Keep Your Enemies Closer
I've been a member of a union for almost thirty years now and I still have a problem understanding why so many Brothers and Sisters stand behind the capitalist way of life. I'm talking a spectrum of support ranging from the lowest paid grunts all the way up to the overpaid officials. Maybe it's my up-bringing or maybe I'm just plain old ignorant but for the life of me, I just can't grasp how organizations built on the premise of, "An injury to one is an injury to all.", can turn into the same identical structure which it was meant to dismantle! A structure which places self gains above humanity. I've read in numerous polls and looked at many graphs which place union members in the republican's camp at somewhere around 40%. Yeah, I know, it's their right and they're free to choose, but I just don't understand it do to the fact of the conflict of interest and different sets of ideals between capitalism and labor. So I decided to just look around the web to see what I could see!
There's an old adage, from the Godfather I believe, which says, "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer". So in the spirit of things, I chose to cruise around some of the pro-capitalist sites which proliferate the web. I did a Google on the word "capitalism" and went to the top of the list. The first site was capitalism.org, and I read this from the quote at the top of the main page:
quote:
The moral justification for capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with man's rational nature, that it protects man's survival qua man, and that it's ruling principle is: justice.
So according to this premise, if one believes in the capitalistic system, they must have a logical and sound mind which is adept at survial and accomplishes this by utilizing the principle of justice. Kind of disconcerting to think I might be of unsound mind and irrational! I guess justice is something like religion. I can do something religiously whether it is a good thing or a bad thing as long as I do it with extreme conscientiousness. I guess the capitalist does things judicially[/] from a divine judgment? [i]Note to myself: Find out which dictionary these capitalists use as I can't seem to corroborate their meaning of the word!
Well, I then went to capitalist.org's labor page and read through their FAQs concerning labor and minimum wage. Here is what I read on that page:
quote:
That a businessmen pays a worker less wages than the worker feels he deserves is not exploitation, as the worker is free to leave his job and look elsewhere for a higher paying one, if he thinks that someone can give him a better job for a better wage.
Well, I had to stop a while after that one, as tears began rolling down my cheeks from the laughter and the coughing began from the years of abusing my lungs with those damn cancer sticks. I haven't had that good a laugh since GW choked on a pretzel.
Well this was getting interesting, so I thought I'd try another link. Next on the list was capitalist magazine, and there at the top of the page was the top story, Thanksgiving: An American Celebration of the Creation of Wealth. Here is the first paragraph from the article:
quote:
Thanksgiving celebrates man's ability to produce. The cornucopia filled with exotic flowers and delicious fruits, the savory turkey with aromatic trimmings, the mouth-watering pies, the colorful decorations -- it's all a testament to the creation of wealth.
Here is another article entitled, What's So Bad About Being Selfish?, and below are a few quotes from the same:
quote:
Selfishness means acting in one's rational self-interest. Contrary to popular opinion, all healthy individuals are selfish.
The opposite of selfishness is self-sacrifice. Self-sacrifice means giving up a greater value for a lesser value.
Certainly, a selfish person wants to share his success with those he genuinely cares about--his family, friends, or children (greater values). But why should he make sacrifices to individuals he does not know or care about (lesser values)?
In a rational society, selfishness is encouraged. A rational society is one where individuals are left free to pursue their self-interest. In the process, everyone benefits. Rational selfishness means acting in your self-interest--and accepting responsibility for determining what truly serves your long-term interest. It is a nice alternative to a life filled with duty, drudgery and disillusionment.
These two articles were by Gary Hull who writes for capitalsim magazine and who is also a senior writer for the Ayn Rand Institute. ARI is an advocate of free-market capitalism with a focus on bringing it's philosophy to students, both in our high schools and our colleges. One common thread I've noticed so far is that the philosophy of Ayn Rand keeps popping up on practically all the pages promoting capitalism. I'm becoming depressed now and I'm no longer sure if it's such a wise idea to keep our enemies closer. It just seems to turn things a shade of gray and brings on a feeling of hopelessness. You know, maybe that's the answer to why so many of us working people tend to support capitalism. We've been forced to wallow in the suffocating stench of the elite's shit for so long, we have begun to smell like shit ourselves!
I'll have to continue this once I feel well again. For now, I think I'll go take a shower to try to remove some of this stench and attempt to return to my life that is filled with duty, drudgery and disillusionment. I seem to find my simple life very consolling.
quote:
In a rational society, selfishness is encouraged. A rational society is one where individuals are left free to pursue their self-interest. In the process, everyone benefits. Rational selfishness means acting in your self-interest--and accepting responsibility for determining what truly serves your long-term interest. It is a nice alternative to a life filled with duty, drudgery and disillusionment.
That is sO warp'd... spun... self-serving. Only a repub could swallow it.
I prefer to keep enemies out - maybe a fence - hmmmm.
quote:
I prefer to keep enemies out - maybe a fence - hmmmm.
Our enemies are so widely distributed around us, I think somethiing similar to the PopeMobile would be more appropriate!
There looks to be enough room in the popemobile for another ten twenty pontiffs.
Irony - a fence of a different colour - for someone so full of faith, that's a lot of protection the pope has there eh.
quote:
I've been a member of a union for almost thirty years now and I still have a problem understanding why so many Brothers and Sisters stand behind the capitalist way of life.
It's what we know A; it's what we were taught to believe in. For most baby boomers the battle to overcome the dreaded communists and almost as evil socialists was etched in our minds daily.
Besides, have you ever sat through a meeting with a bunch of communists? My god, 6 hours later i always left feeling tired, drained and wondering what we accomplished 
.
quote:
Selfishness means acting in one's rational self-interest. Contrary to popular opinion, all healthy individuals are selfish
There were any number of quotes to ponder, but i found this one particulary offensive. I guess this just flat out says Mother Teresa wasn't healthy. What an ASS
The bigger concern is if this is what they are teaching young people, there is little wonder the right is winning the battle. The further we move away from a collectivist society, the more we will see this what's in it for me mentality. Ugly.
Thanks for the info A, but if you are going to keep reading this crap, i'm afraid a shower won't get it done. Steam cleaning may be have a shot, but even that is questionable.
quote:
For most baby boomers the battle to overcome the dreaded communists and almost as evil socialists was etched in our minds daily.
Hmmm...Maybe you've partially answered the why Bill. It seems the majority of the people I communicate with think this way also. They believe there are only two social structures that we have to choose from. We can either go with the capitalist structure with it's many short comings or we can choose socialism, which we attach to the order of communism we saw fail in the U.S.S.R.
Perhaps if we can ever look beyond what has already been and begin to look at the what could be, we will begin the needed steps to create the what should be?
>'I still have a problem understanding why so many Brothers and Sisters stand behind the capitalist way of life.'<<br />
Don't worry A, I'll be glad to explain it all to you sometime. But more significantly, I find it heart warming that you still refer to us 40%ers as Brothers and Sisters.
quote:
But more significantly, I find it heart warming that you still refer to us 40%ers as Brothers and Sisters.
Enjoy the civility while you can. It must be the holidays or possibly even senility, but whatever the reason, I have a feeling my passiveness will be short lived!
quote:
They believe there are only two social structures that we have to choose from.
Good point AT - who said we had to buoy between two equally evil choices? The possibilities are limitless and all that has to happen is to find one that works. We can get man to the moon, cure disease and we're to believe there's no solution to capitalist devastation? I'll believe that when Trump's hair moves.
We are not really living in a capitalist economic system at all. What we are living in is a crypto-fascist corporatist system or one that is moving rapidly towards full-blown fascism.
A lot of people don't understand that "capitalism" was an economic theory developed in the late 1700's by an economist (Adam Smith) who theorized that an unregulated market would create prosperity and promote human progress because, driven by self-interest, humans would do things that would help themselves prosper. The forces of supply and demand would encourage them to do things (provide services and manufacture goods) that were needed by other humans.
There is a good short description of this theory in this wikipedia entry about Adam Smith:
quote:
One of the main points of The Wealth of Nations is that the free market, while appearing chaotic and unrestrained, is actually guided to produce the right amount and variety of goods by a so-called "invisible hand". If a product shortage occurs, for instance, its price rises, creating a profit margin that creates an incentive for others to enter production, eventually curing the shortage. If too many producers enter the market, the increased competition among manufacturers and increased supply would lower the price of the product to its production cost, the "natural price". Even as profits are zeroed out at the "natural price," there would be incentives to produce goods and services, as all costs of production, including compensation for the owner's labour, are also built into the price of the goods. If prices dipped below a zero profit, producers would drop out of the market; if they were above a zero profit, producers would enter the market. Smith believed that while human motives are often selfish and greedy, the competition in the free market would tend to benefit society as a whole by keeping prices low, while still building in an incentive for a wide variety of goods and services. Nevertheless, he was wary of businessmen and argued against the formation of monopolies.
That last sentence is really important. What most people also don't know about Smith is that he developed his theory at a time well before the advent of mass production, manufactured "needs" and concentration of economic power in the hands of large corporations.
He developed his theory at a time when the industrial revolution was just beginning, "markets" were small and local and merchants were individual entrepreneurs running family businesses. On this kind of landscape his theory may have had some chance of creating a level of prosperity that may actually have benefited communities. But that's not the way that things worked out.
Smith didn't foresee the evolution of the huge corporations nor did anticipate where self-interest would take things although he had some sense that his theory may have its weak spots. He warned against the concentration of too much economic power in the hands of businessmen and cautioned about businessmen conspiring ("combining") to inflate prices and keep wages down. He actually believed that higher wages were a good thing!
Although the neo-cons describe their favoured economic system as "capitalist" it bares little resemblance to the kind of system that Smith had in mind when he wrote Wealth of Nations. Smith would be rolling around in his grave if he knew what kind of exploitive lunacy was being practiced in his name. The neo-cons call it capitalism and use bits of Smith very selectively to spin their propaganda.
However capitalism was supposed to work, and we really don't know because it never became established in the way that Smith envisioned (by the mid 1800's, the landscape had changed - self-interested people were setting up empires and doing all the things that Smith said they shouldn't do), it's not the system we have. We've been brainwashed into believing we live under capitalism and that somehow or other Smith's theories are still going to work even though it's no longer 1785 but 2005 and the conditions that were supposed to make capitalism work are long gone.
Today's Toronto Star has a wonderful article about the system that we're living under. The sooner people get their heads around this the better.
Fascism Then, Fascism Now
That's true, I call it capitalism because I didn't know what else it could be. But, then that conflicted with some of the things I believe and of course with most of the way that I (we) live - we're a little bit socialist and a little bit capitalist.
quote:
We are not really living in a capitalist economic system at all. What we are living in is a crypto-fascist corporatist system or one that is moving rapidly towards full-blown fascism.
Uh Oh! You said the "F" word!
You're right Remote, our current system is much more corporatism, with shades of fascism, than it is capitalism. Rather than focusing on capitalism as the enemy, I should have stressed neo-conism, conservativism, or possibly mullism? Just kiddin' 
You may want to check the link to the Star Remote. It is an excellent article and downright spooky!
>'Enjoy the civility…'<<br />
Civility, even offered begrudgingly, is still civility I suppose –no matter the season or one's state of mind.
But I can't help notice a certain amount of arrogance mixed in with your civility as well. -Brings to mind the comment made by AFL-CIO political director Steve Rosenthal who, when reminded that 40% of union members voted Republican in a national election, said, '…those members who supported Republicans had simply voted 'wrong.''
It does take a certain amount of chutzpah [disrespect] toward a large chunk of the Brothers and Sisters for condemning them as 'wrong' for voting to their own satisfaction. Rosenthal was saying, in essence, that despite the fact that the afore mentioned 40% were voting according to their own best interests –they were still 'wrong.'
So what we seem to be saying here is that despite the fact that most folks who, given a choice, want to retain capitalism and it's attendant government structure, are wrong! Choice by voting is apparently out of fashion according to what I'm reading in these parts.
Straighten me out on this one A, and you too BP -always good to hear from you all.
Mull do you have to work at missing the point or does it come naturally to you? 
I'm sure there's one here somewhere.
quote:
Choice by voting is apparently out of fashion according to what I'm reading in these parts.
Yes it is unfortunately. Thanks to the corporatists, electoral choices are limited to Republicans For Corporatism and Democrats for Corporatism (and their Conservative, Liberal and NDP counterparts in Canada).
One of the things that fascists do really well is creating the illusion of democracy while running the show themselves and sidelining or eliminating any alternatives that might threaten their hold on power.
quote:
But I can't help notice a certain amount of arrogance mixed in with your civility as well.
You mean arrogance as in "...greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works."
quote:
So what we seem to be saying here is that despite the fact that most folks (40% of union members?) who, given a choice, want to retain capitalism and it's attendant government structure, are wrong!
Okay, If you say so! But what I said was, I still have a problem understanding why so many Brothers and Sisters stand behind the capitalist way of life. I just don't understand it do to the fact of the conflict of interest and different sets of ideals between capitalism and labor.
quote:
Thanks to the corporatists, electoral choices are limited to Republicans For Corporatism and Democrats for Corporatism (and their Conservative, Liberal and NDP counterparts in Canada).
Agreed! I see very little difference between the elephant and the jackass icons of the political gaming association here in the states. They both prey on the common people and worship the corporate structures of power.
quote:
between the elephant and the jackass
quote:
I'm sure there's one here somewhere.
What a relief - at least there's hope.
Unless you're one of the elite and absolutely any kind of change threatens or cuts into the take-home, then I don't get it. Why - in what is otherwise considered able-thinking persons - there's intent to undermine or reject (derail) possible change.
It's not necessary to agree on how or when or who. But given the needless death, war, violence and poverty plaguing the world, it's not unreasonable to expect that at some point every warm blooded being would reveal a modicum of concern. Absent full-out contribution, then at least an acknowledgement of a need.
Why would anyone be afraid or reluctant to try to create a system where everyone in it is living equally?
>'Why would anyone be afraid or reluctant to try to create a system where everyone in it is living equally?'<<br />
-because the utopian dream of socialism has never been realized and never will be.
[CAUTION: Rant Alert]
The utopian ideology is an illusion built on good intentions by those who are naïve enough to buy into it. The reality is that socialism is no different than any other tyrannical form of government.
Show me one country that is or has ever been totally socialistic. There is no such thing. People know instinctively that socialism doesn't work. That's why no one voluntarily wants to be under socialistic rule. 'Socialism,' or any of its protean forms, has always been implemented by 'force or subterfuge,' as someone has correctly written –not by popular upheaval.
People don't live equally because by nature people -aren't- ‘equal.' Some try harder than others to get ahead –making socialism unworkable except by force.
>'You mean arrogance as in…'<<br />
No, the word ‘arrogance' has to do with disrespect for another's beliefs. It suggests that one knows more about what is good for another than they themselves do. It's an expression of contempt for others in view of one's own beliefs.
Has nothing to do with the term ‘greed.'
Don't call me naive - geeezus!
quote:
-because the utopian dream of socialism has never been realized and never will be.
Interesting method Mull, using history to defy history.
quote:
The utopian ideology is an illusion built on good intentions by those who are naïve enough to buy into it. The reality is that socialism is no different than any other tyrannical form of government.
First off the utopia ideology is a different thread entirely. Secondly here we go with the socialism again! Read above posts.
quote:
People don't live equally because by nature people -aren't- ‘equal.' Some try harder than others to get ahead –making socialism unworkable except by force.
Do you mean some of us aren't equal due to intellignece, color, race, our up-bringing, or what? Or perhaps you mean some of us are just born naturally lazier than others and are therefore just not part of the dominant culture?
quote:
No, the word ‘arrogance' has to do with disrespect for another's beliefs. It suggests that one knows more about what is good for another than they themselves do. It's an expression of contempt for others in view of one's own beliefs.
Has nothing to do with the term ‘greed.'
Whatever!
>'Whatever!'<
Exactly. The use of the term ‘whatever' in its modern context is a form of arrogance. ‘Whatever' suggests contempt for, or dismissal of, another's point of view.
Come on A! You're not toeing the line here. ‘Whatever' is not much of an argument.
quote:
Mussolini, the one-time socialist, went on to abolish the inheritance tax, a measure that favoured the wealthy. He decreed a series of massive subsidies to Italy's largest industrial businesses and repeatedly ordered wage reductions. Italy's poor were forced to subsidize the wealthy. In real terms, wages and living standards for the average Italian dropped precipitously under fascism.
Loved this cut from the article, and i'll explain why in a minute. In the interim, let's have some fun with words and rewrite this paragraph:
quote:
Bush went on to abolish the inheritance tax, a measure that favoured the wealthy. He decreed a series of massive subsidies to America's largest industrial businesses and repeatedly ordered wage reductions. The United State's poor were forced to subsidize the wealthy. In real terms, wages and living standards for the average American dropped precipitously under fascism.
Scary eh, and i would invite brother Mulligan to dispute the statement rather than debate the insignificant minutia around it. (Before you get all pissy M and suggest i don't care about your right to choose, i do, but that's not the discussion in question here).
I've played this game before: While living in the Twin Cities i called Jason Lewis (a right wing talk show host) and started out by reading him the definition of Fascism. This one works close enough:
quote:
An extreme form of nationalism that played on fears of communism and rejected individual freedom, liberal individualism, democracy, and limitations on the state.
The one i was citing was better, but the point was simple and clear, the neo-cons were very much in the mode of the fascist dictators of the past. One of Jason's favorite techniques was to get his minions to call and imprint every liberal as a communist or socialist. It was such and tired old trick, but group think is easy of you just keep painting every picture with the same brush.
Jason and the boys hated the label. The problem was/is it is hard to argue the direction we are headed in. All across North America and the world there are forces moving toward a world government controlled by the largest corporations and a handful of men. Jason's solution was similar to Mull mans, ignore the discussion and pick fly shit over the insignificant.
To help M get through this, i have always been uncomfortable telling members how to vote. The facts should be sufficient to allow people/members to choose. I respect their choices and think the idea institutionalized labor spend millions of dollars on politics is ludicrous. The sad fact is, way too many "democrats" are woefully inept when it comes to workers rights issues.
Back to the point, this article is a powerful recap of the historical movement to a time when workers meant nothing. I am curious how brother Mulligan feels about the dismantling of organized labor and how that possibly will benefit him and his brothers and sisters in and out of labor. No offense, but spare me the pendulum addage, there ain't no swinging back from where we are, it's too far gone.
The article is amazing and word play mandatory. I read the entire piece and it was not possible to read it without inserting the names of illustrious leaders of the day - American and Canadian, they both fit.
Exceptional talent when an author can hit home for millions without having to cite specifics.
What about you Mull - recognize anyone?
>'To help M get through this, i have always been uncomfortable telling members how to vote. The facts should be sufficient to allow people/members to choose. I respect their choices and think the idea institutionalized labor spend millions of dollars on politics is ludicrous. The sad fact is, way too many "democrats" are woefully inept when it comes to workers rights issues.'<<br />
Well said, sir. Sorry, too tired to deal with this tonight. Later.
What we see today in the nationalistic, conservatist climate is an apparent "Clear and Present Danger", and the destruction in it's wake takes a great toll on humanity and social justice is far removed. I once believed in the importance of negotiating. I once believed in the importance of compromise in working out our differences. I once believed practically everyone believed in compassion. I no longer believe these things. The enemy of our world is easily recognized and I will no longer negotiate with them nor will I compromise the destruction of humanity just to appease them. What these dictatorial few are doing is real terrorism.
The enemy camp which rages against humanity and supports the proliferation of profits for the chosen few is well fortified and they have been enforcing their ramparts for a long time. The American Enterprise Institute, is possibly the most powerful pro-business, right wing think tank in existence. Global capitalism is their goal, and placing their chosen people in powerful governmental positions, is and always has been, their plan of action. A plan that has been in the making for over thirty years and has been extremely successful especially since the introduction of reaganomics, or as it's known, the trickle down effect. Primary funding for AEI comes from the Pew Freedom Trust, which is based on oil money via Sun Oil Co. And AEI is just one of many of these so-called think tanks who have their hands and money in structuring the spin, not just in the U.S., but the entire world and the fascist smell is all over it.
We need to learn to recognize the many different guises in which tyranny appears.
quote:
"Like Brownshirts, the new conservatives take personally any criticism of their leader and his policies. To be a critic is to be an enemy."
In short, what we have alive in the US is an updated and Americanized fascism. Why fascist? Because it is not leftist in the sense of egalitarian or redistributionist. It has no real beef with business. It doesn't sympathize with the downtrodden, labor, or the poor. It is for all the core institutions of bourgeois life in America: family, faith, and flag. But it sees the state as the central organizing principle of society, views public institutions as the most essential means by which all these institutions are protected and advanced, and adores the head of state as a godlike figure who knows better than anyone else what the country and world's needs, and has a special connection to the Creator that permits him to discern the best means to bring it about.
The war of these elites has been so orchestrated and planned so well. Details haven't been overlooked and as we lay sleeping, they have entered our homes and now they threaten our lives. So thorough is their focus that even the books that are read have become part of their agenda. These "fellowships" of the largest of these "think tanks", according to Ralph Nader,"The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) has a problem. It is loaded with corporate money, full of rich fellowships for Washington, D.C. influence peddlers, masquerading as conservatives, who wallow in plush offices figuring out how to assure that big corporations rule the United States and the rest of the world."
These 'new age' neo-cons are nothing more than parasites and their belief system is apparent. They are against affirmative action, bilingual education, multiculturalism, and they support welfare reform and tougher criminal sentencing. And their analyses of race issues in the United States is well documented. The Rights Race Desk and their belief of the Bell Curve shows too well they think their views and their intelligence is far greater than other people of race and or color. And I'm sure they believe some people are just inherently lazy and simply don't fit within their ideal structure!
Back in 2001, the National Review Online published an article by Michael Ledeen entitled "Time for a Good, Old-Fashioned Purge'. In it Ledeen, who was an advisor to Oliver North during the Reagen era, asks the Bush team to purge the 'environmental whack-os,' 'the radical feminazis,' the 'foreign policy types on the National Security Council Staff and throughout State, CIA, and Defense, who are still trying to create Bill Clinton's legacy in the Middle East…'
Although these elite have mainly been invisible while they have been building their empire, their camouflage no longer blends in with the surroundings and these elite and their supporters are easily identifiable. If we don't try to halt their nationalistic, fascist protocol, the human beings of the world will find their views, ideals, and freedoms "purged" and humanity will cease to exist!
Here's a thought. Gun control is anathema to the right wing, no? Watch out if they ever begin to change their position.
>'I am curious how brother Mulligan feels about the dismantling of organized labor and how that possibly will benefit him and his brothers and sisters in and out of labor.'<<br />
For the most part I think Labor shot itself in the foot. I'm sure that Big Biz and the conservative element in politics has often done their best to drive the price of labor down. But on the other hand, what explains the constant drop of Organized Labor membership over the past years?
My suggestion is that [as you have noted, BP] many members have recognized the political hypocrisy that arises between the Democrats and Labor -and either went to the other side because the politics are closer to their traditional ideals, or just plain voted with their feet for greener pastures.
And how do you ‘dismantle' organized labor when there is/was such a powerful entity as Big Labor in command for so long? Why isn't –it- held accountable for our reversals? I suspect that the Republicans are, and always have been, a more convenient scapegoat.
Anyone see the newest wave of infighting in shrub's administration? A former aide to Colin Powell sez Dick Cheney must have sincerely believed Iraq could be a spawning ground for new terror assaults, because "otherwise I have to declare him a moron, an idiot or a nefarious bastard." Nefarious- had to look that one up. Means wicked or evil. Works for me. And then there was shrub this morning, doing his imitation of the ol' one trick pony with his message on the war. Sheesh!
RE: Rockwell article.
>'The vigor and determination of the Bush administration has brought about a profound cultural change, so that the very people who once proclaimed hated of government now advocate its use against dissidents of all sorts, especially against those who would dare call for curbs in the totalitarian bureaucracy of the military, or suggest that Bush is something less than infallible in his foreign-policy decisions.'<<br />
Ah yes, the fear of the Authoritarian Personality is most palpable here. Adorno and Horkeimer must be turning in their graves by now.
There is an interesting political evaluation test that can be taken online here:
http://www.politicalcompass.org/
It's a little different from most since it creates a chart which assesses liberal/conservative views on a horizontal axis and authoritarian/libertarian views on a vertical axis.
For example: Hitler and Stalin are in about the same place vertically due to there authoritarian ideals even though they had vastly differing economic views.
I think the real value of such a test is in pointing out that our societal formations are far more complex than merely those of economics or of personal morality. And, that the options we have as human beings are so much more expansive than the little niche carved out and presented to us by the global corporatacracy. It's amazing how many world leaders would seem to be plotted in the upper- right quadrant!
I feel kind of lonely in the bottom left corner. 
Rogead: I am with you on the bottom left...you have a friend. Ghandi is one of us as well.
Whew that was close! Nearly missed the chart.
quote:
I feel kind of lonely in the bottom left corner.
Lots of empty seats eh. Well not for long - it's friday night and MfD'rs everywhere are probably out somewhere do-gooding, they'll be along shortly.
How predictable was that? And how scary - in order to even edge any of the right leaning graph, one would have to strongly agree to some really abhorrent attitudes and strongly disagree to some humane basics.
OMG!!! I think I'm an anarchunist....errrr...no wait....maybe that's a commuchist! Damn, I don't know what I am, but if we were target practicing, I damn sure missed the bullseye!
Me too, me too...cool, sitting right alongside Nelson Mandella. Guess most of us freaks frequenting MFD have some pointable bias. If i gotta be a part of something, this ain't a bad thing to be a part of.
Wonder where Brother Mulligan is on the spectrum? Let us know M-man, this should be good (scary?).
Damn, does this mean that I am an addict ? I saw a news program the other day about people addicted to the internet.
This web sight is a good thing to be addicted to, and my wife doesn't get P.O.ed . You know, no naked women. 
>'Wonder where Brother Mulligan is on the spectrum? Let us know M-man, this should be good (scary?).'<<br />
Hmmm. Yes, it is a little scary –for me anyway. I'm a little to the right and three spaces above the left/right line. Right about where Pope Benedict is except more to the right. Which reminds me, I need to do a little more reading about this new pope.
Maybe I'll go back and take the test again –maybe be a little more authoritative with my answers.
quote:
Maybe I'll go back and take the test again –maybe be a little more authoritative with my answers.
Shooting for bush status Mull?
>"...bush status...<"
Well, I find it refreshing that the Pope and I are on some common ground at least.
quote:
Well, I find it refreshing that the Pope and I are on some common ground at least.
You say refreshing, we say frightful, let's call the whole thing off. Introspection is a marvelous thing but I think when it reaches papal proportions, there may be a problem. How do you feel about interventions Mull - are you in?
>"How do you feel about interventions Mull - are you in?"<<br />
Interventions?? Uh-uh! No recovery programs for me thank you. I don't have a problem -everybody else does.
Hello. My name is Mulligan. I am here because I have a addiction, I am a bushaholic.
quote:
I don't have a problem -everybody else does.
Ain't that the truth!
>"Ain't that the truth!"<<br />
Sure, I'm fair minded about things.
M, as your name suggests, (at least as it is used in golfing terminology), maybe it's time for a "do-over". Seems like your present shot has left you with a bad lie and it seems appropriate that you either take a drop or you could choose a completely different game possibly!
And it's not the fear of authoritarian personalities M, it's their arrogance and love of self I find disgusting!
Keep your enemies closer? Well your known
enemies you worry about less. It's those that
you haven't idenitified as yet, that are your most
dangerous enemy or enemies.
>'...choose a completely different game possibly!'<<br />
Thanks for the kind suggestions A, but until slek or Siggy decide to run me off, I guess I'm comfortable where I am. Besides, I've gotten much easier to get along with over the years than before.
As for the Mulligan pseudonym -it has more to do with Buck Mulligan of 'Ulysses' fame than golf. Unlike –that- Mulligan, I'm neither ‘plump' nor ‘stately.' But like Mulligans creator, James Joyce, I am a bit of an iconoclast.
>' …it's their arrogance and love of self I find disgusting!'<<br />
Would that we all could pontificate [speaking of pontiffs] from such a high moral platform, A. We'll have to keep you around for a while just to bask in your light.
quote:
Thanks for the kind suggestions A, but until slek or Siggy decide to run me off, I guess I'm comfortable where I am. Besides, I've gotten much easier to get along with over the years than before.
Oh, I wasn't suggesting you leave M. The game I was referring to was a social game, an ideological game, a game that places humanity above coercive man-made laws!
quote:
>' …it's their arrogance and love of self I find disgusting!'<<br />
Would that we all could pontificate [speaking of pontiffs] from such a high moral platform, A. We'll have to keep you around for a while just to bask in your light.
Yeah, good example! That's exactly what I mean! Thanks M.
Oh no AT, thread subject notwithinfluence, I can tell you Mull is as MfD as they come and he gives as good as he gets. Oh sure he never agrees and worships at some fairly questionable altars but when push comes to shove Mull is always here - right Mull. Run you off? I'm hurt.
