[aklug] Re: !~

On Thu, 31 Oct 2013, Greg Schmitz wrote:

> I don't see it as guilt (your attribution). I see it as pragmatism if one
> considers, for example, how the courts have used history and how folks might
> react the BS we are being fed - and I'm not referring to government. I'm not
> directing my arguments towards you only towards the arguments you have made.
> Speaking only for myself I'm aware of politik and real politik and how both
> work. How things work now - and how things will work out are not the same
> thing.

Pragmatism means being prepared for the misdirected external forces, while
directing your own force in productive pursuits. Understanding history is
important, we both agree on that, but being bound and consumed by it is
completely different. It's the difference between recognizing the
circumstances we're born into and committing to make the most of our
relative resources, or focusing on how to atone for acts that happened
generations ago. A question of reparations which is, in reality, the
ultimate in intellectual cowardice because the proponent lacks the backbone
to make the self-sacrifice in the proportion one thinks they've unfairly
benefited by. Instead, they want it forced upon all society so they don't
actually lose any actual power of benefit, everyone gets dragged down with
them.

Pragmatically speaking, given our government's extensive record on financial
management and corruption, I don't see how you stand by your comments that
you'll take government control over a free market. The private enterprise,
at least, knows how to concentrate their resources into turning a profit.
The government can try to pick market winners like, say, Solyndra, and can't
even make those numbers work.

As for the courts, I might have agreed with you that history is important
fifty years ago, but today I'm not so sure. Not with the Supreme Court's
decision on eminent domain being acceptable purely on the grounds of
economic development. Not with Obamacare being authorized under the premise
that it isn't a compulsion to buy services but a tax, all while every
non-judicial proponent claiming the exact opposite. How many more examples
do you want? It's ridiculous, and it flies in the face of established
precedence and historical fact.

With half of the judicial system considering the Constitution to be an
"evolving document" it's no wonder that we've created an imbecilic organism
with only the primal urge to consume brains. Your government, brought to
you by the letter braaaaiiinnnsss....

In the end, all politicking in its current form doesn't work. They're all
just a dance which ends up with us all tied to different sides of the same
power keg. And the fuse is already lit.

         --Arthur Corliss
           Live Free or Die
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
Received on Fri Nov 1 00:12:09 2013