During the “revolutionary” times of the 1960’s, young people looked at the establishment with a jaundiced eye and believed what they saw was a corrupt, harsh, capitalist society that cared little for the common man. Protests and even violence in the streets eventually showed change would have to be brought about from within the establishment structure and could not be effectively made by marching in the streets of our major cities. Those same protestors went back to school, finished their degrees, got jobs in government and even more importantly, they got jobs in the establishment education system as teachers and professors. This allowed slow structural changes to be brought about in public policy and a sure and effective change in the way young people thought about themselves, their parents, the government (and its responsibilities), the capitalist economic system and even their allegiance to the United States. The “Occupy” protests we now see in major cities throughout America are a direct result of this incremental indoctrination and brainwashing perpetrated upon our youth by the radicals and their sympathizers of the 1960’s. When asked exactly what it is the protestors want, they find difficulty in articulating their goals or even enumerating the steps needed to achieve those goals. The platitudes and liberal talking points flow like a river of warm sap, thick with sentiment, smelling of communism but bearing little in the way of any ability to deal with reality. Finding their inability to answer even the most modest of questions posed by fawning media interviewers, we now are beginning to hear a stronger focus on our “problems” as being caused by the “International Jewish Banking Conglomerate”. At last we begin to hear the truth of what these folks really believe. Remember, these are supposed to be the “free-thinkers” the “compassionate” and the “tolerant” among us. Yet they fall back into the same old prejudices and hatreds so common in 1920’s Germany. At least the Germans of that day were willing to work for what they wanted. Here we see thousands of people more than willing to TAKE what they want from those whom they suppose do not deserve what they have earned due to some twisted notion of “fairness”. It only goes to prove how easy it is to propagandize youth when the study of history has been bastardized, mischaracterized, and even excluded from curriculum. To all those who would now lay their alleged problems at the feet of the Evil Jews I would ask a question: Adolph Hitler killed every Jew within a thousand mile circumference of Berlin. After he had rounded them up, seized their worldly goods and exterminated as many as possible in the time allotted before Americans blocked his plans, was the life of the average German better? The answer is an emphatic NO! Hitler’s hatred of the Jews was real enough but more importantly, the extermination of the Jews was a tool whereby he consolidated his power over the German people. After all, if Hitler could round up Jews, why could he not round up Catholics, Gypsies, political opponents or anyone else he took a dislike to? As it turned out, that is exactly what he did. The advice I would give to the organizers of these “Occupy” demonstrations is: Be careful what monster you create. Mobs have little reason and no compassion. Even Robespierre was killed by the same whom he had led. There I go with that history stuff, again. It seems to me the biggest fraud foisted upon the American taxpayer (meaning the worst bang for the buck) is the established education system. Turn on your television any evening and see what your money has bought.
Yeah, protesting is bad! That's why things like "free speech" and "right to assemble" aren't included in the constitution. Wait.... I think the Hitler reference is a bit of a stretch. Don't you? You're saying middle America's upset at the financial system is akin to the slaughter of millions of innocent people. Are you a tea party member? I find those people to be more dangerous than the Occupy Wall Street protestors. Get your guns, and let's paint bulls-eyes on the presidents head, and then let's have someone use that as propaganda! VS I think middle America is getting the shaft by big business. Yeah... I can see where you've made a mistake..
Calling historical fact a “stretch” does nothing to change the fact. Referring to the Occupy protestors as “Middle America” is truly a stretch. Middle America has jobs to attend or is looking for a job. Paid union protestors, communist agitators and slackers do not qualify as “Middle America”. Let’s compare any TEA Party demonstration with any “Occupy” demonstration: You will note most TEA Party activities are held on the weekend because they go back to work on Monday. You will note the areas where they gathered are cleaner when they leave than when they arrived. You will note there is no drug/alcohol use at a TEA party function. You will note there is no anti-Semitism rhetoric at TEA Party gatherings. You will note there is no violence at a TEA Party gathering. Yes, I guess you are right. If I were a leftist/socialist/liberal, I too would be frightened of TEA Party gatherings. When real working stiffs use valuable non-work time to protest, you know the liberal agenda has gone too far and you just may loose control of political power in America. And by the way, how did you feel about “getting the shaft” when you bought that Vendetta? Do you think for a moment that a socialist or communist society could ever produce a product like that? Even your Kool-Aid was manufactured by a money machine…the Democrat Party.
Obviously you read about as well as you're informed. I said, "You're saying middle America's upset at the financial system is akin to the slaughter of millions of innocent people." Is a stretch. If you actually believe what you've said here, you are severely misinformed. You know what they say, though, ignorance is bliss. http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2011/10/world/hires.occupy.irpt/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 The Tea Party doesn't protest, they rally. Rallies are short, protests are long. As far as the other, extremely volatile, accusations you've made here. I'd like to see where you are getting your information. Isolated incidents cannot be generalized towards an entire group/function. You wouldn't want to be generalized, and judged by a few bad apples would you? You're really bad with this generalization thing. I don't think leftist, socialist, and liberal mean the same thing. Implying that those three aren't "real working stiffs" is insulting, at the very least. In your statement it would seem that you think liberals should be afraid of the tea party; They are afraid, but not for the reasons you think. When people start putting crosshairs on our president, people should be scared. There are problems in this country: the financial system, corporate greed, lobbyists, etc. Saying the people protesting are the problem makes you seem very small. It's sometimes hard to see the forest through the trees. I'm a working, contributing, proud member of society. I have liberal leanings, but I'm not a "leftist" or a "socialist". I'm a humanitarian, something you should take a look at. This is where I leave you, and I won't return. I wish you the best.
What you decide to use as the meaning of any given word has little bearing upon what the rest of the world accepts as definition. Just because you say “I don't think leftist, socialist, and liberal mean the same thing.” Gives no weight to your statement. From Wikipedia…”Left-Wing”: “The spectrum of left-wing politics ranges from centre-left to far left (or ultra-left). The term centre left describes a position within the political mainstream. The terms far left and ultra-left refer to positions that are more radical. The centre-left includes social democrats, social liberals, progressives and also some democratic socialists and greens (in particular the eco-socialists). Centre-left supporters accept market allocation of resources in a mixed economy with a significant public sector and a thriving private sector. Centre-left policies tend to favour limited state intervention in the economy in matters pertaining to the public interest. In several countries, the terms far left and radical left have been associated with communism, Maoism, Autonomism and many forms of anarchism. They have been used to describe groups that advocate anti-capitalist, identity politics or eco-terrorism. In France, a distinction is made between the left (Socialist Party and Communist Party) and the far left (Trotskyists, Maoists and Anarchists). The US Department of Homeland Security defines left-wing extremism as groups who want "to bring about change through violent revolution rather than through established political processes."” It is not I who generalizes. The terms I use are accurate. Perhaps Big Education has worked a little of their majic on you. You know, it’s all shades of grey and after all, who are we to judge the meaning of words, the correctness of social behavior…you know, morals? As far as humanitarianism goes, are you sure application of those lofty ideals is best left up to government burocrats taxing all and applying the funds as they see fit? Or should you, as an individual, make the decesion to donate your funds and time in the way you see most benificial? If you think government does a more effective job, you are really a liberal stateist (i.e. socialist or communist) and not a true “humanitiarian”. Donation to your local food bank and volunteering a few hours at the soup kitchen is an infinatly more efficient use of resources than letting Harry Ried decide he wants to use our money to support The Cowboy Poetry Festival.
Your facts are not objective.. which is why this is not history but opinion... particularly those about the Germans following WWII. What I find humorous is your talk of history in the classroom when your own talk is skewed just as much. What I find even more humorous is history books written for the classroom often exclude facts left out by not the education system.. but by government itself. Your whole argument contains many flaws. But.. happy hunting!
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in complete agreement with you. He swears there was no holocaust, the Germans were benevolant rulers and society would be far better off had the NAZIs been victorious. But each to his own.
Thomas Jefferson started this mess since he was one of the first to fund public education, I blame him. The guy feared our banking system, it's obvious he was a socialist If he would have not funded all those hippies going to school, we would not be in this mess
