Collectivist Memes We Just Had To Fix....

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Collectivist Memes We Just Had To Fix....

Post by sWamp-Ass on Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:06 pm





Let's talk about the abortion issue first and let me keep it short. There are only 2 cases in the history of the Supreme Court where it ruled that people aren't people!!!. One was the notorious Dred Scott case, and the other was Roe V. Wade. The Dred Scott case said black people weren't people. And the Roe decision declared that babies aren't people. Obviously, both, terrible mistakes of logic. Simply put, how can people not be people? Well, there are reasons why the Supreme Court said people weren't people in these cases, because if black people were, then how can there be slavery and if unborn infants were, how can you have legal murder or abortion? In other words, the ruling in both decisions was based on convenience and outcome and not logic or morality.

Now, let's deal with the collectivist issues...

First, let's get this straight, Thomas Paine ain't Adam Smith (for those of you weak in USSA history). He was a Keynesian (before Keynes was cool) who believed in excessive taxation and debt just like today's liberal socialists! Yes, he was on their team.

Second, It is impossible to be acquire property without being born first, fed, diaper changes, clothed.... So what? This doesn't mean anyone else is responsible for what you do later in life. We all interact and deal with each other VOLUNTARILY, and this is fine and even encouraged, but this doesn't make the every other party you've ever dealt with or contracted with in your life a part owner of your house, business, automobile, sons or daughters, or anything.

Leonard Read wrote a great pamphlet on economic cooperation here; http://www.econlib.org/​library/Essays/rdPncl1.html
This is probably more the idea that Payne was trying to express, the peaceful co-existence of man in an atmosphere of free and VOLUNTARY trade. Read it and see for yourself. Leonard Read was no socialist!

Third, let's talk about what OBAMA said, not Thomas Paine! After all, isn't that really the subject here and the purpose of the little cute quote "You didn't build that" on the bottom?

Obama's quote was this;
ďIf youíve been successful, you didnít get there on your own. If youíve got a business, you didnít build that ó somebody else made that happen.Ē (full quote at end of post).

This sounds like something the President of Venezuela, Cuba or the old U.S.S.R. might say, but no, it was our president who so proudly and boldly proclaimed this.

I'm glad he said it. Why? Because, it makes his intentions unmistakable and as he so often puts it "perfectly clear." It's clearly articulated in his recent statement that the president does not believe in individualism. This is because Obama is a collectivist and he worships at the alter of BIG government.

A collectivist is someone who believes in groups or collectives and not individuals. Collectivists believe that the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts, you know, that stuff we are taught in grammer school. Remember, there is no "I" in TEAM?

Obama's statement makes it clear that he believes that the individual is always subservient to the greater needs of the greater collective and you may feel this way too. Many people do, it's pretty popular in this day and age. It was also pretty popular with slave masters in the antebellum South. This was how slavery is rationalized. The rights of the individual are secondary to the greater good, or the collective, in this case the white south. In this way of thinking, individual rights are turned into a minority (the smallest minority is the individual by definition), subject to the whims and rule of the majority, always and by definition. It's simply another way of defining slavery, but in this case the slave master is the state.

You see, collectivism views individuals as chattel. Individuals serve the greater need of the state and when this view is systemized, there is no stopping it. Ask yourself, where does this all end? If my rights are secondary to collective, do I really have any rights at all?

We are finding out the answer to this question and it is unfolding all around us. Things like the Patriot Act being used to listen to our calls, The TSA in our pants, the NSA spying on us, the drones, the assassinations of USSA citizens overseas, the ever ballooning debt on our unborn children and debasing of our currency and the never ending overseas wars are living proof of this answer. We now exist with permission and to serve the state.

Obama's statement doesn't surprise those who've read the novel by Ayn Rand called "Atlas Shrugged." Compare the script in Rand's novel written over 50 years ago to what Obama said just the other day and see if you can find any real difference?

I'll be you can't.

In "Atlas Shrugged" the passage went like this;

ďHe didnít invent iron ore and blast furnaces, did he?Ē
ďWho?Ē
ďRearden. He didnít invent smelting and chemistry and air compression. He couldnít have invented his Metal but for thousands and thousands of other people. His Metal! Why does he think itís his? Why does he think itís his invention? Everybody uses the work of everybody else. Nobody ever invents anything.Ē
She said, puzzled, ďBut the iron ore and all those other things were there all the time. Why didnít anybody else make that Metal, but Mr. Rearden did?Ē
- Atlas Shrugged, P1C9

Obama said;

"There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me ó because they want to give something back. They know they didnít ó look, if youíve been successful, you didnít get there on your own. You didnít get there on your own. Iím always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something ó there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If youíve got a business ó you didnít build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didnít get invented on its own**. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

Not much difference is there?


Last edited by sWamp-ass on Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:08 pm; edited 2 times in total

sWamp-Ass
VIP(VeryImportantPoster)
VIP(VeryImportantPoster)

Number of posts : 593
Reputation : 0
Points : 3691
Registration date : 2012-02-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Collectivist Memes We Just Had To Fix....

Post by sWamp-Ass on Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:57 pm

Judge Nap on Abortion;

In the past 39 years, American physicians have performed more than 50 million abortions. Abortion is the most frequent medical procedure performed in the USSA The linchpin to Roe vs. Wade is the Court's rationale that because the decision to undergo an abortion ordinarily occurs between patient and physician, and because that interaction ordinarily takes place in private, the right to privacy insulates abortion from the reach of the State. Roe vs. Wade itself does not define the right to an abortion, but it does unambiguously declare that the baby in the womb is not a person, and that the right to privacy protects the mother's decision to kill the baby.

Did you catch that? The Supreme Court declared that the baby in the womb is not a person. When it made that declaration, it rejected dozens of decisions of other courts, in America and in Great Britain, holding that the baby in the womb is a person. This is reminiscent of the Supreme Court's infamous Dred Scott decision in 1857 in which it ruled that blacks were not persons. In both cases, it cited no precedent, it gave no rational basis, and in Roe vs. Wade, it merely said that because philosophers, physicians and lawyers could not agree on whether babies in wombs are persons, it would declare them not to be persons.


If the baby in the womb is a person, then all abortion is unlawful. That's because of the constitutional protection for all persons. The Constitution unambiguously prohibits the government from impairing or permitting others to impair the life, liberty and property of persons without due process. Here's my political beef with so-called pro-life politicians in both parties. In the years in which the pro-life Ronald Reagan and both Presidents Bush were in the White House, from time to time, both chambers of Congress had pro-life majorities. Did you see any legislation passed that declared a baby in the womb to be a person? No. This could have been done by a simple majority vote and presidential signature, and Roe vs. Wade, and all the killing it spawned, would have ended.

How scary is this? The Supreme Court declares a class of humanity not to be persons, and then permits people to destroy the members of the class. That's what happened to blacks during slavery; that was the philosophical argument underlying the Holocaust; that's what is happening to babies in the womb today; and that might become the basis for the government killing persons it hates or fears in the future. It will declare them to be non-persons.

Is the baby in the womb a person? Of course babies in wombs are persons. From the moment of the union of egg and sperm, there is present a fully actualizable human genome; meaning all the genetic material necessary for post-birth existence is there. And the parents of that union are human beings. With human parents and a human genome, what else could a baby in a womb be but a person? If you have any doubt, why not give the benefit of that doubt to life, rather than to death? Unless you prefer death to life and killing to nurturing and misery to joy, I expect you agree.

Since you have been reading this essay, 10 babies have lost their lives, as abortions occur in the USSA about two and a half times a minute. How long can a society last when we cannot protect the weakest among us, and when we destroy them out of convenience, and when we make that destruction legal? Who will be destroyed next?
Source/More Here.

sWamp-Ass
VIP(VeryImportantPoster)
VIP(VeryImportantPoster)

Number of posts : 593
Reputation : 0
Points : 3691
Registration date : 2012-02-01

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum