Darwin never proposed Evolution, he proposed survival of the fittest or
natural selection... Huge difference, so try to keep it straight... but
If your not going to read the facts about it you'll never keep it
straight.... Also before you claim you have, I know most of you haven't
otherwise you would have know he never proposed evolution and thus would
not keep referring to him as the one who did... Oh and his (Darwin's)
"THEORIES" have already been proven, Natural Selection happens, we have
seen it all around us and witnessed it occurring....
Also if most
of you had read and were even rudimentary versed in science, you would
know the difference between hypothesis and theory but you don't. Because
you people sling around "theory" like its some 4 letter word when in
fact a theory has already been proven, which it why it is called a
theory...
Part of the problem today come from the generalization
use of the word theory in the English language in common conversation.
For example when one individual looks at another individual and says
something like:
"I have a theory why this object might not be working... "
it
in fact, is a hypothesis, as it is unproven until said individual tests
it.. But in modern Language theory has come to mean something
completely different from what it actually means.
A nice explanation of Theory Vs Law, which is of course your next argument is as follows.
The
origin of this confusion has it's roots in the history of the
development of science. When we speak of early, classical physics, we
talk about laws, Newton's laws of motion for instance, the ideas have
the weight of veracity. After all, the word "law" has a serious and
strictly defined meaning in our culture. Back when Newton declared his
laws, he believed them to be absolute descriptions of how the universe
worked. At the time, they were irrefutable. We now know that his laws
are in fact approximations, rules that work when describing motion on
the macroscopic scale but which break at the quantum scale.
Since
that time, science has gotten warier about describing anything as being
absolute. Science, and physics in particular, is a tool to root out the
true nature of reality. It can describe only what it observes which may
or may not be true in every case. In order to say if something is
absolutely true, every single possible case of a particular phenomena
must be observed. In a universe as vast as ours, that's completely
impractical. Science can say if something is probably true all the time
if observations of a phenomena are the same in many cases. This tiny bit
of waffling bothers many people who are not familiar with the inner
workings of science. Shouldn't something be always true if it is true at
all? Science just can't commit all the way to absolute - otherwise it
wouldn't be science, it would be faith.
So science has tossed the
use of "law" in favor of "theory". This "theory" does not mean
"hypothesis" which is a speculation. In this case, think of music theory
- definitely not a hypothesis, but a working set of rules that define a
body of knowledge.
The line between theory and hypothesis can
become blurry when it comes to very active and new areas of science. For
instance, M-theory, an extension of string theory, is a body of
knowledge that attempts to define how everything in the universe works,
explaining quantum phenomena along with cosmological and everything in
between. Unfortunately, M-theory is largely unproven. It makes a lot of
sense (as far as descriptions of the quantum world make sense), but
hasn't really been tested yet. M-theory can be more precisely be
described as a hypothetical theory.
Read more:
"Theory vs. Hypothesis vs. Law: Unraveling the Confusion of Important Terminology"
http://physics.suite101.com/article.cfm/theory_vs__hypothesis...
Problem
is though Most of you will never get it straight because you take and
recycle the arguments of those before you believing the horse crap they
spout and re-spout it yourself...
The Theory of Gravity
The Theory of the Principal of Super-Position
The Theory of Special Relativity
The Theory of Atomic Structure
The Theory of Nuclear Fusion
All of those are known just like:
The Theory of Evolution
That's why it isn't called
The Hypothesis of Evolution
As a Midwesterner, I was raised to believe in god, church, guns, camping, girls and country. Not necessarily in that order either, well god first. This is not the case today.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Stop with the "it's just a theory bullshit"
Monday, September 19, 2011
Why are atheists suddenly attacking religion (christians)
I have seen this reference in many poll, poll responses, and blogs
spots... Thing is yeah it is fairly new but there is a reason why
Atheists are suddenly so vocal, and just because we are becoming more
vocal it is NOT necessarily an attack...
For many centuries it was a punishable offense to be an atheist in the world, In fact it still causes prejudice, in many cases people are ostracized for being openly atheist... People have been fired from jobs, kicked out of organization refused admittance to job and organizations for having the atheist stance... And example 15% of the US is now estimated to be atheist, how come there is only ONE atheist in government open about it? because simply put the is no way in hell an open atheist would get elected in this country... that one atheist came out after he had been elected to office...
Recently well known people (Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, etc.) have stood up and said we are tired of it and fighting back against this continued oppression (YES Oppression). the atheists of the world have been and are still oppressed in many areas. In some communities around the world you are still open to be KILLED because of an atheist stance...
The reason it appears "the 'in' thing to do" is because millions of atheists who, until recently, have been afraid to speak openly, are now coming out, like the previously mentioned people, because of this oppression are saying "NO, we arent taking it any longer"... They are arguing back for once strongly and openly... they are feeling empowered and able to do so without fear of overt retribution...
As for the whole "attacking christianity all of a sudden", that is not the case. We are vocal against all religion, even peace loving Buddhist, As religion leads to illogical conclusions, conformity to authoritarian rule, and well closed mindedness in general. I could list a whole slew of other things as well but it would be redundant. The reason it appears to be christianity is the simple fact, really...
We live in a country (countries) dominated by christians, it is who we deal with on a daily basis and what cult/sects we are most familiar with. Many of us are Ex-christians, though many believers try to play that off. SO it would stand to reason that we would talk about christianity the most.
For many centuries it was a punishable offense to be an atheist in the world, In fact it still causes prejudice, in many cases people are ostracized for being openly atheist... People have been fired from jobs, kicked out of organization refused admittance to job and organizations for having the atheist stance... And example 15% of the US is now estimated to be atheist, how come there is only ONE atheist in government open about it? because simply put the is no way in hell an open atheist would get elected in this country... that one atheist came out after he had been elected to office...
Recently well known people (Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, etc.) have stood up and said we are tired of it and fighting back against this continued oppression (YES Oppression). the atheists of the world have been and are still oppressed in many areas. In some communities around the world you are still open to be KILLED because of an atheist stance...
The reason it appears "the 'in' thing to do" is because millions of atheists who, until recently, have been afraid to speak openly, are now coming out, like the previously mentioned people, because of this oppression are saying "NO, we arent taking it any longer"... They are arguing back for once strongly and openly... they are feeling empowered and able to do so without fear of overt retribution...
As for the whole "attacking christianity all of a sudden", that is not the case. We are vocal against all religion, even peace loving Buddhist, As religion leads to illogical conclusions, conformity to authoritarian rule, and well closed mindedness in general. I could list a whole slew of other things as well but it would be redundant. The reason it appears to be christianity is the simple fact, really...
We live in a country (countries) dominated by christians, it is who we deal with on a daily basis and what cult/sects we are most familiar with. Many of us are Ex-christians, though many believers try to play that off. SO it would stand to reason that we would talk about christianity the most.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Come From a Position of the Informed, NOT Ignorance, PLEASE
I am so tired of correcting people on my blogs or facebook, hell, really anywhere in the internet where they make their statements and, to some degree appear, completely ignorant of what they hell they are talking about.
For instance, I posted a link to an article today on facebook, about Ron Paul making a statement he "will ban funding for planned parenthood". Upon posting the link and making my statement about Planned Parenthood being a LOT more than just abortions. One of my Libertarian friends makes the statement:
Really? I mean because, this just shows how ignorant these types are. Not Libertarians in general, though I am sure they have their fair share, just people like my friend who made the statement in the first place. Now you may be asking, why is this ignorant? Quite simply because he is claiming with this statement, like he KNOWS, or has access to some fount of knowledge, that this law (and apparently many others) are unconstitutional. Which if he knew anything about constitutional law he would know there are means and guidelines which have to be followed in order to make laws.
I am by NO MEANS a constitutional Law expert, but it isn't hard to research some things and I know a few things to from my required Political science class in college for instance. Like, for instance, if you have a law, that you question as constitutional, what recourse do you have? It's this amazing thing called the Judicial Branch of the American government, guaranteed us by the CONSTITUTION. WHOA AMAZING REALLY WE HAVE THAT? That's right you just take it to court Like atheists are doing here!!! Which of course in the case of Planned Parenthood it has been taken to court several times. Which also means that it is very much constitutionally legal to be funding it.
Now, I am sure he THINKS he is right, and has a source (maybe more) showing his argument is valid. But here is the next question, how much critical analysis has he applied to his source to validate that it is a good source and not some biased tripe just waiting to be cited as legitimate. I am willing to bet, not much.
To many people in our country, didn't pay attention in school, to know how to critically analyze anything. Many don't really even know what critical analysis or critical thinking is. Most just think that if the cited site looks good and makes sense, or just supports their argument in a smart sounding way, well that's enough. Well that's just stupendously STUPID on their parts.
Now, I am not saying that you shouldn't air your Opinion, hell that's garanteed by the constitution. No what I am saying is that you should really, before making yourself look ignorant, research your position carefully THEN state your Opinion. And be ready to call down the idiots who argue their point as fact of knowledge, because your going to have to.
For instance, I posted a link to an article today on facebook, about Ron Paul making a statement he "will ban funding for planned parenthood". Upon posting the link and making my statement about Planned Parenthood being a LOT more than just abortions. One of my Libertarian friends makes the statement:
- "Show me where in the constitution this is authorized spending, its unconstitutional just as all these other programs AND our undeclared illegal wars."
Really? I mean because, this just shows how ignorant these types are. Not Libertarians in general, though I am sure they have their fair share, just people like my friend who made the statement in the first place. Now you may be asking, why is this ignorant? Quite simply because he is claiming with this statement, like he KNOWS, or has access to some fount of knowledge, that this law (and apparently many others) are unconstitutional. Which if he knew anything about constitutional law he would know there are means and guidelines which have to be followed in order to make laws.
I am by NO MEANS a constitutional Law expert, but it isn't hard to research some things and I know a few things to from my required Political science class in college for instance. Like, for instance, if you have a law, that you question as constitutional, what recourse do you have? It's this amazing thing called the Judicial Branch of the American government, guaranteed us by the CONSTITUTION. WHOA AMAZING REALLY WE HAVE THAT? That's right you just take it to court Like atheists are doing here!!! Which of course in the case of Planned Parenthood it has been taken to court several times. Which also means that it is very much constitutionally legal to be funding it.
Now, I am sure he THINKS he is right, and has a source (maybe more) showing his argument is valid. But here is the next question, how much critical analysis has he applied to his source to validate that it is a good source and not some biased tripe just waiting to be cited as legitimate. I am willing to bet, not much.
To many people in our country, didn't pay attention in school, to know how to critically analyze anything. Many don't really even know what critical analysis or critical thinking is. Most just think that if the cited site looks good and makes sense, or just supports their argument in a smart sounding way, well that's enough. Well that's just stupendously STUPID on their parts.
Now, I am not saying that you shouldn't air your Opinion, hell that's garanteed by the constitution. No what I am saying is that you should really, before making yourself look ignorant, research your position carefully THEN state your Opinion. And be ready to call down the idiots who argue their point as fact of knowledge, because your going to have to.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Anger Issues of a Strict Upbrining
So I have blogged some about my upbringing and the physical punishment I grew up in. What I have been avoiding is talking about my issues as an adult. I am still not sure if I want to blog about them or not. Its not like I am hiding it, all of my friends know I have aggression, and a few also know I have anger issues.
I know that keeping a journal would be good, and I also know that sharing my experiences with others helps, a lot. I have always been a sharing type person. When my father killed himself, it caused a problem in the family as I posted it and shared it with friends of mine that I was dealing with it. My sister-in-law got so mad at me she defriended me on Facebook.
I worry that if I share though, being as I am an outspoken atheist, some will try to turn my anger into my stance of anti-theism, when really that is mostly based in reason and logic. Though at the same time I feel that if I share my process and why I am the way I am and what I am doing to fix it, then it may full well show that I am firmly grounded in reality and doing this to FIX the issues. to make sure my kids don't get messed up from my influences too.
Well friends this is my latest quandary. Do I share with you, the things I am doing (counseling and such) to work through my issues on the same blog that I use to bitch about Theism, or do I create a new journal/blog for that and keep it to myself? A really trusted friend of mine Jt Eberhard, said "do what makes you feel comfortable". I know I need to share sometimes to help me deal with and understand my emotions, that's who I am. I also know that this can muddy up my position with some people, as I know they will look for any excuse to discredit that position.
On the other hand does that even matter in the end?
Throw me your 2 cents worth, here, on Facebook, or e-mail, I would be interested in some Input...
I know that keeping a journal would be good, and I also know that sharing my experiences with others helps, a lot. I have always been a sharing type person. When my father killed himself, it caused a problem in the family as I posted it and shared it with friends of mine that I was dealing with it. My sister-in-law got so mad at me she defriended me on Facebook.
I worry that if I share though, being as I am an outspoken atheist, some will try to turn my anger into my stance of anti-theism, when really that is mostly based in reason and logic. Though at the same time I feel that if I share my process and why I am the way I am and what I am doing to fix it, then it may full well show that I am firmly grounded in reality and doing this to FIX the issues. to make sure my kids don't get messed up from my influences too.
Well friends this is my latest quandary. Do I share with you, the things I am doing (counseling and such) to work through my issues on the same blog that I use to bitch about Theism, or do I create a new journal/blog for that and keep it to myself? A really trusted friend of mine Jt Eberhard, said "do what makes you feel comfortable". I know I need to share sometimes to help me deal with and understand my emotions, that's who I am. I also know that this can muddy up my position with some people, as I know they will look for any excuse to discredit that position.
On the other hand does that even matter in the end?
Throw me your 2 cents worth, here, on Facebook, or e-mail, I would be interested in some Input...
Labels:
Anger issues,
Anti-Atheism,
Journal,
Self
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Latest NATURAL disaster another call by god.... REALLY?
Over years there has been a rash of statements by the religious right that various natural disasters are "god's wake up" call to the US to stop sinning against god. You know the Classic "Katrina happened because god is mad that we are placating to the homosexuals", I belief that was Fred Phelps Go figure every bad thing according to him is because of homosexuals. I would look this up to link it but I am at work and don't really have the time to rummage for a link atm.
So what is wrong with these (bullshit) claims?
First and foremost, there is absolutely no shred of evidence these things aren't anything that naturally occurs already. its Hurricane season and we normally get hit, or they drift close by, with a number of them throughout the season. nothing unusual there. When I did some research a long time back there was no indication that the number was more or less what was typically expected, and with global warming, to some degree, factored in there is an expectation of more hurricanes as time goes on, go figure.
Now show me a hurricane in the middle of the time frame when we DON'T expect hurricanes, then I might bye the whole hand of god drivel being spouted... I said MIGHT, because you would still need to show me how it Miraculously appeared and supernatural not natural forces put it there.
Second this is a little over kill for an all powerful and LOVING god isn't it? I mean this is like catching your child in a lie and throwing his entire class at school in front of a firing squad of cross-eyed soldiers and then saying "THAT WHAT YOU GET"!!! After all, isn't a natural disaster, according to the fundamentalists, god's equivalent of "STOP SINNING YOU FUCKERS". No that's not over reacting at all.
When are people going to realize that just because they believe doesnt make it so> I mean really what does it take to have realization set in.
So what is wrong with these (bullshit) claims?
First and foremost, there is absolutely no shred of evidence these things aren't anything that naturally occurs already. its Hurricane season and we normally get hit, or they drift close by, with a number of them throughout the season. nothing unusual there. When I did some research a long time back there was no indication that the number was more or less what was typically expected, and with global warming, to some degree, factored in there is an expectation of more hurricanes as time goes on, go figure.
Now show me a hurricane in the middle of the time frame when we DON'T expect hurricanes, then I might bye the whole hand of god drivel being spouted... I said MIGHT, because you would still need to show me how it Miraculously appeared and supernatural not natural forces put it there.
Second this is a little over kill for an all powerful and LOVING god isn't it? I mean this is like catching your child in a lie and throwing his entire class at school in front of a firing squad of cross-eyed soldiers and then saying "THAT WHAT YOU GET"!!! After all, isn't a natural disaster, according to the fundamentalists, god's equivalent of "STOP SINNING YOU FUCKERS". No that's not over reacting at all.
When are people going to realize that just because they believe doesnt make it so> I mean really what does it take to have realization set in.
Labels:
Athism,
Fundamentaist,
Religion.,
Right wing nuts jobs
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
The 14 Characteristics of Fascism
Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt wrote an article about fascism (“Fascism Anyone?,” Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine’s policy.
I have added to it some recent examples and how it looks for us...
These 14 characteristics are (with my fill in of connectors):
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottoes, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
This is constantly seen on the conservative front, granted liberals do wave the flag but they dont present it as a must follow or get the hell out scenario. This connects to the discriminatory nature of Conservatives as well as the nationalist ideology of 'anything against must be destroyed or put out' (see below).
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Overwhelmingly seen in the conservative movement. Denying racism (or sexism) is occurring, saying there are no race issues or they are over with, so get over it. As well as denying things are happening or pointing the other way to divert attention away (calling the white spot anything BUT chicken shit). Anti-gay rhetoric can just as easily be connected here as a denial of basic human rights (Don't Ask Don't Tell, Anti-Gay Marriage) and open discrimination.
Remember torture was justified and used by the Bush administration and people defending the use argued the U.S. is no longer bound by the Geneva Convention, the human rights agreement the U.S. was fervently behind in its creation, and a standard we have consistently held others to. People argued that suddenly "waterboarding" is not torture although it has been considered torture by the U.S. and the world since the technique was used during the Spanish Inquisition.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
In the religious right they point toward Atheist (religious Minorities) and science (generally) as a common enemy undermining the "values of the country" and making connecting claims of socialist and communist agendas (nationalism). Constantly attacking any liberalism as Socialism/Communism without a full or even rudimentary understanding of what either of them really are. Openly pointing at various representatives as Socialist/Communist and in some rare cases outright calling individuals terrorists or terrorist sympathizers.
4. Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
Historically the most spending for military budget has mostly been conservative movement/elements, excluding times of war. Conservatives overwhelmingly support strong defense spending. You will hear from them constantly how mighty we are, how vastly superior our military is, and at the same time prop military personnel or actions on a pedestal glorifying the person or deed. Don't get me wrong some individuals deserve the prop up, but not all, not in the sense of glamorizing them. There is no doubt of the sacrifice these men and women give in order to maintain our freedoms, but isn't that what they signed up for? Take care of them, provide them the much needed care they need during and after the conflict, but to glamorize and centralize war through the warrior, is despicable.
5. Rampant Sexism – The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
Notice he says tend to be dominated, not exclusive. But women in conservative circles tend to be downplayed. Current the hot button topics are, abortion (pro-life and redefining life), Anti-Gay Marriage (rights) which is inextricably linked to homophobia, I have heard many a conservative state "gays should be tagged" with something to "identify them" (akin to the Jews in Germany during WWII) make it easier to "find the degenerates" or even in extreme cases deported or shot.
6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
This is tricky on the conservative part, I think to draw attention away from the fascism roots inherent in the nature of the movement, but they label the media as liberal. This is laughable as MOST media sources tend to be RIGHT of center in this country, NPR is the Most centrist and the Conservatives have attacked it on three separate occasions now as too Liberal. CNN is a bit left of center and constantly under fire from the conservatives. But truth be told most sources are right of center and the biggest mouth box for the conservatives is conservative owned and calling itself news, which tends mostly to be opinion.
7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
No brainier here. Conservatives like their war and warfare, anything that can be taken as a threat to national security will be met with open hostility and attacks. Even if the likely hood of such a thing is remote. The conservative movement pushes for things like HR-1528 (2005), which is STILL tied up in subcommittee. This bill would REQUIRE you to spy on your neighbor and if you witness suspicious behavior and fail to report it, and you will go to jail. This is fascism at it finest, do this or else face consequences (jail, deportation, torture, death).
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
There is no doubt religion is intertwined within our government, and the is no way an openly atheist person can get elected to any post in this country, NONE, you openly admit as such and you are essentially blackballed. In at least 4 state your legally blocked by their constitutions from being able to hold office. you will hear from especially the conservatives how important religion is to them and openly.
Not only is religion parroted by elected officials as buzz words for the church going community, but it goes much deeper than that. There is a dichotomy in America between our constitution, which provides equal rights for all, and the religious perspective of a totalitarian god. The two will not work together and we see this confusion in America today. How can the average Christian resolve the contradiction between the bible and the constitution. Love your neighbor, homosexuality is an abomination to god, everyone is created equal. These all seem to say contradictory things. It's apparent that the bible is unconstitutional, so what does the Christian do? They seek to change or reinterpret the constitution which usually takes the form of a denial of reason to those unfettered by religious dogma. Is it any wonder that we look at religious conservatives as mental? They are the most confused people in the land.
9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
The Conservative party in this country receives most of its money, support, and friendship from, Corporates ties. the largest financial supporter by far is big money like oil, manufacturing, banks, financial corporations, and brokers. So much so that the average voter feels there is no power in the government of the people, that it all centers on special interests.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .
It is well know and well documented that Conservative don't support labor. Oh, they claim to be for the working man but constantly denounce unions and labor organizations. If they could revert to just the recent past where unions could be strong armed they would in a heartbeat. Constantly belittling unions and attacking them in ads, but secondary mentioning or connecting them to liberal affiliations, during election races. In everyday conversations with Conservative Unions are counted as the number one reason for economic problems in the country, never the corporations themselves. Suppressing labor is an ultimate goal of the conservatives.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
This is a without saying issue, "the LIBERAL colleges are brainwashing our children from true values in the country", "liberal institutions are forcing god our of the class room (recall religion and government)", "The communist liberal control the higher education institutions".Constantly see this from the Conservatives.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
Conservatives are staunch death penalty supporters, and strongly advocate punishment over rehabilitation. In their eyes you do a crime you are less than worthless, until you serve your time. Oh wait, even after you time is served, as Conservative owned and operated businesses are habitually the lowest to hire offenders in the system. Civil liberties are definitely secondary to rule of law in the conservative wing. Examples of such have been recorded throughout history in the US, look at the civil rights marches in the 60's. Many of today's conservative deny this period and point out it was Democrat ruled governments doing the deeds, but in fact the Southern Democrats were notorious conservatives (and the later Dixiecrats) in the day.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Ah The Good ole Boy system, outlawed after the Teapot Dome scandal, but still very much in effect today. Both parties are notorious for this however, simply because you want supportive members working with you and behind you in government. I don't know if there has been research as to either side having more or less of this occurring, but I would be willing to bet its strong on the religious based conservative network, it is definitely prevalent in their churches, organizations, and groups.
14. Fraudulent Elections – Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Gerrymandering , district redrawing accepted practice by both parties though commonly downplayed by conservatives and definitely berated by liberals, smear campaigns of both parties (commonplace these days). Media manipulation is clear and seen in the prior mas media control issue. Assassination? possibly but hard to prove, many conspiracy theories are abound and definitely circulate about such occurrences.
So in conclusion, all in all, both sides are in this to some degree but overwhelmingly the conservative moment has the most presence in the whole of the 14 points. they by far exhibit the strongest characteristics for fascism in the whole of the country, its no wonder the likes of the KKK, Aryan Brotherhood, Aryan Nation, Nationalist Socialist Party, and various other right wing militant fringe groups, have aligned themselves with the conservative elements in our country. By far, no one embodies more the ideas of fascism then the conservatives here in the US. How long until this rises up and bites up in the ass? Who knows for sure? But one thing is for sure unless we get this under control soon we are facing a civil war in the future as these elements get more and more out of control and more radical.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Rigth Wing Equals Violence.
I have been saying this for years now. The right should be synonymous with violence. Growing up in hard-core right wing circles I have seen the typical reaction of the believer and it is a want to do violence against anything that disagrees with their stance. One of the most recent cases? Death threats against atheists.
At the end of July they had to shut down the comments after, American Atheist Communications Direct, Blair Scott, did an interview. The Faceboomk Page came alive with some 8,000 recorded hits of DEATH THREATS Against atheists. Fox again shut down commenting and then edited many of the threats OFF their site, but no before another bloggers, One Man's Blog, was able to screen shot and save some of them. here are a few to look at.:
...
What amazes me is how people are shocked by this. We have known for a long time that people on the right are violent. Not only are they violent they are quick to it angry diatribe, almost immediately threatening violence and bragging about how tough they are. Lots of Fuck you"s, "eat shit's", etc. The MOST watched groups for violence against the people and the state in the country is, BY FAR, the right wing groups. Yet we tolerate this under freedom of speech and tolerance. The most tolerant groups by in large are the left wing groups. these are statistic facts.
yet we acted shocked when seeing these people openly spout the hate filled garbage. Why is that?
At the end of July they had to shut down the comments after, American Atheist Communications Direct, Blair Scott, did an interview. The Faceboomk Page came alive with some 8,000 recorded hits of DEATH THREATS Against atheists. Fox again shut down commenting and then edited many of the threats OFF their site, but no before another bloggers, One Man's Blog, was able to screen shot and save some of them. here are a few to look at.:
...
What amazes me is how people are shocked by this. We have known for a long time that people on the right are violent. Not only are they violent they are quick to it angry diatribe, almost immediately threatening violence and bragging about how tough they are. Lots of Fuck you"s, "eat shit's", etc. The MOST watched groups for violence against the people and the state in the country is, BY FAR, the right wing groups. Yet we tolerate this under freedom of speech and tolerance. The most tolerant groups by in large are the left wing groups. these are statistic facts.
yet we acted shocked when seeing these people openly spout the hate filled garbage. Why is that?
Labels:
Anti-Atheism,
death threats,
HATE,
Right wing Violence
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)