Posts
Read more!
More and more I find myself taking a decidedly biblical view of the world. A view informed by Old Testament wisdom, law and the Covenant. That is especially true when I think of the Adolescent Rebellion of the 60's and 70's and the evils that followed (and continue to follow) in its wake.
I dwell also on the societal consequences of the interruption of generational continuity. For America the break was, in the main, brought about WWII; for Europe (and broadly, Western social, literary, economic, academic and religious foundations) dissolutions were brought by the combination of World Wars. Disillusion and cynicism, following great breakdowns of confidence in institutions, secular and divine.
Showing posts with label Tyranny. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tyranny. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Donald Trump: More Balls Than Sense. And That Ain't All Bad
Read more!
Trump's critics tell us a lot more about themselves than the man they criticize. John McCain and his love child, Lindsay Graham head a long list of pussified Republicrats who see a threat in anyone who dares to commit the heresy of truth-telling in public. Donald Trump has joined Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton and (too few) others. At least for the moment.
 |
| Photo by Gage Skidmore |
Monday, March 23, 2015
Is It Time, Yet, to Inquire Whether Our President is an Islamist?
Read more!
When I say "is it time,yet..." I mean, has the mountain of evidence from which we can infer the President's affinity for the Muslim enemies of the West achieved sufficient mass that we now dare to violate the canon of political correctness and broach the question. Too harsh? How about 'Fellow Traveler'?
Looking back on the foreign policy decisions taken by this administration (a.k.a. Mr. Obama), I cannot discover one that has not favored Islamists at the expense of America and the free world; not one.
When I say "is it time,yet..." I mean, has the mountain of evidence from which we can infer the President's affinity for the Muslim enemies of the West achieved sufficient mass that we now dare to violate the canon of political correctness and broach the question. Too harsh? How about 'Fellow Traveler'?
Looking back on the foreign policy decisions taken by this administration (a.k.a. Mr. Obama), I cannot discover one that has not favored Islamists at the expense of America and the free world; not one.
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
The Redcoats are Coming! The Redcoats are Coming! Shelter in Place!
Read more!
Living under the care of a nanny has its place among some of our children, but, continuing the relationship after a child has reached adulthood, would be strange at the very least. And if the nanny is a psychopathic Amazon shrew, and the former child has been intimidated beyond any dream of self-assertion, that relationship has become bizarre. Sick.
Thinking of Revere, Dawes and the Minute Men, one can hardly avoid the sense of shock in drawing the contrast between 18th Century American patriots' passion for independence and 21st Century New Englanders cowed into submission in the trail of the Boston bombing. Or, more recently, the lack of protest from New Yorkers "ordered" to stay in their homes in anticipation of the blizzard that wasn't. Shelter in place has become the watch-phrase under the tyranny of the nanny state over the growing herd-like fearfulness of so many of today's Americans.
 |
| Paul Revere |
Living under the care of a nanny has its place among some of our children, but, continuing the relationship after a child has reached adulthood, would be strange at the very least. And if the nanny is a psychopathic Amazon shrew, and the former child has been intimidated beyond any dream of self-assertion, that relationship has become bizarre. Sick.
Thinking of Revere, Dawes and the Minute Men, one can hardly avoid the sense of shock in drawing the contrast between 18th Century American patriots' passion for independence and 21st Century New Englanders cowed into submission in the trail of the Boston bombing. Or, more recently, the lack of protest from New Yorkers "ordered" to stay in their homes in anticipation of the blizzard that wasn't. Shelter in place has become the watch-phrase under the tyranny of the nanny state over the growing herd-like fearfulness of so many of today's Americans.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
There is no Serious Problem -- Social, Political or Economic -- that is not Either Caused by or Made Worse by Big Government
Read more!
For a number of years now I have been posing the title statement as a question. In print and in conversation. Crickets and bullfrogs; the query might just as well have been rhetorical. Few have responded, and no one has ever offered an apposite answer. Big-government types occasionally make an attempt, but only after they've changed the question to suit a prepared answer. The most common response, for example, is to reply that government does some things right, which I've never denied and which is entirely outside the scope of the question.
 | ||
| The Course of Empire Destruction (Thos. Cole, 1836) |
For a number of years now I have been posing the title statement as a question. In print and in conversation. Crickets and bullfrogs; the query might just as well have been rhetorical. Few have responded, and no one has ever offered an apposite answer. Big-government types occasionally make an attempt, but only after they've changed the question to suit a prepared answer. The most common response, for example, is to reply that government does some things right, which I've never denied and which is entirely outside the scope of the question.
Friday, April 5, 2013
Big Government's "Problem" Racket
Read more!
If government is the problem, why would government want to solve it? Think about it.
Since Marxist-leaning John Dewey's educational reforms took hold in America, our citizens have been conditioned to turn to government when difficulties arise. It was a long transition from the instinctive habit of individualism and self-reliance that held on stubbornly from pioneer times through the late 50's. Vestiges of America's independent spirit remain (as seen in the Tea Party, Tenth Amendment initiatives and scattered patriot groups sandwiched between the coasts), but recent social, political and economic developments in America suggest that self-reliance is now more relic that viable force. We turn to government.
 |
| Understanding the Rackets |
If government is the problem, why would government want to solve it? Think about it.
Since Marxist-leaning John Dewey's educational reforms took hold in America, our citizens have been conditioned to turn to government when difficulties arise. It was a long transition from the instinctive habit of individualism and self-reliance that held on stubbornly from pioneer times through the late 50's. Vestiges of America's independent spirit remain (as seen in the Tea Party, Tenth Amendment initiatives and scattered patriot groups sandwiched between the coasts), but recent social, political and economic developments in America suggest that self-reliance is now more relic that viable force. We turn to government.
Sunday, March 24, 2013
"Comprehensive": Cover For Central Planners
Read more!
Comprehensive legislation -- whether emanating from a city council or the US Congress -- is bound to be destructive. The differences lie only in limits of hubris and the scale of harm. At the moment I'm thinking of the push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, the recent fiasco of healthcare reform and proposed "grand bargains" to reshape the economy. I believe the principle applies universally.
Incremental legislation, by contrast, is more targeted, manageable, easily understood, simple and transparent. Its outcomes and costs are less difficult to predict. When mistakes are made they are easier to remedy. On the other hand, incremental is harder than comprehensive. Since incremental initiatives will be elements in a larger (comprehensive) scheme, they will require careful planning, sequencing, coordinating and prioritizing. Once implemented and evaluated in action, an element may indicate the need to revise parts of the plan not yet launched.
 |
| Alter to Reason |
Comprehensive legislation -- whether emanating from a city council or the US Congress -- is bound to be destructive. The differences lie only in limits of hubris and the scale of harm. At the moment I'm thinking of the push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, the recent fiasco of healthcare reform and proposed "grand bargains" to reshape the economy. I believe the principle applies universally.
Incremental legislation, by contrast, is more targeted, manageable, easily understood, simple and transparent. Its outcomes and costs are less difficult to predict. When mistakes are made they are easier to remedy. On the other hand, incremental is harder than comprehensive. Since incremental initiatives will be elements in a larger (comprehensive) scheme, they will require careful planning, sequencing, coordinating and prioritizing. Once implemented and evaluated in action, an element may indicate the need to revise parts of the plan not yet launched.
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Tea Party Terrorism
Read more!
I was recently dismayed to learn that, as a Tea Party member, I am, per se, a terrorist. Well, a potential terrorist anyway. And that revelation on no less authority than the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). [1]
A report commissioned by DHS called Hot Spots of US Terrorism tells us exactly who the terrorists are:
 | |
| Che Guevara |
I was recently dismayed to learn that, as a Tea Party member, I am, per se, a terrorist. Well, a potential terrorist anyway. And that revelation on no less authority than the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). [1]
A report commissioned by DHS called Hot Spots of US Terrorism tells us exactly who the terrorists are:
Extreme Right-Wing: groups that believe that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent (for some the threat is from a specific ethnic, racial, or religious group), and believe in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism. Groups may also be fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation), anti-global, suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty, and believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Voter ID is Clearly Discriminatory
Read more!
Laws that require careful verification of a voter's identity discriminate not so much against blacks, Hispanics or other ethnic groups and the poor as against an entire political class -- cheaters. Known also as Democrats. [1] Polls indicate that as many as 80% of the American public (including many of those said to be injured) favor stringent voter ID laws. The Marxist-Progressive Left, however, behind lamentations and crocodile tears, stands in utter contempt of the righteous public will. Citing a litany of imagined (and therefore real) abuses of helpless 'victims', they howl with feigned outrage. If strawmen, in company with the dead, could vote, Marxists would never lose another election.
 |
| Karl Marx |
Laws that require careful verification of a voter's identity discriminate not so much against blacks, Hispanics or other ethnic groups and the poor as against an entire political class -- cheaters. Known also as Democrats. [1] Polls indicate that as many as 80% of the American public (including many of those said to be injured) favor stringent voter ID laws. The Marxist-Progressive Left, however, behind lamentations and crocodile tears, stands in utter contempt of the righteous public will. Citing a litany of imagined (and therefore real) abuses of helpless 'victims', they howl with feigned outrage. If strawmen, in company with the dead, could vote, Marxists would never lose another election.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Evaluating The Republican Field
Read more!
In company with many Tea Party conservatives, I am not particularly sanguine about the current field of Republican candidates. But my choice at this point is not a difficult one to make. Simple elimination leaves me supporting only Rick Santorum. A year ago I would not have thought it possible, but things change. The candidates currently in the early lead are not, in my view, core conservatives. If either makes the nomination cut, I will vote for him in the general election. With all the enthusiasm I felt for John McCain; maybe a tad more...
The big talking-point issue with establishment Republicans in general (and other wobbly conservatives) is "electability". A combination of hubris and elitism causes too many to think it is a knowable trait. Makes them confident they know what the electorate will decide in November. A conceit of known and would-be pundits everywhere. I think more in terms of principle than what is believed to be the most likely outcome. Let me explain.
In company with many Tea Party conservatives, I am not particularly sanguine about the current field of Republican candidates. But my choice at this point is not a difficult one to make. Simple elimination leaves me supporting only Rick Santorum. A year ago I would not have thought it possible, but things change. The candidates currently in the early lead are not, in my view, core conservatives. If either makes the nomination cut, I will vote for him in the general election. With all the enthusiasm I felt for John McCain; maybe a tad more...
The big talking-point issue with establishment Republicans in general (and other wobbly conservatives) is "electability". A combination of hubris and elitism causes too many to think it is a knowable trait. Makes them confident they know what the electorate will decide in November. A conceit of known and would-be pundits everywhere. I think more in terms of principle than what is believed to be the most likely outcome. Let me explain.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Human Nature
Read more!
Human nature is imperfect, and it is unchangeable. The failure of the naive to acknowledge and accept those two simple, yet elemental facts leads inevitably to grief.
But grief does not discourage idealists; when their schemes fail they see only error in planning and execution, never questioning the possibility of -- nor their own faith in -- achieving a perfect end-state.
Utopian Dreams
The belief that men are capable of creating a perfect society is an old one, attested in Biblical writings and in Plato's vision, articulated in his Republic.
That vision echoed through the Middle Ages and persisted, with growing momentum, into the current era. Along the way it found expression in Thomas Moore's Utopia (most famously), in the writings of Rousseau and in the early codification of communist socialism by Marx and Engels in reaction to the Industrial Revolution and the rise of capitalism. [1]
 | |
| Utopia |
Human nature is imperfect, and it is unchangeable. The failure of the naive to acknowledge and accept those two simple, yet elemental facts leads inevitably to grief.
But grief does not discourage idealists; when their schemes fail they see only error in planning and execution, never questioning the possibility of -- nor their own faith in -- achieving a perfect end-state.
Utopian DreamsThe belief that men are capable of creating a perfect society is an old one, attested in Biblical writings and in Plato's vision, articulated in his Republic.
That vision echoed through the Middle Ages and persisted, with growing momentum, into the current era. Along the way it found expression in Thomas Moore's Utopia (most famously), in the writings of Rousseau and in the early codification of communist socialism by Marx and Engels in reaction to the Industrial Revolution and the rise of capitalism. [1]
Saturday, January 21, 2012
The Historical Roots of Statism in America
Read more!
Opposing Statism: The Incomplete Conservative Argument
Until recently, I had never been satisfied with with conventional explanations of the steady rise of American statism. Within the conservative pundit class there seems to be general agreement (or, at least, emphasis) that beginnings lay in the presidencies of Roosevelt, Taft and Wilson and the rise of the Progressives. To be sure, anti-Jeffersonian policies flourished in their administrations as it later did with F.D.R., Lyndon Johnson. But the nagging question for me was how, after the Founding period, did this trend -- more or less suddenly -- emerge? Say with Theodore Roosevelt...? So recent? What about the Hamiltonians, the Federalist Party? Some of our conservative voices, Glenn Beck, for example, will talk about Alexander Hamilton (a good start), but then they seem compelled to leap over a big chunk of history to the late Nineteenth Century. Why is that? What are they avoiding?
Opposing Statism: The Incomplete Conservative Argument
Until recently, I had never been satisfied with with conventional explanations of the steady rise of American statism. Within the conservative pundit class there seems to be general agreement (or, at least, emphasis) that beginnings lay in the presidencies of Roosevelt, Taft and Wilson and the rise of the Progressives. To be sure, anti-Jeffersonian policies flourished in their administrations as it later did with F.D.R., Lyndon Johnson. But the nagging question for me was how, after the Founding period, did this trend -- more or less suddenly -- emerge? Say with Theodore Roosevelt...? So recent? What about the Hamiltonians, the Federalist Party? Some of our conservative voices, Glenn Beck, for example, will talk about Alexander Hamilton (a good start), but then they seem compelled to leap over a big chunk of history to the late Nineteenth Century. Why is that? What are they avoiding?
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
European Riots and the Vision of Thomas Hobbes
Read more!
The rioting we have recently seen in Great Britain, Greece, Sweden, France and parts of Germany (not to mention the emergence of American "flash mobs") gives us a window into the future. A future that will surely come if the West persists in its determination to commit cultural suicide. The violence of mobs also invites us to look at the past, and, indeed at most of the world around us today.
Of the several points to be covered here I want to place special emphasis on this one: most of us in the West have lived so well for so long that we do not appreciate how fortunate we are. And we don't recognize than we are a tiny island in a vast sea of human predators who understand only existential conflict and brutality. They exist in established states which attempt to conceal murders, starvation, slave prisons and the near-total loss of liberty, and they exist openly in the killing fields of Rwanda and other African states. What good people know in these places we do not -- what it means to live in constant fear of other human beings.
The rioting we have recently seen in Great Britain, Greece, Sweden, France and parts of Germany (not to mention the emergence of American "flash mobs") gives us a window into the future. A future that will surely come if the West persists in its determination to commit cultural suicide. The violence of mobs also invites us to look at the past, and, indeed at most of the world around us today.
Of the several points to be covered here I want to place special emphasis on this one: most of us in the West have lived so well for so long that we do not appreciate how fortunate we are. And we don't recognize than we are a tiny island in a vast sea of human predators who understand only existential conflict and brutality. They exist in established states which attempt to conceal murders, starvation, slave prisons and the near-total loss of liberty, and they exist openly in the killing fields of Rwanda and other African states. What good people know in these places we do not -- what it means to live in constant fear of other human beings.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Wanted: Strong, Artilculate Men Of Principle
Read more!
In the current political war over the US debt ceiling and reductions in spending, I find myself more than slightly annoyed by the want of a certain kind of courage on the part of establishment Republicans. John Boehner, Speaker of the House comes to mind [1]. Like others of his experience in politics, he is foremost a pragmatic man. He weighs his options and carefully considers their political consequences. Pragmatic men are precisely the kind who are needed to conduct the day-to-day business of government, but only so long as two conditions are met. The first is that their political opponents act in good faith, and second, is that there not be an issue of such magnitude that the future of the nation is in peril. Neither condition is currently satisfied by the current administration and the Democrat members of congress. It is no longer the time for leadership to remain in the hands of moderate pragmatists. Sorely needed are men of principle with the political will and courage to stand fast by their values and those of the American people.
In the current political war over the US debt ceiling and reductions in spending, I find myself more than slightly annoyed by the want of a certain kind of courage on the part of establishment Republicans. John Boehner, Speaker of the House comes to mind [1]. Like others of his experience in politics, he is foremost a pragmatic man. He weighs his options and carefully considers their political consequences. Pragmatic men are precisely the kind who are needed to conduct the day-to-day business of government, but only so long as two conditions are met. The first is that their political opponents act in good faith, and second, is that there not be an issue of such magnitude that the future of the nation is in peril. Neither condition is currently satisfied by the current administration and the Democrat members of congress. It is no longer the time for leadership to remain in the hands of moderate pragmatists. Sorely needed are men of principle with the political will and courage to stand fast by their values and those of the American people.Friday, July 22, 2011
What the Debt Battle Really Means to America
Read more!
The outcome of the pitched battle now underway in Congress will be of enormous importance to America's future. Though nominally concerned with fiscal and economic matters, it is much, much more than that. At issue is nothing less than the peoples' sovereignty.
In earlier essays (notably here) I have remarked that the behavior of the current president, his leaders in the house and senate and his allies in the Executive branch is stunning for its arrogance -- its contempt for the majority of Americans. Add to that, and in concert, the same arrogance of the legacy media [1], K12 and academe, Hollywood, labor unions, the "permanent government" bureaucracies and many of the nation's courts, and we have to ask ourselves if they know something we don't. What might that be?
The outcome of the pitched battle now underway in Congress will be of enormous importance to America's future. Though nominally concerned with fiscal and economic matters, it is much, much more than that. At issue is nothing less than the peoples' sovereignty.
In earlier essays (notably here) I have remarked that the behavior of the current president, his leaders in the house and senate and his allies in the Executive branch is stunning for its arrogance -- its contempt for the majority of Americans. Add to that, and in concert, the same arrogance of the legacy media [1], K12 and academe, Hollywood, labor unions, the "permanent government" bureaucracies and many of the nation's courts, and we have to ask ourselves if they know something we don't. What might that be?
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
The Left Deals in Good Faith: A Dangerous Assumption
Read more!
There is an on-going argument among conservatives that Obama and the Progressives are simply misguided and ignorant, on the one hand, or that they are deliberately bent on America's destruction on the other. That argument is perhaps best exemplified by the thinking of Michael Medved in the first case and that of Rush Limbaugh in the second. I believe Limbaugh is correct.
Both men are deeply rooted in the Western Tradition's norms of civil society, and that is a good thing. Limbaugh, however, is canny enough to recognize that Progressives, while careful to appear otherwise, entertain no such notions. They are deconstructionists whose sole motivation is the will to power, and they well understand that their ends can only be achieved by the calculated and deliberate dissolution of American society and its roots in the heritage of the West.
Mr. Medved, like other "moderate" conservatives, naively -- and dangerously -- assumes that the Hard Left upholds the same values and plays by the same rules honored by the Right. He fails to see that Progressives have launched upon a course of triangulation in aid of division and conquest: the fascist "third way" [1].
There is an on-going argument among conservatives that Obama and the Progressives are simply misguided and ignorant, on the one hand, or that they are deliberately bent on America's destruction on the other. That argument is perhaps best exemplified by the thinking of Michael Medved in the first case and that of Rush Limbaugh in the second. I believe Limbaugh is correct.
Both men are deeply rooted in the Western Tradition's norms of civil society, and that is a good thing. Limbaugh, however, is canny enough to recognize that Progressives, while careful to appear otherwise, entertain no such notions. They are deconstructionists whose sole motivation is the will to power, and they well understand that their ends can only be achieved by the calculated and deliberate dissolution of American society and its roots in the heritage of the West.
Mr. Medved, like other "moderate" conservatives, naively -- and dangerously -- assumes that the Hard Left upholds the same values and plays by the same rules honored by the Right. He fails to see that Progressives have launched upon a course of triangulation in aid of division and conquest: the fascist "third way" [1].
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Obama vs. Arizona: It Begins
Read more!
Actually, it has already begun but so far without clear resolution. I am referring to a definitive showdown between the central government and the states. Conflict between the states and the federal government has been escalating for some time in the form of de facto nullification on the part of some states and the rapidly increasing evidence of contempt for constitutional limitations on the part of the federal government.
Perhaps the best-known current examples of nullification center around the refusal of states to enforce laws pertaining to immigration (sanctuary cities) and to state legalization of medical marijuana -- both in direct conflict with federal law. Those issues have been before federal courts and found some legal resolution, generally favoring central government. But federal court rulings against the states have had virtually no effect, and the liberal Washington political class has not evinced enthusiasm for enforcement of laws (especially immigration) when violations coincide with its political ambitions. (1)
Actually, it has already begun but so far without clear resolution. I am referring to a definitive showdown between the central government and the states. Conflict between the states and the federal government has been escalating for some time in the form of de facto nullification on the part of some states and the rapidly increasing evidence of contempt for constitutional limitations on the part of the federal government.
Perhaps the best-known current examples of nullification center around the refusal of states to enforce laws pertaining to immigration (sanctuary cities) and to state legalization of medical marijuana -- both in direct conflict with federal law. Those issues have been before federal courts and found some legal resolution, generally favoring central government. But federal court rulings against the states have had virtually no effect, and the liberal Washington political class has not evinced enthusiasm for enforcement of laws (especially immigration) when violations coincide with its political ambitions. (1)
Sacred Ground: The Lincoln Myth
Read more!
Preface
For some of us the time comes when we are forced to recognize that much of what we have been taught -- what is "common knowledge" -- is simply untrue. That is the case, I believe, to some extent in all the academic disciplines but perhaps less so in the hard sciences than the soft sciences and liberal arts. Here, I am concerned with history, which seems to be the subject of more ideological tampering than other disciplines.
In this essay I assert that the commonly accepted history -- the orthodoxy -- of the American Civil War period and the persona of Abraham Lincoln are largely innocent of salient fact, intellectual honesty and the application of common sense. Further, I will argue that Lincoln's abuse of constitutional powers did great violence to Jeffersonian view of federalism and ultimately became the template for contemporary statism.
Preface
For some of us the time comes when we are forced to recognize that much of what we have been taught -- what is "common knowledge" -- is simply untrue. That is the case, I believe, to some extent in all the academic disciplines but perhaps less so in the hard sciences than the soft sciences and liberal arts. Here, I am concerned with history, which seems to be the subject of more ideological tampering than other disciplines.
In this essay I assert that the commonly accepted history -- the orthodoxy -- of the American Civil War period and the persona of Abraham Lincoln are largely innocent of salient fact, intellectual honesty and the application of common sense. Further, I will argue that Lincoln's abuse of constitutional powers did great violence to Jeffersonian view of federalism and ultimately became the template for contemporary statism.
Friday, June 18, 2010
The Gulf Cleanup: Government Incompetence?
Read more!
Beyond the context of an objective, competence cannot be measured. For example, imagine a case in which a large tree is to be brought down in a short time and with a minimum human effort; here, we have defined an objective. Next, imagine three woodcutters, each given his choice of tools for the purpose of felling the tree. The workman who chooses a power chainsaw will be seen as more competent than one who chooses and axe. The one who chooses a scout knife will be seen as least competent.
Beyond the context of an objective, competence cannot be measured. For example, imagine a case in which a large tree is to be brought down in a short time and with a minimum human effort; here, we have defined an objective. Next, imagine three woodcutters, each given his choice of tools for the purpose of felling the tree. The workman who chooses a power chainsaw will be seen as more competent than one who chooses and axe. The one who chooses a scout knife will be seen as least competent.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
The Fundamental Significance of the Tea Party Phenomenon
Read more!
O.K., the title seems pretentious; the use of the word "fundamental" in context may suggest that I am laying claim to some special insight. Maybe, maybe not. That's for the reader to decide.
In short, I think what is most important in the Tea Party movement is unity; unity that transcends, and may ultimately overcome, the politically-driven balkanization of America. (1)
This unity, as I see it, is certainly not a lock-step agreement on most issues, but it seems clear that there is a consensus on certain principles, ideas and approaches strong enough to trump other areas of disagreement. It is the unity suggested by e pluribus unum.
O.K., the title seems pretentious; the use of the word "fundamental" in context may suggest that I am laying claim to some special insight. Maybe, maybe not. That's for the reader to decide.
In short, I think what is most important in the Tea Party movement is unity; unity that transcends, and may ultimately overcome, the politically-driven balkanization of America. (1)
This unity, as I see it, is certainly not a lock-step agreement on most issues, but it seems clear that there is a consensus on certain principles, ideas and approaches strong enough to trump other areas of disagreement. It is the unity suggested by e pluribus unum.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)