Talk-Polywell.org

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opini ... .html?_r=0

Because it is in their interest. Not very Christian of them is it?

Ever since your civil war and perhaps even before, it has been in the interest of industry to have police and the justice system (italics because it really was not justice) lie.

"since your civil war"

???

Oh God, a foreign neo-Confederate!

No, you dolt, every crap of this idiocy dates from Wilson and later.

Even the stupidity of Diogenes, who's just an earlier--but not pre-Wilson--flavor of Progressive.

There isn't one thing ailing the nation which didn't come about 40 or more years after the civil war, and which had anything to do with who won it.

TDPerk wrote:"since your civil war"

???

Oh God, a foreign neo-Confederate!

No, you dolt, every crap of this idiocy dates from Wilson and later.

Even the stupidity of Diogenes, who's just an earlier--but not pre-Wilson--flavor of Progressive.

There isn't one thing ailing the nation which didn't come about 40 or more years after the civil war, and which had anything to do with who won it.

TDPerk,

What amuses me is that these modern day progressives on the right have no clue that they are progressives nor do they get how far they have strayed from the conservatism of 1900. You point it out to them and it just goes over their heads.

========

The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition. Thus we have two great types — the advanced person who rushes us into ruin, and the retrospective person who admires the ruins. He admires them especially by moonlight, not to say moonshine. Each new blunder of the progressive or prig becomes instantly a legend of immemorial antiquity for the snob. This is called the balance, or mutual check, in our Constitution. — G.K. Chesterton

I have more to say on this here:

http://classicalvalues.com/2012/08/cons ... -the-past/

TDPerk wrote:"since your civil war"

???

Oh God, a foreign neo-Confederate!

No, you dolt, every crap of this idiocy dates from Wilson and later.

Even the stupidity of Diogenes, who's just an earlier--but not pre-Wilson--flavor of Progressive.

There isn't one thing ailing the nation which didn't come about 40 or more years after the civil war, and which had anything to do with who won it.

Quite GiT or digot-like of you to resort to name calling.
I have never misrepresented my nationality.
Neo-Confederate? You must be joking!

Suggest you look up peonage, the 'Black Codes' of the southern states and convict leasing. In was in the interest of state governments to have full prisons to supply cheap labour to the various businesses. Your 13th amendment allowed criminals to be used for hard labour. The state governments rented out 'criminals' to various businesses (farms, factories etc.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convict_lease.

Whenever labor was needed, a police sweep accomplished the goal of getting more 'workers.' Very sad chapter of your history.

The prison system contracts of today, requiring a minimum occupancy, is scary.

TDPerk wrote:"since your civil war"

???

Oh God, a foreign neo-Confederate!

My working theory is that he is Québécois Canadian possibly employed in Academia. I'm sure he's not a Confederate sympathizer, he is just likely not afflicted with the baggage most Americans have regarding the Civil war.

TDPerk wrote: No, you dolt, every crap of this idiocy dates from Wilson and later.

No, it started with Lincoln, but I doubt you would be interested in any links, so i'm not going to bother. Wilson wasn't even the next President to grow the power of the Government. That was Teddy Roosevelt.


Wilson did more DAMAGE than did Roosevelt, but probably not as much as did Lincoln. After that it was FDR who massively increased the power and scope of Government, later followed by LBJ. (Who really put the nail in our financial coffin.) Then pretty much every President since.

TDPerk wrote:
Even the stupidity of Diogenes, who's just an earlier--but not pre-Wilson--flavor of Progressive.

Yes, I stupidly believe in Tyranical government because I think dangerous narcotics should be controlled and regulated for medicinal purposes instead of being used for entertainment by people who leave others to clean up the mess.

TDPerk wrote: There isn't one thing ailing the nation which didn't come about 40 or more years after the civil war, and which had anything to do with who won it.

You need to do some reading. You are apparently unaware of the role Lincoln played in laying the groundwork for our current uber-government. I was not even aware of it until one of my best friends (A History Major who is Black) put me on to it many years ago. Lincoln initiated unconstitutional methods to achieve his goals.


Was it possible to lose the nation, and yet preserve the constitution? By general law life and limb must be protected; yet often a limb must be amputated to save a life; but a life is never wisely given to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful, by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the constitution, through the preservation of the nation.


Lincoln had thirteen thousand political prisoners arrested and held without trial. (Wilson had something like 35,000+ political prisoners. J. Edgar Hoover started his career as a head breaker for Wilson. )


The internet has abundant references to the Lincoln's extra constitutional abuses of power. Don't take my word for it, look up the history yourself.

On the other hand he might be a pretentious Brit.

In was in the interest of state governments to have full prisons to supply cheap labour to the various businesses. Your 13th amendment allowed criminals to be used for hard labour. The state governments rented out 'criminals' to various businesses (farms, factories etc.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convict_lease.

Whenever labor was needed, a police sweep accomplished the goal of getting more 'workers.' Very sad chapter of your history.

The prison system contracts of today, requiring a minimum occupancy, is scary.

Yes. We keep the prisons full today with Drug Prohibition. It is sordid. And it is not history. And funny enough we prefer to make blacks the targets of our prohibition laws.

As to naming names? I do get named often enough. It doesn't bother me. It is the price of being a (very minor) public figure.