Tuesday, September 01, 2009

Where's the line?

This is a follow-up from yesterday's post...

A rather humorous, although likely fictitious exchange between a lady and Winston Churchhill is reported thusly:

Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?
Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill… Well, I suppose… we would have to discuss terms, of course…
Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds?
Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!
Churchill: Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.

I saw a comment yesterday on Facebook about those who call Bush and Obama, Hitler. It indicated that while US Presidents past and present have made some incredibly dumb decisions, until they murder 6,000,000 people, based on their perceived inferior genes, you can't make the comparison.

I agree with that wholeheartedly. I had this discussion with my Sunday School class on Sunday though. The thing with Hitler is that he didn't start out, wanting to rid the world of Jews and anyone he saw as inferior, or at least that's not what he told people, or they would have thrown him out on his rear for being a psychopath.

As a down on his luck painter, he started to frequent coffee bars, and realized that people were pretty worked up about the Jews. The more he spoke about them, the more people listened to him, and gradually it went from hate to the mass murder of millions of people. I suspect neither he nor any of those listening would have entertained thoughts of genocide when they started, but little by little they went down that road, until they had crossed the line.

But where is that magic line? When did he go from racist nut job at the corner cafe with political aspirations to maniacal leader intent on destroying anyone he didn't like?

It's like the old analogy of the frog in the hot water... If you heat the water slowly, at what point does the frog go from sitting in a warm bath, to being boiled?

When you're the frog sitting in the water it's hard to tell.

Finally, it was pointed out yesterday that my posts have only two themes... The LDS Church is bad and horrible, and Obama is perfect and can do no wrong. Which I think is a rather simplistic view of what I've been posting on, but I guess I can see why a person might think that.

First of all... Up until a couple of years ago, I lived in a magical world where the LDS Church I associated with was perfect. Leaders received revelation directly from God, we had the truth in it's entirelty, and one day we would live with God again.

And then I had a series of experiences, some of which I've shared, many of which I haven't which made me realize that a fairly significant portion of what I had been led to believe was true, was a complete fabrication. Much of the good remained, but there was a whole other side to the organization which was intentionally hidden from the membership. This blog became a place for me to vent about some of that. As of right now, in the last two years, I have yet to find out any new facts that make the organization look better than it was prior to those experiences. From exorbitant compensation for leaders to a history of racism, murder, rape and infidelity, all of which has been systematically and intentionally hidden and covered up, everything I've discovered has been negative.

If I have mis-represented any of that, I welcome feedback. If I'm right in what I have found, and you don't like it, perhaps a little more time reading the propaganda they publish, and less time reading this blog would make your life a little happier. I have never claimed to be pro-LDS, but I have claimed to try and represent the truth. After 30 years of brain-washing and lies though, I think I have some reason to be a little pissed off though.

And finally on my political standings... I voted for Barack Obama for president last year. I don't think he is perfect, but I think he was a vastly superior choice to John McCain, and his VP from Alaska. In some ways I feel a little bad for Ms. Palin, because I feel she's been used by the establishment to try and pander to a certain demographic, but at the same time... Come On Sarah!!!

The election was going to result in wasted tax-payer money either way. I saw the choice as... Do I want the government to waste the money blowing up fellow human beings in the middle east, or do I want them to spend it on welfare programs...

Not exactly a difficult choice from where I stood.

Mr Obama has screwed up a couple of things, many of which I've called him out on. I think he dropped the ball when it came to Gitmo and the Don't Ask Don't tell policy in the military. I think he's allowed the debate on health-care to be controlled by those who are in the pocket of the medical industry, the very thing he campaigned about being the problem in Washington. We need some kind of reform, but it's been politicized, possibly beyond the point where a workable solution can be sort.

At the same time though, he walked into a crappy situation.

It was his predecessor, who was either an idiot and didn't have the balls to stand up to a VP who was over stepping his bounds, or he knowingly started wars to profit the defense industry or promote a religious agenda against Islam. I can't say for sure which.

It was his predecessor who cut taxes, creating a temporary boom in the economy, but then escalated government spending over 25% to assist in causing a global recession.

It was 2 of his predecessors, Clinton who signed the law, and Bush, who vetoed a proposed removal of the bill, which allowed insurance companies to further crush a weakened global economy.

The guy got served a big old plate of dog crap as his innaugral meal, and while he's made some mistakes, I tend to think that overall, he's done a pretty decent job of trying to get things fixed. Unfortunately the political climate in the country is such that thinking someone has done something well, apparently means you hate his opposition and are deeply in love with him.

I believe libertarianism is the best solution to our problems, but it's not a philosophy which is going to get voted into place anytime soon, and due to the way in which our culture has evolved is not feasible at this point.

Capitalism in the United States is failing. It's failing because the system has been perverted and corrupted. When CEO's are making billions while their companies fail and are bailed out with tax-payer money, I think that's a clear sign that the system is broken, and it's time for something else.

I don't Socialism is the answer to all the problems, but I do think it's viable and it's not the great plan of Satan - which has been the point of my pro-socialism posts. It works reasonably well in other countries, and I think it could work reasonably well here. The vast majority of American's believe this as well, or at least that was they indicated by their vote last year. The US is a democratic country, even if you may not agree with the voice of the majority of the people.

I'm not naive as to think it will solve all our problems, and it, like capitalism is definitely subject to corruption. The Socialist dream is one of an egalitarian society. Yes, if you're in love with money, and want more than everyone else, it's a bad idea - but that's the problem with any political philosophy - The love of money!

As always, if I have misrepresented the truth or made baseless claims, please feel free to correct me!

No comments:

Post a Comment