[SultanKnish] Every movement has a mission statement. "Make America Great Again" is the conservative one. (It’s the "Again" part that makes it conservative.) The enemies of making America great have one too.
If the radicals had red hats, they would say, "They’re Out To Get You."
TOTGY has been the leftist motto since before Marx learned to shave and then decided to stop doing it. The arc of history may bend toward many places, but the black rainbow serviced by a snarling leprechaun with a PhD and a cocaine problem always begins and ends in the same paranoid place.
Continued on Page 49
[AccordingToHoyt] Lately there has been a baffling revolt on the left against "meritocracy."
As with almost every one of these crusades the left goes on, it ain’t what they’re saying it is. And those of us on the right(ish) who think that it’s all part of a master plan to destroy society so the great communist utopia appears automagically aren’t precisely right. I mean, most people on the left would welcome collapse, because, yes, they believe a communist matriarchy is ONLY waiting for the "oppressors" who create capitalism and patriarchy to vanish
...When we say "merit" and "meritocracy" they think we’re using "code words" to say "white males." There are reasons for this, besides the fact that the left is heavily into Manichaean thought systems that go something like: identify problem-find a person who MIGHT be responsible for/benefits from the system as it exists-assume that if that person were removed, the problem would be gone. See, French Revolution.
The initial confusion on the left arises from the fact that they might never, in fact, have witnessed meritocracy in their dealings or those of people around them.
This is because, as part of the long march, and to secure absolute control of all fields and institutions, the left has a mythology (the manichaean thing again) that anyone who disagrees with them is evil. And of course, you don’t hire evil people.
The problem with that type of hiring is that you’re NOT hiring the best. And most people know they’re not the best. And hire someone less bright than they are. This in four generations takes you to the level of management/operation that takes monarchies twenty generations of inbreeding to achieve.
Right now, in everything but the hard sciences and STEM (and they’ve gotten into some of those, and can’t always be routed around.) the people in power would consider pouring piss out of a boot with the instructions written on the sole a feat of unachievable genius.
Not baffling at all when you reconnect every dot starting from the social rights movements to when American universities were first infiltrated by foreign ideologues, and down to affirmative action and the LGBTQSPwhatevers in the military- all backed by globalist interests.
It is a formula for imposing mediocrity on an otherwise industrious, hitherto prosperous nation. Only then can its might be challenged by the never-do-wells.
Trump is like a shot out of the blue, something they never expected, which is why even the agents of this formula which populate DC offices are against him.
Reminds me of the 60's. Half the group of boomers were honorable and the other half dopers. While I get the joke, our military is as capable and willing as any generation of military.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
06/07/2019 12:32 Comments ||
So, the fact that we had universal conscription back then escapes everyone?.
Today we don't have that. The modern US military is basically a mercenary force. It's all about retention bonuses and benefits. Serve your country, sure, but how is that done by getting killed in Niger? Or Afghanistan? You're just serving globalist goals and providing fuel for a fire that will never warm you.
I say this as a red white and blue America-loving American. It would be wonderful if our military defended our shores. But it doesn't. It's mafia enforcers for an unelected transnational elite. We are sworn to the death to defend the borders of others but cannot defend our own.
Posted by: Herb McCoy ||
06/07/2019 13:35 Comments ||
The thing is, Mr, McCoy, there is near defence and far defence (I’m sure there are technical terms for this, but I don’t know them). At the moment I’m working up an article about the upcoming trial of the support crew for the 2015 Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris. Nowadays near defence, which is what you are proposing we concentrate on, looks remarkably like fighting attackers within the national borders. So that os the choice, Mr. McCoy: keep them busy fighting us far from our home, where the people they kill are mostly their own countrymen, or fight them in New York City subway stations and college football stadiums.
There is one thing we could do in order to be able to keep the troops at home, though: expel from the homeland everyone in any way connected to those who would war against us. Granted, this would mean driving out all Muslim immigrants, all those who have provided or expressed support for Muslim immigrants, all Black Muslims, all those connected to illegals brought in by coyotes and all those — illegal and otherwise — connected to narco gangs... At a rough estimate we’re talking thirty to fifty million people, many of them American citizens — and many of the citizens Democrats — but there is no point in setting our mercenaries to guard the walls if the enemy army is already within, right?
As General Patton reportedly said, “No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.” And it’s ever so much easier to ensure that happens when the war is fought in the enemy’s back yard instead of ours.
"A volunteer army is the only proper, moral - and practical - way to defend a free country. Should a man volunteer to fight, if his country is attacked? Yes - if he values his own rights and freedom." - Ayn Rand.
There is nothing "immoral" about being hired to fight for the US Army rather than being forced to do so. And I think what a lot of you are actually debating is whether or not a lot of millennials actually do value their rights and their freedoms. Unfortunately, I don't think that enough of them do.
The modern US military is basically a mercenary force.
Gee Herb, a draft army was only a small part of history of the US. Most of the time its been a active volunteer force. By draft, what is really meant is the activation of the federal militia. Since 1792 and the first Militia Act to today's Title X USC subparagraph Militia, all male citizens between 18 and 45 are active members of the federal militia in accordance with Art. I Section 8 of the Constitution.
The draft was to be just an emergence back up in case the situation was too much for the regulars.
It stopped after WWII but was reactivated in 1948 because of the Berlin Crisis.
Unfortunately, that force became a means to engage in long term interventions around the globe. Foreign adventures that lead to too many failures and too many lives of the basic citizenry squandered. When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Concurrent with that employment came more and more power to the Executive and expansion of government.
A mercenary force fights for its pay master. The US force is sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. While some in the ranks and more in the senior political positions may look at who ever is in Washington as their paymaster, there are far more who serve and will 'give the last full measure of devotion' to the sworn duty. That is why Obama tried to break it.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.