Guest Post: The Giffords Shooting Changes Nothing

Tyler Durden's picture

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Dr. Sandi's picture

Personal responsibility. What a quaint concept. Too bad most of us are too immature to make it a lifestyle.

pan-the-ist's picture

Like people who choose to be responsible for their actions when they drive intoxicated.

Pants McPants's picture

Driving while intoxicated should not be a criminal offense, if that's what you are referring to.

pan-the-ist's picture

Really?  Buying a handgun after you have been committed for being a danger to yourself and others should be legal too, right?

Pants McPants's picture

Completely separate issue.  Stay on topic.

AnAnonymous's picture

Too bad most of us are too immature to make it a lifestyle.

 

How is it a matter of immaturity?

Selective responsibility is superior to personal responsibility in the framework built by the US.

One goes farther when able to claim any positive of one's action while rejecting negative (US example) than when taking responsible for the whole package. Worst is people who are stripped of the positive of their actions to be associated with the negative only. A kind of population required in the US framework to allow the first category to exist.

johnnynaps's picture

Personal responsibility doesn't pay enough to survive in this country anymore. And, to add insult to injury, most working, money-bagged Americans have a responsibility to be ethical within their professions.......yet most aren't.

kaiserhoff's picture

Well said.  Lack of respect for an honest day's work explains many layers of problems.

Alex Lionson's picture

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves" - Abraham Lincoln

Mark Medinnus's picture

This is a tiresome bit of Abetry.  Passing from the United States are to the United States is was the constitutional perversion central to Lincoln's legacy.

Now, from the article:

"While the murder of 6 bystanders, the wounding of 14 people, and the attempted murder of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, is indeed a horrible smear in the history of the America, it is but one of many."

A horrible smear, perhaps, if one were picking historical nits.  Consider:

1. 350,000 Native Americans exterminated by the US government

2. 620,000 American Civil War deaths in Lincoln's war for a new birth of freedom (and this, from a total population 10% of current numbers)

These are two statistics among many and ZH readers may enlarge this list at their leisure.  My point: this Loughner moment is lilliputian, neither a national tragedy nor a historical smear.   

Oh regional Indian's picture

Well said all around Giordano. 

But all well said-ness aside, the truth is that there is no hiding behind a return to constitutionality. Can any good student of American history tell me when it was exactly 9or around about) that the constitutional basis of the US was undermined? What about the men who wrote said constitution? Do we know the truth of them and their times or mere eulogistic historical accounts of who they were perceived to be or more importantly how they were meant to be perceived? A lot of my reading says that many of the Founding Fathers were not great or even good men. You can do your own research. Enough books and articles pointing counter to school taught history abound.

I think what this article points to is a very fundamental question, namely, what is governance and what is freedom?

Tribal societies worked because they we small, manageable and had contiguous histories.

Anything larger has always proven to be un-managable except though some flavour of despotism.

I see a return to tribalism and welcome it.

ORI

http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/evolution-devolution-involution/

cossack55's picture

Screw tribalism.  A little more LIBERTY and lot less freedom would be fine by me.

Oh regional Indian's picture

Cossack, any collective experiment equals compromise. Liberty, fine word, but most people's definition of it suggests the loner life. 

tribes represent optimal collective living. Anything larger (even a village) begins to show cracks and despotism in some flavour.

ORI

pan-the-ist's picture

The problem with Tribal living is that it favors the breeders, and unless the family is very wealthy, the breeders tend to be poor and uneducated (as you need wealth to educate and provide for children.)

I'd recommend solving the worlds problems by requiring a licence to breed.  This will reduce the population of people unfit to participate in society.  The ignornant will likely call me statist, but their children will thank me.

Pants McPants's picture

I have no problem with tribal living so long as it is a voluntary association.  Freedom and voluntaryism are inseparable.

Who would issue the license to breed?  I would think sound money would take care of that on its own.  Specifically, your safety net consists of your family and (maybe) a few friends within the tribe or neighborhood.  If you are on your own, well, you will have to save $$$ before reproducing.  I mean, can you imagine?  Saving for something before purchasing/investing?

AnAnonymous's picture

I'd recommend solving the worlds problems by requiring a licence to breed.  This will reduce the population of people unfit to participate in society.  

 

This is a non sense. People have much, much troubles to get with the program.

The program is one of an unsustainable model of functioning.

The only people who must be deemed to participate in such kind of society are people who could provide a key to turn the model sustainable.

Current number: zero.

Every one is a person who is pushing more or less the model to its lethal end.

It is a classic reflex of expansionists. Usually, expansionists progress by pushing others out of their resources. Issue comes when there are no more people  to push out of their resources. At this point, expansionists are unable to notice that the tables have turned, that the people who were pushed out of their resources are the ones able to expand.

 

You cant solve an overconsumption trouble (unsustainability of the model) by kicking out people who consume less, do not consume. It never works.

pan-the-ist's picture

I apologize for the agony you put into this heartfelt response, as I was trolling.  Obviously allowing the state to explicitly decide who can breed is a mistake.

AnAnonymous's picture

It might be not.

If a rowing boat is sinking, the mistake, as it is done now, is to blame bystanders looking at the scene from the banks. Done many, many times.

Pushing over the smaller people might buy time. Pushing over the bigger people, might stop the boat from sinking.

State or not.

cossack55's picture

Sadly, I must concur with P-T-I (which normally freaks me out).  Tribes tend to grow into nations which leads us back to HERE. Only a matter of time.  Darwin/Malthus may have been right, it is only a question of how, when, and by whom.  Otherwise, please, tell me, what is the maximum sustainable population of this particular iron ball, 1 ea., blue in color.

Oh regional Indian's picture

Cossack, tribes do not grow into nations. Just take native american tribes as a great example. They stayed independent even in the face of the white man.

Most tribes faded into oblivion due to genocide by invaders or defeat at the hands of an insider supported by invaders.

Tribes as a unit survived a few 100,000 years. The nation state is a young, failed experiment.

Always god to ponder why something survived that long. usually had something going for it.

Not sure I understand your blue colour iron ball (you mean the earth?) question?

ORI

pan-the-ist's picture

But Tribes failed.  Would you rather live in Afghanistan or Canada?

Oh regional Indian's picture

Afghanistan, prior to American occupation, anyday.

You do realize that the American/Nato occupation forces have distorted that nation beyond what it's tribal origins were? Soviets did that back in the 70's 80's?

Not a good choice set. Try again?

ORI

cossack55's picture

I must disagree with above premise.  Many Indian nations united to destroy the murdering cur Custer at Little Big Horn.  Once the reason for unification was removed they went back to their seperate lands.  Lawrence was equally disappointed in his vision of a United Arabia at the end of WW1.  Ended up as a despondant green grocer. 

Granted, the nation state usually results in millions getting it in the neck, but it looks like thats the current game in progress for the at least forseeable future.

StychoKiller's picture

Look to Africa, then tell me how tribalism helped an entire continent resist those societies that left tribalism behind.  Too many humans, not enough humans using their brains, after all, thinking is hard work -- doing what the chief tells you to involves very little thought!

Hephasteus's picture

No screw this. I won't live in anything other than a tribal society. It's not perfect but it's a damn site better than this. I want to cooperate with people who have the SAME GOALS as me. I want to judge people I have a good deal of experience with and we are much more intimately acquainted than this fucking strangers doing everything in our fucking lives. Forcibly including you in monetary sytems. Laws rules which are not laws or rules at all they are fucking games of I win you lose. Calling indians and blacks idiots and lower because they won't operate outside of tribal systems of government and won't EVOLVE. Because they are better and more satisfying for more of the participants. Brutalizing and then ridiculing them all along the path of haha you lost our gangs are bigger and we can legitimize and illigitimize force and violence better than you.

These systems do nothing but create systems, make them honest and forthright, this is the tradiitionalizing stage. Then they corrupt them but keep the tradition.

pan-the-ist's picture

ORI, leaving no opportunity unspent to push his agenda.

Oh regional Indian's picture

Interesting pan, what agenda do you perceive? Please do tell.

ORI

Oh regional Indian's picture

Hmmmmm..... maybe you see a trend that I don't in what I'm saying.

ORI

Oh regional Indian's picture

Hmmmmm..... maybe you see a trend that I don't in what I'm saying.

If you really understood my agenda, I think you'd pop an artery. ;-)

ORI

cossack55's picture

I've some arteries to spare, go for it.

Oh regional Indian's picture

Butlerian jihad. Takedown of the current industrial paradigm, deeply flawed in it's very origins.

In-ovation of a new energy/tech-no-logical paradigm, perfect harmony between man/machine/nature.

A re-evolution (in-volution) leading to the quest for the  discovery of the 'self" as the true basis/reason for our existence.

ORI

Rodent Freikorps's picture

I believe ORI will defend the Caste system.

cossack55's picture

ORI, as a Deist I have no argument with your vision.  It is currently apparent that both your vision and my vision of Liberty are both probably not going to happen, hope springs eternal.  The interesting occurrence is that both of our visions of a better world are not mutually exclusive.  I just think our species has yet to evolve enough to "see" it.

Oh regional Indian's picture

Awesome Cossack. So interesting to discover inner worlds of seemingly anonymous people, eh?

our vision and it's roots are a lot, a whole lot closer than you think. ;-)

Well met.

ORI

pan-the-ist's picture

You both scare the shit out of me. :)

StychoKiller's picture

Sure, feel free to stuff all the Djinnis in their respective bottles.  All things must pass -- Time marches on.

Mark Medinnus's picture

"Can any good student of American history tell me..."

History, American or otherwise, may not hold the key.  Poetry suggests the antecedents: Of man's first disobedience and the fruit of that forbidden tree/Whose mortall taste cliffnotes of sadness lent/To each Leviathanic public woe  

Oh regional Indian's picture

nice Mark. Thanks. Good to read classical english. Who wrote it? Not familiar.

ORI

Mark Medinnus's picture

Hi OHI!

It comes from Palgrave's Book of Twisted Lyrics.

BTW, for eighteen months now I've lived with my family on a Native American reservation as a health care provider.  The atmosphere here is tribal and familial.  This is fine.  But the other day I felt very outsider.  This made me feel sad.  I'm neither Native nor part of the tribal family.  And although my professional position has prescribed levels of respect and responsibilities, my authority was successfully undermined by a Native staff member well under my supervision.  I have much to learn.  Blessings, Mark       

Oh regional Indian's picture

So interesting to hear that Mark. And thanks for the book reference.

Interestingly enough, I find that kind of disconnect you mention here in india, being an indian. My "foreign returned" past has forever made me another, different. Very interesting feeling.

ORI

Mark Medinnus's picture

Forgive me, ORI.  I was kidding about the book reference.  The quote comes from the opening line of Milton's Paradise Lost, which I twisted in the words that followed.

I value your insight.  Yes, being somehow "another" or "different" is an interesting feeling.  Of course, I'd like to feel welcomed as a member of the community.  In time, perhaps, I may become so.  This is my hope.  Take care, Mark  

pan-the-ist's picture

Let no opportunity to exploit a high profile event go to waste.  Reframe it and use it to push your agenda.

snowball777's picture

You mean like Bruno is pushing the NRA's?

pan-the-ist's picture

Pick an agenda, I'll provide a Laughner related sound-bite.

pan-the-ist's picture

Had Mr. Laughner been allowed to experiment with drugs in the mainstream, he would not have mixed with the criminal underground, which, no doubt, assisted his descent into insanity.

His psychotic symptoms may also have been recognized by the family doctor and dealt with sooner, as the family would not have been afraid to seek help.