Posted on 06/02/2010 1:58:17 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
“George Orwell was quite right when he observed, in a response to Austrian economist F.A. Hayek, that “the problem with competitions is that someone eventually wins them.”
Did Georgie-boy ever say whyyyyy that was a bad thing or is he another dummy who believes that there mere act of winning in a competition is bad?
The constitution is the constitution and to “change” it in the way the communists wish to do, they have to amend the constitution. It is a legal thing; not a religious thing. Otherwise, they are law breakers which they are.
Marxists do not respect the rule of law nor equality beyond race before the law. To them the constitution is a “religious” document rather than a legal document.
When we say the bill of rights rights are guarenteed by God, not government, we mean the government has no power to remove those rights from the citizens. This means if the government ends free speech, for example, we will not accept it’s authority to do that.
The commies, being ignorant slobs who disrespect constitutional freedom, are mixing apples and oranges. They want to end free speech and racial equality before the law so they can squash their opposition through hate speech law harassment and oppression.
The constitution gets in their way of acting like the Klan and White Citizens groups they replaced in the post segregation era to discriminate by race in opportunity and install inequality under the law. Installing preferences for some races and oppression to others, gives the communists the voting power base they want and need. To gain the total control they want, they have to divide and conquer the nation by race and class.
George Orwell was quite right when he observed, in a response to Austrian economist F.A. Hayek, that “the problem with competitions is that someone eventually wins them.”
......
So, then it’s a bad thing that in rental car companies’
#1 is Hertz
#2 is Avis
#3 is Alamo
Funny, I never thought of that as a problem. I wonder why the author does?
Now if he said that the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other peoples money, he’d be on to some thing, eh?
And the money shot quote near the end:
"At Marxism's root is the desire to make real the consciousness of the individual. Human beings are recognized as beings with a consciousness that surpasses other animals, and to have such an exceptional consciousness is what makes us human. Marx states this when he asserts, in his early work "The Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844" that conscious activity is our species-activity. Only when human beings are emancipated, and able to unite their will with action, do they feel satisfied.
It was also in that work that he first examined alienation in detail, defining alienation as the process by which a person's will is subverted by engaging in activity which does not match the person's desires.
Heteronormativity, therefor, is a form of alienation. It enforces this alienation among all competent persons, restricting them from the possibility of queer identity and love. Heteronormativity is antithetical to emancipation and the freedom of adults to chose their life-activity.
Regardless of any individual view of gender or sexuality, queer people's experience is real. As a person's being queer does not limit other people's ability to express themselves, the claim that queer activity is unnatural and should be repressed should not be responded to in a way that invalidates the experience of any queer person. As people are queer, and have constructed loving queer relationships that satisfy them, anti-queer organizations cannot justify their position with any sort of appeal to science, but must present a real, pertinent reason queer love is to be forbidden.
If the debate is framed this way, anti-queer organizations must admit their objections are rooted in personal beliefs, such as their interpretation of religion, and the debate becomes more honest. It becomes a debate over freedom, which is what it has really been about all along, and conservative, anti-queer proponents are framed as nothing more than people who chose to be supporters of oppression.
Further, heteronormativity is another form of alienation. It is both exhibited by what institutions do to restrict love, and what people who remain neutral fail to do to include queer people in our social environment. Racism, sexism and classism have continued to exist as forms of alienation in similar ways, and all people who have experienced such oppression share a common struggle with queer people.
The struggle for queer rights is also our struggle.
Tolerance is not enough. Marxism insists society represent all forms of love.
Have a Happy Valentine's Day!
"
(Meanwhile, we Christians will breed and you Communists will abort and bugger yourselves out of existence: but the Islamists will finish you off before we Christians win everything.)
Cheers!
There is no individuality in socialism. Socialists lie. Always.
If the debate is framed this way, anti-queer organizations must admit their objections are rooted in personal beliefs, such as their interpretation of religion, and the debate becomes more honest. It becomes a debate over freedom, which is what it has really been about all along, and conservative, anti-queer proponents are framed as nothing more than people who chose to be supporters of oppression.
Socialists have long pushed the sex positive agenda. No moral judgements over ANY sexual pairings regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s).
Reich, Kinsey, and Feminists stand shoulder to shoulder in this regard.
A pseudodocumentary film from the early 1970s on Williem Reich played up Communist ideology and the release of "orgone" energy.
The left works on emotions, hand outs through buying elections and dependence on monopolies that should be illegal among government connected unions and employees.
The right likes to balance the check book, but after a while many start to become Democrat-lite because there is so much giving away of the treasury that it is hard to compete telling people they need to be independent and responsible for their own actions.
Then there is the infiltration of the teachers and press with extreme leftists who's views get pretty much brainwashed into all our kids through at least college.
What needs to be done to counter the blah blah blah of this article?
Develop strong conservative leaders from the grass roots.
We need to take back the press by having conservatives go into journalism.
Take back the children by having conservatives become teachers in great numbers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.