Neoconservative Jibber Jabber

Stacy Summary: This book sounds interesting, Neoconservatism: An Obituary for an Idea. Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News, of course, gives these guys so much air time to indoctrinate Americans into their quasi fascist cult. Here’s one source of info on who’s who in neoconservatism. Here is Ron Paul’s speech, “Neo-Conned”. I can think of no other group in the world that has done so much to destroy America as the neoconservatives. Their members are the primary architects of the wars currently bankrupting the nation (not to mention, murdering tens of thousands around the world) and of the legal and cultural arguments for ridding Americans of most of the Constitutional rights on which the nation was founded. And it is because of this fascist movement that the whole left / right, Red State / Blue State exists as the orchestrated Straussian sideshow it is. Prior to the neocons becoming the Republican party, there was at least a more genuine liberal / conservative choice and debate. Now you just have Big Government Dems and the even Bigger Government Republicans.

105 comments on “Neoconservative Jibber Jabber
  1. chArles says:

    ok back again

    “Are you arguing the actions of a capitalist only benefit him/herself?”

    yes they are primarily to the benifit of the individual that what it means by definition…now while Alexander conquering the world brought the Helenistic tradition to greater prominence and I sorta favor that I shan’t say it was worth it or to the greater good or any other such nonsense…what he did he did out of service to self any ancilary benifits do not factor into the equation morally speaking…otherwise Annabella slavery should be praised for extending the natural life span of African slaves…it gets worst too Colonolilism, Imperilalism WARS all have “benifited” individuals and socities

    “Are you arguing for individual property rights to enable personal autonomy and security of person and property OR are you arguing for collective rights to property and thus collective decisions over property and the actions of people?”

    this is hard to fashion truthfully…Locke knew there was a thorn inside his theory and that was the finite nature of the World…so there is his caveat of “As good and of the same quaility” in saying that one was free to mix one’s labor with the material sbubstence and thus secure ownership…this is a problem that both Capitolist and socialist overlooked in crafting their individual theories..they both accept and demand infinite growth to ensure material progress…

    while I don’t buy the whole PEAK EVERYTHING movement I do believe there is limits to the material world…this limits can only be recognized collectively which constrains “individual autonomy” in a certian manner namely doing as one pleased with the material world regaurdless of its impact upon others…this in my opinine isn’t the same enfrindgement upon a person as BONDAGE…and there is degrees…so we are in a balencing act…I try to fudge the issue with the personal individual is autonomous and secured in self (able to decide any and all issues that only reflect upon self)…when in relation to the material world he/she/it will be in relation to others and therefore all decesions must take into account the other

    is this perfect…HE!# NO!!! I recognize this

    no more answers…

    “The root of the syndicalist idea is to be seen in the belief that entrepreneurs and capitalists are irresponsible autocrats”

    Strawman arguement no Syndiclist would make that arguement other to rouse the troops…if one is curious as to what most syndiclist accept or argue…one can’t beat Rudolph Rockers Anarchosyndiclistn also rocker’s Nationalism and Culture would offer one of the best primers of and Anarchist picture of Western Civilization…along with the normal junk of Noam Choamsky and Orwell’s Homage to Catalonia…gives an honest broker account of the last time Anarchism was given an honest try on Catalonia and Barceleona during the Spainish War

  2. Adam C says:

    @chArles

    Thanks for your reply.

  3. chArles says:

    back to the grind

    “The market is a consumers’ democracy.” this is a fallacy and a misuse of the word Democracy…Democracy demands equality of personhood where one person is fundmentally equal to the other in that his/her/it’s vote counts exactly as much as does any other…the Market reflects no such demand and is subject to the will of Capitol…that peverts the collective WILL..the many may demand Mosquito nets to prevent malaria but unless their is the Capitol their collective pleas will go unaddressed and the Market will still grind out I-Pods…if the Market was a Democracy of equals then we would not be having this arguement

    and going back to my little problem with reduction of people to property that those who profess property rights demand…one can regulate a PERSON one can’t regulate a THING/Property…my LAW that says one can’t strike another with a HAMMER has not regulated the HAMMER but PEOPLE…the whole Libertarian NeoCon nonsense dilebrately confuse this issue…so I can regulate and infringe upon what people sell and how they sell it without infringing upon THE MARKET nor enslaved my breathern

    “The syndicalists want to transform it into a producers’ democracy.”

    YES this is the point of anarchosyndiclism

    “This idea is fallacious, for the sole end and purpose of production is consumption.”

    I for the life of me have no earthy idea what this means…this does not remove in the least Democratic Production should bow before “Democratic Consumption”…sorry there is nothing to this arguement other than one of aesthetics…he/she favors Consumption because he likes it, ?I favor Production because I like it…and would bet dollar to donuts that if the Consumption was based on Democratic principles and not monatary one’s he/she wouldn’t favor democratizing what the Market is geared towards…so I maintain its a false arguement and intellectually dishonest as I maintain a good chunk of the author’s other points

    “In [the syndicalist's] eyes the individual plant or workshop as it exists and operates today is a permanent establishment. It will never change. It will always turn out the same products. He ignores completely the fact that conditions are in a ceaseless flux, and that the industrial structure must be daily adjusted to the solution of new problems.”

    No Sysndiclist would ever make this arguement…it is a cariciture of the ideology…quite the opposite…syndiclist would say that one demands more democratic control because of the need to continuously adapt to changing material conditions…sorry Democratic institution can closer reflect changing dynamics in a community or society the any form of hierachical one…yes decession making is easier in autocratic ones (BIDDNESS as it is now constituted is autocratic at its best and totalitarian at its worst) but history has shown us that Autocratic bodies change slower than democratic ones.

    the author I believe is not engaged in meaningful discussion but grinding axes…COOL I do this from time to time…but hope I try to maintain some semblance intellectual honesty…I may cliff notes my oppositions ideas but do not completely reframe them to suit my ends…

    my ideology is not set in granite but is hard enough to sustain me through life…and I recognize the flaws in my philosphies

  4. chArles says:

    @ ADAM C

    Thanks for engaging with me today made the day go by so much quicker at work…sorry was unable to respond to every question (rebuilding a 4 cycle engine which I changed the cylinder out and rebuilt carb…still doens’t work, frustrated…but getting to go home now so gives me something to do tomorrow) and I am sure we will continue this engagement again at a latter time

  5. Mary Tabazan says:

    We are in Iraq for oil and natural gas. We are in Afghanistan for its mineral wealth including lithium and rare earth elements. If we end up at war with Iran it actually concerns water, not nuclear weapons. Iraq no longer has the water supply necessary to pump oil.
    Neo con politics is theft by stealth or force, whether civil liberties or mineral wealth. It is fundamentally un-American in every aspect and immoral by nature. It promotes elitism and exceptionalism, repudiates democratic values while wrapping itself in the red, white and blue of the flag.
    The American wars of greed, the bully takes all, instil anti-Americanism and undermine economic opportunities that normally American companies would have been able to access though conventional business practices.

Access The Max Keiser Podcast
Weekly Downloads, live Q & A Session and exclusive video posts from Max and Stacy

Subscribe Learn More
Buy Gold Online
Watch the latest Keiser Reports:

Watch our Google Hangouts: