Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Borepatch on Secession

Borepatch put up an interesting post about the seething nature of our current political situation.  He wonders if secession may happen again in the United States, and whether it may be in his lifetime.  Go.  Read.  His points are more nuanced than I can possibly summarize.  

My response is thus:

It looks like this all may very well happen within your lifetime, Borepatch.  It’s scary and disheartening, and I think it all boils down to the fact that leftism is asupremacist movement.  They think that they are the smartest people in the room, and use their own perceived intellectual superiority to dismiss all dissenting opinion.  After all, if they are the smartest, why would they deign to listen to the opinions of the dullards that surround them?  Why would they give those opinions any merit at all?

"Typical American citizen outside of the cultural hubs,"
According to leftist jackwads
The problem is that these folks aren’t nearly as smart as they think they are, and the worst cognitive block that they display is their failure to realize that people don’t like to be ignored, dismissed, marginalized, and have their rights and concerns trampled over by people claiming to be their betters – the intellectual elite. 

"Out of bread, eh?  Then let the dullards eat cake!"
The dislike it enough that it makes them angry.  When their angry voices are ignored, and dismissed as the voice of ignorance, or, more recently, that of “domesticterrorism” they are going to get violent. 

It is as inevitable as the setting of the sun, and yet these supposedly “intellectually superior” leftists can’t see it coming.  They just disregard and ignore; lampoon and mock; and then act all surprised when even clear cut cases like the Bundy affair blow up in their faces.  Ten years ago, even, the Bundy affair wouldn’t have even been a thing:  the government would have filed a lien against Bundy’s property for the back payments, and fined him for every day his cattle continued to trespass, adding economic sanctions up to and including seizure of bank accounts and garnishing wages to make their point.  All non-violent, and all a perfect solution to the problem.  Nobody would have said a thing.  But add in a decade of marginalization, dismissal, and mocking by the leftist elites, and the people of Nevada are righteously pissed off.  Top it off with an armed SWAT raid with armored vehicles, further displaying the leftist arrogance and contempt for the poor, stupid people, and the people of Nevada considered getting violent. 

Ten years ago, this would have gone totally differently, but not today.  Today, the BLM, run by intellectually “elite” leftists, mocks and lampoons its dissenters, and responds violently and threateningly to any dissent, because their view is that the dissent is just the ignorant ramblings of stupid people in flyover country who can’t think at the same level as they can.  They don’t take a second to consider WHY these people are standing up to them.  They refuse to ponder whether these people have valid grievances or not, because THEY DON’T CARE.  They just know that this moronic sedition, perpetrated by mouth-breathing flyovers, must be squashed at all cost. 

"A traitor is everyone who does not agree with me" King George III

I don’t see the attitude of this supremacist movement changing any time soon, either.  The reason is because of the true nature of the end goal of leftism, which is not communalist, or socialist utopia, but rather power over the people.  They could form their socialist utopia any time they want, with mutual agreements between consenting people and a relatively simple network policing that, but they don’t do that.  Instead, they insist on dragging us all in along with them, against our will, by force.  They insist, not on communalist or socialist lifestyles for themselves, but for everybody, and they do so not for the sake of socialism, but because socialism allows them to have power.  

Just look at this cocky fuck.  You think he gives a shit about whether you have health insurance?
Power to dictate to people what they may or may not do.  Power is the goal.  Equality?  Egalitarianism?  Fairness?  All means to an end.  They don’t give two hot shits about any of those things, except for the fact that they can provide for them the power that they crave.  

Leftism is a Supremacist Movement

I’ve been saying for a long time that the left is not about collectivization, or socialism, or creating that great, utopian society that they tout, so much as they are about the power that such an arrangement would grant them.

Proof of this comes with the fact that if collectivism, socialism and so forth is so great, what is stopping them from going for it?  They could create private organizations, through mutually agreed-upon rules and bylaws, that would allow them to live in collectivist bliss, without demanding that from the government and forcing the rest of us to come along against our will.  No one would stop them.  They could start tomorrow, and in today’s connected world, they wouldn’t even have to move – living in proximity to one another would not be necessary.

The fact that they don’t do this is proof to me that forcing the rest of us into their way of life is a feature, not a bug.  They don’t want collectivism.  They want power.  They want the satisfaction of being able to force everyone else to do things their way; in the way that they see as superior, because they are so convinced in their own intellectual superiority (and by extension, the inferiority of everyone else) that they think that they are uniquely positioned to save people from themselves.

They desire the power make choices for people who would otherwise make the “wrong” choice, in their worldview.  Leftism is not about brotherhood, equality, or egalitarianism.  It is about power, and wielding that power to force everyone on Earth to live the way that leftists want them to live.

It is a supremacist movement.  

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Gooberticker Update

I went to the electro-cardio-physicist, or whatever the hell he called himself, yesterday.

It’s confirmed.  I’ve got the AFIB. 

They had me on the ECG yesterday and I’ll be damned if I wasn’t just AFIB-ing my little heart out (ba-dum tiss!), even though I couldn’t feel it.  Other than being tired.  More tired than I ever remember being. 

Or maybe tired isn’t the way to describe it.  Maybe fatigue is a closer word. 

Anyway, he told me that I needed surgery.  Something called an ablation.  I guess they want to go in with a catheter and burn away/scar the part of my heart that isn’t working right. 

This sounds somewhat terrifying to someone who is sincerely hoping to be able to use that heart for another 60-ish years.  Sounds like it’s time for a second opinion, but to be honest, from all the research I’ve done on the situation, it looks like ablation is my best option (the other one being drug therapy for the rest of my life, but since I was in AFIB this morning, the drugs didn’t seem to be working too well).  

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

More on the Bundy Situation

So far, all I’ve written about vis-à-vis the Bundy affair has been about the legal claims of Cliven Bundy, and not the actions of the protesters, or the State of Nevada, both of whom supported him. 

To that, I cannot post fact, only opinion.  My opinion on the matter is that the protesters and the State are fighting a good, worthy fight, but they've picked the wrong poster boy. 

Pictured: Not a bad guy, just someone who is wrong.
 Since the 1970s and beyond, Nevada, and several other western states, have taken exception to the Federal Government owning so much of their land, and therefore having so much influence over their doings. 

Courtesy americanteapartypolitics.com

The Feds, once very permissive about the use of these lands, have grown increasingly protective of them, and increasingly hostile to people using them outside of a very tightly constrained “allowable use.”  Many lands that were once open to all, are now constrained and restricted in order to please certain special interests and the EPA (which are essentially one and the same).  They change rules without notice, and without explanation, and then enforce them without telling people about the changes.  

Lands that I used to be able to use for hunting and fishing, for instance, are now closed to all forms of access but walking in on foot.  While this may seem like it isn’t a big deal, keep in mind we’re talking tracts of land the size of New England – not something that you can generally walk into.  It is likely that I’ll never again see the tight bend in Moose Creek that I used to go to, because it’s 22 miles into the wilderness, and they no longer allow any travel means but on foot, including horses.  I don’t have the time to put together a trip of that nature (minimum two days in, two days out) and so I’ve resigned myself to just living with it. 

What I’m not doing, you’ll notice, is just going in with my 4-wheeler or pickup anyway, despite the law, because while I don’t think that what the Feds did is right, it is their land and they make the rules.  That’s where Bundy and I differ. 

The tightening federal noose on the use of all federal lands is happening everywhere, and it is not a good thing.  It is being driven by special interest groups in Washington DC who have no clue what it means to live out west, and have tracts of land that big that are essentially useless to all uses but sitting there and collecting dust.  Frustration with the federal government in this issue is everywhere you look, any time you’re west of the Mississippi.  They haven’t been paying attention because the protests have been weak and decentralized, but we can organize and make ourselves be heard without pointing guns at people! 

Shame on you!

Shame on you, too!

Do any of you really, truly think that doing so gained our cause any ground at all?  

Piss off the feds, guys, good plan.  Way to go!  Now they’ll escalate, like they always do, and bring down the iron fist.  Maybe even use this as the final excuse to pass that gun ban.  Fucking genius. 

Ahhh duuurrrr!

It is my firm belief that the Feds need to get out of the land ownership business.  They are a blunt instrument, incapable of adapting to the conditions in the field, because they operate from half a nation away.  Their solution to conflict is helicopters and SWAT teams.  They solve problems by killing people.  They are the wrong folks to be owning land in America.  The lands should be given to the States post haste, with few exceptions, and the disposition of those lands should be left to the State legislatures to decide.

My guess is that this would incidentally clear up Cliven Bundy’s problem, assuming he lives long enough to see it happen. 

It is also why I routinely write my congressman and senator to ask that they consider a bill to relinquish federal lands to the states.  It is a good idea.  It is good policy. 

I understand the pain that the folks in Nevada are feeling.  I get it.  They are losing their livelihood due to the whims of special interests in Washington DC, but the thing is that it was THEY who put their livelihoods in the hands of the government to begin with.  They created a business that required the use of lands that they did not hold the title to, and then just expected everything to go to plan, without planning for any contingency, ever. 

That was monumentally stupid. 

It was a big enough error that it puts them enough in the wrong that grabbing the torches and pitchforks, as they have, is plainly wrong.  The Federal Government was acting as a landlord evicting a tenant.  Oddly enough, at the very same time, a bunch of “Occupy” types were falling out in San Fran to protest some evictions of long time residents from an apartment complex that was purchased by Google.  

So for the first time in my life, I see extreme right-wing militia types fighting the exact same battle as the “Occupy” types in arguing that because someone has rented a property for a really long time, that they should have legal claim to that property.  Does that seem right to you? 

Both groups are very clearly wrong in both situations.  The properties in both cases belong to the owner.  As long as the owner has a contract with a tenant, then he must abide by that contract, but as soon as the contract is up, or the terms of that contract are not being met, then the tenant should expect to get evicted.  Google evicted their folks in San Fran amidst a raucous cry from “occupy” types, and the BLM evicted their tenant amidst the raucous hue and cry of right wing militias.  How fucking weird is that?  How far off the rails have we gone in the situation when we’re arguing the same argument as “Occupy” in San Fran? 

People have accused me of being a socialist for not siding with Bundy, but Bundy’s argument, and the arguments of the people supporting him, are as socialist as the definition of the word can mean. 

So what to do from here? 

Demand action.  If every one of the folks who I’ve seen supporting Bundy on the internet put that effort into writing a letter to their Congressman and cc-ing their Senator, we’d make an impact, and perhaps do some damage.  Shedding blood is not the answer.  Threats of shedding blood are not the answer. 

We’ve picked the wrong hill to die on here.

You can't be 100% right, but can we at least try to find someone who isn't quite so wrong?