This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Cynicism is Intellectual Cowardice ... a Cop-Out to Rationalize Fear and Laziness
Cynicism Is Not Smart, Sophisticated or Detached … It’s a Cop-Out
Preface: Obviously, giving up cynicism and getting active doesn’t mean adopting phony hopium. It means abandoning both fear and laziness – on the one hand – and false hope on the other.
In other words, question authority and be cynical of those in power. But don't be cynical of the desirability - and necessity - of acting to challenge the destructive or criminal acts of those in power.
We have overwhelming numbers (and see this). If we worked together we would win.
Why aren’t we?
A large reason that we are failing is that people are copping out … by adopting a cynical attitude.
Many of us pretend that we are too smart to think anything can change. Too smart to get emotionally involved in the destruction of our prosperity or our liberties.
“Cynicism is nothing but intellectual cowardice”.
- Henry Rollins
“Cynicism is not realistic and tough. It’s unrealistic and kind of cowardly because it means you don’t have to try.”
- Peggy Noonan
“A cynic is a coward …. Cynicism always takes the easy way out. It is a form of laziness that provides someone with an excuse for not making any attempt to change the world …. Cynicism is a way to hide …. Cynics are afraid …. So, instead, they pass judgment on anyone who is trying to make a difference. They ridicule the efforts of individuals and organizations that are working hard under incredibly difficult circumstances …. Being cynical is often thought of as being composed and detached. It is considered to be a sign of sophistication. Cynics are mistakenly given credit for possessing a deep awareness regarding the limits of what humans can accomplish which is somehow lacking in those who spend their time in passionate efforts to change the world …. Being filled with cynicism is indeed a cowardly and sad way to go through life. ”
- Michael Crawley
We’ve previously noted:
The ironic thing is that if all of the people who think of themselves as cynics or skeptics made noise, things would instantly change for the better. In other words, the millions upon millions of cynics/skeptics/self-described “realists” aren’t raising a ruckus against the fraud being committed by the giant banks, the corruption of our political system, or the lawlessness and imperial arrogance of our military-industrial complex because they think things can’t change.
But by staying silent, they are actually creating the conditions in which nothing can change.
If the millions of cynics woke up to the fact that they are a huge group – especially when combined with the people who are already actively working for the restoration of a democratic republic, justice, and the rule of law – they would suddenly realize that collectively we can change things in a heart beat.
***
Skepticism, cynicism and “realism” is an act of fear, of cowardice, of apathy. Because if the skeptics just got off their backsides and made some noise, things would change.
The Real Hero Fights Without Knowing Whether Or Not He’ll Succeed
The optimist – whether a person of faith or plain old positive temperament – is sure that he’ll succeed.
The pessimist - i.e. the cynic - is sure he'll fail. Indeed, the powers-that-be try to instill pessimism (see number 2) so that we won't try.
But the truth is that we never know in advance whether we’ll win or not.
How do we know if what we’re doing will really have an effect or not? How do we know if we are being called upon to struggle in order to succeed in changing things for the better … or for the heck of it?
***
We are called upon as part of our core purpose to struggle to try to make the world a better place. But we are not privy to fruits of our actions. We are not granted a view of the future … we will never know how many people we will help, and how we will change the course of history.
We are called upon to struggle, but we can never know the end result of our efforts … that is not for us mere mortals to know.
Chris Hedges – the Pulitizer-prize winning reporter who challenged the indefinite detention law and amazingly succeeded against all odds in having a judge strike down that law, saying:
None of us thought we would win.
Another judge – amazingly – halted all nuclear construction and licenses until disposal risks are addressed.
They didn’t know until they tried whether or not they could win.
And – even if we lose the immediate battle – we will help win a long-term war. Specifically – as bad as things are (and yes, we know things are getting worse) – they would be much worse if millions of people worldwide hadn’t struggled.
As Hedges writes:
The battles that must be fought may never be won in our lifetime. And there will always be new battles to define our struggle. Resistance to tyranny and evil is never ending.
So how can we fight not knowing whether we’ll succeed?
F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote:
The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. One should, for example, be able to see that things are hopeless and yet be determined to make them otherwise.
Hellen Keller pointed out:
Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing.
And Czech leader Vaclav Havel said:
Hope is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense regardless of how it turns out.
Go Viral … It’s Contagious
Courage is contagious (and as scared as we may be of the powers-that-be, they're terrified of us as well.)
So is the ability to think.
As we’ve previously noted:
[Studies show ] that even one dissenting voice can give people permission to think for themselves. Specifically:
Solomon Asch, with experiments originally carried out in the 1950s and well-replicated since, highlighted a phenomenon now known as “conformity”. In the classic experiment, a subject sees a puzzle like the one in the nearby diagram: Which of the lines A, B, and C is the same size as the line X? Take a moment to determine your own answer…The gotcha is that the subject is seated alongside a number of other people looking at the diagram – seemingly other subjects, actually confederates of the experimenter. The other “subjects” in the experiment, one after the other, say that line C seems to be the same size as X. The real subject is seated next-to-last. How many people, placed in this situation, would say “C” – giving an obviously incorrect answer that agrees with the unanimous answer of the other subjects? What do you think the percentage would be?
Three-quarters of the subjects in Asch’s experiment gave a “conforming” answer at least once. A third of the subjects conformed more than half the time.
Get it so far? People tend to defer to what the herd thinks.
But here’s the good news:
Adding a single dissenter – just one other person who gives the correct answer, or even an incorrect answer that’s different from the group’s incorrect answer – reduces conformity very sharply, down to 5-10%.
Why is this important? Well, it means that one person who publicly speaks the truth can sway a group of people away from group-think.
If a group of people is leaning towards believing the government’s version of events, a single person who speaks the truth can help snap the group out of its trance.
There is an important point here regarding the web, as well. The above-cited article states that:
When subjects can respond in a way that will not be seen by the group, conformity also drops.What does that mean? Well, on the web, many people post anonymously. The anonymity gives people permission to “respond in a way that will not be seen by the group”. But most Americans still don’t get their news from the web, or only go to mainstream corporate news sites.
Away from the keyboard, we are not very anonymous. So that is where the conformity dynamic — and the need for courageous dissent — is vital. It is doubly important that we apply the same hard-hitting truthtelling we do on the Internet in our face-to-face interactions; because it is there that dissent is urgently needed.
Bottom line: Each person‘s voice has the power to snap entire groups out of their coma of irrational group-think. So go forth and be a light of rationality and truth among the sleeping masses.
And a recent study shows that when only 10% of a population have strongly-held beliefs, their belief will often be adopted by the majority of the society.
This is true of soldiers as well as civilians. Indeed, if the soldiers, sailors, seals, flyboys, intel operatives and law enforcement officers wake up to what is really happening, things would change overnight.
Some historical quotes may be helpful in illustrating the importance of struggling to make things better …
It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.
- Robert F . Kennedy
We must never despair; our situation has been compromising before; and it changed for the better; so I trust it will again. If difficulties arise; we must put forth new exertion and proportion our efforts to the exigencies of the times.
- George Washington
There is no act too small, no act too bold. The history of social change is the history of millions of actions, small and large, coming together at points in history and creating a power that governments cannot suppress.
- Howard Zinn
If you don’t like the news, go out and make some news of your own.
- Scoop Nisker
To hell with circumstances; I create opportunities.
- Bruce Lee
»
- advertisements -
100% correct Banzai.
This article leaves me flat. I disagree with it's premise.
I am cynical of government, big business, and politicans of both major parties.
I am also cynical of the nature of mankind (in the 1st world countries such as the US) to band together and force governments and businesses to change - which they should and must.
Problem is, the sheeple are too busy chasing the dollar, and too distracted by daily life. Governments - and for the most part - businesses - know this, so thereby have the perfect "trap".
We traders who see tons of unwashed and unpsun/unedited data KNOW the true score, and are not fooled by lying politicians and deceptive big business.
As Robert Redford said in "Lions for Lambs";
they bank on your apathy, they bank on your wilful ignorance.Now, that can be said and used for BOTH sides of the political spectrum, and used in many ways.
Redford meant it against the MIC and the Bush administration, but it now can be used for Obama as well as big business.
..because they ALL do.
Just read earlier that M. Friedman was responsible (in part) for "automagic withholding", as you put it. This from the man who once quipped, "Put the Federal Government in charge of the Sahara Desert, and within five years there'll be shortages of sand." Nobody's perfekt, I guess.
+ 10 ... you've got it exactly.
Too much is annoying but, I don't trust anyone that doesn't have a healthy dose of cynicism.
Enjoy your posts, GW, and you are among those that make the world a tad wiser. Don't take this the wrong way, but for future reference, one reaps what they sow (not sew). You must not be a gardener!
GW : you sound like Ann Barnhardt. Establishing the link between collective decadence trends and factual events is not easy; it requires extreme vigilence to not bend to populist and emotional fervour.
Your message is true but your focus is now emotional. Stay rational. Cynicism is the expression of those who believed in "manifest destiny", in USa, USa, USa, and seeing their hegemony mantra now being trampled provokes this knee jerk. Its this prevalent reality which propogates the negation of a certain idea of the "american dream"; not that of Tom Paine but of Rambo! Ronald was the man who morphed the US nation into Rambo and ROcky mania. We lost the generosity, the solidarity, the soul of Steinbeck. And those who believed in that new John Galt age are now in pain; withdrawal and denial pain.
Its not a question of cowardice its a question of DENIAL. Its much deeper. And the US community has lost its collective compass; as altruism is now considered a dirty word in the name of selfish objectivism and "greed is good" and "damned if I say hold enuff!"; all in the name of libertarian ideology.
In a finite world we need new values. Spiritual and sustainable in humanist universality. The US inception has all the ingredients to allow the US nation and its people to refind THAT flame.
True spirtuality, a belief in ethical values and the collective accumulation of past wisdom, devoid of dogma, is not incompatible with a material world of progress. It provides the essential : balance. Like reconciling Aristotle with Gaiea.
Refinding the balance between democracy and republic; between general good and entrepreneurial, individual freedom, stays the magic of western civilisation. But it needs the "bottom up" impetus of grass roots people's voice to compensate the prevalent "top down" momentum of elitist rule in society; which is the fountainhead of all hubris. Navigating between Charybdis and Scylla...tied to the mast of reasoned probity.
falak
You seem to speak from one generation-- and your view of cynicism is contained in your perceived failure of the "American dream" dream of TV reality.
Values exist. Morality exists. Whats missing is your ability to see it. Your confusion in defining differences between Libertarian ideology and Rands objectivism belies your liberal education.
The world is finite but the universe is quit large and your call for new values sounds a lot like "living breathing Constitution" pap.
True spirituality, faith, beliefs, from past wisdom is right out of Vera Stanley Alder or maybe Carlos Castanada.
Balance is fine but the USA is not a democracy-- (a socialist wish) it is a representitive republic. Life says there will always be inequality in all things regardles of your dogma so learn to live with it. Your call for the rise of the prolotariat is telling as you say it is that that will "balance" the hubrus of the elitist rule--except that in real life some of the grass roots are more equal than others and soon become elite.
Libertarian ideals forever.
there is nothing "new" about the values that I adhere to in the historical context.
But I do agree with you that my perspective specifically focusses on what America has morphed into as dominant political and economic system, since November 22 1963.
Yes, that is the tipping point moment IMO in the story of current AMerica.
And to understand the current conundrum of the world, aka Pax Americana runaway train, you have to understand what happened since that fatal day and how the power structure of the dominant, hegemonial nation-state moved away from its cultural heritage of democracy and republic to something very different under Nixon and then Reagan.
In the delusional, elitist quest inconised by Atlas Shrugged and John Galtism in literature, which then affirmed itself politically with Wolfowitz's NWO mantra after the fall of Berlin Wall. Yes, clash of civilisation was the logical sequel to the idealised quest. Just like Laude Novae militiae was the logical real life sequel to 'God wills it'. Politics always needs "hands on" solutions to add flesh to idealism of the original vision. Power never functions in an ideal vacuum. It needs blood and guts! Thats when the rot begins! In every imperial quest.
Well, we have the John Galts now running the world and... dying like flies in the face of what they have themselves built. Their perpetual fiat machine fed on steroids.
Ironical epitaph to Atlas Shrugged novelista ideology dream is now provided by the REAL world; in hard facts as the curtain of this sham ideology falls.
I don't feel like Gene Kelly and "singing in the rain" anymore! About the American dream!
Ain't is strange that humanity nevers learns from past lessons, and invents the Hoy Grail of Capitalism...to subsequently destroy it's very own creation time and time again!
It happened with the USSR ...
Just like it did with the radiant city on the hill of old : Jerusalem, now once again symbol of new age corruption.
Just like 'God wills It!' of old, the three prophetic words of the past Holy Grail Crusade destroyed precisely those who proclaimed it : the Universal Catholic church, in the rubble of its own inquisitorial intolerance. Something that the likes of Ann BArnhardt conveniently forget in her pursuit of fundamentalist catholcism; Te Deum to her!
History repeats to defeat Man's hubris!
So although my focus is on what my generation has lived through; as the material for current case study; my message is universal and recurrent.
We're seeing it before our very eyes with the Pax Americana unwind...the tale of our times!
BTW : using historical parallels to make a point is not something specific to my posts. Look at this on ZH :
41 Years After The Death Of The Gold Standard, A Look At "How We Ended Up In This Economic Purgatory" | ZeroHedge
Key line : If you want to understand current events, then you first have to understand history. How did we get here? More specifically for financial markets, how did we end up in this mess -- this economic purgatory?
That's the epitaph to John Galtism I'm referring to!
I believe that you have a complete failure to understand what John Galt means. Simply that we have the right to what we have produced, not that we have the right to what others have produced. We are not to be forced to "sacrifice" on the altar of another persons making. And we are not to be punished for our desire to produce. None of us wants to go to the gulch as that would be abandoning everything we have strived to build. The money changers, the traders and bankers that leverage the producer's wealth to incentivise gambling and theft are not objectivists. They are simple thieves and manipulators. They have not produced one single thing...except destruction. Galt's gulch never had any place for those people so why would you assume that what we have today is an objectivists goal? As far as i can tell you simply don't like objectivism because it is in direct contradiction to collectivism. Collectivism has gotten us to where we are today. Central government control involved in virtually every facet of business and personal life and choices, determining the winners and losers while raising hands from the table and declaring "i didn't make that"!
you sir are in the rosy ideology of the book's mantra. I am in the reality of what that ideology, as practised by RR and Greenspan and consorts made it into. Ayn Rand apart from being a novelist became a political ideologue and trend setter. I examine that role of her contribution to society not her narrower role as novelist; a latter day Agatha Christie writing a mystery, romantic novel.
They, the movers and shakers of american libertarian politics of the 60-80 period, ALL said they believed in that entrepreneurial ideology; just like the original knights Templar were supposed to guard the Temple as annointed by the Popes and kings; not indulge in ethnic cleansing and becoming the bankers/traders of the holy land! Losing finally their sacred mission as fallen, bickering, corrupt but collectively very rich soldier-monks. Like the Bankstas of today. History alas repeats.
Unfortunately, reality is what shapes the world and the ideology is then left like the empty shell once the fruit has been eaten!
Damned interesting to see the evolution of commentary here lately, as divided by place of residence....
Falak, I've noticed yu n Ghordius have been on fire here lately...whilst our Merikan buddies have been dipping deeper n deeper into a repetitious recycling of stale rhetoric that, unlike wines or cheese, do not get better with age...
I cannot account for this increasing divergence in quality of thought and presentation except by supposing that somebody in Brussels must have temporarily turned off the taps of the chemtrail program over yus all, while it's goin extra strong atop of the new world...
or maybe that Fukushima shite is really starting to bite!
At any rate, when confronted by howlers like this one
yu have to shake yur head and ask if there's any hope left of at least a rump of real resistors to the Femaville Express....
Obviously, we must all defer to your superior intellect, Sir! Maybe you can attach your resume for us to ponder so even more of us can be in your awe!
early exit from school, then lead-off sledge at the head of a CN Tie Gang...after that, farmin and running small biznesses...did wonders to work out all the konformist konditioning and get rid of the tendency towards tedious theorizing.
further questions chuckles?
An ideology as practised by the individual, not through a collectivist, central control. Every ideology, when put into a centrally controlled system leads to abuse. To my knowledge Ayn Rand never suggested that a central government, which would include the Fed, had anything to do with objectivism, except to keep its hands off! Involking Reagan or Greenspan means nothing, if they in fact used their beliefs to centralize power. The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the one. The beauty of objectivism is that it can be practiced as an individual without impact on others. I can grow as much wheat as i wish and stuff my self to the gills without harm to another. Collectivism, on the other hand, relies totally on the theft of anothers labor to sustain ones self. That is ultimately destructive, especially when done without the "victim's" consent. AS MArx saw it, it would only take a few generations of dictatorship enforced collectivism before all of the "individuals" were bred out and we could achieve the communist utopia. Is that what you believe? That we can be modified into selfless little State robots?
Sounds like the convoluted, self-important nonsense my World Studies 101 professor used to make us read. Makes about as much sense too. Actually I just sense a lot of projection of the author's personal beliefs; or whatever...
Exactly who are you suggesting has failed your "altruism" test? The .001% that run the big banks and government? Seems a bit of a massive over-generalization. I feel very altruistic. I simply refuse to support those elements that our collectivist government has seen fit to reward with my money without my permission. That is not generosity, that is theft. Generosity and altruism require the voluntary action of the giver. If the giver is not given the choice but forced, he is deprived not only of the money but the rewards that that choice would provide, for generosity has as much if not more to do with the giver than the receiver. If you are suggesting that cynicism is somehow an excuse for the lack of altruism, i would say that cynicism and the lack of altruism are the result of being robbed. Robbed of money, security, diginity and freedom.
The problem is: A majority of Americans can't even understand what you just said even thought it was written in the langauge they (mostly) can read.
it requires extreme vigilence -- which appears to many as cynicism.
Appeals to altruism must be held to the test of extreme cycnism about the real motives of the person making the appeal.
We are called upon as part of our core purpose to struggle to try to make the world a better place -- And appeals to the tenets of an unnamed religion require the highest level of cynicsm.
religion is dogma and denies the basis of rational trial and error process we call empiricism, that feeds science and progress; provided we don't believe blindly in it and realise all science is limited : it is fact until it isn't, like newtonian science today.
Bullshit GW. I respect you deeply and I love your posts.
But you're not fighting. You're writing.
And there's a universe of difference between those two things.
What we need is the former. And no one, including you is willing to go there yet. Despite all the propaganda-promoted notions of "passive resistance", history shows us very few examples of non-violent change. In the 21st century, speeches, blog posts and other non-violent demonstrations are viewed as important release valves to keep the peace, but they are *not* seen as vehicles for change.
You can tell yourself that you're "fighting for change".
But the above post isn't fighting. It's merely "tolerated demonstration" in an unimportant corner of the Internet.
Fighting is fighting.
That's where this ends. This ends and we all know it. Because the situation is intractible and those in power will not willingly part with it. ... But we're not there yet.
You can call that "cynicism". But others call it realism and knowledge of history.
I wonder if this helps: Chinese has this saying: "Gun lips and sword tongue".
Words bite.
Passion starts in the heart and it is good to first move the the hand in the form of writing before it moves to the feet in the form of fighting. GW's passion shows through in his writing, regardless if he uses quotes or original content. You can clearly see his intent. Will America stand up when the time comes? We'll see, I hope it does and I hope to think that I will.
The pen is mightier than the sword.
...but no match for the gun. That's why DHS just purchased hundreds of millions of rounds of .40 hollowpoint. ZOG does not fear words; nobody can beat the Jews at that game. ZOG fears guns. In the hands of people who are going to use them.
Isnt it said,that, the pen is the strongest weapon!
First you inform,and then you fight,though i se what you meen ,but it never happend reverse!
Might be more about, in what everybody is reading,mainstream idiocracy,then we gets nowhere,total conspirations teories,the same,nowhere.
And luckely,somebody havent the ,Foamscreen on,24/7,and dont read Sun or WSJ or Guardian or RT Der Speigel ect,but read them all,and shake the information 364degrees!
Infomation is a weapon stronger than any bomb,it just has go out to all:Like, i dont want Law,i want Justice,and then Law,build on Justice!
Seems like English isn't your native language, but +1000 for "mainstream idiocracy"! Sad part is, it's apparently willful.
So you are saying there is no point in even talking about change - only doing?
Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. People organize first BEFORE they fight. And organization requires talking.
There is absolutely value in talking.
But to suggest as GW does above, that the entire problem is simply cynicism and a lack of "spreading the word" is historically naive.
History is filled with nations in which the people universally understood their oppression. And it wasn't cynical to recognize that the only thing standing between reality and change was blood in the streets.
Btw -- I'm a big fan of GW's posts. My issue here is simply with this notion that change can be realistically affected through widespread consciousness of the issue. Historically speaking that argument is on very thin ice.
No wonder I am addicted to this website. Where else could I get this kind of discussion and dialogue?
Agreed. You wonn't find the Krugmans, Bernanks or Diamonds of the world (Let's not forget the Rockfellers and Windsors) debating the status quo with the proles. They leave that to the permanently brainwashed (red team/blue team adherents) and the libertarians.
“I am of course confident that I will fulfill my tasks as a writer in all circumstances -- from my grave even more successfully and more irrefutably than in my lifetime. No one can bar the road to truth, and to advance its cause I am prepared to accept even death. But may it be that repeated lessons will finally teach us not to stop the writer's pen during his lifetime? At no time has this ennobled our history.”
"The strength or weakness of a society depends more on the level of its spiritual life than on its level of industrialization. Neither a market economy nor even general abundance constitutes the crowning achievement of human life. If a nation’s spiritual energies have been exhausted, it will not be saved from collapse ...by the most perfect government structure or by any industrial development.
A tree with a rotten core cannot stand."
Alexander SolzhenitsynPretty words. Solzhenitsyn's totalitarian government was replaced in name only by an equally totalitarian government. The former head of the KGB is now the prime minister. The apparatchiks became oligarchs. And the people were royally fleeced.
Your quote is a perfect example of what "writing" so often achieves.
His nation's prior revolution however achieved actual regime change. That it didn't work out so well is another story.
First of all, Solzhenitsyn did not have a totalitarian government. He wrote about forced labor camps. It wasn't his making.
Second, whether they were later fleeced or not, depends on which side of the ledger you're on. But for sure they were not being murdered by the millions anymore for political "crimes". However, if you really long for the Soviet Union prior to 1990 you can probably arrange a permanent visa for yourself to North Korea.
You're misinterpreting my use of the possessive. I've read Solzhenitsyn. I studied political philosophy, and knew his son well.
Yes, he raised consciousness. Show me where those in power lost it.
I'll show you that the Russians have virtually no national debt. I'll show you that the USSR is now many separate republics.
Prove to me what's the same about it. The number of nukes? If you're saying that people in power remain in power regardless of the political system, tell me anywhere in the world that's not true as well. It's universally true.
Furthermore, "democracy" in America is merely a convenient term for making propaganda. The US doesn't need to spread :democracy" to the rest of the world. The US doesn't even know what "democracy" means. It's propaganda that Stalin would be proud of. And it works well, even today. Democracy. Right.
"Prove to me what's the same about it."
Are you kidding? The Soviet hierarchy fleeced their respective nations and they and their families are still their nation's elites. Privatization was the greatest theft in their nation's histories. Putin was head of the fucking KGB.
That would be like having regime change in the United States and celebrating Dick Cheney as our new populist hero.
'Prove what's the same about it'???
Everybody already knows who benefited from privatization. What's the difference, Putin or Schmootin? It's universal. It's going to happen, Putin or Chavez or Obama. Whatever. Power begets power. It's more demonstrable than E=MC2.
Now who's cynical?
Me.
Say what you want about Russia today, the country and its people is a lot better off than it was 20 years ago. That's a fact.
These fucking haters can't get past Putin or Bush or Cheney or whomever. They waste their time on simpleton hate. Like one fucking guy matters. They'd be a lot better off forgetting about this preposterous scapegoating. One guy doesn't do that much.
It's a weakness of the libs. The same self importance that makes them think humans cause climate change. Hey. Wake up. You're not that fucking important. The earth doesn't fucking need you or care about you. It will be here long after your sorry ass is gone.
They betray themselves everytime with their fucking knee jerk, populist reactions. Who the fuck cares about Putin. Like he controls the fucking world. Like Obama controls the fucking world. Like Bernanke controls the fucking world.
The whole notion is simpleminded and delusional. Change yourself. Quit blaming your situation on some object of derision your liberal cohorts have erected as a monument to their self-righteous indignation. Don't be a fucking stupid tool ---- of any side.
One guy does matter.......... Mao, Hitler, Ho, etc. Ask the millions they had killed.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/08/15/zionist-extremist-chamish-admits-bollyn-is-right-zionists-did-911/
9-11 sealed the deal, the checkpoints and surveillance, inability to assemble at your own White House (the people's house) is a yellow ribbon around the people. Just as they had planned. No one will be spared in the end but the ones in the "club." You may be in that club, I don't know.
But I do know this - It is americans like you who will ensure there will be no "aid to America" and nowhere to run. 127 nations turned away the Jewish people during the holocaust, denying them entry as refugees. Americans could very well face the same fate, all the while soothing muscic will be blasting out of the speakers as self-important, ignorant Americans, still will be pounding their chests when their pants are down around the knees, bent over and taking it again and again and again.
Well said.
End the Fed. Boycott Ben's paper. Use metal.
At least allow us our rhetorical tools to avoid charges of treason or worse.
"At least allows us our rhetorical tools..."
Not the least.
The unbraves listen to the braves.
Valor running rampant.
4 and a half years volunteering for Ron Paul, then watching the RNC and the delegate scam, vote fraud, vote supression, etc, how could you not be cynical.
And, I fear that after the election the Ron Paul supporters will be hunted down and "re-educated".
yes yes yes, thats why i love to read Machiavellis books.
take heart-- after five years of fighting for RP on the inside of the REC( republican executive committee) of a southern county -- I was rewarded by a county wide vote on the Republican Primary ballot that elected a Liberty Caucus Ron Paul candidate to the State Committeeman position-- this is a position that gets to vote on the state chair to the national conventions and the National Republican Chair-- and puts together the national platform--
So we went from a REC that was a lock step top down oldboy drinking club to a up front in your face liberty movement that will grow and educate the voters in this county--and it only took five years--and belief in the cause. I want all 80,000 plus republican voters in this county to be liberty and Constitutionaly aware and I'm going to work like hell to get it that way.