Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Where Do You Draw the Line in Today’s Crazed Political Environment?
Source:
Liberty Blitzkrieg
URL Source: https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2018/ ... -crazed-political-environment/
Published: Jun 26, 2018
Author: Michael Krieger
Post Date: 2018-06-27 07:34:38 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1203
Comments: 12
If you vote for Trump, then you the voter, you, not Donald Trump, are standing at the border like Nazis going ‘you here, you here’. – Donny Deutsch on MSNBC last week Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. – Friedrich Nietzsche With each passing day, Trump’s hardcore supporters and detractors become more deeply entrenched in their respective corners and grow more hysterical. With every turn of the news cycle, we see two groups increasingly and equally convinced that only they and their allies can save the nation from total ruin. As someone who isn’t a cheerleader for any politician or political party, it’s fascinating to watch. It’s also made me consider where to draw the line when it comes to political action or commentary. First off, we need to understand that an increasingly centralized, corrupt and unaccountable government making decisions for 325 million people will be inherently and systemically abusive toward the citizenry. To confront this reality we need resistance, but it can’t be the superficial, purely partisan kind. Superficial resistance is what you see from establishment Democrats and MSNBC, peddling the fairytale that Trump the person is the problem, not the system itself. In contrast, genuine resistance is admitting and confronting our root problems which are deeply engrained and systemic. It means coming to terms with the fact we’re largely living in an imperial, executive-driven government structure as opposed to a Constitutional Republic. Congress doesn’t even bother to seriously weigh in on war and military operations anymore, essentially outsourcing its most awesome responsibility to whoever happens to be president. Trump the man isn’t our huge problem; excessive, secret and unaccountable government power is. We need to admit that whoever happens to be elevated to the presidency will invariably abuse such misplaced power. Obama’s terrible policies were deserving of intense criticism as are Trump’s, but thinking that merely switching out the president is going to magically fix our problems is deranged. This is why I have no patience for “the resistance” to-date, which focuses all its energy and passion on Trump the man, versus they imperial leviathan he happens to be in charge of at this moment in time. Obsessing about Trump the man has caused many of his high profile detractors to become overly hysterical, myopic and downright foolish. A perfect example of this occurred last Friday when Donny Deutsch, an advertising guy and pundit, explicitly instructed people to consider Trump voters Nazis. What Deutsch manages to do is take an already existing obsessive focus on Trump the individual and move it in an even more counterproductive and mindless direction. Blaming Trump the man apparently isn’t superficial enough for him, so he encourages you to demonize the voter. You know the average person who’s intentionality given two awful candidates to choose from every four years. They’re the real problem according to him. Moreover, he doesn’t just want you to blame Trump voters, he wants you to consider them Nazis. This is the sort of clown they put on political television. The fact that such nonsense so seamlessly flowed from his mouth demonstrates a total lack of capacity for reason. According to this logic, every Obama voter should be seen as a reckless imperialist murderer directly responsible for the destruction of Libya and the emergence of slave markets there. Feel free to use this sort of logic, but you won’t like where it leads. Even worse for Deutsch, blaming voters is a surefire way to achieve noting politically. Trump supporters expressed outrage over what Deutsch said, and I’m sympathetic to that. What he said was ludicrous, dangerous and petty. That said, many of those same people got equally bent out of shape over the fact Trump press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was asked to leave a Virginia restaurant by its owners. On this front I disagree, and think it’s important to draw a distinction between what Deutch said and what the owner of the Red Hen restaurant did. Of course, I’m not arguing “anything goes” when it comes to government officials and bureaucrats, but kicking Sanders out of a restaurant is a non-violent political statement specifically directed at someone who voluntarily works for government. Standing up to and making government officials uncomfortable is part of our political heritage. We should also never forget how uncomfortable our unaccountable and overbearing government makes us feel all the time. Finally, the action may herald the beginning of a new sort of activism based on grassroots action as opposed to the superficial, nonsensical and completely phony resistance promulgated by cable television pundits and washed up corporate Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi and Chucky Schumer. Obama wasn’t the problem, Trump isn’t the problem, and one slice of desperate, irritated voters isn’t the problem either. If we want to start blaming voters then we should look in the mirror, because all of us allowed this to happen. Demonizing and dehumanizing our neighbors because they voted differently might feel good, but it won’t get us anywhere. However, giving government officials a hard time for doing terrible things is a reasonable tactic, irrespective of which party happens to be in power. They work for us, and if they’re screwing us over (which is at least 95% of the time) we shouldn’t just bow down and accept it.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
So those that vote for Demoncrap party are putting the coat hanger into the woman to murder the baby not the doctor? Also having and maintaining a border is not being a Nazi(Demoncrap party would make even Hitler jealous). If you have no border you have no country.
– Donny Deutsch on MSNBC last week Really? Well, ok then. You here.
Was this brought up when Obama was President? Clinton? Trump is President and NOW he brings it up?
Anymore? This has been going on since Harry Truman committed U.S. troops to the Korean War as part of a United Nations “police action". Congress stopped the practice in 1973 with the War Powers Act.
Was this brought up when Obama was President? Clinton? Trump is President and NOW he brings it up? Pretty sure Krieger has always been critical of government corruption, no matter which party it is. Unlike some here who only criticize fed.gov corruption when it's "the other guys" doing it.
Really? Then it shouldn't be difficult for you to prove it, right?
But did he write about it?
BULLSH***. This fake narrative is bad enough; But the label, "Trump's HARDCORE Supporters"?? Why weren't 0bama's Commie contingent labeled "hardcore"? And why aren't the FBI/Deep State TRAITORS referred to as "Hardcore 0bama/Clinton Supporters"?? This entire essay is more red herring projection, what they now call "gas-lighting", pure and simple. Aready we see the strategy of the Left: "Blame BOTH sides." NOPE, that dog ain't gonna hunt. Btw, "Gas-lighting" is when you accuse the OTHER side of losing their mind, of lying to themselves, of being delusional. This author is a tool of THE LEFT, attempting to gas-light Trump-supporting, MAGA-conservatives. THE AUTHOR: "Obama wasn’t the problem, Trump isn’t the problem..." BUZZZZZZZ!!! Author totally exposed as a propagandist AND liar. YES 0BAMA WAS A PROBLEM. He was a Communirah Organizing Commie from the get-go. His agenda was anti-MAGA, anti-Capitalist. Why insult the intelligence of Liberty's Flame? Why are you posting this tripe??
But did he write about it? Of course not. The new strategy as I've just posited is....The Media is now blaming BOTH sides for the deranged insanity OF LEFTIST-DEMOCRATS. I've noticed even FNC has done this just last evening: (Bret Baer -- a moderate at best, and Laura Ingraham.)
No, it really doesn't. That's just another layer of the onion. Our root problems are deeply engrained and personal: we do not love each other, and we justify to ourselves those things that let us exploit others. The libertarian ideal has each man and his dependents living on their own plot of land, minding their business. This is a good model, as far as it goes, for keeping people free of many problems. It too breaks down, however, at the origin point. New land does not materialize with new people, and those dependents really are dependent: adults do not all come to adulthood with either the intellectual capital or actual capital to be able to get their own piece of land and start their own family. It takes time. When the game is fair, they can get there, but when the game is not fair - as it wasn't, for example, to former slaves and their kids who were "free", without capital - and it isn't today, for example, for crack babies - then the question is "What do we DO about it?" And the trouble with sticking with an unmodified libertarian model is: "We do as much as individuals voluntarily decide to do". Trouble with that is that there are more ex-slaves and crack babies than there is willingness to voluntarily provide. And that's where it breaks down. If you stick with the perfect libertarian model, you will end up with a class of people who had no chance from the outset, and who are destitute and desperate and don't have that plot of land for their family, or for themselves. But to shore it up, you have to break the voluntarism of the model: there are too many needs for voluntarism to cover. In the end, you have to decide what you value more: the more complete liberty of the libertarian model, or the lesser liberty of the "compromised" libertarian model - libertarian as far as practical, but with sufficient coercion to reduce the human misery quotient substantially. Most conservatives, and posters here, prefer the first option. I prefer the second option. The question then is merely one of moral motivation. My motivation is empathy, and my biggest political ally in this is Catholicism. Your motivation seems to me to be the genuine belief that it will be better for everybody if we just have that full libertarian model, that in fact there will so few poor folks under it that volunteerism will be able to cover the difference. And I just don't believe it. I would say that history gives us the example that a much more libertarian model existed in the past, and it didn't provide nearly enough. I expect you would counter that even in the past, the model was not TRULY libertarian, and therefore it has not been tested. I would acknowledge that may be so, and would argue that in the real world of real men we can never get to the true libertarian model, because not all men simply value liberty and being left alone - many thirst for power, status and rulership, and any political process allows that. We could go back and forth. I would call it the argument between a realist and an idealist, on this score, but when we flip back to the original issue that creates the fly in the ointment, I would say that we are both realists on this matter in a different way. I do not see, in you, a person who doesn't care about the lot of marginalized and destitute. Rather, I think you do care, and that you just believe that a true libertarian model would get us there, while I also care about them and just don't think it would work in reality - or maybe it would, but that we can never get there because of supervening realities of human nature. And, because I care about the marginalized and the destitute, I think we have to help them in the here and now, and can't wait for the world to change. So my concern for them is strong enough for me to cause me to be willing to damage the purity of a model I don't think would work, while your counter is that I am not giving what would work a chance. I actually respect your position on this, at least what I have described as your position, because I acknowledge that maybe I'm wrong, maybe it could work, and your intentions are good. What I don't like is when other people who call themselves Christians won't admit that the problem of destitution and human suffering is more important than the integrity of a political model they prefer. And when they actually attack the concern itself, I get pissed off and vicious, and sometimes say very un-Christian things myself. Then I feel bad, but they stay smug. I console myself in noting that NONE of the models that ANY of us on this site prefer is actually the way that the country is run, but that the real way it is run comes a lot closer to covering the things I worry most about than any of the alternatives proposed here. So, while I really don't like our present system, I conservatively prefer to stick to it, because it does provide for the people at the bottom, rather than go along with the political ideas of others who make a POINT of saying that the people at the bottom are all criminals who should be cut off, etc. That was long. Honest, but long. Sorry.
Really? Then it shouldn't be difficult for you to prove it, right? Gee whiz man! This article is NOT slamming Trump. But since you asked so nicely, here's a few of Krieger's previous articles. I had to go back a ways, something you could have done on your own if you were interested - but you're really not, are you? If an article is not glowing completely with praise for Trump - it must be "faaaake news". Meet Peter Kadzik – Another Clinton Stooge at the Justice Department Democratic Senate Candidate Evan Bayh Represents Everything Broken, Corrupt and Wrong With America We Can Prove the Podesta Emails Released by Wikileaks Are Authentic…Here’s How U.S. Foreign Policy ‘Elite’ Eagerly Await an Expansion of Overseas Wars Under Hillary Clinton Thanks Obama – My Healthcare Plan Was Just Canceled The Status Quo vs. Donald Trump ***** You know what -I think if you actually read the articles at the site, you'd find much more that you agree with and not as much to disagree with.
Attaboy! Putz. But the label, "Trump's HARDCORE Supporters"?? Pretty apt description of the inhabitants of this site. The scary thing is - there are some out there in the real world even more "hardcore" than you clowns.
If you vote for Trump, then you the voter, you, not Donald Trump, are standing at the border like Nazis going ‘you here, you here’. – Donny Deutsch on MSNBC last week
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
If you vote for Trump, then you the voter, you, not Donald Trump, are standing at the border like Nazis going ‘you here, you here’.
#3. To: Deckard (#0)
First off, we need to understand that an increasingly centralized, corrupt and unaccountable government making decisions for 325 million people will be inherently and systemically abusive toward the citizenry.
#4. To: Deckard (#0)
Congress doesn’t even bother to seriously weigh in on war and military operations anymore, essentially outsourcing its most awesome responsibility to whoever happens to be president.
#5. To: misterwhite (#3)
First off, we need to understand that an increasingly centralized, corrupt and unaccountable government making decisions for 325 million people will be inherently and systemically abusive toward the citizenry.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#6. To: Deckard, misterwhite (#5)
Pretty sure Krieger has always been critical of government corruption, no matter which party it is.
#7. To: Deckard (#5)
Pretty sure Krieger has always been critical of government corruption, no matter which party it is.
#8. To: Deckard (#0)
With each passing day, Trump’s hardcore supporters and detractors become more deeply entrenched in their respective corners and grow more hysterical.
#9. To: misterwhite, Deckard, ALL (#7)
("Pretty sure Krieger has always been critical of government corruption, no matter which party it is.")
#10. To: Deckard (#0)
In contrast, genuine resistance is admitting and confronting our root problems which are deeply engrained and systemic. It means coming to terms with the fact we’re largely living in an imperial, executive-driven government structure as opposed to a Constitutional Republic.
#11. To: Liberator (#6)
Pretty sure Krieger has always been critical of government corruption, no matter which party it is.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#12. To: Liberator (#8)
(Edited)
This fake narrative is bad enough
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]