On 7/11/2020 12:50 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sat, 2020-07-11 at 06:32 -0600, Eric Broch wrote:
Obama was a community organizer, and that's what community organizers
do. They stir up trouble where no trouble exists. This is a Marxist
tactic to overturn a society in the school of Saul Alinsky (Author:
'Rules for Radicals').
Maybe so, but one thing I know it that the people were not fooled by
their Warsaw Pact governments. They knew very well that what they got
was not what they were promised.
I was in Chechoslovakia when Solidarity was the name of the game on
Poland and the Berlin Wall hadn't yet fallen. We met a lot of young East
Germans who were holidaying there because it was the only country they
could get holiday visas for. The one thing we heard from these young
East Germans at some point in a conversation was a variation on "Of
course we know about Marx and his brand of Communism because we had to
study that in school. It sounds wonderful: we just wish we had it in our
country".
We knew then that something was about to change soon, so weren't
surprised when the Wall came down.
Anyway: that was realpolitik. Political correctness is not realpolitik,
even slightly. Its a pity George Orwell isn't around now.
One does not concede ground to radicals one punishes them because
they are intent on destroying anything civilized.
I don't think you have the faintest idea of what a radical is.
Martin
Well, if we're going to discuss whether I know what I'm talking about
maybe I should ask whether there is a standard by which we can judge? Is
the standard simply the opinions of men, or is there a higher standard?
Obviously, I believe there is a higher standard and anyone who departs
from that standard in their thinking is a radical. There are varying
degrees of radicalism and varying boundaries among the radicals.
With SA I'm certain that the founders had NO evil motives when borrowing
and using the terms 'whitelist' and 'blacklist.' I assume that the
motive was to create and maintain software helpful to all men regardless
of race. Innocent of any evil intent they most likely didn't give it a
second thought. They are now being swayed into thinking that each one of
them had evil motives all along and that those evil motives have to do
with their whiteness. If this is not racism--a form of radicalism--I
don't know what is. The normal person looks at the words and assumes no
racial slur was intended since, again, the software is intended to help
all alike. The SA team now made aware of their "inherent racism" and
"white privilege" by these radicals will are now bent on placation while
no wrong was ever committed. How does one placate an irrational person,
a radical? The only ones who try are irrational themselves. As is
obvious in the U.S. right now the radical is not concerned with truth,
justice, or reason, only control. Yes I can tell what a radical is by
comparing their deeds and speech to a higher standard, a moral standard,
if you will, a standard that does not change at whim.
Whether your young East German acquaintances knew it or not they were
under a form of Marxism in East Germany. The same is true in China
today. China is a form of Marxist ideology with minor variations. Of
course there will be differing degrees of oppression between Marxist's
nations making one preferable to another.
