course. There were a few others (Vernon Johns springs to mind) but I do have endless admiration for the man who shook the world from the pulpit of an "insignificant" black church.
gkh6
QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 4:48 pm) *
The smartest man I know owns a private airfield in the D.C. area. So you can imagine how much government he has to put up with day in, day out. He regards government regulation as a set of obstacles between him an his goal, and figures out the quickest, easiest way over, under, and/or around the obstacles. When they change the obstacles, he doesn't waste time or effort getting angry, he just replots his course. I admire him immensely.



He sounds very pragmatic and intelligent. Those are hard traits not to admire.

QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 4:48 pm) *
There was this black preacher once...


And he scared the status quo so much they killed him. If this country is ever going to change it is going to be the people that change it. The question is how many will have to die to truly change it? What will be the straw that breaks the camel's back? Those were rhetorical questions Sky. Don't bother answering them. dry.gif
Jubal
QUOTE(gkh6 @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 6:14 pm) *
He sounds very pragmatic and intelligent. Those are hard traits not to admire.
And he scared the status quo so much they killed him. If this country is ever going to change it is going to be the people that change it. The question is how many will have to die to truly change it? What will be the straw that breaks the camel's back? Those were rhetorical questions Sky. Don't bother answering them. dry.gif

I think Dr. King would have been content if he had known his fate, good and ill.
gkh6
QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:15 pm) *
I think Dr. King would have been content if he had known his fate, good and ill.



I hope he at least had contentment. That is worth more than gold.
Abell9
QUOTE(Jubal @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 4:34 pm) *
That's not what Abell's saying. He's not cynical, he's realistic. And his consistent advice to everyone is "If you can't beat 'em (and you can't), minimize the influence they have over your life and enjoy yourself."

That's pretty good advice in my book.


Give that dude a cigar. clap.gif
sky of mind
QUOTE(Abell9 @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 2:10 pm) *
This writing wrote things that do pose truth in a unvarnished manner. GKH6 wrote a pretty interesting piece as well. The problem is momentum and conditioning. This country cannot untrack itself from itself. While all would like to see...no, not true, most would like to see a utopian Govt. that does work for it's people without Corporate interest first. Corporate interest will not allow it but to a token degree. And that will not change. Those same people who THINK they want to change things cannot let go of what they have, cannot sacrifice, and will not sacrifice. Even if they did, do we honestly believe those who have done with nothing for so long will not grab what they can and become what the others were? The people of this country do not have the committment to effect dramatic change. Im thinking...you would almost have to start a new country somewhere to even get close. And if you DID start a new country, some other country would come along and try to change the way you think.

People do like to bitch, like to say they want more equality, more voice, more this and more that. But in the end, we are a conditioned society that is more and more dependant on the Government to make it happen. And the momentum is on the side of an established system. Add in the fact that we are the fattest, laziest, I want mine now society in the world and tell me, do you or anyone believe that change will ever come to any meaningful degree? I dont.

No, we are not a democracy in its truest form. We can elect leaders but only those leaders that have the approval of the Corporate interests, media, and other factions. Think THAT is going to change?




This guy has my vote.

I don't always agree with Abell, but damn if he doesn't walk his talk without the need to talk his walk!


IMO? Do what you can in your community. Follow your own interests and help those closest to you.
My thing is waste reduction. Not much glory there and it's not often a great party conversation topic. However, it's something that effects and is a part of everybody's life, and is at the very core of our real problems.


Good post Abell
Rousseau
It's hard to come down off the belief that people can be helped to see what is going on, and actually be interested enough to try and do something about it.
Thanks, Abell.
Your clear realism is hard to take without strong alcohol and much singing and dancing into the night, but it's also pretty spot-on.

It also puts into sharp perspective the Red Army Faction, the Red Brigades and many of the extremists who became frustrated with the lack of change, and lack of will to change, in a system that maintains just the tension neccessary that the people don't actually mind that much being rolled over.

I think that's my biggest problem with the neocons, and the actual state of affairs in the World today.
Prior to Bush, the World was a fairly good and improving place, the rich elites were still agitating behind the scenes, where they always have, and probably always will, but it was a progressive evolution towards something better. Then "Bosh !" It's Bush. rolleyes.gif


If you would convince a man that he does wrong, do right. But do not care to convince him. Men will believe what they see. Let them see.
Henry David Thoreau

sky of mind
QUOTE(Rousseau @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 4:02 am) *
If you would convince a man that he does wrong, do right. But do not care to convince him. Men will believe what they see. Let them see.
Henry David Thoreau




You can't teach anybody that does not wish to be educated.
Instead, lead by your visable actions. These actions will be seen, and if they are worth while, others will eventually follow.
Highstreet
QUOTE(Abell9 @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 5:10 pm) *
This writing wrote things that do pose truth in a unvarnished manner. GKH6 wrote a pretty interesting piece as well. The problem is momentum and conditioning. This country cannot untrack itself from itself. While all would like to see...no, not true, most would like to see a utopian Govt. that does work for it's people without Corporate interest first. Corporate interest will not allow it but to a token degree. And that will not change. Those same people who THINK they want to change things cannot let go of what they have, cannot sacrifice, and will not sacrifice. Even if they did, do we honestly believe those who have done with nothing for so long will not grab what they can and become what the others were? The people of this country do not have the committment to effect dramatic change. Im thinking...you would almost have to start a new country somewhere to even get close. And if you DID start a new country, some other country would come along and try to change the way you think.

People do like to bitch, like to say they want more equality, more voice, more this and more that. But in the end, we are a conditioned society that is more and more dependant on the Government to make it happen. And the momentum is on the side of an established system. Add in the fact that we are the fattest, laziest, I want mine now society in the world and tell me, do you or anyone believe that change will ever come to any meaningful degree? I dont.

No, we are not a democracy in its truest form. We can elect leaders but only those leaders that have the approval of the Corporate interests, media, and other factions. Think THAT is going to change?


Of course they never release control easily, but that doesn't mean we stop struggling.

Highstreet
QUOTE(Rousseau @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 7:02 am) *
I think that's my biggest problem with the neocons, and the actual state of affairs in the World today.
Prior to Bush, the World was a fairly good and improving place, the rich elites were still agitating behind the scenes, where they always have, and probably always will, but it was a progressive evolution towards something better. Then "Bosh !" It's Bush. rolleyes.gif
If you would convince a man that he does wrong, do right. But do not care to convince him. Men will believe what they see. Let them see.
Henry David Thoreau


There have been Moneyed interests on both "sides" of the aisle working to secure more power in their hands. Bush has just been able to accelerate it because of the "new Pearl Harbor".
BillCo98
QUOTE(seuss @ Tuesday, 4 December 2007, 10:42 pm) *
you're right, hence the pragmatic comment. and maybe I spoke incorrectly when I said "join 'em" - but realism is cynical at this time in the world.


I wholeheartedly concur. I am tired attempting to shake people out of the easy, lazy, apathetic and complacent backwater of cynicism born out of a misplaced sense of realism.
Jubal
QUOTE(BillCo98 @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 1:04 pm) *
I wholeheartedly concur. I am tired attempting to shake people out of the easy, lazy, apathetic and complacent backwater of cynicism born out of a misplaced sense of realism.

Maybe they're just not as fundamentally unhappy as you are.
BillCo98
QUOTE(Jubal @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 6:06 pm) *
Maybe they're just not as fundamentally unhappy as you are.



Maybe so, Jubal. Or maybe they are just like those poor folks who watched the deckchairs being rearranged on the Titanic. The ship was doomed at that time but they probably still believed the hype that she was 'unsinkable'.
Abell9
QUOTE(BillCo98 @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 12:04 pm) *
I wholeheartedly concur. cynicism born out of a misplaced sense of realism.


Im not sure that realism, if based on elements of fact and truth is ever misplaced. True that some have their own reality and it may not be reality to all nor based on anything but complacent thinking.

Its a great discussion to have about dreams vs. reality. Desire versus expectation, ect....

Im not cynical nor am I a negative person. But, as several have pointed out, aptly I might add....reality is a bitch to swallow. Once a person accepts reality, then you work with what you have, change what you can, when you can, and as justly as you can. You leave the lanquishing cynics on the road side and hope they either wake up or dont reproduce.
Highstreet
QUOTE(Abell9 @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 1:31 pm) *
Im not sure that realism, if based on elements of fact and truth is ever misplaced. True that some have their own reality and it may not be reality to all nor based on anything but complacent thinking.

Its a great discussion to have about dreams vs. reality. Desire versus expectation, ect....

Im not cynical nor am I a negative person. But, as several have pointed out, aptly I might add....reality is a bitch to swallow. Once a person accepts reality, then you work with what you have, change what you can, when you can, and as justly as you can. You leave the lanquishing cynics on the road side and hope they either wake up or dont reproduce.



I find that my cynicism is balanced by my sense of humor and ability to laugh at the man behind the curtain. Your sentence there about reality is key.

Doing well and prevailing despite being dealt a bad hand in life is the mark of good character. It is also wise to build and maintain good relationships, family and community, because at one time or another we all fall on tough times.
sky of mind
QUOTE(Abell9 @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 10:31 am) *
Im not sure that realism, if based on elements of fact and truth is ever misplaced. True that some have their own reality and it may not be reality to all nor based on anything but complacent thinking.

Its a great discussion to have about dreams vs. reality. Desire versus expectation, ect....

Im not cynical nor am I a negative person. But, as several have pointed out, aptly I might add....reality is a bitch to swallow. Once a person accepts reality, then you work with what you have, change what you can, when you can, and as justly as you can. You leave the lanquishing cynics on the road side and hope they either wake up or dont reproduce.




Again, I couldn't have said it better myself, and I have tried.
Abell9
QUOTE(sky of mind @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 2:41 pm) *
Again, I couldn't have said it better myself, and I have tried.


Wow......and to think I grunt and walk on all fours most of the time....
Jubal
QUOTE(Abell9 @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 5:16 pm) *
Wow......and to think I grunt and walk on all fours most of the time....

Better balance that way. And you can put a hell of a lot of meaning into a grunt. Certainly more than there is in the average political speech.
Abell9
QUOTE(Jubal @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 4:17 pm) *
Better balance that way. And you can put a hell of a lot of meaning into a grunt. Certainly more than there is in the average political speech.


From day 1 you have cracked me up....everytime, Jube.... biggrin.gif
sky of mind
I've never been fond of the military. Not anti-military, just never considered military types to be thinkers, or that they might actually hold many of the same values that i do.

As Abell has said he has learned from us, I have and continue to learn about people from you two.
And in doing so, I learn a little more about myself, which is after all, the ultimate goal.
seuss
are you fucking serious (no offense, abell,)?

This went to the philosophical underpinnings of a conservative... from thoreau?

What the hell happened here?
Jubal
QUOTE(sky of mind @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 10:17 pm) *
I've never been fond of the military. Not anti-military, just never considered military types to be thinkers, or that they might actually hold many of the same values that i do.

As Abell has said he has learned from us, I have and continue to learn about people from you two.
And in doing so, I learn a little more about myself, which is after all, the ultimate goal.

You'd be amazed. The military has produced philosophers (Socrates was a soldier) and artists (poet Joyce Kilmer springs to mind), as well as many, many leaders.

If you read your New Testament, you'll see why I claim that of all the people he met, the one who understood Jesus best was the centurion.
Abell9
QUOTE(seuss @ Wednesday, 5 December 2007, 9:23 pm) *
are you fucking serious (no offense, abell,)?

This went to the philosophical underpinnings of a conservative... from thoreau?

What the hell happened here?


laugh.gif laugh.gif None taken... laugh.gif laugh.gif

BillCo98
'What could be more incompatible than virtue and wealth, than business and morality? What could be more opposed to beauty, to truth, justice; to art and poetry, to life—than big business and capitalism? It is telling that our cultural icons are people like Donald Trump, Bill Gates, George Steinbrenner and other business tycoons, not virtuous men like Frederick Douglas and Henry David Thoreau or women like Mary Harris—the fiercely tenacious Mother Jones.'

Here's a man who shares some of Thoreau's principles.


The fisherman standing in way of Donald Trump’s golf course


David Lister, Scotland Correspondent

From The Times
October 10, 2007

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2625478.ece



He is the man standing in the way of one of the world’s most famous billionaires. A gruff, obstinate Scotsman who has refused to bow to the financial might of Donald Trump and his vision for the world’s finest golf course.

Michael Forbes, a humble salmon fisherman whose family has lived behind the sand dunes at Balmedie, Aberdeenshire, for 40 years, yesterday pointed to the boundary of his land and shook his head.

“That’s where the golf course will be,” he said. “Fifty yards away on that side and fifty yards away on the other.”

To say that Mr Forbes, 55, is a thorn in Mr Trump’s side is an understatement. His 23 acres of land sit directly between the tycoon’s two proposed 18-hole golf courses and a planned 450-bedroom five-star hotel. A golf academy and driving range would be next door. Just a few hundred feet away would be the majestic sweep of Trump Boulevard, the main access road to the £1 billion resort.

“I’m right in the middle, you see,” Mr Forbes said yesterday. “I wasn’t against the golf course from the start, but then they just went mental because I wouldn’t sell. They said they’d make my life a misery and they are.”

Mr Forbes’s land, where a saltire hangs in one corner and a barn emblazoned with the words “No Golf Course” greets visitors as they arrive along the single-track unmade road, has become an embarrassing symbol of defiance to Mr Trump.

“All my family came from around here. My grandfather fished down here and all my uncles as well. I’m the last in line and I’ll see it out.”

Although the billionaire has insisted that he will build around Mr Forbes’s property, his irritation burst into the open this week when he launched an extraordinary attack on his neighbour.

Describing the land as “in total disrepair”, Mr Trump said: “Take a look and see how badly maintained that piece of property is. It’s disgusting. There are rusty tractors, rusty oil cans. I actually asked him, ‘Are you doing this on purpose to try and make me look bad, so I have to pay some more money?’”

The dispute has all the hallmarks of the plot of Local Hero, the 1983 cult film in which an American tycoon seeks to buy a tiny Scottish village, though on this occasion the dispute is about golf, not oil. Mr Trump has submitted plans to turn a 1,400-acre site at Balmedie, 13 miles north of Aberdeen, into “the world’s greatest golf course”, with two championship links courses, a five-star hotel, a golf academy, almost 1,000 holiday homes and about 500 private houses.

He hopes permission will be granted in the next few months, but faces strong opposition from conservation groups, who claim that the plans will do irreparable damage to the dunes and the wildlife they contain.

But while Mr Trump has fought environmental concerns with flattery and argument, his problem with Mr Forbes is one with, at the moment, no apparent solution.

Mr Forbes’s 83-year-old mother, Molly, who lives opposite, will see the golfers as they pass her mobile home, which has the name Paradise hanging on the wall. She said: “I came here to live in peace and quiet in my Paradise, but the golf course is going to spoil the look of our quiet area.”

Mr Forbes refuses to apologise for the state of his land. “If I had the money [Mr Trump] has this place would be a palace as well. You should have seen it here eight years ago, it was much worse.” He said the tractors were used on his land and the oil drums were needed to burn rubbish.

Over the past 18 months Mr Forbes has received two offers, the first for £350,000 and then, a month ago, the second for £375,000. He claims that he is now being pestered. He insists that his refusal to sell is not a ploy to force a higher price, but a desire to stay in his own home.

A spokesman for Mr Trump denied that Mr Forbes was being pestered.

George Sorial, one of Mr Trump’s senior advisers, said that Mr Forbes had been abusive and aggressive towards his colleagues on at least two occasions. He said: “We have been the good neighbour. Mr Forbes is the bad neighbour here.”


The latest developments on this story are that the Local Council rejected Trump's planning application only for the Government to 'call in' the application in order that Parliament can decide. Que much forelock tugging, grovelling and spreadeagling at the feet of the US billionaire.

The world needs reality check and, more to the point, a new enlightenment.
Jubal
Over here Trump would just bribe the council to take the land by eminent domain. And the Supreme Court would support him and them. Good to see some Scottish sense at work.
Boot
Ah the stubborn Scots.


Twelve Highlanders and a bagpipe make a rebellion-Scottish Saying
Jubal
QUOTE(Boot @ Thursday, 6 December 2007, 11:01 am) *
Ah the stubborn Scots.
Twelve Highlanders and a bagpipe make a rebellion-Scottish Saying

Alba go bragh!
karen
QUOTE(BillCo98 @ Thursday, 6 December 2007, 9:48 am) *
'What could be more incompatible than virtue and wealth, than business and morality? What could be more opposed to beauty, to truth, justice; to art and poetry, to life—than big business and capitalism? It is telling that our cultural icons are people like Donald Trump, Bill Gates, George Steinbrenner and other business tycoons, not virtuous men like Frederick Douglas and Henry David Thoreau or women like Mary Harris—the fiercely tenacious Mother Jones.'

Here's a man who shares some of Thoreau's principles.


The fisherman standing in way of Donald Trump’s golf course


David Lister, Scotland Correspondent

From The Times
October 10, 2007

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2625478.ece

He is the man standing in the way of one of the world’s most famous billionaires. A gruff, obstinate Scotsman who has refused to bow to the financial might of Donald Trump and his vision for the world’s finest golf course.

Michael Forbes, a humble salmon fisherman whose family has lived behind the sand dunes at Balmedie, Aberdeenshire, for 40 years, yesterday pointed to the boundary of his land and shook his head.

“That’s where the golf course will be,” he said. “Fifty yards away on that side and fifty yards away on the other.”

To say that Mr Forbes, 55, is a thorn in Mr Trump’s side is an understatement. His 23 acres of land sit directly between the tycoon’s two proposed 18-hole golf courses and a planned 450-bedroom five-star hotel. A golf academy and driving range would be next door. Just a few hundred feet away would be the majestic sweep of Trump Boulevard, the main access road to the £1 billion resort.

“I’m right in the middle, you see,” Mr Forbes said yesterday. “I wasn’t against the golf course from the start, but then they just went mental because I wouldn’t sell. They said they’d make my life a misery and they are.”

Mr Forbes’s land, where a saltire hangs in one corner and a barn emblazoned with the words “No Golf Course” greets visitors as they arrive along the single-track unmade road, has become an embarrassing symbol of defiance to Mr Trump.

“All my family came from around here. My grandfather fished down here and all my uncles as well. I’m the last in line and I’ll see it out.”

Although the billionaire has insisted that he will build around Mr Forbes’s property, his irritation burst into the open this week when he launched an extraordinary attack on his neighbour.

Describing the land as “in total disrepair”, Mr Trump said: “Take a look and see how badly maintained that piece of property is. It’s disgusting. There are rusty tractors, rusty oil cans. I actually asked him, ‘Are you doing this on purpose to try and make me look bad, so I have to pay some more money?’”

The dispute has all the hallmarks of the plot of Local Hero, the 1983 cult film in which an American tycoon seeks to buy a tiny Scottish village, though on this occasion the dispute is about golf, not oil. Mr Trump has submitted plans to turn a 1,400-acre site at Balmedie, 13 miles north of Aberdeen, into “the world’s greatest golf course”, with two championship links courses, a five-star hotel, a golf academy, almost 1,000 holiday homes and about 500 private houses.

He hopes permission will be granted in the next few months, but faces strong opposition from conservation groups, who claim that the plans will do irreparable damage to the dunes and the wildlife they contain.

But while Mr Trump has fought environmental concerns with flattery and argument, his problem with Mr Forbes is one with, at the moment, no apparent solution.

Mr Forbes’s 83-year-old mother, Molly, who lives opposite, will see the golfers as they pass her mobile home, which has the name Paradise hanging on the wall. She said: “I came here to live in peace and quiet in my Paradise, but the golf course is going to spoil the look of our quiet area.”

Mr Forbes refuses to apologise for the state of his land. “If I had the money [Mr Trump] has this place would be a palace as well. You should have seen it here eight years ago, it was much worse.” He said the tractors were used on his land and the oil drums were needed to burn rubbish.

Over the past 18 months Mr Forbes has received two offers, the first for £350,000 and then, a month ago, the second for £375,000. He claims that he is now being pestered. He insists that his refusal to sell is not a ploy to force a higher price, but a desire to stay in his own home.

A spokesman for Mr Trump denied that Mr Forbes was being pestered.

George Sorial, one of Mr Trump’s senior advisers, said that Mr Forbes had been abusive and aggressive towards his colleagues on at least two occasions. He said: “We have been the good neighbour. Mr Forbes is the bad neighbour here.”


The latest developments on this story are that the Local Council rejected Trump's planning application only for the Government to 'call in' the application in order that Parliament can decide. Que much forelock tugging, grovelling and spreadeagling at the feet of the US billionaire.

The world needs reality check and, more to the point, a new enlightenment.


What a great read! clap.gif clap.gif clap.gif

Thanks for sharing Bill.
BillCo98
QUOTE(Jubal @ Thursday, 6 December 2007, 4:02 pm) *
Alba go bragh!


Or, in the context of Michael Forbes, to quote the National Motto of Scotland -

'NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT' - 'Wha daur meddle wi me?' or in plain English 'Who dares meddle with me?'
Jubal
QUOTE(BillCo98 @ Thursday, 6 December 2007, 11:25 am) *
Or, in the context of Michael Forbes, to quote the National Motto of Scotland -

'NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT' - 'Wha daur meddle wi me?' or in plain English 'Who dares meddle with me?'

Unfortunately, the answer to the question is "The English. And rather successfully."
BillCo98
QUOTE(Jubal @ Thursday, 6 December 2007, 4:52 pm) *
Unfortunately, the answer to the question is "The English. And rather successfully."



It might appear that way but just look at the number of Scots who run the show down there and, unfortunately, help to fight their imperialist wars. Wait a few years and we'll see what happens to them when we finally break away!

Alba go bragh!
Jubal
QUOTE(BillCo98 @ Thursday, 6 December 2007, 12:08 pm) *
It might appear that way but just look at the number of Scots who run the show down there and, unfortunately, help to fight their imperialist wars. Wait a few years and we'll see what happens to them when we finally break away!

Alba go bragh!

I wish you the very best. Of course, to be historically accurate, England didn't take over Scotland. Scotland took over England in 1603. I'd just be happier if fewer Scots had died in English wars (despite the fact that their names will live forever), and if fewer Scots had been driven into exile by English policies such as the Highland Clearances. The Scots would be happier, and there would have been fewer of them killing the Shawandasi.
karen
QUOTE(BillCo98 @ Thursday, 6 December 2007, 11:08 am) *
It might appear that way but just look at the number of Scots who run the show down there and, unfortunately, help to fight their imperialist wars. Wait a few years and we'll see what happens to them when we finally break away!

Alba go bragh!


When I lived in the Isle of Skye I was told, more times than I can count, how hated the English are, but that was always qualified with 'except for Scousers and Gordies'. So now my question is, when you finally break away, can we come too? thumbup.gif
BillCo98
QUOTE(Jubal @ Thursday, 6 December 2007, 5:15 pm) *
I wish you the very best. Of course, to be historically accurate, England didn't take over Scotland. Scotland took over England in 1603. I'd just be happier if fewer Scots had died in English wars (despite the fact that their names will live forever), and if fewer Scots had been driven into exile by English policies such as the Highland Clearances. The Scots would be happier, and there would have been fewer of them killing the Shawandasi.


Please excuse my ignorance but who or what are the Shawandasi?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.