This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Your Kids Don't Belong To You
Submitted by Michael Krieger of Liberty Blizkrieg blog,
This is such an incredibly creepy video it’s actually hard for me to believe it’s real. Professor of political science at Tulane University and MSNBC host, Melissa Harris-Perry states the following:
We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it’s everyone’s responsibility, and not just the household’s, then we start making better investments.
This clip is very important because it really demonstrates the mentality of a statist. They want to run your lives in every way you can possibly imagine, including the upbringing of your children. Outrageous.
»
- 46297 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
http://www.youtubedoubler.com/?video1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwa...
How does that fit in with say the repeal of Glass-Steagal? I have no idea what your views are but wasn't that a good law that protected us from bankster mischief for more than 50 years until Clinton signed it out of existence in 1999? My point is that not all government intervention and oversight is bad. And some "statism", if you want to call it that, is pretty damn good at insuring the general welfare of the overall population.
I am not an anarchist by nature but I'm becoming one.
Glass-Steagal was a good law, just as freedom of press, freedom of speech and freedom OF religion is good law etc. What we have now is a continuation of rights infringement, natural rights codified under law at our founding as a nation slowly being eroded by MORE law.
Every man has his limits for what he will accept for "the common good", mine has been reached. You don't touch my kids, you don't even think about touching my kids or influencing my kids on statist bullshit.
We have Big Brother cameras at intersections now. We have Big Brother implementing soda bans, prying & spying into ALREADY TAXED assets, Big Brother trying to allay concerns a missle fired from a joy-stick-drone-warrior will never enter my patio. The best & brightest Big Brothers have destroyed the economy and lives.
And then this latest stupid bitch allowed to broadcast ON MY AIRWAVES (to use a statist vernacular) that some collectivist, unseen, unaccountable society is responsible for raising my children.
Well, if thats the case, they'll have no one to blame but themselves when this "collectivist society" finds their "collective" heads on pikes...they raised them to be what they are.
I didn't like the women either, but that was more on points of style than message. I thought she came off as imperious and overweening the same way Rachel Maddow dispenses her snark. But the message was actually on point. We are not producing educated professionals or knowledge workers at anywhere near the rate needed to sustain the post-industrial economy. So something is wrong. Something is definitely wrong when a Russian 7th grader can come over here and pass the GED without even breaking a sweat, and yes I mean the English comprehension portions as well. Many Europeans and Russians speak better English than we do. You can't place all the blame on the public schools, much of it perhaps, but not all. The 21st century aint gonna get any easier for young people entering the work force. It is only going to get more competitive. If we keep churning out delinquents and illiterates (roughly 50% of Detroit is illiterate and it's not much better across the nation) we're simply going to collapse under the pressures of a global, knowledge-based economy.
I have relatives in Berkeley. Sometimes I go there. The place teems with arrogant power mad commies like this.
"I didn't like the women either, but that was more on points of style than message."
I didn't either.
And it wasn't style it WAS message. The kids are not yours or hers, she's barely literate enough herself to even be opining on such things. She (and you apparently) thinks more of the SAME education SYSTEM is the answer when 80% of high school graduates in one of our largest cities (NYC) have to take remedial courses to get into a fucking community college?
No.
You strip teachers out who can't teach. You also stop cooking class, ag class, mommy has two daddys class until you get the basics back down. And not only that, children shouldn't have to go to school twelve hours a day, twelve months a year to learn the BASICS.
Well I'm not going to argue with you on that point. I think we are in violent agreement that something is seriously wrong with the public school system. I mean I'm a product of the public schools and look how well I turned out. Check out this 8th grade final exam from the 1895 to see how far we've retrogressed. Hell, I'd have flunked out and I have two college degrees.
http://www.barefootsworld.net/1895finalexam.html
Or another example - my son, sweet as the day is long, bullied and teased unmercifully all last year. He also takes jujitsu twice a week - loves it. This goes on and on in school - you know, the public schools with their no bullying policy. We have meetings, call parents - no relief. One day he has finally had enough and knocks one of these nasty kids on his ass. Guess who gets detention? That's right, my boy.
Many, if not most, public schools are primarily normative conformity machines.
Meant for this to post below the comment nmewn made -
"How many times has a good man (or woman) stood by and watched REAL abuse and their first thought is to kick the abusers ass?...then the second thought comes...I'll be the one going to jail for doing the right thing."
If I'd have been your kid's dad I would have said "Job well done!" and took him out fishing or to a baseball game.
It's acutally good that your son learned that the public school system is a microcosm of the larger macrocosm of society. So, this is actually very beneficial that he learns how these penalties apply, sooner, rather than later.
if i am "avoiding the point" then please elucidate, preferentially in coherent and simple sentences with standard paragraph formation.
is your point that crimes have been committed? in what respect? Fully understanding that I agree that your given examples are indeed negligent, however, they pale in comparison to the crimes of the state. which paints your examples as either diversionary or naive.
your assertion as far as i can ascertain is that all individuals are the property of the state, de facto. if i am incorrect, then please explain, as i am lost. If the state has the authority to determine who can breed, and what skills/understanding they impart to their offspring, then what ownership(vested control over outcomes) of oneself can truly exist?
do not bother appealing to my emotions on such a topic either, (in the world i inhabit, the vast majority of people come from such households, trust me, i've heard enough stories) it is a dishonest tactic, and also foolish, as you have no understanding of my upbringing.
I've already answered these questions. I think their should be minimal screening procedures for people planning to have kids. At a minimum I would include:
1) Financial means testing. No one below the poverty level is allowed to have kids. This should be done for obvious reasons. Not the least of which is that the children will require state support simply to survive. 1 in 4 children is already on food stamps and that's too much. On 4/5/2013 Tyler posted this article on poverty in America: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-05/21-key-statistics-about-explosive-growth-poverty-america. Did you read it? Instead of interrogating me maybe you should. A raft of disturbing statistics about child poverty in t his country. Is that factual enough for you? Can you not connect the dots between this sociopolitical reality and the need to stop unwanted, unplanned, or irresponsible pregnancies? Because if not then I don't know that we have anything more to talk about. I can't make a stronger argument than the one already presented in this article.
2) Psychological testing: I would test both parents with psychological screening tests designed to reveal the most deleterious mental illnesses, e.g., schizophrenia, depression, extreme bipolar, borderline personality disorder, and psychopathy. If one or both parents scores high on any of these tests they should be required to undergo counseling before they are allowed to conceive. Actually, this should be required before marriage in my opinion, just as we now require a blood test.
There. No ad hom in any of the above. If you still want to argue then I guess we have to agree to disagree.
i disagree that you or anyone has the right to enforce such policies.
the only real means of enforcement are within your own community, giving the state authority to assign valuations in respect to appropriate conduct results in genocide. base rule of law is favorable, any specific means of enforcement will result in regulatory capture on a scope which either you comprehend or endorse.
the above statement would only be viewed as hyperbolic in absence of historical precedent.
your arrogance is palpable.
either that, or you live devoid of experience with real men in the real world. you know, the one where your merits decide whether you live or die? irrespective of inherited wealth or a system that coddles you like an infant from cradle to grave?
learn your logical fallacies, ad hominem is a fun one to say, but there are so, so, many more.
i get that your world is only models, as in; poor people shouldn't reproduce because robots. but seriously, we are a species on this earth that needs periodic replenishment, and you really can't engineer that, you need nature, and that aspect of random generation to create people that will rise above..
You asked me to respond to you without making personal attacks, which I did, citing facts and making a fairly clear argument. You however came back with ad hom and bunch of flowery rhetoric and didn't cite a single fact. Want to try again or is that the best you can do?
"the only real means of enforcement are within your own community"
That's just a claim, an unsubstantiated claim. And even if it were true please describe the mechanics of how enforcement at a local level would work. Suzerainty? Feudalism? You're suggesting these are superior forms of government because they are smaller? That's your argument. Pretty weak argument. Non-existent actually.
BTW, your last paragraph looks like it was written on an etch-a-sketch and is filled with so many sentence fragments that it's unintelligible. So I don't think you should be scolding me on logic or my writing style.
In traditional China, if a kid does something bad, the parents go to jail. I think something like that would be appropriate here
Its the luck of the draw, son.
Did having idiot parents make you what you are now? Do you consider yourself a bad or good person now?
I behave ethically most of the time (99%). I don't break society's laws or cut people off and take their parking space. That kind of thing. I can function in society. But am I a "good person," as in likeable, winning personality, the guy in high school voted most likely to succeed? Certainly not. But I am self-aware enough to know that my psychological baggage would not make me a good parent. I'm far too self-absorbed plus I have quantative results to back that up. I've taken the Meyers-Briggs test several times (required at my last company) and I always score the same--"mastermind"--which is highly intelligent but rather cold and emotionless. Unfortunately, it's only the intelligent people who introspect on their fitness as a prospective parent. Stupid people which form the vast majority of society don't give a shit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icmRCixQrx8
"But I am self-aware enough to know that my psychological baggage would not make me a good parent. I'm far too self-absorbed plus I have quantative results to back that up."
We all have psychological baggage, some just handle it better.
You're coming from the point of view that you couldn't be a good parent. All a good parent is, is to show unconditional love.
I've seen "good parents" go bad and "bad parents" go good...its not a static proposition and not as clinical as you think.
I'm sure that's true in some cases, but I'm the opposite of the crying guy in Tuesday night's "Men With Testicular Cancer." He always wanted 3 kids. I never wanted any. The only similarity between him and me is that in both our cases it led to divorce.
No doubt, yet another "unhappy" american who wishes to blame his parents for his own fucked up choices.
On the other hand, iI find it ironic that one needs a dog license to own an annimal. Yet can squirt out dependants as long as one can fuck.
So you either suffer from cognitive dissonance or you didn't bother to read my comments. Your dog license analogy is exactly analogous to my driver's license analogy. There are no rules whatsoever for squirting out kids. And that is a problem that can't be glossed over with populist libertarian rhetoric no matter how hard you try. Octomom and "who gonna feed my babies" motel room lady are IN YOUR FACE. We know how these kids will grow up and we know most likely what they will turn into, and it aint neurosurgeons and lawyers. More like the corner crack dealer. So take your fatuous Dr. Phil profiling and shove it up your ass.
Because you and some others had a dysfunctional family does not mean that everyone should turn their children over to the statists. There are alwready laws to take children away from abusive parents.
Straw man argument. I never said that.
I'm glad you don't want kids.
For a mastermind, you seem rather slow witted and immune to the fact that you sound like a Nazi eugenecist.
They were pretty fond of the ability of the State to dictate who had the 'right' to reproduce.
Sorry your parents were assholes. They obviously damaged whats left of your mind.
I'm a lot of things but slow-witted isn't one of them.
I'm perfectly aware of how controversial this topic is, and I'm prepared to take the heat for it. We live in an age of genetic screening, and very soon, I'm talking a matter of less than a decade, we will be dealing with "designer babies." If what I am saying irritates you or infuriates you, buddy you aint seeing nothing yet.
Imagine two prospective parents (very wealthy) being able to walk into a baby clinic in the Caymans (offshore of course because it will certainly be illegal here in the US) and shop for their baby exactly as you would toss items into your grocery cart. "Yes we'd like 190 IQ, blond hair, blue eyes, musical ability (violin and piano), exceptional athleticism, no recessive genes for genetic abnormalities, no risk of alcoholism or other mental disorders...", etc. You think that can happen? Gattaca is happening. Now. How are you or your progeny going to compete with these alpha children? The plain and simple answer is you and your children won't.
But that's only the beginning. Parents who choose to forego genetic screening and opt for natural childbirth will be regarded as irresponsible. Especially if in the process of rolling the genetic dice they give birth to a child with Downs Syndrom, or Spinal Biffida, or Muscular Dystrophy, or any one of a 1000 different genetic defects that could have been caught by the Blue Cross genealyzer. People will grow increasingly intolerant of parents who burden society with children requiring enormous health care costs, and such parents may even lose their health care insurance. It's not out of the question. Insurance companies and corporations are already punishing people for smoking and obesity. This was reported in ZH just a couple days ago.
This is the Brave New World reality that is coming. Normal birthed humans will be completely downsourced into insignificant roles, if any roles at all. That is the terrifying new reality you will have to deal with, just as described in Huxley's novel. A thousand times more frightening than what I am suggesting which is rather tame by comparison. Don't waste your energy taking our your frustrations on me. Your real problems haven't even appeared yet, but they will soon.
Aren't your ideas for thinning the herd, not grossly unlike the Gattica - like scenario you have just outlined? Your argument is about weeding out bad parents, i get it, but in doing so you are simply eliminating the bad apples instead of plucking the red shiny ones.
"All they are doing is: a) Creating a damaged soul that will have a hard time finding their way in a merciless world. b) Creating one more unit of cheap labor for the global slave mill (especially true in 3rd world countries)." (I added the bold)
That is the purpose of school now, producing unquestioning, cheap labor. Where have you been?
Are you seriously using that as an arguement FOR gov't/ statist involvement?
Kids are an entirely private enterprise. If there is no family then there is no privacy, period. Marxists always twist? the language to suit their twisted ideology. Scooping up kids and imprisoning them in some horrible place to suit their disgusting statist ideology. Making better investments in what exactly? Pederasty? Certainly not the community.
Im glad I grew up in the 60's so at least I understand this level of BULLSHIT. Todays younger crowd doesnt know the difference of a true good and independant life. Never have, never will. Hope they can fight when required, but I dont think they wil realize its time to fight!
You would be surprised. Ron Paul's greatest fanbase came from people young enough to be your grandchildren. I was raised in a career military household, educated in Department of Defense schools, growing up on military bases--both foreign and domestic. Despite this, within 2 years of moving out of my parents house to college, I was full-tilt anarchocapitalist.
The internet has changed everything. People are learning. This cannot be stopped. The changes brought by the printing press centuries ago will look insignificant compared to the changes the world is experiencing, and will experience.
betcha john mccain and the other katzanjammer twin lindsey graham could find a rationale to agree with this commie harlot.
We better find out how many mullato kids are walking around with a bad lisp pretending to "be from the hood" (but raised upper middle class) when it suits their professorial job search. Might have a strong correlation to the views expressed above.
commodification of people is a symptom of
extreme stupidity, imho. "belong to" is just
the wrong phrase communicating the wrong conceptual model.
stupid people get all the air time, it is not an accident,
it is intentional.
ye be consumerables.
ye be consumerables.
1 in 5 kids on ADD or ADHD meds.
Over 5.4 million on psychotropic medications, with a good number misdiagnosed.
Story after story of horrible outcomes with these kids snapping mentally.
This video makes me want to punch a steel fucking wall in anger. So now they are labeling all parents unfit for their collectivist purposes? This exemplafies the ideology of welfare statist beliefs.....we are all equal, except for those people who are equally better than you. If this is true and they want this, than i suggest all political persons children start going to inner city public schools in DC, no special privilages allowed, it's only fair. All the same people should be put down on the national median for household incomes at the same time, unknowingly laid off from their jobs randomly, and be upside down on every aspect of their lives. I mean its only fair. At the same time I am just going to start procreating like a rabbit, as everyone else should, cause it's only fair, that way we all have to take care of more than we can handle.
Maybe I'm going on a tangent and making no sense, but we are walking full speed into the biggest fucking cyclone of shit armed with only a fly swatter from the dollar store.
You're just angry. This is a topic that gets people riled up. Tyler sometimes likes to throw a rock at the hornet's nest just to stir up controversy and get the natives pounding their chest and thrusting their spears in the air.
Now that my 3 cups of coffee have worn off, you want to know what I think will happen? Nothing. People will do what they have always done which is act irresponsibly. we will go from the present 7.1 billion on this planet to 8 billion, and then to 9 billion without even slowing down. Tens of millions of illegal aliens will swarm across our (US) southern borders to escape the poverty and squalor in their home countries and large parts of the US (in particular the southwest) will begin to resemble Tiajuana or some other 3rd world shithole. And all the while people will be asking "How did this happen?" It's pretty obvious how it is going to happen, i.e., no coherent family planning policy in the US or anywhere else in the world, except maybe China--and we see what an utter failure that is /sarc. But like I said, I don't think you have to worry about the gubmint coming to get your kids or promoting any kind of intelligent family planning. The government won't do shit until it's too late, and then it will be too late. Enter Soylent Green and +20 foot sea levels stage left.
P.S. I agree that Benzos and SSRIs and NRIs are being handed out like candy and we are far too overmedicated. It's a well known fact that most of the school shooters (like Columbine) were on some form of psychotropic SSRI.
"People will do what they have always done which is act irresponsibly. "
Governments will do what they have always done which is act irresponsibly...with the power to jail and kill. At least bad parents only mess up their own children, for the most part.
We are all so f**king stupid that we must have our decisions made for us.
This woman is one of the most elegant demonstrations of the absolute need for the 2nd amendment I have ever, ever seen. "They're coming for your children" is a cliche that is supposed to indicate overreaction or parody of someone who is paranoid. But...dude. Listen to the woman. They really are literally coming for your children.
I am sure this government employed black lady with corn rows and a lisp will do a great job of instilling productive and independent values into your kids.
Hey what happened to keep your f(n) laws off my body??????
That used to be the democrats. Now they own your f(n) body
Children do not belong to anyone including parents. They are not property and cannot be owned. Parents and to some extent the community has a responsibility towards children...to keep them safe, educate them etc but the notion that they are owned is pathological.
They belong to parents. They do not belong to the community.
They do not "belong" to anyone. Dogs belong, cars belong, possessions belong...people do not "belong" to other people.
They don't belong to their parents. They absolutely DO belong *WITH* their parents until such time as parents prove they are unfit, however. As a foster parent of 5 years' experience, I've seen the worst of the worst in parenting. And I'll go to my grave believing that as a rule of thumb and with very few exceptions (especially when you take practical reality into account) children belong with their parents. Nothing else will work because nothing else CAN work. Though, statists have proven that they WILL try once they've articulated a position like this. But it won't end well.
I love the smell of civil war in the morning.
In San Francisco, you don't own pets. You are their guardian.
Yes, they do. They belong to the Collective, as the nice lady in the video just told us, and you confirmed.
Will you let them out for feeding now and again? Or will they be too busy fetching your shower slippers for that to happen?
God I hope you do not have children.
Two thriving honest tall handsome successful sons thank you very much. I raised them and then set them free. Because I never owned them, I was responsible for them. Get it?
OK, so would you have relinquished your own plans and ideas of how to raise them to the democratic party? WTF?
Teach them well, and let them lead the way. Show them all the beauty they possess inside.
Children's lives belong to them. The mother and father historically have the love and interest to care and nurture and teach them as best as they are able, unless the parents are incapable.
Now your argument falls flat on its face as compared to Hitler's brown shirts and other social dreams where children were programmed by .gov.
Thank God there are people who are brave enough to fight this travesty.
I don't "own" my children - but they sure as hell belong to me and my husband and will continue to belong to us until they are adults.
Dude as long as parents can be held liable for the actions of their children then in fact those children do belong to those parents until those children are held liable for their own actions. "Belonging" is not synonymous with "owning" and any person with a bit of intellectual honesty would know that.
Not true. Given that children are literally products of two persons' labor, the claim that they are property is valid. It is only after a child demonstrates self-awareness and invokes self-ownership that this can really be contested. This happens quite early, typically by the age of two or in some cases younger. Most parents refer to this period as "The Terrible Twos". That being said, it is not to say that the child is without rights prior to this achievement.
@PUD, MDB, is that you? That was one of your best!
My kids are mine and my wife and family and nobody else. I WILL FUCKING GUT YOU FROM NUT TO NOSE IF YOU BELIEVE OTHERWISE.
They are your responsibility as you brought them into the world. You do not own them. Just so long as we're clear on that
OK, so if the term children who are "minors" is PC for you, then my children who are minors: I own them.
No you do not. You are responsible for them you do not own them. if you own something you can sell it, trade it, bury it in the backyard if you want. You cannot do that with other human beings regardless if you gave them birth or not
Are they my possession? No. Are they mine to love, care and protect? Absolutely.
Typical.
The socialist makes you responsable to pay with time and money, but it is their property.
I'm not talking about losing custody in a divorce.
If the state took away my kids, I would be prompted to wage war on it and it's agents until I was killed or captured.
So the folks that choose not to have children for their own personal reasons, under this notion, are now supposed to be responsible for children they specifically chose not to have? The children I chose to have are now subject to the whims and ideology of complete strangers? WTF. I suppose this bitch wants to reinvent the "Hitler Youth" but rename it with some catchy phrase like the "Affordable Care ACt" that makes it sound positive.
from another thread but goes here too...
I freakin' never knew about this but
have been knowing it all along anyway.
..
Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars
An Introduction Programming Manual
Operations Research Technical Manual
TW-SW7905.1
http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/sw4qw/
.
"...
The Artificial Womb
From the time a person leaves its mother's womb, its every effort is directed towards
building, maintaining, and withdrawing into artificial wombs, various sorts of substitute
protective devices or shells.
The objective of these artificial wombs is to provide a stable environment for both
stable and unstable activity; to provide a shelter for the evolutionary processes of
growth and maturity - i.e., survival; to provide security for freedom and to provide
defensive protection for offensive activity.
This is equally true of both the general public and the elite. However, there is a
definite difference in the way each of these classes go about the solution of
problems."
.
it appears the new world order actually has a manual, who knew?
and this bit ..
" ..Apparent Capital as "Paper" Inductor
In this structure, credit, presented as a pure element called "currency," has the appearance of capital, but is in effect negative capital. Hence, it has the appearance of service, but is in fact, indebtedness or debt. It is therefore an economic inductance instead of an economic capacitance, and if balanced in no other way, will be balanced by the negation of population (war, genocide). The total goods and services represent real capital called the gross national product, and currency may be printed up to this level and still represent economic capacitance; but currency printed beyond this level is subtractive, represents the introduction of economic inductance, and constitutes notes of indebtedness.
War is therefore the balancing of the system by killing the true creditors (the public which we have taught to exchange true value for inflated currency) and falling back on whatever is left of the resources of nature and regeneration of those resources.
Mr. Rothschild had discovered that currency gave him the power to rearrange the economic structure to his own advantage, to shift economic inductance to those economic positions which would encourage the greatest economic instability and oscillation.
The final key to economic control had to wait until there was sufficient data and high-speed computing equipment to keep close watch on the economic oscillations created by price shocking and excess paper energy credits - paper inductance/inflation.
" ...
and it gets even worser ...
I get it, she's invested in some dreary childrens care home some place where all the kids are abused. Talking her book!
bolsheviks ..... pure & simple
it is the collective ..... and as part of the influencing elite .... we know best .... unless you want to pay 'us' for a 'societally beneficial exemption' ... then you can do what you want
Total boycott of MSNBC and its shareholders!
THIS IS WAR!
This lady is on TV because those corporations WANT her fascist message.
Cunt and the secret producers that put her on TV.
Boycott of ALL MSNBC advertisers.
IMMEDIATELY!
Front page for Drudge - get the Lead Out!
99% of us are God's children. Go ahead 1%ers, piss Him off!
The momentum picks up toward totalitarianism, youth camps, and absolute power.
We're looking at getting out of here before it's too late.....Like what happened to the average Jewish citizens in Germany; too many waited thinking it would get better.
I'm tired of academia "birthing" Harris-Perrys and I'm tired of the corrupt media giving them a platform. It's all a provocation. Completely irresponsible.
Maybe I saw a different clip here. Yes, I saw a dippy academic who is used to talking to people who already agree with her, as most ZH'ers will not. But I'm also a parent in America, and I do have an idea of what she's talking about. It's harder to raise a kid in America than just about anywhere else in the world.
America hates kids. You get all the expense and responsibility. The State begrudges giving families even the things they've already paid for. When a kid screws up, as kids do, politically ambitious prosecutors want to try pre-adolescents as adults for felonies. Family health insurance costs more than most people spend on housing. Kids in America are seen as a non-productive cost. Kids are tolerated if they can influence their parents to spend enough money in a certain direction. But that's about it. If they're not a potential market, they're seen as a net negative on society. Can't abort 'em, of course, but once they're born America can't stand them.
When people saw themselves as belonging to a community, it made sense to do what we could to make sure kids turned out OK, and the next generation would have it better than we did. Even if they weren't our kids.
Nowadays, however, we've taken on the mindset that we're all living in the end times, so there's no point actually investing. In financial terms, we call outright casino gambling "Investment," and we call actual investment "Stranded Costs." We cut back on everything that might actually help kids, saying we can't afford it, but we can afford to incarcerate kids at the highest rate in the world, for far more money than it would cost to help other people's kids grow up right. But we don't care about that anymore.
My extremely conservative grandparents wouldn't have seen anything wrong with what this woman said. But then, they still had the idea that America was not in decline, that our system was not collapsing, and that our society would only get better no matter how discouraging things look at the present. Once you give up that notion, and decide that the best you can do is cash in now for whatever you can get, then it doesn't make any sense at all to give a shit about any kids who aren't your own.
I can't stand these hipster do-gooder types, myself. But the alternative that is taking over America is nihilism. " I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos."
If I argue that my daughter does not belong to 'the community', that is not nihilism.
I took her out of the public schools, because they are evil. I kept paying for them, I just didn't use them. My wife and I schooled her for six years.
I chose not to let the state destroy my child. I chose not to let her be fed into a chipper even though that would have been easier and less expensive for me. Because I do not 'belong' to the community that tells me that I and my child are its property.
That is the opposite of nihilism.
Alright, what about your daughter's friend? Do you feel any responsibility to her? How about some random kid you don't even know? Do you think it behooves you or benefits you, as an adult and as a citizen of your local community, to take an interest in those kids?
I agree about the overweening hand of The State. But whom exactly do you think The State is? Is it some alien interloper? If not, then who is it? Whose obligation is it to take care of kids? If you say, "Their parents, not me," then don't complain when Those Damned Kids don't ring up your order correctly at Tastee-Freeze. Their parents done give 'um the upbringin' they seen fit to give 'um. None of your business at all. Or, on the other hand, those of us with a stake in making things work properly need to come together to make things work properly. That's a notion that has gone way out of fashion since we've finished building the grid and the highway system and now we all have iPads, I know. But there's still plenty of work to be done that we're going to have to do together. Or everything's perfect and everyone's just bitching.
I remember as a kid when adults would tell us to quit smoking pot and cut our hair and start showing up on time. We called them all "Fascists!" Now when people state the obvious, that we don't all live in a vacuum, we call them all "Socialists." It's all the same immaturity. And that immaturity leaves the openings for the real Fascists and Socailists to come in and mind our business for us, since we won't tend to it ourselves.
I think that parents who homeschool their children aren't looking out for the wellbeing of their kids but rather the wellbeing of themselves, in that if they can make an economically efficient drone-child, that they will be able to depend on the cashflow that child generates and they can be lazy and relax and not have to provide their own living. In other words, they take away the life of their child in order to preserve their own. This meme of "I home school to protect them from statism" is garbage, the real agenda is creating an emotionally stunted adult-child that is homebound - an indentured servant of sorts, and is just as ugly as any statist utopia where children are made to speak in concert the praises of some glorifious Orwellian dictator
LOL,
Obviously, you don't have children.
Do you even know any?
Wrong place. again.
.
In an article posted Apr 5, http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-05/21-key-statistics-about-explosive-growth-poverty-america, Tyler notes 20% of American children living in poverty, 60% in detroit. Shocking statistics and 19 other shocking stats about poverty to accompany them. Bill Hicks once said (I think he was castigating right wing yenta Dr. Laura Schlesinger), "What, do children drop off your "love list" after the age of 12?"
There's a lot of disconnects in American society, and when you hold these social breakdowns up in people's faces, invariably, a lot of people get angry. They were happy living in their Disneyland of the mind. And truth just messes up the ride.
Indeed. I'd love to think that all the cool things about America were things I could take credit for, and all the shitty parts were things I could blame on somebody else. But I grew up poor on a farm, and I've been working for money (as opposed to just doing chores) at least part time since I was 10, so make that 36 years. Long enough to realize that unless you go live on a mountaintop and kill all your own food, we're all in this together to at least some extent, and in even a semi-modern society, we can't do it ourselves. So without ceding our own autonomy, we're going to have to deal with some things that to the toddler mind, aren't really our problem. The flip side of that is, we certainly all confront the problems. The kid whose education and employment isn't our problem may become our problem when he's carrying our TV out our (broken) window. Most people's self-reliant Libertarian righteousness tends to desert them when they've just been mugged.
National Socialism only has one purpose. To break the will of the people that it is forced upon. That is exactly why it was used on Germany, because Germany was the last hold out against the Imperialist efforts of the Bankers in Europe. So what did they do? They funded a guy that would radicalized and enslave the populace and break their will.
Seriously, it's not that hard to go back and look at history objectively and see what happened.
http://www.tcoe.org/SEE/LaSierraMilitary.shtm
Military academy above is a block from my house. It is for kids who are kicked out of public schools for misbehaving. I hear the bugle at 7 a.m. every morning. They are dressed in fatigues.
Military schools for under 18 are popping up. Called charter schools, I believe this is misleading. I specifically was told this was for "juvenile delinguents" by a military personnel.
Obama Youth Camps to come....
Well, actually, the kids belong to no-one but themselves. The notion that the family, the parents or the society can claim children as belonging to them is just nonsense and depriving children of their human dignity. Another issue is who ought to have (ultimate or shared) responsibility of them, and that you can have different opinions of. But confusing the two issues and mixing them up like in this instance just make a debate out of a misconception. This is really making a hen out of a feather. Move on.
It's self evident that children own themselves but parents have to be able to provide and decide for the family. Neo marxism is always attacking and undermining the family. There is no privacy without the family, but there is a tidal wave of state interference directly in the home. If you have no privacy then you are nothing but a slave. If that's making a hen out of a feather... well it must take a hell of a lot to get you alarmed about pretty much anything.
It is also self-evident that children, parents and families are part of society, like it or not. So the question still stands, what do you leave for the family be responsible of and what do you leave for society at large to take care of or arrange? After all, a family cannot design e.g. an educational system. This is a policy question of where you should draw the lines, not a true/false-question, freedom/slavery issue or any other either/or black/white (mis)representation of the question that you can think of. My point was that the debate has lost all proportions, because it seems so many wants to misinterpret what is obviously a clumsy quote taken out of context. As to privacy: The Patriot Act (and how it was adopted) scares me much more than what an academic at the margin says in a 15 sec snippet. The policy question about children and the interrelation between family and society? That we can debate.
Great point. Not likely to be too popular here, owever. This is a pretty single-male, no-kids, "I did it all on my own, gosh-darnit" kind of crowd, at least on this topic. Never mind almost all of us are totally dependent on infrastructure built and paid for by others.
You sound just like Obama. The highways were built by someone else so you better listen to what we say because you're selfish. I kind of thought that was the whole idea personally, we have a division of labour, some people buld roads while others do other productive things... economics basically. But no, I guess because you know that your fridge and the clothes on your back and your house and everything was made by someone else then you are keeping it real.
Now you're just trying to have it both ways. Either we have a division of labor in our society, in which case there are some overlaps of responsibility, or we don't and there aren't. So when my kids get out of school, I shouldn't have to pay for schools anymore, right? I should get to use the roads and grid in my neighborhood because they're already there, but I shouldn't have to pay to extend it all out to the exurbs where I don't live, right?
Hey, it's a lot of fun to say "I built it all with me own two hands." But as a grown up living in a community I realize that my rights are commensurate to my responsibilities. My right to swing my fist ends at the tip of your nose. If that's "Keeping it real," then so be it.
Division of labor doesn't apply to your household endeavors, but please do feel free to attempt negate it by demagoguery and fallacies though.
Married guy here, and the wife agrees, you're an idiot and probably should be kept away from other people, because you are likely to be violent and force them to comply with your demands.
No we can't debate because society either respects privacy and enshrines it in law or it doesn't. Children and family are private. If you can't decide what happens in your own home (and that was always a proper common law right) then you let government decide what is correct behaviour. Correct me if I'm wrong but nobody on here is suggesting we go back to pater familias?
Society is a collection of individuals associating freely to gain mutual advantages. The law of property (and by extension privacy and familly) was fairly well defined philosophically and legally before all of this sophist nonsense with political correctness kicked off. I live in the UK and the children are being taken from parents all the time in secret courts. It's absolutely frightening.
Neomarxism is the zen and art of making the mendacious sound like a "clumsy quote taken out of context". There's nothing clumsy in what she says, it's a breakdown of privacy.
"The policy question about children and the interrelation between family and society?"
It's not a policy decision so it's not for debate. What we do in the home is not a matter of policy. You seem to have no clue as to the differnce between public (i.e. policy) and private. If we harm children then a jury of 12 people are good to go and decide on the matter. As for education, parents can decide that too. A family most certainly can design an education and many of them do. That's another matter of privacy. See? Besides, do you really want to have your children educated by the state? Have you seen the kids that they turn out these days THEY ARE DUMB AS BOXES OF ROCKS.
"What we do in the home is not a matter of policy"
Actually it is. Use of violence against children, wife or any other member of the family used to be allowed, but is not anymore. It used to be considered an issue of privacy and none of the concern of others. Likewise, spousal rape was not a concern for law, with the same arguments. This has luckily changed, which I do hope you can agree on. But it also shows that the notion of "privacy" isn't a substance with an essence, but what we make of it and what we want to make of it. It is not an absolute, but rather an object for public discourse which you so eloquently show, without admitting it.
As you said yourself:
"If we harm children then a jury of 12 people are good to go an ddecide on the matter" Well then, there are situations of "harm" where your walls of privacy will give way. Q.E.D.
My natural rights as a human being are not defined by debate. They cannot be conferred upon me nor separated from me by the decisions of others.
Good for you. However, your "natural rights" have been the object for debate and delimitation in court rooms for centuries. My prognosis is it will continue whether you accept it or not, unless you live by yourself in your very own jurisdiction.
The term "jurisdiction" is a fiction. But if you want to stretch the term as far as can be rationally argued as legitimate, the only "jurisdiction" is over SELF.
The vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of human beings today are absolutely, completely, insane. And I do mean clinically insane. The vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of topics people discuss these days are chock full of fictions being treated as if they are real (that is, exist).
What kind of sense to humans expect to achieve when they hold an apparently (on the surface) reasonable conversation in which many of the notions their consciousness are manipulating are fictions? I mean really! That's exactly like having apparently reasonable conversations about the workflow in SantaClaus workshop and ignoring the fact that SantaClaus doesn't exist, his workshop doesn't exist, his reindeer don't exist, reindeer don't fly, and so forth.
Yet perform thought processes this way is what the vast majority of humans do every single day. Probably 90% of the messages in ZH, even those that come to valid conclusions, do so based upon fictions. But as any honest sentient being knows, the moment our progression of thought includes something bogus (like something that flat out doesn't exist), our entire thought process is invalid, and collapses like a house of cards.
If humans don't learn to distinguish real from fiction, humans are finished. Given that something like 99.9% of humans (even some downright brilliant humans) are completely incapable of distinguishing real from fiction, the future is certain --- down the tubes.
All I can say is, I hope a few of the 0.1% of humans who are mostly sane manage to separate themselves from humanity and survive the self-extermination of the species.
Just think how conversations would change if everyone suddenly accepts the obvious --- that every "government" is a fiction, that every "corporation" is a fiction, that every "official title" is a fiction, that every "authority" is a fiction, that every "law" is a fiction, and so forth. Good grief! I mean, quite a few people know that long-standing fundamental law calls all organizations "fictitious entities". Ignoring for the moment that a "fictitious entity" can't be a [real] entity, at least these folks should stop talking about "what government should do". After all, they already recognized the damn thing ("government") doesn't freaking exist! Don't people realize that is "end of story"? That no further conversations about "government" are sane?
This is why I so often write "predators-DBA-government" and "predators-DBA-corporation" and "predators-DBA-centralbank" in ZH messages. That's meant to be clear, to emphasize that the "predators" are real, physical, living human beings that can and do take actions that have consequences... but "government" and "corporation" and "central bank" are pure, unadulterated fictions. The totality of their "existence" is as a mental unit in the brain. But that is precisely what a fiction is. There is indeed a real mental unit (configuration) in the brain that we call "SantaClaus", but it does not refer to anything. Simple enough!
It is almost surprising that adults give up the notion that "SantaClaus" exists at some point, because they do not give up any of the other fictions inserted into their brains by parents, friends, teachers and human predators of various flavors.
I don't believe you.
You just made this diatribe up in your imagination and it has no basis in reality.
Hehehe...
+1. That's pretty funny, smartass.
"Hmmm. Good point. You're new to prision, aren't you?"
This fool is emblematic of today’s Democratic Party.
She doesn’t understand what “investment” even means; she doesn’t understand private vs. public; and she is a moron.
Truly frightening – this is mainstream thought for Dems now.
O.K. This is just some fucking sick shit. This bitch should be burned. She thinks she's fucking God or somthing.
Look there comes a point where you have to realize what you are dealing with, stop the "debate", and "respect for everyone's opinion" pretexts, and start bashing heads. In this neomarxist assault it is truly them or us. The later you realize this the worse. Enough is enough.
It's NEOMARXISM and it needs to be properly identified as such.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaBpVzOohs
We need more fluoride in the drinking water too...and complete surveillance on all citizens...and is there any way to make our money more intrinsically worthless? No? Thought I'd ask just in case. How bout numbers for all our babies when they're born. Oh wait. We got that. Now we just need to disarm everyone and we're half way to the utopia. So happy to be here in the land of the free.
Melissa Victoria Harris was born in Seattle and grew up in the Virginia cities of Charlottesville and Chester, where she attended Thomas Dale High School. Part of a mixed family[citation needed], she is the youngest of five children. Her black father, William M. Harris Sr., was dean of Afro-American affairs at the University of Virginia, and her white mother, Diana Gray, taught at a community college and worked for nonprofits that helped poor communities.[3][4] Her mother was raised in a Mormon working-class family in a racially homogeneous neighborhood and went to college at Brigham Young University. After a failed first marriage, her mother left the LDS Church and was a single mother before she met Melissa's father.[5] “I’ve never thought of myself as biracial,” Harris-Perry says. “I’m black.”[6] Harris-Perry's family later became Unitarian Universalists.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melissa_Harris-Perry#cite_note-Leaving_Prin...
“I have a love for the sister, but she is a liar, and I hate lying,” says West, adding that Harris-Perry later said on MSNBC’s “The Ed Show” that West attacked Obama’s White mother in the interview with Truthdig.com. “I don’t talk about people’s mamas. She’s reinforcing all of the vicious perceptions of me as a racist, and she knows better than that.”
Harris-Perry’s scathing critique, West says, has more to do with the fact that the Center for African American Studies unanimously voted against her when she came up for promotion from associate to full professor, adding that her work was not scholarly enough.
“There’s not a lot of academic stuff with her, just a lot of twittering,” says West, who added that her book Sister Citizen, released last year, was “wild and out of control.”
“She’s become the momentary darling of liberals, but I pray for her because she’s in over her head. She’s a fake and fraud. I was so surprised how treacherous the sister was.”
http://diverseeducation.com/article/16821/#
These psycho Human Services people probably got the idea from UK. The couple in the video below had their brand new baby taken by the State only because the mother has learning disabilities and they felt the baby would not do well in the environment...there was no evidence the child was in danger of any kind.
This is awful to watch but listen to the two talk show hosts later in the clip. They say that this is going on in England by the thousands!! Children are being taken and molded for State purposes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jGw98F6iebU
And another UK Column Live report on deteriorating social conditions in the UK. What happens in the UK for Social Culture ends up in the U.S. eventually. The State of Oregon is becoming a lot like the UK system....They are taking children away from parents who do not want their kids given 50 doses of vaccines by the time they are 5 years old. Oregon also killed my mother last year by getting her to sign over all her wealth and then they took her to a Hospice and killed her with morphine. We went there to get her but she had signed her paperwork already and refused to come live her remaining days out in household.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZHFjVXOm2EE
Absolutely right about UK. And it's all done in secret family courts. Frightening. Some of you need to wake up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaBpVzOohs
We are all comrades now.
FORWARD, Soviet!
I love that she's a Tulane political science professor.
I have a political economy degree from Tulane. I was a poli sci major for a semester. It was painful. Every once in awhile political science majors would try to take a political economy or economics class. Too funny.
For those of you not in the know, political science majors don't know economics, history or philosophy. They hardly know much about political thought. I'd say they don't even know voter theorem. They get degrees taught by Harris-Perry, James Carville, Mary Matalin (all Tulane political science professors) in manipulative, identity-politics electioneering. They spew horseshit in these courses like "perception is reality" and "might makes right". "Well, the Clinton tax surplus" and "globalization".
They are developing an entire army of Third Estate, nanny state, democracy worshipers. The concept of "democracy leads to mob rule" sends them in an autistic conniption. "Mandate" is a popular word with this group. They think that libertarianism is a nothing movement because it doesn't have a significant political party. The 2nd Amendment has something to do with hunting or sporting. "Privacy" is really important because it has some sort of link to abortion, which is a great topic for a political science major because people generally give a shit about it.
I know a lot of you want to assign "communist" or "fascist" to this, but at it's very core it's nihilistic.
Hitlery is looming out there. This is her brand of garbage.
Hitlery makes me want to root for the apocalypse.
Hitlery vs. Jebby in 2016? God save the republic.
Jebby as in Jeb Bush? 12 years of Bush Presidencies hasn't worked out too well. Prescott Bush was pissing in the geopoltical soup since the end of WWI. An American political dynasty or a crime family run by posh New Englanders?
"vs."?
What happened to being responsible for your own actions, your own decisions, children, debts, etc... This, in my opinion just another way of rationalizing the shierking of responsibility and putting it off on society. Academia complains that the school is not there to raise your children but to educate them. But what I have noticed since my children started school, the school also wants to have it's say in how much they weigh, how much time the parents spend with them and their school work, and now this one is wanting to let the entire community have a hand or say in the manner in which I raise my children. If they step out of line and break society's rules then so be it but until then, FUCK OFF and mind your own business.
The ONLY reason this woman wears dreadlocks is to emphasize she's "black". If she had very black skin she never would have been whored at Princeton. So she goes with the natty look to try and convince us she wasn't 98% raised by a white Mom, while getting the BENEFITS of helping her employers meeting quota requirements. Talk about "getting the best of both worlds".
She's quite beautiful actually. Some of these people probably have good intentions. They think we're all going to get along and love one another, all women with flowers in their hair and all men wearing loin cloths. But reality is more like nukes, earthquakes, haarp, and getting drunk.
“better investments” – a human being is not an end in itself, it is an investment unit.
EMAIL THE SICK BITCH AND LET HER KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS
melissa@melissaharrisperry.com
Well, lets look at the opposite extreme. Suppose parents are allowed to do whatever they want with their kids. Suppose some kid is raised to parents who tell him/her that a high-school (much less college) education is a waste of time, and that the only way to get ahead in the world is to sell crack, and to kill your competitors.
Then, when the kid does this very thing, we incarcerate the *kid*, as though its the *kid's* fault for being born into this world with zero knowledge and not, instinctively, knowing to ignore their parents and listen to those PSA's on TV about staying in school.
I'm not saying that one policy is, objectively, better than the other, here. I'm just saying that, if you're going to take the policy that society can't intervene in how children are raised, then we have no business intervening when that upbringing produces someone who harms our society. In other words: if you weren't in the kitchen, cooking, then you don't get to complain about the food.
School is a waste of time. Going into business is good but I advise not to compete with entities that are much bigger than you like international pharmaceuticals or the government.
One of the most telling facts about the Left is that the same political philosophy that argues that it is Not OK for parents to raise their children in "wrong-headed ways" -- also argues that it's Perfectly OK for mothers to kill their children.
I'm just saying that, if you're going to take the policy that society can't intervene in how children are raised, then we have no business intervening when that upbringing produces someone who harms our society.
So there's no point having rules or laws if you don't intervene in the lives of children? There was no formal education until the 20th century when Protestant post millennialists and pietists created compulsory education to "christianize the catholics". The history of compulsory, state run education in the US doesn't have its roots in teaching civic-mindedness or respect for the rule of law. It has always had its roots in cultural subversion.
Again, reductio ad absurdum. The discussion hasn't (for the most part) been about NO governmnt involment. The discussion is about the collective TAKING CONTROL of children.
Having been raised by a mother who was born in an orphanage and raised in home after home, I can tell you that you don't turn out more of a wrecked person than one who is raised without unconditional love.
Bonding and trust are essential. You can do it via brainwashing but without love, not idolation, but love as a connection, a fondness so great you'd risk you life to protect theirs, that kind of love that a parent gives a child, you have an empty vessel who turns to tactics to survive - Tactics including passive aggression, people-pleaser (character found in children of alcoholics as they adjust their responses according to their parents mood/soberness) - personality disorders.
If you care about children. If you care about families. If you care about the nation that America is and was founded to be. You'd never suggest such a thing.
I don't know where people get off suggesting that a stranger could do a better job than parent. The love in a parent's eyes is the most powerful motivator in a child's life. Those of us who were dealt a less than desirable family will hopefully have a relative who can see what is missing and come in to save the day; or a lifelong neighbor who has them over for dinner regularly, or a teacher who has had the child for enough years,they can watch for sudden changes.
Want to help children? Protect communities from the plaque called forecloses which has dessimated neighborhoods. Protect jobs from outsourcing so that families do not have to live under the unrelenting burden of debt and the stress of trying to keep your family alive in a country where there ARE NO JOBS.
If you love America, you'll protect her in her original form.
Yes, get to the children, turn them against their parent. Only takes 1 generation to go through, and you've got a population who, due to constant "suggestion" in first 12 - 18 years of life is indoctrinated to accept slavery and drudgery while giving the fruits of their labor to the BANKS.
You people are spreading propaganda throughout the web. Working together in teams, leaving essay long comments that can be best described by Harry Truman's: "if you can't convince them, confuse them".
As Henry Kissinger said: We only have on generation to deal with. That is us, the parents.
What is being presented to us as our "new lifestyle" in the name of communitarism is an affront to freedom and democracy.
"We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent."
Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, 1950
http://globalistagenda.org/quotes.htm (edited to fix typos)
Somebody needs to read the Tragedy of the Commons.
She is the answer to the question, what do you get when you send a moron to college? A moron with a college degree.
All your babies are belong to us!
I emailed that cunt this morning...
Melissa,
I saw you commercial explaining that our educational system is failing due to the communities inability to take responsibility collectively for each child.
I am responsible for my child, no one else.
Why would you not expect a parent to be responsible for their own child? I teach my child about morals, work ethic and manners. I do not expect others to do these things. If my child fails it is my failure.
Maybe you should preach to parents to take ownership in their own child's upbringing and well being and then they won't expect others to do their job.
Since my little girl could talk, my wife and I worked with her on learning skills, taking responsibility, self respect, problem solving, finishing what is started, doing it right the first time and manners. My little girl is about to turn 4 now and she would excel on a first grade level and her logic and reasoning skills are superior to some adults I have met.
Her early successes are not at the hand of a community, collective or any other communist propaganda term you decide to use... Her successes are ours.
I went to public school and I have family members who work in public schools. There are parents who just don't care and expect teachers and schools to raise them. Schools are there for reading, writing and arithmetic, not to raise them to be productive citizens.
It starts at home, it starts early and it isn't the villages responsibility.
Responsibly,
Joey
Dear Joey,
While I admire some parts of your letter, I must point out that your example to your daughter in referring to this women as a "cunt" is a poor one.....
Some day your daughter might express opinions that others find distasteful and disagree with, would you appreciate her being refereed to as a cunt?
Would your refer to your own daughter as a cunt if she disagrees with you. How about your wife?
If so, than perhaps you are not the role model parent you believe yourself to be.
HCL
You are a cunt too you fuck. Like my daughter just read my post.
Ahh.... the ongoing mixed animal shit known as, "It Takes A Village," ... remember that one from Hillary I Don't Know How To Trade Mr. Tyson Chicken and I Don't Know Whitewater Clinton? Fuck these people.
Just another hyphenated cunt. Fuck with my kids and I will beat you.
They'll educate your children that your grandchildren should be collectively owned. It's a propaganda war that'll last decades.
"In economics, investment is related to saving and deferring consumption. In finance, investment is putting money into something with the expectation of gain, usually over a longer term."
While I differ with her concept of "community OWNED children", I find myself asking has this generation "invested" in the well being and care of the next????
Ask yourself, are the children from the next generation going to have the same opportunities that your parents made possible for you?
Think of the National Debt, the poverty level (57% of all children in the USA live in poor households), our education system is a dismal shame, and look at the level of debt these kids come out with, consider the job opportunities for new graduates and I could go on.
No I will give my children much better opportunities than what my parents made for me. My father abandoned me before I was even born, the youngest of 3 and my mother married one abuser after another before she took off when I was a JR in high school. I lived in trailer parks most of my life and went to bed with no food or electricity in roach infested, flea infested nonsense. I worked in a warehouse in the mornings before school and lived with zero adult supervision and noone giving a damned whether or not I lived or died, much less went to school. I started college late but did it with zero help, encouragement etc from any adult. So forgive me if I don't wax poetic about the baby boomer generation that practically invented abandonment. So you God Damned right my children are going to have a helluva lot more opportunities than I ever had. They actually get to go to a dentist or doctor when needed. They get to take lessons in music and martial arts and, unless they don't want to go to college or the government skull fucks us along the way and tuition gets so high only the elite of the elites get the chance to attend college then yeah I'm pretty fucking confident that my children will have it better than I did.
In the end people have to realize that most of what happens to them in life is the result of their own actions, not the actions of some dip shit politician. Unless of course they continue to ask us to enter war after war and decide to take control of our free will and handcuff us in our ability do what we think is best for our own.
Way to down arrow self determination. That is a symptom of what is wrong with our society. I guess in my above biography, to steal from Obama and his notion of folks that built their own business didn't really build them, I must not have truly not bult my future, somebody else did. But for the life of me I couldn't imagine who that ghost fucker was.
Do you think the "Greatest Generation" coming out of high school at the start of the Great Depression, many living on farms during the dust bowl, then entered WWII, sat their and lamented about this. NO they did not. They pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps so to speak and did what they had to do to first, survive, then make sure they never had to rely on anyone for their own survival and then had families. Little did they realize the children they bore would be the first generation to abandon, first their parents in old age and then their children in divorce due to their incredibily selfish and narcissitic ways. They were the generation of cocaine addiction, materialism, psychoanalasys, and self actualization. Now they lead the charge for cradle to the grave security. They came out with the mantra of "not trusting anyone over 30" but now they wag their finger at people and say "we know best what you need and don't need" What a fucking disappointment that generation must of been to their parents who endured so much. Their children certainly know what selfish pricks they are. Cry me a river with this nonsense.
All this crap started with Hegel. The organic theory of the state. Pure rubbish... CB
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLQ7klqYE_4
This is real
I found this clip incredible. Although I might be in favour of it if they could retrospectively put Bush, Obama, Corzine, Hank, Bernanke and the rest of them into some sort of juvenille detention facility. (and keep them there).
roflmao, thank you for that visual.......
I would add Connie Rice, Wolfie, Cheney and many more.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLQ7klqYE_4
The Parable of Responsibility
Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody were members of a group.
There was an important job to do and Everybody was asked to do it.
Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.
Anybody would have done it, but Nobody did it.
Somebody got angry because it was Everybody’s job.
Everybody thought Anybody would do it, but Nobody realized that Anybody wouldn’t do it.
It ended up that Everybody, blamed Somebody, when Nobody did, what Anybody could have done.
In the New Collectivism Personal Responsibility, and Family Responsibilty to Correctly Raise Your Children has been changed to a New Government Awareness and Reliance On The State to do what Parents and Individuals should do, but don't.
It's this kind of parenting that has made afreeka so great.
wait, what?
Brainless, greedy, violent niggers are the perfect weapon for the communist revolutionaries to use against bourgeois society.
They've even made it a crime to defend yourself against a violent nigger attacker. And anyone who dares critcize or even disagree with one has their career and reputation destroyed by being labeled "racist".