Inflammatory Opinion:
The Belt of Justice
What I am about to write here may trouble some readers, particularly because I must unabashedly put on display that side of my views decidedly not in keeping with my more progressive, tolerant side. In advance, I forewarn that what I write below might not sit well with many, and I shall understand that discomfort. In some ways, it troubles even me that my patience with neo-conservatism has become so truncated that I must revert to attitudes within myself that pose in such harshness. That, unfortunately, is one of the many downsides of becoming agéd: patience in some areas of life takes the form of a precious commodity to be reserved only for those worthy of it. Neo-conservatives and Right-wing evangelicals have fallen off my list of those for whom patience, tolerance, and acceptance is warranted. I trust that they shall never again find their way to the limited space that remains within my soul for good will. With that caution in preface, suffer now my statement of position.
I have no delusions about the American people. Enough of them liked the mean, nasty, hateful words, ways, and innuendos of the Republicans to turn this into one of the grimmest chapters in American history. People like that don't change their stripes, and they certainly wouldn't do so in the span of a mere few years.
Those same people whose rah-rah, kick-some-ass-Georgie mentality got us into this mess are still out there all around us, and their attitudes now are every bit as disgusting as they were.
But those same people, like the people of every age, are craven and cowardly. When their former heroes get hanged in the public square, they'll be nowhere in sight to protest the swinging of the apes.
At worst, they'll hide in their homes grumbling about the horror of it all; at best, they'll feign shock and dismay at the "betrayal" by their former heroes, and they'll swear to God they had "no idea."
Bull. That's the same apology of the Germans as the truth about the Third Reich got rammed down their throats in the years after World War II. The facts shut up the Hitler generation and allowed a much more benign couple of generations to grow up. It took all of fifty years for Fascism to become once again fashionable in European polite company and its hate speech to become wholly defensible by American liberals.
We may yet again have to beat the Hell out of its ugly pigs over there in the decades to come, but at least we had more than half a century of peace and quiet, in no small part because the common people by the millions who had grovelingly supported Hitler, Mussolini, and their ilk laid low, died quietly, and got buried with their hate and their stash of commemorative swastikas.
That's how it can be here, too; but this will happen only if there is a loud enough, authoritative enough, and harsh enough presence standing in judgment over the leaders of this failed neo-con rebellion against the American rule of law and the progressed civil society we were achieving.
That is the dual purpose of a truth commission in every country where one has been established: not only does it expose and punish the wrong-doers who had infected and perverted the government, but it also puts their miserable supporters whose mentality had infected the society on notice that they weren't just wrong, they were also bad.
And, no, by that I don't mean they had bad ideas; I mean they were bad.
I might not be able to make a bad kid into a good one, but I can sure as Hell scare him into keeping his bad behavior to himself. If he wants to act like a hellian in his own private little bedroom, that's fine; but I want him to understand that, not only is his kind known for its ways, but if he ever again shows those attitudes in public, he'll get the same treatment as those he thought were so cool for their destructive malevolence that caused so much pain before.
That might not sound like a particularly caring, liberal way of thinking on my part, but then again, I have never called myself a "liberal" here or anywhere. I may be progressive—Lord knows, I might very well even be a Progressive—but speaking as an anachronistic version of old-time, Rockefeller-type conservativism (and this is just between you all and me, mind you), I really do know what a belt is for; and God knows, there isn't any other remedy of which I know that will cure this country of its current brand of Republicanism.
When a gang of kids has spent the past week tearing up the house, the first and most important thing I need to do is to turn the ringleaders over my knee for the swift Belt of Justice. I mete out the punishment right where the other kids can see it, and I make the sound of righteousness hitting paydirt ring thoughout the land. The rest of those malcontent kids will suddenly turn into the nicest, sweetest, most God-fearing little angels anyone would ever want to have to help clean up the mess they'd made.
That's how we used to take care of bad kids, anyway; and speaking here as an old-time conservative, it's high time we returned to some old-fashioned values in this country.
Let freedom ring? You bet. But not until the belt swings.
The Dark Wraith has spoken.
Published 3/28/2006 01:27:00 AM
<< 24 Comments Total
Good morning, Dark Wraith.
Thank you for putting that into words, it was quite brave of you to do so. I too, am a conservative in the original sense, and it gives me great joy to see a progressive who embraces the old conservative way of looking at the world come forth and show how the two are not mutually exclusive.
Small government, sensible taxation that balances the books, a no nonsense attitude toward our enemies, both at home and abroad, environmental conservation, social trampolines instead of safety nets, an emphasis on education for all and above all, the application of good common sense to solving problems. These are the principles that any government lives or dies by in my eyes. Needless to say, by these standards the current Republican administration has been an abject failure from day one.
I've been thinking for a while now that the Democrats need to move rightward, that indeed, on some of the issues, like smaller government, for example, they are being compelled to do so, if only to differentiate themselves from the Republicans. What I can't stand is that instead of proactively marching forward and taking the high ground on the more traditional conservative values that I mentioned above, they are instead beating a cowardly retreat on the progressive principles that have always been their best asset. This isn't a move rightward, it is a move backward, and it means that there is no longer any party that folks like us can call home.
Small government, sensible taxation that balances the books, a no nonsense attitude toward our enemies, both at home and abroad, environmental conservation, social trampolines instead of safety nets, an emphasis on education for all and above all, the application of good common sense to solving problems. These are the principles that any government lives or dies by in my eyes. Needless to say, by these standards the current Republican administration has been an abject failure from day one.
I think if you were to poll those Americans who vote regularly but are not a member of any political party you would find the vast majority of them in agreement with these sentiments.
The historic problem with both major parties is that they associate with some, but not all, of these values.
(I am of course speaking of the historic positions of the Republican Party, rather than its present incarnation's positions, which more closely resemble something from Dr. Strangelove, or from Hell.)
- oddjob
Your message isn't even close to being troublesome to me. That bushco, the neocons, and their spawn need to be punished is beyond doubt to me. Tolerance is a slippery slope; become too tolerance and the snot-nosed brats are free to tear up the house you speak of. In this case with your back against the wall, lack of tolerance is progressive, in that you are taking an alternate view with the intent to salvage what you stand for. Accepting the same old BS with the idea that "things will eventually change" is not progressive.
Your quest has skimmed over a key component that is only implicit in your arguement for a Truth Commission and punishment. Any spoiled brat needs to have various boundaries established to contain and guide their behaviors, with consequences established for deviations. The same is true for government.
It is clear that the governmental branches of today no longer check and balance each other as they were intended. Somebody must establish those boundaries for our rotten government. Let the Commission punish the wicked, but let's also establish those boundaries for the sake of our future.
Spanking the village idiot for starting a war doesn't mean the sorority princess understands that the same consequences apply to her.
in the "it's all my mother's fault" column, my mother was raised in middle georgia in the 30s and 40s. she's lived in new england since the 60s, and she's appalled at what the bushies and radical right are doing. problem is: her upbringing taught her to value one thing above, literally, all else: be polite. she slathered that stuff all over me from day one. even when i'm being accused by some right wing freak at a social event in my own living room -- like of being a racist (soft bigotry of low yadda yadda) or a communist (i work for organized labor) or some other piece of in your face nonsensical horsecrap -- i remain unfailingly polite. i'm constitutionally, biologically incapable of being anything else. values wise, i think THAT's the fundamental difference. our mommas raised us right. oh what i wouldn't give to be let off that particular hook for just one brief shining second. 'cause out would come the strap...
Good afternoon, rael.
Recapping my response to you over at Big Brass Blog, I do know about that "unfailing politeness" of which you speak. There were, indeed, times in my life when I was plagued by some idea that it was always best to suffer in silence, as if martyrdom were its own greatest reward.
That era passed, however. I think it had something to do with realizing that, by definition, martyrs are all dead, and the only one rumored to have returned had a special relationship with God for which I have no evidence of a similar arrangement.
My politeness these days has a bad quality: when it fails, it does so without much warning either to me or to a Right-wing windbag who has set me off.
If only you could by some force allow me to possess you for perhaps an hour just once when you're under this kind of Right-wing attack nonsense, I could use the great diplomatic reserve and high-minded, long suffering silence for which I am well known.
And once my patience failed, I would loose the demons of Redneck, Old-Time Religion Hell upon the hapless soul foolish enough to spew Right-wing hate around me.
Then I'd see if the evicerated, former loud-mouth wanted some coffee.
The Dark Wraith makes coffee particularly strong, especially for guests in need of resuscitation.
wow. articulate, well-reasoned, and back-at-you. it's not that i don't have a spine. i work for the teachers' union, and you gotta have one here these days. it's always me here urging folks to stop pussyfooting around. but i actually agree with them that, over the long haul, hope does work better than fear. part of my trope is that we're battling old testament fear mongering with new testament tools, so to speak. i had a conversation recently with an evangelical and found myself saying that, actually, this IS the armaggeddon they've been predicting, the final battle between new testament hope and old testament fear. they've just been mischaracterizing the nature of what that battle would be for two millenia. yeah yeah, i've been reading elaine pagels...
yet i digress. and, possibly, ramble.
so here's another question. how do you use well-reasoned logic to refute unreasonable illogic? they're apples and oranges, not part of the same conversation. i'm called a racist in my living room not because said wingnut actually thinks i'm a racist but because it's a rhetorical trick to keep me off balance in front of an audience. it's the political equivalent of playground trash talk, which leads me to say that my best response is a graceful slam dunk, not an articulate rejoinder.
i've discovered that simply ignoring them in such situations works better than anything else. they really don't like that. no, really. a generation leading up to six years of in your face and i'm convinced it's mostly a cry for attention from the culturally deprived. we really have been having more fun than them. like the jocks vs. the freaks time back way back at my high school, they beat up on us because our parties are better. nothing infuriates them more than this simple reality.
Good post Dark Wraith and you did not over step the line, if fact, you probably did not go far enough but that is ok...
Until theMcFly Democrats fight back against the Biff Republicans nothing will change.
I personally have never been registered with any political party. But because I am anti-Bush and anti-NeoCon, I get lumped in with the "unhinged" liberals as Malkin would say.
Being called liberal to me is not an insult. But I do not consider myself liberal. Like many I believe in fiscal conservatism, and small government. I beleive in local/state's rights over Federal Rights on certain issues.
I am probably more Libertarian than liberal and more Independent than Democrat. But I would rather have Democrats in power any day over what Republicans have become.
In actuality, having a balance of power is far superior to having any party have total power.
Oh well, I lost my train of thought. My thoughts are not that important anyway.
What is important is that if we do not act soon to take back this country, we will soon be without a country.
It sickens me to see those on the right who STILL believe Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda, 9/11, and WMD's EVEN AFTER thier dear leader Bush has now denied he ever made such claims.
What this tells me is that the few, proud, and stupid who still love Bush do know better, they do know the truth, but they also realize their propaganda is really effective on a certain gullable part of our population.
So they keep towing the line and they will continue to tow that line until we beat them into the ground.
Tolerance and politeness versus a rip-shit ass-whuppin'? What to do? Well, let us take a lesson from the "Prince of Peace":
John 2:13-16 The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers at their business. And making a whip of cords, he drove them all, with the sheep and oxen, out of the temple; and he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. And he told those who sold the pigeons, "Take these things away; you shall not make my Father's house a house of trade."
I've always appreciated the older translation which includes the phrase, "You have turned my Father's house into a den of thieves."
Good evening, Dark Wraith.
Sometimes tolerance is good. Sometimes it can be taken too far. In the situation of the Republicans, I cannot understand why the Dems continue to sit back and allow some great opportunities pass them by. In doing so, they do a disservice to the American people. I like your post. It's very forceful, direct, and truthful. Sometimes politeness isn't enough. As the cowboys always said, "you're an idiot if you take a knife to a gunfight!"
Good evening, Mr Wraith.
It is odd that you should choose such an allegory (unless indeed your arm is sufficiently strong and you have a steady supply of leather straps on hand) particularly when the day-to-day emergencies of life have given me cause to ponder.
Perhaps I should remain (somewhat) silent on this until I have worked out a course of action. But in this case, I believe it is a matter of consoling myself for doing what I know to be right in a situation where I really don't want to be involved.
Which brings me to item #2,
for Rael:
Terribly sorry to hear of you in such an awkward situation. For what it's worth, this is my advice.
Here's a link to the Topics, Book I. Read careefully part 1, and recognize these; in particular:
reasoning is 'contentious' if it starts from opinions that seem to be generally accepted, but are not really such,...
and the classes of knowledge set forth by Spinoza(I have no link) may be of some use.
In general, begin by defining terms, moving away from particulars to generalities, eg "And what do you suppose is meant by 'Racist?'"
And from definitions to specifics, back and forth, as needed.
At best, this person will come to realize that they are an idiot; at worst, you may learn something about Racism that you didn't already know.
The Columbo routine. Works well on engineers that need their egos stroked while you're showing them where they went wrong.
Works for me.
And best of luck.
In the situation of the Republicans, I cannot understand why the Dems continue to sit back and allow some great opportunities pass them by.
I could be wrong, but I think the reticent Dems. in the Congress are so because they worry about the ramifacations of making a stink, not so much because of what will happen to them exactly, so much as they worry that by making a stink they will give the Repubs. a way to take the focus off the news of the day, which now is largely horrible for their political futures.
If I am correct in this assumption, I can see the wisdom in it. If there were Dem. majorities and they were being this silent that would be inexcusable, but with the Dem. minorities in the House & Senate and the news being so Repub. horrible, how will the Dems.' making a stink improve things?
Doing so won't allow them to force investigation or punitive action, will it?
- oddjob (disclaimer - I'm not a member of any political party)
So what is it, exactly you are advocating, Dark Wraith? A return to sensibility? I'm definitely with you on that; in fact I echo Mr. Shakes. Nothing beats honest to god, middle of the road common sense - especially when it comes to conservation of anything. I personally abhor the extremes both sides of any debate usually have to offer. High dungeon based, throw money at it solutions flat out don't work; and usually do much more harm than good. Are you suggesting an end run around the pseudo-conservative religo-fascists? Write them off as a bad job and be done with it? If so I heartily agree there as well. Short of an epiphany, neo-Nazi's are not about to turn their swastika's in for rainbow stickers. With luck, the current crop will have been bred out within the next 50 years or so. I won't live to see it; but I certainly would like to know their biased opinions will, at some point, no longer hold sway.
Now – as for implementation? The de-Nazification of Germany was accomplished by means of a world war. That hasn’t happened in our time yet, thank God – and if it does, any victor over the United States would be more likely to prefer bias and rights limitations rather than the centrist approach you support. Change will have to come from within, and it will probably have to be organized; if only as much as 60’s counter-culture organized its own peculiar social revolution through sheer numbers and dogged persistence. So – and we come full circle here - what exactly do you propose?
Keller(*a republican up for reelection*) launched into all the times he had recently opposed the Bush Administration, including the deal to allow a Dubai company to manage operations at several U.S. ports. And then Keller went right for the punch line: "'Don't be too hasty,'" he claimed the Vice President had pleaded with him. "'Let's go hunting. We'll talk about it.'"
Heh heh heh
Comparing the SS to the NSA is ludicrous: for one thing, the NSA hasn't gotten everyone terrified of it yet; and for another thing, the Schutzstaffel had better wardrobe designers.
LOL! For a bunch of genocidal maniacs the Nazis did have a certain panache. I remember watching WWII movies as a kid and being annoyed that the Wehrmacht uniforms were so much cooler than the wet wooly socks that my countrymen appeared to be fighting in.
By the way, has anyone else noticed how the helmet sported by modern U.S. infantry is remarkably similar to the old Nazi design?
By the way, has anyone else noticed how the helmet sported by modern U.S. infantry is remarkably similar to the old Nazi design?
Yes.
- oddjob
sounds like a plan to me. can i whup cheney? do we really get to administer corporal punishment?
my own opinion of the democratic idiocy is that they almost all get money from the same places as the repubs. i think that a rightward shift would make the dems even more like repubs.
i somehow missed the liberal defense of european fascism. not denyin', just don't get the reference.
mr shakes, is your gravatar an image of plato?
oops. dang my lapse of manners.
good morning dark wraith.
mr shakes, is your gravatar an image of plato?
No, it's Demosthenes. I've been meaning to change it, as it's rather pretentious, and I am definitely no Demosthenes.
Hi Oddjob,
you wrote earlier:
"how will the Dems.' making a stink improve things?
Doing so won't allow them to force investigation or punitive action, will it?"
The problem is that most Americans do not understand that Democrats cannot do anything because they are in the minority. They see the Democrats being quiet as a sign of weakness and self doubt.
I hear all the time from people of all political stripes "Why aren't the Democrats doing anything?"
I explain to them as you pointed out that they can't because they can't even hold a frickin' hearing without Rethuglican approval.
People are looking for leadership. Being quiet is not leading.
This is why when Feingold made his Censure proposal many PEOPLE were behind him even though POLITICIANS, specifically Democratic politicians distanced themselves from him.
If Democrats are not careful, the Repugs will steal their thunder.
Already PNAC Co-Founder and NeoCon guru Bill Kristol is distancing himself from the decision to invade Iraq.
Pat Buchanan, hardly a NeoCon but still, is making the circuit telling people that Bush wanted to invade Iraq from day one and that the intelligence is faulty.
Republicans are about winning. And if winning means they need to trash Bush, criticize the war, and question pre-war intelligence, they will. And they won't be bashful about vocalizing it.
After the '06 elections they will sent flowers and gift baskets to the White House along with appologies and all will be forgiven so long as they remain in power and keep doing Bush's bidding.
Keeping quiet will play right into the Republicans hands.
It reinforces the rethugs stereotype of Dems that they have no message, lack leadership, and are weak.
The democrats may be constrained by being a minority in congress, but they sure as hell could be doing something about getting (re)elected. The various polls indicated that votes are ripe for the picking, but I hear hardly anything except some of the lame posturing - there is no cohesive message for the future.
On your original post, DW . . .
HEAR!! HEAR!!
Need to know if this resonates with you. Because of our car culture, tax incentives to build in the suburbs, zoning, racism and accompanying economic problems, farm subsidies, television, etc etc, people have a lot more opportunity to be isolated in this country. My dad's generation could only sit inside for so long before they had to go forth into the streets and seek companionship. But kids these days can sit in front of the TV or the computer more indefinitely and more reliably. People feel compelled to box themselves into monster trucks because they don't fancy the thought of riding a bike or walking in the same space as the endless fleet of TRUCKS. You can cover the whole city without seeing almost any faces. Look someone in the eye for long enough that you have to decide 'smile or frown'? Cars prevent people from this, and unburden them from something they're beginning to do very poorly for lack of practice. People are becoming less sociable because our culture puts so many barriers between them.
People who do get a lot of face contact with others come to understand their body language's cues about their intentions. They are, in some cases, more trusting, more trustworthy, because they've seen that many more examples of cooperations that worked or didn't. They understand the motive for working together and the reasons it works well. And they favor it, they often have little compulsion to keep things to themselves and imagine others untrustworthy. By contrast, people who live in remote rural homes and don't get much social contact are less tuned in to body language, less confident in the good intentions of others, less trusting and cooperative, and far more defensive of their personal sovereignty, even if its never really in question. They even take to the habit of thinking that the typical uninvited visitor is suspicious enough to greet with a gun, and this resort to self-reliance works hard in other parts of the psyche. When you then realize that some subset of the Republican party is these people who don't get enough human contact, don't have many trusting relationships, probably lead lives that could be more rewarding, it really strikes pity into your heart. No one intended for our culture to be like this. We didn't realize that cars could lead to isolation and depression and obesity. We need to get back to a denser transit society, for obvious economic and energy reasons but also to repair our collective people skills. Interaction takes practice, but sympathy comes out of the effort even when there's loads of poverty in the society (although that makes it a lot tougher, for sure!). So let's get to work on our social conventions before the interest rates rise and all Americans become poor. Like turn down the music at bars so we can converse and be understood.
The reason I bring this up is because you said 'people like that don't change their stripes', and I wanted to point out that if we put them into a cultural place where they can learn about sociology, they could change their stripes. I think their self-interest is intact, their intentions are good, and if we let them become enlightened, would that not provide for their enlightened self-interest ;)
Good evening, schwabsauce, and welcome to The Dark Wraith Forums.
What you said does resonate with me: I grew up in a different time and in a much different culture from that in which I must now live out these years of my life. The situation of my memory is tangled, though, and in no small part this is because I know that not all of my memories are clear; and more importantly, I do understand from reading the thoughts of people from other times that where we are now is not entirely unique.
You are correct: we really did have more opportunities and need for sociability in that time away from the here and now. I remember.
I remember growing up thinking that, like my father and mother, I would have many friends, and I would see them all the time. I expected that my life would be intertwined with many others, and I'd grow up and grow old in the company of life-long friends and associates. We'd know each other, each other's children; we'd go places together or just sit at the local diner to talk about this, that, and the other thing; we'd have our times, and we would live and die in the great and painful life of small people who were nonetheless big to some others.
That didn't happen. The land is shattered, and people live in shells of family, extremely tight associations, or merely alone, even when they're at work, in a crowd, at worship, or at play.
You and I, here in this electronic community, try to speak, to know one another, to see if we could relate and be acquainted, perhaps over years. But it's just not the same. It just isn't.
But I must caution myself in this lament. I know very well that the seeds of this time were all around me in my childhood and adolescence—especially in my adolescence. I thought back then that it all had to do with my mother and me having to move way out into the country awhile after my father died. There was just no one around, and I thought to myself, "God! am I lonely. I want to get back into town and live with people."
By then, though, the world was coming to its end in that regard.
The horror writer Stephen King wrote a book about awful little monsters called Langoliers, creatures who came to eat the past. Woe be to the hapless person caught in a time warp, unable to move forward with his fellow people: the Langoliers were on the move, inexorably, voraciously, and completely consuming all that had come before.
I think, in retrospect, I understand such horror.
I also think I understand that alienation is not a novel experience in this terrible age. It comes to people in many times, particularly those where the culture has disconnected from the society, and both have lost their way from the needs of people, most of whom choose isolation because they choose fear because they choose control from without rather than strength from within.
This world is the unquiet city of those who live mostly for the day and not for the age, who would reach for the cause at the expense of the reason.
Times such as these have come before. They have not, in general, ended well.
The Dark Wraith is glad you've come, schwabsauce.
LOL! For a bunch of genocidal maniacs the Nazis did have a certain panache. I remember watching WWII movies as a kid and being annoyed that the Wehrmacht uniforms were so much cooler than the wet wooly socks that my countrymen appeared to be fighting in.
Hey, there's a general military principle that, all other things being considered, the side with the dullest uniforms tends to win.