Now why, I asked myself, would anyone in their right mind want to inflict totalitarianism (via any ideological or religious system) onto humanity? It has been proven by the USSR, China and Korea, to deaden human creativity and intellect. Although I must admit, all Russians I have met - who were brought up under Socialism - were well versed in opera, ballet, classic literature, history - albeit a bit slanted but then isn't ours? - and politics. Not so now that they havc a steady diet of Western rubbish, but there is a reason for that and it has to do with what I see as treasonous actions by Russian traitors. Russians don't miss standing in line to buy brown synthetic suits, but they do miss the cheap power which gave them warmth in their flats - if they were lucky enough to get one. Sometimes I think the Russian State would have had a perfectly happy population if they had just arranged massive imports of the latest blue denim jeans from USA for their young people.
Look at all the left-wing proponents throughout the world. In history even. All they want, it seems, is to reduce all people to the same level - economically, intellectually, and even (as I have noticed lately) racially. They don't really want diversity or multiculturalism, although these are cried on their banners. They want everyone to be brown, poor, and stupid. Then, it appears, we will all be happy. Because we are the same people in a global village there will be no more wars, no more competition. Eveyone will be happy, well fed, and have a job. There will no longer be rich and poor, (we will all be poor) sick and healthy, (baffled about how they will fix that - make a law against being sick?) weak and strong, (we will all be weak) clever and stupid (we will all be stupid), and marching in formation to enriching and fulfilling work each day. Heaven knows what sort of work we will be marching to! Possibly, as George Orwell predicted, the more literary of us will be re-writing history. (Vale, Cordus!)
What about religion? Christianity won't be much of a problem, (bend your neck to the yoke, render unto Caesar etc) but Jews and Muslims - now there's a problem. One lot wants time off to pray five times a day with obligatory washing, half of them can't work because of the clothes they wear, another lot won't work on Friday, all the holy days they are half stunned with hunger from fasting, some won't work with others...I suppose the Christians will have to pull double their weight but hang on, will there even be religion? Will the State permit it?
Have the left-wing proponents of the uni-race global village thought this whole plan through properly?
Do they really think millions of people are going to give up their languages, customs, identities and religions to become some sort of mono-man?
Valerie Morse (who burnt the New Zealand flag on ANZAC day - if my father had been there he would have re-arranged her teeth for her) has been sucking at the public tit for a long time. The woman is a professional agitator who spends her spare time doing university degrees at the taxpayers' expense. She applies for, and gets grants. I suspect a lot of agitators do the same. They seem to have an enormous amount of spare time on their hands to travel, print off their little agitprop leaflets and tracts, socialise with other agitators, and just generally agitate. It's a living I guess.
I suspect the proponents of a future socialist heaven think their natural talents for leadership and ideological guidance for the masses will propel them into leadership positions so they will never have to be bound by their own totalitarian philosophies. Poor silly creatures. Those who don't know about history are bound to repeat it. They are hoist by their own petards.
So my conclusion about all this left-wing nonsense of freedom for all is that they will (if we don't do something about it) have us end up in chains. If people like Valerie Morse and her kind think they will somehow be exempt, I can assure them (and probably will as we pass each other on the way to the cornfield with our sickles) they will not.
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Freedom of Speech
A.D. 25 TACITUS Annals IV
Next year, a completely novel type of charge was levelled against the historian Cremutius Cordus: that in his Annals he had eulogised Marcus Brutus and referred to Gaius Cassius as the last of the Romans.
...
(Cordus was on a trumped up charge of treason, brought by dependents of Sejanus, the man who was a favourite of Tiberius, and gave a speech in the senate in his defence - some excerpts are below in quote marks.)(Jude)
...
'The poems of Furius Bibaculus and Catullus are literally packed with insults aimed at Julius Caesar and Augustus, and they are still read today. Both rulers, however, tolerated these writings and let them alone, showing moderation, or perhaps I should say statesmanship. People lose interest in things that are ignored, but think there must be some truth in those which provoke anger.'
'I am saying nothing about the Greeks. Not only did they enjoy a freedom of speech without fear of punishment, but one might even call it a licence. In the case of objection, words were met with words.'
'Surely my speeches are not therefore inciting people to civil war? It is seventy years since Brutus and Cassius died; yet their statues are still to be seen. Not even their conqueror banned these.'
'Posterity gives each man his due; if I am condemned there will be people who will remember me just as Brutus and Cassius are remembered.'
After his speech Cordus left the Senate and starved himself to death. Even so, by senatorial decree, the aediles were instructed to burn his books. These survived underground, however, and were republished.
The episode leaves one amazed at the stupidity of those who believe that the political leaders of one generation can starve the next of memories. On the contrary, if you take action against writers it enhances their standing. Foreign monarchs and those who imitate their cruelty only succeed in glorifying the reputation of those whom they try to suppress, and in bringing dishonour upon themselves. (Tacitus)
A.D. 2007 JUDE (post on blog)
There has been a law passed named 'Holocaust Denial' and anyone who denies that the Holocaust took place can now be jailed. I think this law is active in Austria but am not sure where else. One old guy named David Irving was jailed in Austria, I read it in the BBC news some weeks ago.
For fifty years I have never doubted that the Holocaust took place. I don't think anyone I have spoken to doubted what they saw as a fact. Now, however, I have heard murmurs asking the question - Why pass a law? Will things get to the stage where I could be jailed for asking why it was necessary to pass a law?
People lose interest in things that are ignored, but think there must be something in things which provoke anger.
Socialism/Communism/Fascism
I have not, for most of my life, been a particularly political creature. I did not have the time. I worked (mostly full-time) and raised three children. However, in my autumn years I now have the leisure in which to view the world, historically, politically, and economically (economics are SO boring). I read left wing blogs and right wing blogs and have come to the conclusion that I am a centrist, with no ideological or religious beliefs that can fire me up whatsoever.
(It is generally accepted that most young people are inclined to the left but that as they grow older and wiser, they incline more to the right. I was too busy to incline either way when young, and now I am too old and too lazy.)
Fascism seems to me to be a good thing - patriotism, nationalism and a policy of independence - which I have noticed all countries aspire to or practise, but the Germans, the best known Fascists in the modern world, have been punished for being Fascists for the last 62 years.
Socialism seems to me to be a good thing. I live in a socialist country. We have a pretty good welfare system (which originated in Germany) which I think is a good thing in a country which is only good at growing grass and is situated on the edge of the Southern Ocean. If we didn't have a welfare system I think most of us would have to move or starve to death. However, the national flag is flown at all important ceremonies (and burnt this past ANZAC day by one Valerie Morse, a woman with a strong American accent) and patriotism and nationalism is called into play whenever it suits the politicians.
Communism seems to have been a good thing - to the Russians I know who lived under it. They call themselves Socialists but most of them also practise traits recognised as Fascist i.e. patriotism (they love Mother Russia), nationalism (they think Russians are the best people in the world), and they would love to have a policy of national independence. However, during their 'socialist' period, young Russians would sell State secrets for a pair of blue denim jeans.
Religion seems to be a good thing to those frightened people who hope for eternal life, but a bad thing for those who see it as hypocritical indoctrination of a belief system used for control of minds. I mean, if one believes in angels and devils (as religions tell you to), why shouldn't one believe in fairies and leprechauns? (Because religions tell you not to.)
Fascism, Socialism and Communism are not compatible with 'open' and 'democratic' societies. They are (or must become) totalitarian. Theocracies are in their very essence totalitarian. I think these ideologies descend into totalitarianism because there are flaws, (often nonsensical), in all of these systems and people must be discouraged from questioning these flaws. Totalitarianism demands the entire subservience of the individual to the State, which will tell you what to think and what to say. If you do not say and do what the State, or the religious person wants you to say and do, you will be jailed, or killed, to protect the system.
People lose interest in things which are ignored, but think there must be something in things which provoke anger.
The one thing a democratic society has which sets it apart from all other idealogies is freedom of speech. When someone interferes with that freedom of speech and puts someone in jail for saying something outside the accepted political or religious line, I (and many like me) sit up and take notice. Words must be met with words! If I was living in a totalitarian society, I would expect such occurrences, but I do not. I live in a democracy - or do I?
Vale Cordus - you are remembered.
Next year, a completely novel type of charge was levelled against the historian Cremutius Cordus: that in his Annals he had eulogised Marcus Brutus and referred to Gaius Cassius as the last of the Romans.
...
(Cordus was on a trumped up charge of treason, brought by dependents of Sejanus, the man who was a favourite of Tiberius, and gave a speech in the senate in his defence - some excerpts are below in quote marks.)(Jude)
...
'The poems of Furius Bibaculus and Catullus are literally packed with insults aimed at Julius Caesar and Augustus, and they are still read today. Both rulers, however, tolerated these writings and let them alone, showing moderation, or perhaps I should say statesmanship. People lose interest in things that are ignored, but think there must be some truth in those which provoke anger.'
'I am saying nothing about the Greeks. Not only did they enjoy a freedom of speech without fear of punishment, but one might even call it a licence. In the case of objection, words were met with words.'
'Surely my speeches are not therefore inciting people to civil war? It is seventy years since Brutus and Cassius died; yet their statues are still to be seen. Not even their conqueror banned these.'
'Posterity gives each man his due; if I am condemned there will be people who will remember me just as Brutus and Cassius are remembered.'
After his speech Cordus left the Senate and starved himself to death. Even so, by senatorial decree, the aediles were instructed to burn his books. These survived underground, however, and were republished.
The episode leaves one amazed at the stupidity of those who believe that the political leaders of one generation can starve the next of memories. On the contrary, if you take action against writers it enhances their standing. Foreign monarchs and those who imitate their cruelty only succeed in glorifying the reputation of those whom they try to suppress, and in bringing dishonour upon themselves. (Tacitus)
A.D. 2007 JUDE (post on blog)
There has been a law passed named 'Holocaust Denial' and anyone who denies that the Holocaust took place can now be jailed. I think this law is active in Austria but am not sure where else. One old guy named David Irving was jailed in Austria, I read it in the BBC news some weeks ago.
For fifty years I have never doubted that the Holocaust took place. I don't think anyone I have spoken to doubted what they saw as a fact. Now, however, I have heard murmurs asking the question - Why pass a law? Will things get to the stage where I could be jailed for asking why it was necessary to pass a law?
People lose interest in things that are ignored, but think there must be something in things which provoke anger.
Socialism/Communism/Fascism
I have not, for most of my life, been a particularly political creature. I did not have the time. I worked (mostly full-time) and raised three children. However, in my autumn years I now have the leisure in which to view the world, historically, politically, and economically (economics are SO boring). I read left wing blogs and right wing blogs and have come to the conclusion that I am a centrist, with no ideological or religious beliefs that can fire me up whatsoever.
(It is generally accepted that most young people are inclined to the left but that as they grow older and wiser, they incline more to the right. I was too busy to incline either way when young, and now I am too old and too lazy.)
Fascism seems to me to be a good thing - patriotism, nationalism and a policy of independence - which I have noticed all countries aspire to or practise, but the Germans, the best known Fascists in the modern world, have been punished for being Fascists for the last 62 years.
Socialism seems to me to be a good thing. I live in a socialist country. We have a pretty good welfare system (which originated in Germany) which I think is a good thing in a country which is only good at growing grass and is situated on the edge of the Southern Ocean. If we didn't have a welfare system I think most of us would have to move or starve to death. However, the national flag is flown at all important ceremonies (and burnt this past ANZAC day by one Valerie Morse, a woman with a strong American accent) and patriotism and nationalism is called into play whenever it suits the politicians.
Communism seems to have been a good thing - to the Russians I know who lived under it. They call themselves Socialists but most of them also practise traits recognised as Fascist i.e. patriotism (they love Mother Russia), nationalism (they think Russians are the best people in the world), and they would love to have a policy of national independence. However, during their 'socialist' period, young Russians would sell State secrets for a pair of blue denim jeans.
Religion seems to be a good thing to those frightened people who hope for eternal life, but a bad thing for those who see it as hypocritical indoctrination of a belief system used for control of minds. I mean, if one believes in angels and devils (as religions tell you to), why shouldn't one believe in fairies and leprechauns? (Because religions tell you not to.)
Fascism, Socialism and Communism are not compatible with 'open' and 'democratic' societies. They are (or must become) totalitarian. Theocracies are in their very essence totalitarian. I think these ideologies descend into totalitarianism because there are flaws, (often nonsensical), in all of these systems and people must be discouraged from questioning these flaws. Totalitarianism demands the entire subservience of the individual to the State, which will tell you what to think and what to say. If you do not say and do what the State, or the religious person wants you to say and do, you will be jailed, or killed, to protect the system.
People lose interest in things which are ignored, but think there must be something in things which provoke anger.
The one thing a democratic society has which sets it apart from all other idealogies is freedom of speech. When someone interferes with that freedom of speech and puts someone in jail for saying something outside the accepted political or religious line, I (and many like me) sit up and take notice. Words must be met with words! If I was living in a totalitarian society, I would expect such occurrences, but I do not. I live in a democracy - or do I?
Vale Cordus - you are remembered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)