DECISIONS, DECISIONS! It must be confusing for "Conservatives" who must now decide whether they support the Civil-War alliance between Jesuit slave-traders, and Southern Plantation owners, or whether they prefer the more modern version of the same thing, Hitler and Father Coughlin's Religious Reich. Not that there is any real difference between the two actually, other than the Paleos get to incorporate the depravity of the wrong side of the Civil War era into their mix. Oh yes, there are supposed political differences, like whether you should put the chair over here or over there, but either way, it never leaves the room of the Roman empire, either way. You simply decide whether you prefer the rhetoric of Rome's medieval inquisators & the post Civil-war era Klan, or whether you prefer the later incarnation of the same people during the American Nazi movement of the 1940s. (Both versions centered around the primacy of Rome)
The prefix paleo derives from the Greek root palaeo- meaning "ancient" or "old." It is somewhat tongue-in-cheek—and refers to the paleocons' claim to represent a more historic, authentic conservative tradition than that found in neoconservative. Adherents of paleoconservatism often describe themselves simply as "paleo-." Rich Lowry of National Review claims the prefix “is designed to obscure the fact that it is a recent ideological creation of post-Cold War politics.”
The same political philosophy that gave us the idea of restoring Hitler's "Third Reich" is now fighting with it's own Klan members and Inquisitionists within it's ranks, for a more "ancient" (paleo) "conservatism". How far back do they wish to devolve the error of anal retentiveness, regression and illusions of grandeur, they call "conservative politics"? Perhaps to the original Neanderthal that thought he too was the superior race perhaps? who knows.
The "right" keeps getting everything "wrong", and it is really amazing that such opposite words somehow got put together and applied to each other. It does make you believe in conspiracy theories. Obviously the work of the Illuminati, no doubt? Who else would stick the world "conservative" with something that wants to "destroy everything" and replace it with "something new"? (like the really bad old?)
The really amazing thing is that intelligent people sit around and impress themselves with their big words that actually argue for all this stuff. And it sounds more like the product of disorientation caused by habitual marijuana use, than anything remotely logical. How else do you sit around and intelligently argue on behalf of the depravity of a disgraced ruling elite in the south that totally raped it's own people (often literally), and almost destroyed the entire nation, in the most mistkaen, bloody and costly war in American history? But they do.
How do you sit around and talk about the inquisition (that you now claim never happened) but defend it's efficiency with torture? That you now wish to reinstate into society?? But they do.
How do you ignore the horrific practices of trafficking in human slavery, while you sit around and defend the killing of fellow Americans over the defense of it... based on a brilliant political or legal technicality you just thought of yesterday? Or the day before? But they do.
How do you intelligently discuss restoring the Roman empire, literally it's 3rd Reich, either in it's medieval version (as the Paleos do) or it's World War II version (as the Neo-cons do), and have the nerve to utter the word "American" from your lips without a guilty conscience? But they do.
They really do. This is actually the "debate" between Paleo-conservatism and Neo-conservatism. I just can't believe intelligent adults actually even entertain the debate. Either side of it? What's "conservative" about any of this? Nothing. It's a false word. A deception, and nothing more. Moving the same thing up and down the time-line hardly changes it's players nor it's outcome. Perhaps they are too stupid to realize that? Or perhaps they are actually smart enough to know. Either way, it get's scary.
FROM "CONSERVAPEDIA":
Paleoconservative is a term that describes an academic or scholarly conservative [Hardy har har] who emphasizes religious heritage, national and Western identity, tradition, civil society and classical federalism [i.e.,slavery], the importance of demographics, and an anti-interventionist policy of Robert Taft. Paleoconservatives oppose immigration [i.e., non-whites], communism, authoritarianism, social democracy and entitlement programs [except for large corporations]. The most prominent figure is TV commentator and author Pat Buchanan.Many paleoconservatives identify themselves as "classical conservatives" and trace their philosophy to the Old Right Republicans of the interwar period, which helped keep the U.S. out of the League of Nations, reduced immigration with the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, and opposed Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. (Yeah, this was also the "Klan Era" and much of this political support was Adolph Hitler's) They were isolationists who opposed entry into World War II [i.e., sided with Hitler]. They often look back even further, to Edmund Burke, as well as the American anti-federalist movement that stretched from the days of Thomas Jefferson to John C. Calhoun. [The famous defender of southern slavery] Paleoconservatism is popular in the Bible Belt states (i.e., Slave States).
This is a particularly lovely expression of "Paleo-conservatism" you will enjoy:
Thomas Fleming stated this opposition to abstract ideals in a way that critic David Brooks called a "startling crescendo": Among the most dangerous of our theoretical illusions are the political fantasies that can be summed up in words like democracy; equality, and natural rights; the principle of one man, one vote and the American tradition of self-government. No one who lives in the world with his eyes open can actually believe in any of this.- Brooks, David (March 11, 1996). "Buchananism: An Intellectual Cause". The Weekly Standard.
Did you read the quote above? I mean did you really read it? If you did really read it, you will realize what "Paleo-conservative" means. No equality, no one man one vote, no natural rights, no "American tradition"? No America?
Yep. This is "paleo-conservative". A return to the Nazis of the 30s, the inequity of the Civil War era, and the torture of the Inquisitions of the Middle-Ages, under the unbrella of the Roman empire from the dark ages. Lovely isn't it? Who would not want to believe this stuff? And they are "selling this" to people who think of themselves as "Patriots"? Yes, "Patriots"! Benedict Arnold, we profusely apologize to your for your "Patriotic" actions. We did not realize you were simply a "Paleo-conservative Patriot"! Not to mention the fact, this would make Satan himself, simply the "Paleo-conservative God". Up is really down, black is really white, left is really right, and right is really left? Let's see ...where have we heard that "which appears to our eyes to be white, we ought in like manner to pronounce it to be black" before? Black is really white? Let me think, hmmm, that sounds really familiar. I'll let the reader discover the source of this for themselves on Google. You will enjoy the surprise.
If you think there is not a great deal of deception to promote this agenda, you are kidding yourself in a major way. No American in their right mind would endorse either platform from these "conservatives". In fact, at least in my mind, a real patriotic American would be more inclined to deport these people back to the Anti-American foreign governments that are sponsoring them. But, thanks to the general lack of real education, it's all too easy to recruit toothless trailer park residents to it's cause.
It does make you wonder if this is indeed the real historical legacy of "conservatism"? Slavery, the Inquisitions and Hitler's 3rd Reich? How do they find people to support this stuff? Is the professional "marketing" in the Republican party really this good? That you sell the lack of healthcare to toothless sick near indigents? That you sell Hitler's vision for the world...to "patriotic" Americans? How about Ice to an Eskimo? And booty-clubs to Islamic Jihadists?
What do we need an army for? Let's just send Republican marketing firms to the Islamic Jihadists in the middle-east, and convince them to shoot themselves in the head, or become pacifists vegetarians? Really! It certainly couldn't be any harder than selling this mess to patriotic Americans? Yet, they do.
There is more about PALEO-CONSERVATISM in the Tuesday, September 29, 2009 post below:
No comments:
Post a Comment