Conservativism is the root of all evil - The individual is all that matters

I consider conservativism to be the root of all evil.

But what does that mean?

Well look at this article, wherein the Toronto Incel Rapist Terrorist (Rapist because he insists women sleep with him against their will making him a Rapist even if he has not been known to rape, and Terrorist because he uses terror as a tactic to promote his political beliefs) justified randomly killing people because women aren't sleeping with him.  We can see here that he is definitely selfish, which is at the heart of libertarian and conservative philosophy, as well as a resistance to change, change in this case being that women are getting rights.

I posted in an earlier post that all conservatism is evil and it lies more.  Conservatism is resistance to change since change has almost always favored granting more rights, but I do think it important to understand, not ALL change is good.  A change BACK to previous conservative times would and should be a change to be resisted.  Conservatism is largely about, why the fuck should I have to give a fuck about anyone else?

The problem is, liberalism and very often to a lesser extent progressivism, and certainly what lying libertarians refer to as 'collectivism' has one flaw and that is a disregard for the individual.  The individual is all that matters in any philosophy that is inherently evil, and is the root of what you can call good or evil.  It is a balance that must be constantly sought and found and then refound to prevent excess.

What do I mean by that? If we call "Greater Good" as doing the most good for the most people possible, then that means just that.  PEOPLE.  A system unto itself is worthless except to the extent that which it helps the PEOPLE that are part of it.  Let's look at the greatest example of 'colletivism' to have a historical model with which to draw example to look for patterns.  Routinely, we saw that the soviets in mid level management worked for the good of the system rather than the individuals in it.  The reason Atlas Shrugged resonates with young impressionable minds is because this really happened.  They can see and sense the truth in it.

If your system does not help PEOPLE, your policy is fuck.  Fuck your system and fuck you.  But ALL people matter, and that means a lot of things.

• It means that you can't write someone off just because their needs are different than yours.
• It means that because everyone matters, the minority can't get a benefit at the expense of the majority.
• It means that you CONSTANTLY have to reasses the benefits of the minority and the majority.
• It also means you must have a HIERARCHY OF VALUES. (Defined below.)

Let's look at Health care as a way of applying this.  The right to have medical care is a reasonable one, and as I've mentioned in previous posts, the concept of what is or isn't a right is an going on.  Natural rights as a concept are garbage.  So for health care

*A minority, libertarians have a need for more money than everyone else.  The majority, not libertarians, have a need of not dying.  You can't just simply write of the libertarian need for more money just because more people need it.
*But some minority rights matter; like religion.  That religion might not matter to you but to that minority it is THEIR WHOLE LIFE.  And if all individuals matter, then those rights are at a basic level fundamentally important and they need to be protected.
*People change, values change and so what is a right today will change vs tomorrow.  If a society is comprised of individuals, then the rights of the current society should constantly be assessed.  (I'll leave off argueing for the rights of previous societies (which should be considered but last) and the values of future societies (which should be considered above all but only in very limited contexts) when making this decision.
*A Hierachy of Values is the key to all of this.  There will be conflicts, and it is not always a black and white case, common sense must be applied, but the fact is, a society, and at that the majority of a society should get to determine what values matter most and when the needs of the majority can trump the minority, but there is NO SUCH THING as fixed rights which do not go away ever regardless of the minority or the majority.

Using that logic, conservatism is always about trying to prevent the natural reassesment of values by the majority to match the individual needs of everyone.  What libertarians argue about in terms of 'collectivism' in this context would be about ignoring the rights of the minority at the expense of the majority in the hierarchy of values, and it is a legitimate point.

Let me repeat that, the SYSTEM is never valuable.  It is only the individuals it serves, so if 90 percent tax is actually LEGITIMATELY helping 90 percent of the people and their desires and needs, then it is legitimate BECAUSE it is helping 90 percent of the people despite the whining of the remaining 10 percent.   But it has to actually be helping people.  A system exists to serve people not the other way around.

There Must Be No "Right to Lie" in a Free Society

If we imagine that democracy is a market place of ideas, then how can the ‘right to lie’ as established by the court in the satanic decision in Susan B Anthony list vs Dreighaus (Here) is absolute bullshit. The First Amendment exists because of the extreme value the press and political literature played in the revolution. The constitution was written at the time of the enlightenment but within a generation lies were created by Thomas Jefferson (yes THAT Thomas Jefferson) which led Adams to Pass the Alien and Sedition acts. From then on, it became the obsession of the left that any argument always favored the liberal if you allowed anything to be said. But this was before the discovery of psychology, propoganda or psyops with surgical computer assisted precision. Experiments conducted by Social Media with such specificity that the APA (American Psychology Association) actually protested it as UNREGULATED NONCONSENTING PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH. So we’re entering Millgram experiment territory here. Moreover, thanks to the libertarian and republican infested government we possess, we have 45 percent of our population literally willing to believe anything a sociopathic traitor says. A democracy is a living fragile thing that requires much more breadth of society than merely a democratic government with checks and balances. It also requires strong non governmental institutions that can build a strong civil society that can build character and honor among its inhabitants who value diversity and freedom for all forms of individuals and fairness for all. This is why the Kock brothers have attacked schools, lawyers, unions and doctors; as well as creating toxic dirt rags like TMZ, to take away legitimacy and power in our society from any source but the rich and the foul lying mouthpieces that they control.

It is time we grew up. It is time that we understood that allowing a market place of ideas should follow the same rules of any other market place; let the market be a market but insider trading (or specifically allowing one person to have an advantage unfairly in a market) is simply not to be allowed. When you allow lying to go unpunished in the political sphere, you essentially set up an uneven market place which is a hazard to everyone. Lying is not a right, no matter what the conservative says. Indeed, why would a conservative not say it? Because it is in their nature to lie. The success of the conservative depends on the lie far more than the liberal, which is why people like Jefferson and every western liberal that has come after him has been such a staunch defender of an unlimited first amendment. Trump, Fox and Facebook show us where that road leads. Lying is the first step at reform in our society. It must stop. It must not be permitted, and while you can have unlimited political speech and unlimited artistic speech, if you are using those freedoms, just like invoking the 5th amendment you must clearly invoke it so all understand what you are doing. You must have a disclosure that says “I am a lying piece of filfh” if you are going to have Fox News. You can’t pretend to be real news and not in a ‘hide it deep in some obscure website way’ but wearing a scarlet L on your forehead.

You can have freedom or you can have lies, you cannot have both. Period.

"Why does God need a Starship?" - Demystifying Xi

There is a moment in Star Trek V where Captain Kirk asks the "all powerful" being from beyond the Galactic Barrier, "Wait a second...why do you need US to do anything for you?"  To which the all powerful being kind of goes "uuuuuuuuuuuh......"

Look, I get that China is the rising power.  Anyone who pays attention to history and world affairs gets that.  But I kind of have to ask...what does that do to change certain well observed rules in history?

There is a well known stereotype called the Inscrutable East which is widely understood to be racist as all out fuck, and I approve those who recognize it as such, but when I see people who approve of a lot of the things that China does well apply it to China somehow being exempt from these rules, I'm like...Excuse me?

Let's look shall we?

1) Democracy is a western form of government.

Is it? There are plenty of other philosophers who abstractly discussed the ideas of self beyond the greeks even if they didn't put it into practice, but I find the idea that the people of Asia are not able to have democracy because they are somehow 'unworthy' of it to be racist, even if it is applying the racism to themselves.  Let's call a spade a spade.  Democracy works because it WORKS just like Science works because Science Works.  If you want to start saying that Asian governments can't be democratic because the people there can't handle a democracy, explain India.  Explain Japan.  Sure, they work DIFFERENTLY, but China has no excuse for not embracing democracy just because of ancient greece.

2) Democracy is the best form of government except for all the others....except for China.

Churchill has this quote because Democracy isn't the most efficient form of government, no matter what your flavor; Direct Democracy, Democratic Republic, Swiss Democracy, Parliamentary Democracy, etc etc.  Splitting up authority means that power is less powerful.  Period.  But the thing is, you lessen your likihood of a crazy person getting into control.  In the US, we've had a lot of inept middling people muddle their way through four years of the executive without causing an implosion of power or having the military take over.

The reason Democracy brings wealth isn't because of all the wonderful things it does, its because of the transition of power.  Lack of democracy means that the sovereignty of the nation lands on Rule of Force not Rule of Law, no matter how much you try and pretty up the words.  This is something the Chinese understood, it's why they made up their own little version of the Sith "Rule of Two." After the last Chinese Civil War they said, "Let's not do this again, be poor and get overcome by richer countries."  And it worked.

Twice.

And now it's broken.

3) China is Strong.

No it's not.  It's just not.  Sure, it has a lot of soldiers, a lot of money, and a lot of soft power.  For an authoritarian regime, it's damn smart. It studies everyone else in the world and says "How can I do that smarter?"  It studies it's own history with remarkable efficiecy and says "How can we avoid ever making that mistake again?" And it even has an ideology to it.  The Chinese Communist Party are the ultimate nationalists, they really DO want China to be strong as compared to the North Korean Party which just wants to be in power and survive by any means necessary.  Sure, there are ideologies there, but there is also insanity.

My point is, that despite having an ideology, China does insane fucking stuff when it fears a threat.

It banned talk of Time Travel to go back and change the past in fiction so the party wasn't there.

Just recently, it banned pictures of the letter N or WINNIE the POOH?!

That's why they were so obsessed with Fulan Gonh, because of their past when religions rose up against them.

But this isn't careful meticulous planning, this is FEAR.  Fear of their own people, fear of the fact that their Faustian bargain that they made with their own people after Tienanmen Square, Growth in exchange for their freedom simply isn't sustainable. 

In fact, it has been fraying for some time.  That's why China has begun to increase authoritarianism.  That's why Xi is seizing power instead of their pathetic attempt to circumvent democracy.  Democracy works because it works, not because it's fantastic.  If you are going to come up with a system that concentrates almost all power in one guy except for another guy, you need more of a check on the would be almost dictator beside 'the party.'  Our country has LOTS of problems, and one big baby disgusting problem in the white house...

But in two years historical context says that America is going to pick another leader and move on.

Sure, there is thunder on the horizon of civil war, and despite Russian attempts at agitation, it has been like that for decades, yes, this time is different but this post is about China.

Xi is behaving like a dictator.  And he has as thin a skin as Thailand. 

I want to share an anecdote about Saudi Arabia when my wife and I visited Portland.  I brought up at our bed and breakfast that sooner or later things would change in Saudi Arabia.  A senior gentleman there said, "I'm sorry Tom but you're wrong."  Then he told us some wonderful anecdotes about his experience in Saudi Arabia and how efficient wise and all knowing the kingdom was.  And though dubious, I admitted I might be wrong.  Nope, I was right.  Saudi Arabia is a kingdom, and like a kingdom, no matter how you try to slice things up, when you transition power, sooner or later someone will want to take power.  Now the Crown Prince is doing just that.  Sure he is instituting 'reforms' but that's because he is aware of the same things I was several years ago; Saudi Arabia has PROBLEMS and the people there are SICK of living under oppression.

The people of China are getting richer.  They are tired of a cowardly inept government and when they do take power, they are going to be pissed at all the western companies that helped them do it.

Xi is a tyrant, a dictator in charge of a country that happens to have more resources than others but all their ideologies are lies and all the dancing around the fact that "China is Different" is just either racism or naivety.

The Lords of Hypocrisy - Part 2 Constitution for Thee But Not For Me

Normally I just spit on conservative websites but I want to use their pathetic wording to make my point.  Here is the National Right to Be Assholes site, let's look at Satanic Verse 4.

Because they enjoy the special privilege of exclusive representation, unions have a legal duty to represent fairly all employees in their bargaining units. Unions are legally required to represent nonmember employees the same as members, but unfortunately this duty is often breached.

So right now the satanic court is trying to, and will, destroy public sector unions because it's their first amendment right.  When it serves conservatives, states right's matter.  When it doesn't, they do as they please.  When it serves conservatives to protect the first amendment, they do.  When it doesn't, they do as they please.


These satanic conservatives are arguing that the first amendment gives corporations the right to unlimited money in politics, that the satanic first amendment gives free loaders the right to get union wages and have to pay nothing? WHAT THE FUCK ABOUT THE FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION OF THE MAJORITY? WHY THE FUCK SHOULD THEY BE BOUND BY SATANIC LIBERTARIANS??!?!?!?!?!

FUCK THIS.

When it serves conservatives to hold up a liberal appointee to the Supreme Court, senate procedure and rules matter.  When it doesn't they do as they please.

Ever hear the phrase "A Stitch in Time Saves Nine?"  People (mainly satanic conservatives) often consider FDR's attempt to increase the number of justices on the court a failure and a dangerous attack on the independence on the court.

First off all, FUCK THAT.  Conservative ideals and ideas have no basis in legitimacy.

Second of all, if the court has 9 vs 200 justices, then the court can still say "fuck you" to the president any time it wants.

If Trump was doing it (the inevitable argument from milquetoasts and centrists) I would say ...OK and? But but but but...they stammer.

We do it RIGHT BACK to them when we retake power.  No congress is ever bound by another.  The size is whatever congress sets it as.

Period.

The rules are meaningless under the current constitution.  Decorum means NOTHING to conservatives.  I am going to be writing about the Judiciary and resuming my rewrite of the Satanic Constitution.

The Lords of Hypocrisy - Republic for Thee but Not For Me

If a Conservative is Speaking, a Conservative is Lying.

This maxim often earns me judgemental eyerolls from centrists and stochastic pacifists, but it is by long and methodical observation of Conservatives in every culture in the world and throughout history that observes it.  All political methodologies lie because humans lie but conservatives are uniquely qualified in their lies.  I explain why here but the TDLR version is that it is simply inherent in the nature of the philosophy because fear and envy bring out the worst in human nature.

So, this disgusting piece goes on and on about how the May government is "giving away" the "Democratic mandate" of the Brexit.  So, when poll after poll shows that a conservative position is in the minority, these guys say "We live in a Republic, not a Democracy" but one vote by a minority and suddenly they're all about Democracy.  When you can even get one of them to admit that they got 3 million less votes than when they voted for Trump, they use illogical bullshit like "well they represent more land mass."  Excuse me, but are we voting by wealth or property ownership in our Democratic Republic? Is the land voting? Because if so then what the FUCK has that got to do with anything?

Time and time again, on pretty much ANY issue you care to name; any value they claim to have, they shift like snakes and it isn't just American conservatives that do it either; its pretty much ALL conservatives.  Aside from the fact that, by and large lower IQ's tend to gravitate more towards them due to fear (empathy is a higher function in the brain), you can bet your bottom dollar that they are going to use Whataboutism or a Gish Gallop to defend their position.  In the rare instance that you can find an honest conservative who doesn't use Fake Facts, they will shift the conversation into such meaningless hyperbole that any fair moderator would vomit in disgust.

It is time to stop engaging these people as equals.  Better, don't engage them at all.  Those among us who insist on doing so should not be taken seriously either.  It is OK to disagree with me, but if you sling nothing but bullshit, you are to be ignored and if you bring someone to dinner at my home who stands up on the table and metaphorically shits on the main course, perhaps I won't invite you back next time.

If you insist on taking liars, conmen and huxters seriously, I won't take you seriously.  My very intelligent friends who tolerate the bullshit slung by their conservative life long friends are still my friends but I assure you the weight of their opinion is much less unless they challenge these fraudsters each and every time.   It's the only way.

The Constitution Was Made By Slavers. Full Stop.

I am writing this post in response to a rather childish challenge that the above sentance was "Intellectually Bankrupt?"  Oh REALLY?

Well, let's break it down for simple minds, shall we?

Let us start with the simple question of STANDING.

What is Standing? 30 Second Summary, the US Courts use a basic litmus test to see if someone even has the ability to bring a case.  IE "Do you even have the right to make this complaint to us at all?"

That's a legitimate question to ask.

The answer is NO, and not just NO but HELL NO.

1) The Constitution has not been ratified since its original ratification over 10 generations ago.

2) The Constitution has totally failed its primary mission in every conceivable way and no longer represents the interests of the United States of America (I will make this case in greater detail below)

3) The Constitution is not only a 'basic law' for our country but an architectural corner stone which is laid in flawed morality of those who thought owning other human beings was a good idea.  Yes, history is replete with flawed men and flawed arguments but we are not trying to hold them up about something which we should argue about as it applies to our CURRENT GOVERNMENT and current lives.

For Crimne's sake the WORDS "3/5th of a person" are still there with a little scratchy line TO THIS DAY.

We are, even now, having the SAME FUCKING STUPID ARGUEMENT about the meaning of the god damned second amendment while we collectively still stand in the entrails and blood of our children.   We have been having this bloody fucking argument for 20 FUCKING YEARS.

The US Constitution  is DONE.  It HAS NO STANDING.  No Moral Standing.  No legal standing.  No functional standing.  IT IS A NONSTARTER.

If you are arguing about the 2nd amendment, you are LOSING.

Now, for those who truly give a fuck (ie likely no one) let's break this down more.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We - Nope.  Those guys.  In the past.  Ratified 1776+.   Not "We" at all any more

People - This country represents the .001%.  This is an oligarchy.

United States - Not United.  Red States are punishing Blue States in a terroristic fashion.

Perfect Union - Uuuuuum.....No.

Establish Justice - HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA.  I don't fucking think so.


Ensure Domestic Tranquility - Nope.

Provide for the Common Defense - Nope.

Promote the General Welfare - Nope.

Secure the Blessings of Liberty for Our Posterity - Nope.

Oh how else hast thou failed? Let me count the ways.

Better,  let someone else do it.

How about that 9th amendment? Ignored.

How about the 10th Amendment? The one that gives all rights to the people not mentioned? Like these rights?

FAIL. FAIL. FAIL.

The United States Constitution is a piece of trash.  A non starter.

Some things are still useful on Daily Filth but why check it?

This diary is a brilliant memetic compilation.

Why, given that I called this website a festering pile of shit, would I still monitor it?

Because I keep hoping someone somewhere will do something that is going to work.  Daily Kos is great at organizing; it always has been.  It helped Occupy and helped get out word about it.  But Daily Kos is not occupy.  Daily Kos conveniently forgot when Obama crushed Occupy; Daily Kos works for HRC and the DNC.

Make no mistake, they do not try to hide this....

"More and 'better' democrats"

Those Democrats are HRC.

This Russian hack thing is important...its a viable method of attack, but they are also unwilling to admit their arrogance.  This is ALL ABOUT their arrogance.  Its why they lost.  Shouting down their opponents, but the nazi sympathizers in the American West, South East, South West and Mid West; and the actual people who simply didn't want HRC to be president.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and is there anything more vacuous than Trump?

Daily Kos is likely to fail; and likely to be crushed, because while they can organize, they are lost in their own self deprivation and lies.  The core of the resistance has to have the moral strength to retain its own identity and message and still be capable of embracing anyone and everyone that might work with it.

Daily Kos is exactly the opposite.  It insists that only the HRC version of freedom is the only one we get to have...and anyone else who doesn't accept that is a racist, classist, sexist pig.  But even if you don't believe that, look at how they treat new comers.  Any organization that does that, that insists on COMPLIANCE on joining, that crushes anyone who doesn't agree with them (yes, there are dissenting voices but only those who were COMPLIANT for a number of years and proved they were not 'sock puppets') cannot succeed, it cannot lead.

Bernie opened up to anyone who wanted to work with him.

HRC said that only those who wanted to go her way could be part of her 'big tent.'

You know where else they use big tents?

Exterminators in a house.

Big alliances are fine, but if you get so big you stand for nothing you're better off with a bunch of smaller tents; that's an army, not a fumigation.