New Confederacy Rising

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by 804brown, Dec 13, 2011.

  1. 804brown

    804brown Well-Known Member

  2. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt Dark Prince of Double Standards Staff Member

    A well written article by a person that dips in and out history drawing conclusions about why events occurred and the causative impact on future events.
    An interesting read on one person's view of history that could motivate one to research what he says and discern where the truth lies.
    One fragment from his article is, "...premise that all human institutions are irredeemably corrupt." I tend to agree with this at the National level bu not necessary at the local or state level. Essentially, institutions start out with pure and truthful intent but as they grow and gain power, they do indeed become "irredeemably corrupt."
  3. menotyou

    menotyou bella amicizia

    Isn't it the people running it that turn it into the 'irredeemably corrupt' institution?
  4. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Well made points Hoax of which I would concur. The organization of human institutions work best and are most effective at the closest levels in which they are used and this speaks directly to human scale. As I read the piece I came across the following:

    What the author sez is true but I was left asking myself does the author also place a large responsibility on those same authorities to use truth and transparency back down to those in whom they demand trust? Human institutions don't breakdown because they are right or left or any of these false constructs but that people begin to experience the falsehoods or what one might call Plato's Noble Lie in the sense that as institutions scale up, the lie or myth must be implored to win the loyalties of more and more people who themselves are of a diverse ideal and belief. If we begin to understand how the human individual is hardwired we may realize we are hardwired towards small scale and thus when we try to scale up, we tend to loose our best qualities of caring, compassion and empathy because we no longer find it as easy to relate. If I don't relate to you, what happens to that voice of conscience when it comes time to tell you a truth. Does the seduction of power and the truth getting my way become the premise on which I justify telling you the noble lie? My ends justify your means. Your death is a small price to pay for my version of civilization.

    I'm glad to see the author mention the great Randolph Bourne who I consider a real unsung hero of the early 20th century. He's often quoted in "War is the health of the State" and as the author suggested, he was right. His 1918' treatise "The State" in this day and age IMO is a must read.

    Good link 804 but also consider this as a kind of counterpoise if you will to the dynamic of the religious right and that is the religious left in the likes of Chris Hedges. You and I have discussed Chris and his being a hero to you and I've said also how much I respect Chris as well. Although I don't share Chris' faith in belief, his moral voice however is a welcome to the discourse of societal discussion. However, Chris is not without his own faults in using the same type of extremes as he would condemn the christian, political right of using. Chris IMO was very wrong in attacking the likes of Sam Harris and others of non-faith in calling them racists and accusing them of resorting to mass genocide with WMD's if given the chance. I would agree that Harris, Hitchens and Dawkins can be very caustic in their attacks on faith but for Hedges to resort to the types of things he would allege is wrong in the christian political right is just as wrong. I will strongly defend Hedges voice being in the conversation but the very nature that Theo Anderson asserts of the christian political right, he seems in some sense to pretend by act of ommission that it doesn't exist on the left as well. I also found it very interesting as a national political force that Anderson failed to mention that the progressive movement of the late 19th and early 20th century was very much a republican led movement, it was early progressivism (right or wrong) that moved conscience minded Whigs to form the republican party in 1854' and it was this force that propelled Lincoln into the White House in 1860'. And it was Teddy Roosevelt with rare mention of McKinley who brought progressivism into the 20th century mainstream.

    I enjoyed and appreciated Anderson's piece and maybe because of brevity he was unable to devote the time to progressive politics it deserves but I do think at the end of the day, both the religious right and the so-called progressive left share the same ideals and that is to control the levers of power. Anderson's theory that the christian right hates man made institutions and wants to abolish them hits a wall when one looks at what gov't does when on those occasions the christian right steers the ship of state, that sucker always gets a rebuild and regardless of who, it always comes out the otherside with even more horsepower than it had before. So much for ending the institutions of man. He's correct in pointing out many good concerns but he only wants to drop one shoe in the process. He should drop the other shoe IMO.