Gravel / Paul 2008

Nonetheless old Mike is a respectable man, even though he is a little cranky and set in his ways. It’s also funny how he pronounces libertarian: “lib-uh-tarian.”

We have referendums which do let people make laws perse. We can’t let people make laws so long as the government controls the media. And congress is no good either.

Key focus should be on building alternative media and breaking the corporate and media relationships. Its a meta issue. We can’t change shite until we change the press.

Just look and think about how much the internet has changed information and politics for the people who use it. Think about all the things you would not know about without it. That is the power of media.

The argument does not have to be about the UN or the congress bla bla bla it needs to be about the media. Everyday there should be a story destroying mass media.

End war? do what was done in Japan just make it part of the constitution that you got to be attacked first.

want to drastically reduce war? strip power away form religion. Take away the tax exemption. Make threatening little kids with being burned forever, considered a form of psychological terrorism. Seriously its these weirdos that grow up and become Bush supporters, Osama supporters, Olmert supporters etc.

if you want the US to stop war, and stop being hated so much then just end all aid to Israel, and stop threatening and attacking countries physically and economically. You don’t need an international body to tell you to do that. You just need more libertarians in office. Best way to do that is for all of us to focus a war on the mass media because without that controlled the neocons couldn’t get away with anything.

Mr. Root is completely agreeable when he says that the middle class has to be restored. Indeed. Every person that has some basic overview of what is happening to society over the decades will see that the “mob” is in the making. How dare you denunciate your fellow citizens as “mob”? But if you do not give them the means to protect their own autonomy they’ll soon enough be a true mob, guided by the word of the demagogue and the law of conformity.

I wonder how many Libertarians are aware of their own nature as a political group. The purpose of Libertarians as a political group is to split the gullible portion of society. Whereas the gullible portion of society organizes itself in recent history almost exclusively by compromise along the lines of the perceived ethical behavior, which thus becomes the means to its control, the Libertarians organize themselves along the lines of being in accord with the doctrine. Neither the one nor the other form of organization needs any form of judgment, which is of course the crucial point, keeping in mind that these are forms of organization for the gullible.

Now, why would anybody want to split the gullible portion of society? Of course, Libertarians are only a tiny minority, so their value seems to be on first glance not very substantial. But if I may invoke the political insight of a great German statesman here: The masses are so dumb that they will stray from their course by the slightest opposition, by the slightest doubt that their course is correct. Hence the Libertarians, as tiny as they might be, do fulfill their purpose which is to stall political processes amongst those who cannot judge.

Which is a good thing of course. But, as I said, the “mob” is in the making, the ability to judge is almost willfully eroded amongst the general population and the Libertarians as a political group are just a result of this increase, a necessary measure of control, because the gullible mass has become too big to anticipate any intrinsic process which might occur in it so that it is not any longer enough to just guide it by ethics but instead it is put into halt mode by confusion and inner conflict.

The most likely explanation for this increase is of course that such a group of people makes excellent slaves. Anger over this enslavement then is comfortably vented against the political power of the slaves which is quite cunningly held responsible for the enslavement by Libertarian doctrine.

It’s a joke. The U.S. have been going straight down from the 50’s on, I’d say. The reason why people don’t see this is because of professional progress. As long as a profession isn’t exterminated it will progress, there is not one case in history where a profession would have regressed. That is because of the nature of knowledge which knows no such thing as anti-knowledge (not to be confused with information, you know only what you know.) But if you take that professional progress away and look at the creativity of a society as such, its ability to evolve as a culture, you’ll see that since the 50’s the U.S. are losing common ground, are losing culture. Liberals confuse individual liberties with progress in this regard, but individual liberties have only in so far to do with this as their presence or absence constitutes an obstacle to the functioning of the society. Differently put, there is no doubt that the American Dream was bigger in the 50’s than ever since.

True, but that’s actually something that rubs me wrong about the show. Most of the interviewees are expecting and receiving leading questions to promote/explain the things they’ve delved deeper into than you or I. Sometimes the “we’re on the same side” mentality causes too much agreement. There’s a whole bunch of not actually hearing what the other said leading to pleasurable back-rubs for all.
I’d love you hear more contention and critique in these discussions.
Just a thought. I only recently started listening and do love the show.

Peace be with you.