Democratic communism is alive and well in the EU. Though they like to call it Christian socialism or Christian Democracy e.g. Germany, Scandanavia especially Norway.
America fears socialism because it implements the welfare state e.g. workers fund unemployment, and taxpayers fund social welfare. This requires more taxation, which is a Commie plot to steal capital from the 1-percent elites, according to the GOP.
Besides, taxation is assumed to be without representation by the 1-percenters, and thus is anathema to American free-market capitalism which funds Fabian fascism in the US.
Indeed, capitalism empowers all the ISMs that control certain governments, including Communism, facism, and good old American democracy. However, American democracy only works for the politicians you vote into office, NOT the People.
Why? Because State democracy implies that once politicians are voted in, that democracy only benefits them.
Since, historically, the People have never been allowed to run a government, except by proxy through elected representatives, it implies that the State enables a plutocracy.
Because of the assumption that the People are akin to unwashed masses who would argue about implementation of policies favoring the People at the expense of the State, it is assumed that the People are vastly more incompetent than the representatives they elect, and thus a democracy run by the People for the People would never work.
So that is seen in the eyes of the State as anarchy, which is mistaken for the actual chaos of a leaderless society.
Yet direct democracy appears to be anarchy to the State and its representatives, who are supported by lobbies such as BigBusiness, the M-I Complex, and their 1-percent backers.
Why? Because the State assumes that democracy demands a leader. Direct democracy says that an individual may be chosen to lead, but everyone — each being an individual — is perfectly capable of leadership.
Who really needs a leader to run a democracy, except for Statists who are demanding total control over the People so they can continue to run their Fabian facist fantasy?
Is it not time to overthrow the State?
Yes, but the Occupy movement and even Anonymous falsely believe revolutions should be non-violent. This is silly because non-violence successful revolution like the one in the UKraine did not remove the Communists and other Statists, including oligarchs who are merely sharks (robber barons) looking for schools of fish (the People). Thus, colored revolutions are ineffective in making permanent changes to prevent a despotic regime (the current Ukrainian leadership) from being elected and ally with their fellow despots (Putin) rather than their socialist counterparts (the EU).
Both the EU and Russsia along with the Commonwealth of Independent States are both Statist but the EU is a soft form of Communism called democratic socialism, mainly due to religious tolerance, and Russia et al still practice the hard form of Communism whilst pretending to be democratic.
Is it not time for the Ukrainians to overthrow the State? YES! Because keeping its ties with Russia is only bringing evil karma upon its current regime.
As for the rest of the world, the Middle East demonstrates that Islam and Western style democracies are compatible as long as democracy does not offend Islam. Like the Christian Socialists and the Christian Democrats of the EU, the Muslim democrats have to walk on egg shells, due to the fact that the military apparatus is used by the Muslim clerics to ensure that no one who believes in Allah offends Him by becoming secular and thus tainted by consumerism. They do so to protect their people's souls from burning in Hell.
It is our atheist mindset in the West that filters this out of the mass media propaganda, which misrepresents Islam as Salafists oppressing Christians and secularists in the Middle East. This is similar to the way Catholicism and fundamentalist Protestant churches oppress homosexuals and people in common-law marriages. Yet because we have been taught in the West that politics and religion do not mix like oil and water, the Western mass media ignores the religious basis for Middle Eastern society and propagates the myth that political factions are duking it out in Syria.
However, al Qaeda is a militant part of Salafi groupthink. It is funded by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait along with military advice by the US. Additionally, the US also supports the Syrian National Committee, which thinks it's a coalition of Christian, Shia and Sunni militants fighting jihad against a regime which is clandestinely supported by the US and is supported by the EU, which depends on Syrian oil.
Yet infighting proves that the SNC is unstable enough to implement a civil war with the foreigners who called all Syrian Sunni militants into their al Qaeda of Syria and Lebanon (the Levant) to counter Hezbollah and its patron Iran.
Theirs is truly a holy war, or so the Sunnis think. So when Bashar al-Assad is dethroned, revolution will come and the al Qaeda will launch a real civil war, rather than the proxy war now being fought.
Even so, it is time for a revolution in the West. It cannot be done through non-violence because that does not rid us of the true enemies of democracy, which is not Salafi militants of even al Qaeda. Rather, the true enemy of democracy is the 1-percent elites. Until each of us takes up arms against the elites, there will be no revolution in the West.
Even so, the NRA will not support us. They support the GOP. Likewise, the Democrats will not support us, because they think non-violent confrontation works especially in the form of diplomacy. Yet diplomacy still requires a lot of taxpayers' money to work. Two examples spring to mind: Afghanistan and Iraq. Through the use of bribes and big fucking guns, the US-led coalition in both countries reduced the influence of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein.
So, the Western revolution against the 1-percent elites will also require money and big fucking guns. It is the pacifist stance of the Democrats that will prevent revolution in America. Likewise in Canada, there will be no revolution.
Even so, it is time to overthrow the State.
Showing posts with label fundamental Christianity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fundamental Christianity. Show all posts
20121219
Child Abuse Cases Have Racist Undertones
Please read this news story, and then ask yourself, "When would African children be defiant in a fundamental Christian home?"
When the adoptive parents are white, and don't understand that they took their adoptive children away from their culture and friends.
I object strenuously to fundamentalist Christian families adopting children from another country where the culture there is dissimilar to their own.
These deaths also have the appearance of a racist element because in the two cases mentioned in the story, the children were of African descent.
If the children were defiant, then it could be that they had previously adapted to the culture of their country of origin. In one case, the girl who died was 7 years old. In the other case, the girl was old enough to have adapted to cultural norms for her country of origin.
Thus in both cases, the adoptive parents made errors in adopting African children who were old enough to adapt to their native culture, and thus would require more patience than the fundamental Christian parents who killed them had.
This is what I have objections with: adopting older children who have already adopted the cultural norms of their country of origin.
It's not the children's fault then.
It is the parents', because fundamental Christian values will have a harder time helping a children of a vastly different culture adapt to a strict upbringing where defiance is not tolerated at all.
Sadly though, a few fundamental Christian parents will ignore this and cause harm to a lot of older African adoptees. This will also impact society in the future if that strict upbringing leads to further defiance caused by child abuse.
For that defiance could actually be because the child knows it is wrong to be physically abused.
My focus in this blog entry are parents who physically abuse their children i.e. have gotten angry when their discipline does not work.
Child abuse is the ritual abuse of a child whilst pretending it's for the child's own good. However, it is not for the parents' good or the child's.
In the two cases found in the news story referenced, the two girls who died were adopted African children.
It actually is the inability of the parents to realize that the "defiance" they faced was because the children KNEW the ritual abuse is wrong.
For the parents to continue to abuse their adopted children in this way shows that whatever love they professed for these children was thrown away when they started to ritually abuse them.
"It is impossible that no offenses should come, but woe to him through whom they do come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:1-2)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/07/us/deaths-put-focus-on-pastors-advocacy-of-spanking.html?hp&_r=0
When the adoptive parents are white, and don't understand that they took their adoptive children away from their culture and friends.
I object strenuously to fundamentalist Christian families adopting children from another country where the culture there is dissimilar to their own.
These deaths also have the appearance of a racist element because in the two cases mentioned in the story, the children were of African descent.
If the children were defiant, then it could be that they had previously adapted to the culture of their country of origin. In one case, the girl who died was 7 years old. In the other case, the girl was old enough to have adapted to cultural norms for her country of origin.
Thus in both cases, the adoptive parents made errors in adopting African children who were old enough to adapt to their native culture, and thus would require more patience than the fundamental Christian parents who killed them had.
This is what I have objections with: adopting older children who have already adopted the cultural norms of their country of origin.
It's not the children's fault then.
It is the parents', because fundamental Christian values will have a harder time helping a children of a vastly different culture adapt to a strict upbringing where defiance is not tolerated at all.
Sadly though, a few fundamental Christian parents will ignore this and cause harm to a lot of older African adoptees. This will also impact society in the future if that strict upbringing leads to further defiance caused by child abuse.
For that defiance could actually be because the child knows it is wrong to be physically abused.
My focus in this blog entry are parents who physically abuse their children i.e. have gotten angry when their discipline does not work.
Child abuse is the ritual abuse of a child whilst pretending it's for the child's own good. However, it is not for the parents' good or the child's.
In the two cases found in the news story referenced, the two girls who died were adopted African children.
It actually is the inability of the parents to realize that the "defiance" they faced was because the children KNEW the ritual abuse is wrong.
For the parents to continue to abuse their adopted children in this way shows that whatever love they professed for these children was thrown away when they started to ritually abuse them.
"It is impossible that no offenses should come, but woe to him through whom they do come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:1-2)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/07/us/deaths-put-focus-on-pastors-advocacy-of-spanking.html?hp&_r=0
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)