Friday, January 6, 2012

When Liberalism Stood for Something

Billy Jack was a badass liberal, fighting for the poor and oppressed and administering spectacular martial arts beatdowns to their oppressors.  We didn't have a lot of blacks out west in the 60's and early 70's; Indians were the oppressed minority, and Billy Jack kicked big-time bigot ass in their defense.  I love his reverse crescents to the face and his leg sweeps were awesome.  As a youngster in the mid 70's I wore a black hat and a denim jacket because I wanted to be just like him...




Tom Laughlin, the actor, writer and independent producer who wrote and starred in the Billy Jack movies, is himself an impressive man; a Jungian who lives out his faith in God and who independently produced his movies. Before he became ill, he wrote extensively on some pretty deep stuff. He is also a liberal icon who has been a sincere champion of the people his entire adult life.

Like progressives before him, he fought the fights that needed to be fought. Today, the movement lacks big causes like civil rights or women's sufferage, but it keeps fighting anyway, not with fists and guns like Billy Jack, but with bullhorns and 1960's retro hippie agitprop and tired chants. And in a Marxian tragic farce twist, liberals now fight for the government establishment, not against it.

Liberalism writ large is Dead

The only big issue left is to pull the rug out from under the corporate welfare queens and the corrupt DC grandees who rail against them by day and then slip in through their back doors at night. 

Self-described liberals would do well to focus on the root of the word they stole: Liberty. Defend it in each person's life. Freedom for each of us to pursue our own happiness, to let our freak flags fly without 15 government permits.
If Americans cannot sell raw milk to willing buyers without risking a SWAT-team raid, then what area of life is left to individual choice? (Scrooge-Like Predictions)
Imagine an independent neighborhood economy based upon barter. Governments hate that, and pear-shaped regulators spill over with sadistic glee at punishing independent daycare providers, home-churchers and free-lance food vendors. Imagine abolishing imminent domain and creating a nation where corporations cannot bribe politicians to seize the property of free citizens.

Marry 15 gay lovers, smoke dope all day, own 100 guns. I don't care what you do with your life so long as it doesn't impinge on my liberties and the government doesn't confiscate my money to pay for your mistakes. Buy raw milk, sell raw milk. Start a business this afternoon based upon a brainstorm you got this morning. Do it without teams of lawyers, and hire people without the bureaucratic red tape.
Already, most Americans hand over about half their income to government. Just for fun, try to name a few areas of life that aren’t taxed or regulated by the government. The government can take away your children based merely on assertions of abuse, or take your property and give it to a developer. You cannot build anything or remodel anything in your home, start a business, hire someone, drive anywhere, buy a firearm, make a political donation or do much of anything without being subject to myriad rules, regulations, taxes, fees, inspections, permits.  (Scrooge-Like Predictions
So my liberal friends, if you want to attract people to your cause, drop the big government statism, stop begging for "free" crap, and start walking and talking like Billy Jack. Like those wild horses galloping across the western plains, people gotta be free. 

78 comments:

beamish said...

I've heard a printed copy of all the federal, state, and local gun-related laws and ordinances in America tightly bound and stuffed under a shirt will stop a bullet.

Always On Watch said...

Wow! That song really takes me back to my college days -- when I played the 45 rpm over and over again on my "hi fi" player that looked like a suitcase.

Never watched the films, though.

Old-fashioned liberalism is indeed dead -- and has left behind ever burgeoning statism.

98ZJUSMC said...

beamish said...
I've heard a printed copy of all the federal, state, and local gun-related laws and ordinances in America tightly bound and stuffed under a shirt will stop a bullet.


Probably stop an 88.

republicanmother said...

It's a fact that almost all liberals now are shills for corporate socialism, the subject of a post I'm working up. You can see it by who donates to the campaign. They're working for the "man"; true liberals are a rarity, maybe Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich.
When push comes to shove, a substantial number of "conservatives" are all about oppressive regs too, but then their campaigns are funded by the same peeps, so there you go..

Ducky's here said...

Billy Jack, my those were terrible films. You can stick them into the general vigilante movement that Dirty Harry made big. Unfortunately the rest of them didn't have Don Siegel directing.

But let's get down to it my Libertarian friends. In the end, it is a system that reduces each human being to an object whose value is nothing beyond what it is worth in the market. Count me out. Nothing but the standard Calvinist crap.

dmarks said...

Ducky: At least the people get to control market decisions. In socialism, each human being is an object subject to the whims and valuations of the ruling elite.

bunkerville said...

But is there anything better than Clint and his statement "well,punk, did I shoot 5 bullets or 6? I honestly don't remember, so ,what is it? Make my day" Anyone remember the answer?

Ducky's here said...

Nonsense dmarks, you want us back in the days of the robber barons whether you know it or not.

Now a socialist government would be interested in a more even distribution of power. So you reject exactly what you claim to desire.

Silverfiddle said...

@ Ducky: In the end, it is a system that reduces each human being to an object whose value is nothing beyond what it is worth in the market.

Remove "market" and replace with "state" and you've described socialism to a T. It is a dehumanizing ideology, as evinced by history.

There is nothing dehumanizing about people having sovereignty over their own lives.

thedaleygator said...

Bravo! Well said!

dmarks said...

ducky said: "you want us back in the days of the robber barons whether you know it or not."

I know exactly what I am saying. And most of the "robber barons" only had great power due to government intervention and sweetheart deals. Not a free market. No, I do not want to go back to that.

"Now a socialist government would be interested in a more even distribution of power."

Of course. Perfect example is North Korea, the most socialist nation on the planet. Like Cuba, poverty is universally distributed (except among the few ruling elites)

"So you reject exactly what you claim to desire."

Not at all. I support freedom and oppose fascism.

Silverfiddle said...

@ Dmarks: And most of the "robber barons" only had great power due to government intervention and sweetheart deals. Not a free market. No, I do not want to go back to that.

Yes! Rock on, brother!

And it is worth noting those "robber barons" used their great power and wealth to lower prices, allowing poor people access to materials and services previously out of their grasp.

dmarks said...

It's not hard to do some research on this. I guess Ducky did not.

See this page, for example. A large proportion of these are railroad 'robber barons', who were beneficiaries not of the free market, but of such government intervention as "eminent domain".

Leticia said...

Silver, don't shoot me, but I have never heard of Billy Jack? Loved the action on the video, though.

You gave some excellent advice to the liberals, let's see if they take the bait.

I fail to understand why they want big government? Do they enjoy being treated like little animals in a pet store or zoo? Because that's the kind of picture I envision when I think of total government control. We would be at the mercy of our "handlers."

Silverfiddle said...

Leticia: I can't believe you've never heard of Billy Jack???!!!

Seriously, it's an old movie, and I have a peculiarity of enjoying movies, music and tv of my parents' and grandparents' age.

I think too many sincere liberals see it all all or nothing. They view us as bomb-throwing nihilists who hate government and want to destroy it, which not true at all.

Ducky's here said...

I'll tell you , Silverfiddle, I think the robber baron era is one of the less well understood periods in our history.
It certainly isn't part of the average persons curriculum.

My take, government was very friendly to the barons and we only have to look at Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad to see that government helped performed the task that the monopolists were achieving by force.

For your reading shelf:
"The First Tycoon: The Life of Cornelius Vanderbilt" - T. J. Stiles

Helps flesh things out. Highly recommended.

beamish said...

My view of socialism vs. libertarianism is that socialists want to own the means of production and libertarians insist people ARE the means of production.

I don't want to own anybody but myself.

Silverfiddle said...

Ducky: I'll admit I'm no expert, but Dmarks is right, and it appears you agree as well. They gained position by getting special favors from the government. Libertarians are against that.

dmarks said...

ducky said: "My take, government was very friendly to the barons and we only have to look at Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad to see that government helped performed the task that the monopolists were achieving by force."

Well, yes. That is what I have been saying all along. That's not the free market at all. And yet you used the robber barons as an example of what the free market would bring us?

Ducky's here said...

Yes, Silverfiddle, we agree that the government eased the way. However, the barons would have had their way regardless. There was little effective resistance.

We could all benefit from going back and looking at the rise of labor resistance that eventually led to the Haymarket riots. The state has been Kapital's enforcement arm for a long time. Going back even before the Molly McGuires.

Ducky's here said...

But dmarks, the issue is that government or not, the free (LMFAO) market leads to monopoly and inevitably oppression.

Now, does a socialist environment lead to the same thing as Isaiah Berlin suggests. I have to take his warning seriously and it leaves a serious dilemma.

In the end libertarians are equally utopian dreamers and dialog is not possible until these limitations are admitted and understood. Then we may reach a useful compromise.

The interesting aspect is that aside from the religious fundamentalists our goals aren't all that dissimilar.

dmarks said...

ducky said: "the free (LMFAO) market leads to monopoly and inevitably oppression."

Most monopolies I can think of exist BECAUSE of government intervention and regulation. Regulation that really has little to do with protecting consumers, but has to do with limiting competition.

"In the end libertarians are equally utopian dreamers and dialog is not possible until these limitations are admitted and understood. Then we may reach a useful compromise."

Perhaps they are utopian dreamers. But the ideas have a lot of promise, and don't seem dangerous at all. Its a much better track record than Marxists. There's a high chance of the Killing Fields when their ideas are tried.

Ducky's here said...

Oh my, the sound you here is Beulah the Buzzer indicating a complete failure to move beyond right wing radio talking points.

Now if we can proceed let's link the robber baron age with Teddy Roosevelt's trust busting and get a wider perspective on the issue.

dmarks said...

Ducky said: "indicating a complete failure to move beyond right wing radio talking points."

Actually, I referred to no radio talking points. Care to bother to come up with a coherent argument instead of a lame insult like that? Can you refute anything?

Teresa said...

The name Billy Jack sounds familiar but other than that I hadn't heard of him before now. He sounds like a good guy. The problem with progressives is their entitlement mentality wrapped around their attitude that nothing that happens is their fault. They blame others for their mistakes.

Silverfiddle said...

@Ducky: the free (LMFAO) market leads to monopoly and inevitably oppression.

Where?

I see Apple challenging Microsoft, I see multiple car, oil, electronics companies, etc...

But back to the subject of this post. So, you are for the continual intervention of the states in each of our lives? You're happy with big government right now?

Ducky's here said...

You see Apple challenging Microsoft? Where?

Apple has moved to consumer electronics and virtually abandoned the desktop.

Checked in with the few commercial entities that are trying to administer Lion? Apple has given that arena to Microsoft, a company that has been pretty dead for almost a decade.

Ducky's here said...

Am I happy with government as it is?

Have you been paying attention?

I'm also not happy with an analysis that assumes government can't evolve and isn't dynamic.

Now how do we get the corporate money out of it?

dmarks said...

"You see Apple challenging Microsoft? Where?"

Actually Apple and Microsoft are just two of many desktop OS alternatives. The market is wide open. Sure, one or two have the lion's share. but that is because people choose what they need.

Apple has moved to consumer electronics and virtually abandoned the desktop.

Selling millions and millions. that is not abandonment. Didn't take long to find this bit of news: "Apple's (AAPL) computer line celebrated a unusually merry Christmas in its first fiscal quarter of 2011, selling more than 4 million Macs for the first time it its history."

dmarks said...

Ducky asked: "Now how do we get the corporate money out of [government]?"

Now that is a good question. I want a lot less corporate money in government. Corporate taxes are ridiculously high in the US and it forces companies to outsource and downsize. This money would be best kept by the companies to use for something productive, rather than be plundered and held by government.

So yes! Lets keep this money in the hands of business where it will do more good.

Ducky's here said...

On the matter of Jung. I have never been able to forgive Jung for derailing Fellini.

Once he started getting heavily into Jungian thought we get "Juliet of the Spirits". So the question remains, was it Jung or the switch to color that derailed on of the truly great directors?


Dmarks - effective corporate tax rates in America are the lowest in the industrialized world. Mind you, that's the effective rate.

dmarks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Ducky,

Without malice, accusation, trickery or rancor I ask you -- as I have numerous times before -- please to give us your ideas as ro what would constitute a "proper" relationship between government and industry?

I see people making assumptions all the time, which you deflect with "reparté" but nothing substantive.

Despite our ritualistic exchange of insults, I don't dismiss you as a worthless nuisance the way many others do. Neither does SilverFiddle.

My personal opinion is that you've been playing a "character part" for our benefit.

I wish you'd be more serious, and let us know your honest desires for our future.

How about it?

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

Good post, SilverFidle -- as usual.

I enjoyed reading it.

~ FT

brianduffy said...

You mean before the extreme loons of the Tea Party totally destroyed the GOP?

Silverfiddle said...

@ Ducky: Now how do we get the corporate money out of it?

Excellent question. I too ponder it.

Ducky: Sincere question: You ran down Tom Laughlin's movies. Do you really consider them "terrible?"

It's not high art, I grant you, and my tastes run to the low brow, but always thought the man did a good job putting his vision down in an impactful way. Look at where they are hauling him off in cuffs, with the old Spanish church with the cross on top in the back ground...

It reminds me of Latin American leftists, who rather than saying there is no God, instead appeal to the Christian faith to make their point.

Have you heard of Violeta Parra? She was Chilean in the time of Pinochet who wrote a protest song entitled, "What would the Pope Say?" meant, of course, to shame the government leadership that all claimed to be good Catholics.

Anyway, I defer to you in all things cinematic, so I as if you see any artistry at all there? And what do you think of Tom Laughlin?

Lisa said...

The only big issue left is to pull the rug out from under the corporate welfare queens and the corrupt DC grandees who rail against them by day and then slip in through their back doors at night.

Perfect summation of what is going on today.

I loved that movie.It was a feel good hero movie unlike some of today's films that portray "gore" as art.

I remember before he kicked him him he said "I am going to take this right foot and kick you on the left side of your face"
Awesome.

KP said...

Ducky: "The interesting aspect is that aside from the religious fundamentalists our goals aren't all that dissimilar."

Damn, there is a lot of truth in that.

KP said...

I enjoyed this post as well, SF. You make some strong arguements. It is interesting on how my generations definition of "the man" has changed a bit.

On the movie -- I was 16 and driving my girlfriends three speed, 298, orange, '64 Mustang when Billy Jack came out. I didn't have two nickles but I had a lot of fun and like Billy Jack's politcs. I never have liked "the man". Unless of course I really needed him. Kind of like a doc or an great attorney!

Anonymous said...

FYI: My tastes definitely tend toward the highbrow, but would much better be described as "catholic," -- i.e universal.

Just for the record: I thoroughly enjoyed Billy Jack just as I enjoyed Walker, Texas Ranger, and used to love Robin Hood, Gunsmoke, Have Gun Will Travel, Bonnza, Perry Mason and Matlock. I LOVE seeing good guys win.

I am a huge Opera Fan, but I love Broadway Musicals of the pre-Andrew Lloyd Webber variety.

I can listen for ours to German Lieder and French Art Songs and Handel Arias sung by Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, Gerard Souzay, Elly Ameling, Hans Hotter, Thomas Allen, Arlene Auger, Frederica Von Stade, Bryn Terfel, and Cecilia Bartoli, et al.

BUT, I love Jazz, Broadway Musicals, and Cabaret Music almost as well. Nothing was more relaxing than an evening with Bobby Short and Mabel Mercer at the Carlyle, or Edith Piaf, or Alberta Hunter, Bricktop, Ella Fitzgerald, Cleo Laine and John Dankworth, Judy Garland, Elaine Stritch, Angela Lansbury (in SweeneyTodd), Gertrude Lawrence, Noel Coward or even Julie Andrews (especially in Victor/Victoria).

And I'm nuts about Gilbert and Sullivan -- as performed by the old D'Oly Carte.

My tastes in literature are pretty well rooted in nineteenth-century England and America. The French stuff is usually depressing. So is the Russian stuff, hough I dismiss neither -- just don't have Masochistic tendencies that's all. I detest most "modern" literature -- at least the kind that purports to be serious. Norman Mailer. Joseph Heller. E.L. Doctorow. PHEW! J.D. Salinger -- THAT'S okay.

Love mysteries and detective fiction. Not crazy about Westerns or Sci-Fi.

The dystopian classics we refer to all the time -- Forster, Huxley, Orwell, Atwood are not FUN, but they are ABSORBING and should be required reading.

Hear endeth Another True Confession from

~ FreeThinke

KP said...

Good stuff, FT! An excellent arts influence.

"Norman Mailer. Joseph Heller. E.L. Doctorow. PHEW! J.D. Salinger"

I thought Heller's "Catch 22" was one of the funniest things I have ever read. My girlfriend (later wife) took turns reading it out loud in the 70s. Brought tears to my eyes I laughed so hard. I wonder if it was love that made it such fun. I'll have to re-read and find out.

My wife was a muscis major when I met her and still plays jass sax and classical piano in bands; so we have seen and enjoyed many of the same things you mention.

Kid said...

Great movie Silver. I couldn't take that chick whining and crying all the time, but otherwise it had some good stuff and was pretty powerful at the time.

Jersey McJones said...

Ah, Silver, you conservatives... perpetually stuck in an imaginary past.

JMJ

Finntann said...

Wow, hadn't thought about that film in decades.

"a system that reduces each human being to an object whose value is nothing beyond what it is worth in the market"

As opposed to what? What it's worth in votes?

I'd be curious as to what your definition of value is in regards to a human being. As an avowed capitalist, I would not assign market value to a person. Salary may be dictated by market value but it certainly doesn't apply to the value of the person, only the relationship of his skills to the prevailing market.

There are worthless rich and invaluable poor people. There are rich artists whose artistic abilities are seriously questionable and poor artists who, while exceptional, will never see any recognition at all.

Take your own profession, I would call little produced in the mainstream "Art", it is mostly entertainment but despite that fact it earns tens if not hundreds of millions. The most successful involve gratuitous sex, nudity, a few explosions, and an exciting car chase and would hardly qualify as art. As entertainment it has some small value, but it is certainly something we could all live without. What would probably be considered the most artistic appeals predominately to a small segment of the market, earns little to no money, and is lost to obscurity to all but students of the profession.

So how do you assign value? By committee? If not determined by market, how? Should Fernando Botero earn the same as Luis Jimenez?

And just in case you're not familiar with the Jimenez, he created the blue bronco from hell at DIA:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/02/arts/design/02hors.html

Cheers!

Finntann said...

Imaginary past?

KP said...

JMJ doesn' think Billy Jack was real?! Ha ... my hood had a couple of Billy Jacks. The difference is that their activities landed them in county jail or state prison.

I was a poser. I only wore the hat.

Lisa said...

"Ah, Silver, you conservatives... perpetually stuck in an imaginary past."

Yeah right Jersey unlike liberals who are stuck in an imaginary future,

Leticia said...

How very true, Silver.

I grew up watching Bonanza and The Big Valley. Occasionally I saw a few films of the Lone Ranger. But no Billy Jack.

Kid said...

Pursuant to Letica's comment, The Rifleman was a great show.

KP said...

Kid: The Rifleman was one of my favorites. Soon after that Chuck Conners did a series called "Branded".

"Branded, scorned as the one who ran. What do you do when you're branded, and you know you're a man? Wherever you go for the rest of your life you must prove ... you're a man."

KP said...

Lets not forget "Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea" and "Time Tunnel".

Finntann said...

"Yeah right Jersey unlike liberals who are stuck in an imaginary future,"

And round one goes to Lisa

Anonymous said...

Anyone remember Sea Hunt with Lloyd Bridges -- the only Diver-Detective ever, as far as I know?

It was just like a good old-fashioned Western, except instead of riding a horse, Bridges rode an Aqualung.

It was -- quite literally -- really cool.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

Imaginary Future?

Imaginary Past?

I prefer to think of each one of Jersey's remarks as an Imaginary Post.

Is there any way they could be for real?

~ FT

dmarks said...

brianduffy said: "You mean before the extreme loons of the Tea Party totally destroyed the GOP?"

There's nothing extreme about that movement, and if by "destroy" you mean re-invigorating the GOP and causing them to re-take the House and advance in the Senate, well, I guess they did destroy the party!

Always On Watch said...

FreeThinke,
Anyone remember Sea Hunt with Lloyd Bridges

AOW raises her hand!

I never missed an episode.

At the time, I was refining my swimming skills, but I never could persuade my mother to let me have scuba diving lessons. **sigh**

For a time, there were a lot of folks taking scuba diving lessons and practicing in the local swimming pools before actually tackling the nearby quarry.

Always On Watch said...

Addendum....

Sea Hunt was filmed in b&w. More's the pity.

dmarks said...

Ducky: Where is your source on your claim that Apple has abandoned the desktop? The charts show massive increases in Apple Mac sales during 2011. In fact, record high sales. Analysts predict a strong 2012 and 2013 for Mac sales.

I honestly had no idea how Mac sales were when I read your claim. But seeing as how so often reality is the opposite of your claims, I decided to look it up and found, as expected, lots of information that contradicted your claim.

Jersey McJones said...

I was a big fan of the movie when I was a kid.

But let's get real here - when liberals do get angry, and sometimes violent, the righties are screaming bloody murder about how "uncivilized"and "immature" the left supposedly is, compared to those righties, so "civil" and "mature," "politely" carrying signs of Obama with a Hitler mustache.

And conservatives, who all live in an imaginary universe anyway, love to compare action-fantasy movies to real life and vice-versa. Batman is their latest favorite. Some of these movies may reflect life a little, but they are just imaginary in the end.

Really, what this is post seems to me to be about is how Silver feels liberals are not masculine enough to his liking, based, of course, on his definition of masculinity, which is being a rough-and-tumble sort of guy. That's fine if you live in rural Oklahoma, but pretty much useless if you live on the Upper East Side of Manhattan.

This whole notion of masculinity is a large part of why many men define themselves as "conservative" or "Republican." They believe it is a more "manly" thing to be. Of course, that's just stupid. You can be "manly" and be a liberated man. I'm a pretty big, tough, masculine dude, not someone most people would want to mess with, but I consider myself a feminist, an animal rights advocate, an advocate for the advancement of minorities and immigrants, and a strong believer in the Social Compact and the Safety Net.

I think a perfect example of how all this confusing masculinity with toughness is just that - confusion - when you walk into a gay bar and say something rude and stupid, then see what happens. Gays are always pictured as feminine and therefore "weak." But if you've known enough gay people - and actually knew they were gay - you'd soon discover they are among the toughest people you'd ever want to meet. They have to be. It isn't easy growing up gay in most parts of this country. It takes a lot of toughness for them to get by.

JMJ

dmarks said...

"and "mature," "politely" carrying signs of Obama with a Hitler mustache."

So, Jersey, was this OK when liberals did this in a massive way during the Bush administration, against Bush?

"This whole notion of masculinity is a large part of why many men define themselves as "conservative" or "Republican." They believe it is a more "manly" thing to be"

Seems like a wild guess on your part, one that is not very accurate. I tend to be conservative because the conservative side has a lot bettet ideas and the liberal side has some really bad ideas on a lot more things. Most conservatives I talk to, including 50% who are women (and very feminine women at that!) are like this also.

"but I consider myself a feminist, an animal rights advocate, an advocate for the advancement of minorities and immigrants, and a strong believer in the Social Compact and the Safety Net."

I believe in most of these, and am a conservative. I part company at feminism, as I believe in equal treatment regardless of gender.

I believe in human treatment of animals, but disagree with ALF and other terrorist groups. I believe in equal rights, which of course results in the advancement of minorities (no racist affirmative action necessary). I believe in a safety net, but only for the needy. This puts me at odds with modern liberals and their big push for free healthcare for the rich and other handouts for the wealthy. Those who sleep in four poster featherbeds in mansions can pay for it themselves, and don't need a "Safety net".

dmarks said...

Your last example is interesting, about the gay bar.

I wonder what would happen if you went into one and started flinging around the term "faggot", which you have apparently defined in a one-person dictionary to be a generic insult devoid of any homophobic intent.

You might get slugged by some reality if you started using this word in your unique fashion.

Silverfiddle said...

Wow, Jersey. It is interesting what you took away from this post. The Billy Jack part was just to add color (and I do like the movies and I do admire Tom Laughlin).

Here's the main point:

Imagine an independent neighborhood economy based upon barter. Governments hate that, and pear-shaped regulators spill over with sadistic glee at punishing independent daycare providers, home-churchers and free-lance food vendors. Imagine abolishing imminent domain and creating a nation where corporations cannot bribe politicians to seize the property of free citizens.

Marry 15 gay lovers, smoke dope all day, own 100 guns. I don't care what you do with your life so long as it doesn't impinge on my liberties and the government doesn't confiscate my money to pay for your mistakes. Buy raw milk, sell raw milk. Start a business this afternoon based upon a brainstorm you got this morning. Do it without teams of lawyers, and hire people without the bureaucratic red tape.

So my liberal friends, if you want to attract people to your cause, drop the big government statism, stop begging for "free" crap, and start walking and talking like Billy Jack. Like those wild horses galloping across the western plains, people gotta be free.


The karate stuff is cool, but notice I praise Laughlin's dedication to social causes and his intellectual pursuits, not that he can kick everybody's ass.

And I didn't question anyone's masculinity. Don't know how you got that out of it...

Z said...

that song gives me the chills; I sang it at a party for RCA recoding execs and went blank on the last 2 verses so I sang the first one 3 times :-) shudder.

Man, Jersey: "those 'righties' politely" carrying signs of Obama with a Hitler mustache." That's almost as silly as still accusing the TPers of spitting on black congressional members, which was proven not to have happened. Maybe ONE nut (and who knows if he was a TP member?) carried a hitler sign and it's plural now and something to hate the TPers for :-)

"I think too many sincere liberals see it all all or nothing. They view us as bomb-throwing nihilists who hate government and want to destroy it, which not true at all."

SF..so true, but they know this 'destroy gov't' SELLS with the entitlement babies the left's created when it's slung by the media...and there's frequently a tinge of that in the left's reporting (networks and CNN, MSNBC, etc.)

MK said...

Happy new year Silver, hope you have been well.

"f you want to attract people to your cause, drop the big government statism, stop begging for "free" crap, and start walking and talking like Billy Jack."

They won't, it's easier to be the useless, free-loading, whiny bitches they are these days. The heavy lifting and return to sanity will have to be done by us as usual.

Jersey McJones said...

dmarks,

"So, Jersey, was this OK when liberals did this (Hitler comparisons) in a massive way during the Bush administration, against Bush?"

Unlike you, I do not concern myself with the way people protest. I'm glad people do. I want to see common people on the street, in Washington, in Everytown America, making their voices heard. That's healthy for a Democracy, even when the protesters are stupid, or say things we don't like to hear.

"(Men associating masculinity with political identity) Seems like a wild guess on your part, one that is not very accurate. I tend to be conservative because the conservative side has a lot bettet ideas and the liberal side has some really bad ideas on a lot more things. Most conservatives I talk to, including 50% who are women (and very feminine women at that!) are like this also."

Well, anecdotes aside, as my experiences are different from yours, I recall a Cornell study that showed what seems obvious to me (Google, "Overdoing Gender: Testing the Masculine Overcompensation Thesis."), that men's political identity is influenced by the security in their masculinity. If anything, it was one of those experiments that only proved the completely predictable, like making a monkey smoke a hundred cigarettes a day.

"Your last example is interesting, about the gay bar.

I wonder what would happen if you went into one and started flinging around the term "faggot", which you have apparently defined in a one-person dictionary to be a generic insult devoid of any homophobic intent."

As long as it's in jest and the proper context, it's okay. It's a generic derogatory for someone who is behaving in a whiny or bitchy way. Funny how you constantly whine and bitch about that.

Silver,

"Imagine an independent neighborhood economy based upon barter."

I don't have to imagine it. We have that now. I trade favors and food and advice and labor and assistance with my neighbors all the time. But I live in a
modern, developed, massive nation. I depend on high technology to convenience my life and to do my job. A neighborhood-barter economy could not produce the standard of living I enjoy today.

While I completely agree that government can overreach, it is most often local and state government that intrudes on our lives, and by far the most! It is they who make all the rules about building codes, and zoning, and practices, and on and on and on. The federal government really isn't all that big in our lives. When you look at the American infrastructure and institutions around you, most of it is local and state created and maintained. Most of these rules you cite are local.

"Imagine abolishing imminent domain and creating a nation where corporations cannot bribe politicians to seize the property of free citizens."

Well, you don't have to abolish imminent domain to stop that, but then many liberals, including myself, do believe we should have some other system for development, other than ID.

"So my liberal friends, if you want to attract people to your cause, drop the big government statism, stop begging for "free" crap,"

Here you really lose it. We don't want "free crap." We want a government that is an advocate for the people and for our advancement. Regulating industry is not "statism." It is law just like all the other laws we have to protect us from wrong-doers.

"And I didn't question anyone's masculinity. Don't know how you got that out of it..."

Think about it.


Z,

"Man, Jersey: "those 'righties' politely" carrying signs of Obama with a Hitler mustache." That's almost as silly as still accusing the TPers of spitting on black congressional members, which was proven not to have happened."

Wow! They proved a negative! That's great, Z. Learn how to debate.

JMJ

dmarks said...

It was actually proven not to have happened. The incident was well documented, so it was easy to find out what happened and what did not happen.

As for the silliness about not being able to prove a negative, remember, a negative is just one re-wording away from being a positive. Negativity or positivity of anything is just a state, a description. One no different from the other.

dmarks said...

As for protesters, I am a lot more fine with them as you think. As long as they are easy to ignore.

Those that block people's ways or try to shout down others' meetings or events are not good for democracy at all. They are lowbrow thugs,

Ducky's here said...

Take your own profession, I would call little produced in the mainstream "Art", it is mostly entertainment but despite that fact it earns tens if not hundreds of millions.

------
Well entertainment is necessary if you consider "entertainment" value to be engagement. Not much purpose without it.

The situation film is in isn't great, Finntann. If you've seen Scorcese's "Hugo" you gt a good example.
In essence he considers the development of film to be largely technological. He rediscovers Melies and "improves" on it. Maybe, but the film had such a cold heart. Immediately forgettable for all its technical skill.

Then there's "The Artist". A B&W silent gets a pretty good release and it's terrific. Very funny film. Someone had faith in the contemporary audience for once.

But making a film has generally become so expensive that you have to pitch it to a very wide audience and that means sex and "action" (i.e. no suspense since action is simply the resolution of suspense, action pictures suck).

Saw a great little documentary today, "Paul Goodman Changed My Life". A biopic of the author of "Growing Up Absurd" and it helped highlight why the 60's were such a failure when they started out with such promise.

Of course film will never see anything like the French New Wave again but even then more people saw Billy Jack than saw the New Wave films combined. However, Godard had a hell of a lot more to say about contemporary culture than Billy Jerk.

Z said...

OH, my, JMJ....sorry if I struck a nerve!!
As I said, the left was all over the Tea Partiers for spitting on Democrats.. and it was proven they did not. Easy...no witnesses, videos showing they didn't.
WHat's hard to understand for you?
I'm not debating...it's just fact :-)

Silverfiddle said...

Jersey: I thought about it. And I still don't get how you think I'm challenging people's masculinity. I don't do that. Although I do martial arts and did some amateur MMA, I sure don't consider myself a badass, and I have known some gay guys that I would not want to mess with.

I agree with you that state and local governments are out of control. Tyranny is not just for the federales.

You said:

"We want a government that is an advocate for the people...

And I say, good luck with that. We've got to be our own advocates. Anyone who trusts government is a fool.

Jersey McJones said...

"As for protesters, I am a lot more fine with them as you think. As long as they are easy to ignore."

dmarks, the whole point of protesting is to not be ignored.

Z, I could not possibly care less about that. It's all nonsense, from all sides. If I was a pol walking in public, and someone spat on me, from behind in a crowd, I would not make a huge deal about it. I would assume an asshole was being an asshole and behaving like an asshole. Assholes happen.

So I really don't care about that. It's bullshit.

JMJ

KP said...

JMJ: "I'm a pretty big, tough, masculine dude, not someone most people would want to mess with, but I consider myself a feminist, an animal rights advocate, an advocate for the advancement of minorities and immigrants, and a strong believer in the Social Compact and the Safety Net."

I am the same type of guy JMJ describes. So is the majority of America. This is key.

When it comes to how the left and right hope to implement change, that is where ideologues part ways. As Ducky and SF and I have said (perhaps JMJ), using a global view (not literally, rather maths) adds context and reminds us of our similarities.

KP said...

To be clear, when I said "So is the majority of America" I was no longer describing appearing big and tough; but was describing the empathy most Americans have toward one another and a certain kindness that defines us as a people. That may be different than what we project via our broken political system.

dmarks said...

Jersey: "dmarks, the whole point of protesting is to not be ignored."

Protesting is one thing. Harassment is another. One very big important part of free speech in this country is the freedom to ignore if it if you don't like it. Protesters that can't be ignored, that harass, have crossed the line from being defenders of democracy to lowlife scum.

Jersey McJones said...

dmarks, there was a time when I personally got into a tussle with a protester, one with whom you'd probably find commonality. It's one thing to march around and be loud and peacefully solicit on the street, as annoying as that may be to some. It's another thing to traumatize people in personal trouble. I doubt you've ever been all that inconvenienced by some liberal protester.

JMJ

dmarks said...

"I doubt you've ever been all that inconvenienced by some liberal protester."

This is not a liberal or conservative thing. I have the same contempt for Run Paul supporters (Paultroons?) that in my town tried to "shut down" a rally by the Democratic governor. Surely this governor and her supporters have the right to freedom of assembly, don't they? Or the WTO protesters in Seattle that tried to "shut down" another meeting they did not like. Another instance of contempt for the right to assembly in the First Amendment.

Or there's also strikers harassing workers. Let the strikers shout, but don't let them block working people on the way to their jobs. Or abortion clinic protesters: they should say out of the way of the customers of the clinics.

Nothing right- or left- about this.

Now, I am curious about your tussle with a protester. I'm sure it is an interesting account.

Anonymous said...

ALas! Alack! For good or ill
The world is no tea party.
When issues press, voices get shrill
And indignation hearty.

This may distress the sensitive
And rouse self-righteous ire
But Life's a mess, and tends to give
Each ass a kiss of fire.


~ FreeThinke

Lisa said...

those 'righties' politely" carrying signs of Obama with a Hitler mustache." That's almost as silly as still accusing the TPers of spitting on black congressional members, which was proven not to have happened."

Nancy Pelosi-your government Representative started that rumor about the congressman getting spit on. That's your government representative the idiot entrusted with confiscating one sixth of the economy with an unclear health care bill that noboy knew what was in it until it was passed.

Not to mention the fact of no plan to pay for it.

Like I said "Imaginary Future"