Republicans such as Scott Walker have a tendency to emulate history's losers, whether it's blocking Internet access to procedures a la Mubarek, building an Iton Curtain across our southern border, or deregulation like Hoover. It's part of their DNA.
REPUBLICANS ARE SOCIAL DARWINISTS -- they believe the government should help the rich live long and prosper! THE government should let the rich exploit the working classes until they die from hard work and exhaustion!! AND should let the poor die off from starvation and disease because they will never amount to anything and are a drain on society!!!
""Social Darwinism is a belief, popular in the late Victorian era in England, America, and elsewhere, which states that the strongest or fittest should survive and flourish in society, while the weak and unfit should be allowed to die. The theory was chiefly expounded by Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), whose ethical philosophies always held an elitist view and later received a boost from the application of Darwinian ideas such as adaptation and natural selection.
According to Darwin's evolutionary theory, nature is a "kill-or-be-killed" system. Those that cannot keep up are either left behind or cut off. The strong survive, and those best suited to survival will out-live the weak.
The seeds of Social Darwinism were actually planted before the publication of Darwin's "The Origin of Species"(though of course the name didn't originate until after). Herbert Spencer, the father of Social Darwinism as an ethical theory, was thinking in terms of elitist, "might makes right" sorts of views long before Darwin published his theory. The concept of adaptation allowed Spencer to claim that the rich and powerful were better adapted to the social and economic climate of the time, and the concept of natural selection allowed him to argue that it was natural, normal, and proper for the strong to thrive at the expense of the weak. Whether it be humans, races, or the state, Spencer's thoughts were clear: "If they are sufficiently complete to live, they do live, and it is well they should live. If they are not sufficiently complete to live, they die, and it is best they die." In its simplest form, Social Darwinism follows the theory of "the strong survive," even in human issues.It is the application of the theory of natural selection to social, political, and economic issues. According to Social Darwinism, those with economic, physical, and technological strength flourish and those without are destined for extinction. This theory was used to promote the idea that the white European race was superior to others, and therefore, destined to rule over them.
Social Darwinism was used to justify numerous exploits which we classify as of dubious moral value today. Colonialism was seen as natural and inevitable; people saw natives as being weaker and more unfit to survive, and therefore felt justified in seizing land and resources. Finally, it gave the ethical nod to brutal colonial governments who used oppressive tactics against their subjects.
At the time that Spencer began to promote Social Darwinism, the technology, economy, and government of the "White European" was advanced in comparison to that of other cultures. Looking at this apparent advantage, as well as the economic and military structures, some argued that natural selection was playing out, and that the race more suited to survival was winning. Some even extended this philosophy into a micro-economic issue, claiming that social welfare programs that helped the poor and disadvantaged were contrary to nature itself. Those who reject any and all forms of charity or governmental welfare often use arguments rooted in Social Darwinism.
Social Darwinism has been used to justify eugenics programs aimed at weeding "undesirable" genes from the population; such programs were sometimes accompanied by sterilization laws directed against "unfit" individuals. The American eugenics movement was relatively popular between about 1910-1930, during which 24 states passed sterilization laws and Congress passed a law restricting immigration from certain areas deemed to be unfit. Social Darwinist ideas, though in different forms, were also applied by the Nazi party in Germany to justify their eugenics programs. With the development of the notion of eugenics — not only could you prevail over the unfit by making war on them, but you could improve the breed by applying "enlightened" notions of selection and genetics.
At its worst, the implications of Social Darwinism were used as scientific justification for the Holocaust.The Nazis claimed that the murder of Jews in World War II was an example of cleaning out inferior genetics. This view embraced the assumption that the strong were superior, and thus ordained to prevail. Social Darwinism applied to military action as well; the argument went that the strongest military would win, and would therefore be the most fit. Casualties on the losing side, of course, were written off as the natural result of their unfit status. Thus, if two countries were to make war on each other, the victor was biologically superior to the loser. It was therefore right and proper for that victor to subjugate or even eliminate the inferior opponent. Not only was survival of the fittest natural, but it was also morally correct. Indeed, some extreme Social Darwinists argued that it was morally incorrect to assist those weaker than oneself, since that would be promoting the survival and possible reproduction of someone who was fundamentally unfit.
A second way pseudo-evolutionary concepts were applied to human interaction was in the development of cut-throat capitalism in the United States. Here the ideology was that the cream naturally rose to the top; the successful made a lot of money simply because they were superior to the unsuccessful. Those who found themselves in poverty were poor because they were intrinsically inferior. It provided a justification for the more exploitative forms of capitalism in which workers were paid sometimes pennies a day for long hours of backbreaking labor. Social Darwinism also justified big business' refusal to acknowledge labor unions and similar organizations, and implied that the rich need not donate money to the poor or less fortunate, since such people were less fit anyway.This political philosophy resisted suggestions like universal education, welfare, minimum wage; in short, anything which interfered with the business of the "superior" ascending to the top of the heap and squashing the unfit beneath their expensive shoes.""
The link to request an anti-war song isn't working, but I would ask for "Buy War Toys for Christmas" (or whatever it's title is) by the Foremen from their album Live at Luna Park. It has lines such as "...have a very merry military day." and "oh by golly, let's be jolly, deck the hall-ocaust" topped off with "singing happy happy birthday to the Prince of Peace." It's very sarcastic.
After the secession of Eritrea from Ethiopia in the mid 90's, a bloody border war ensued, pitting brother against brother. This is a song by Ethio-fusion band Admas, and it's about how war can hit even closer to home than losing a loved one - when being responsible for that loss becomes a reality. Many of us Abyssinians know that if we were in our homeland at the time we may very well have been forced to be on opposite sides of the battle lines, fighting our own kin... and it's hard to make sense of that kind of an absurdity. We're additionally saddened to be aware that this scenario is not peculiar to just one part of the planet. Here's to peace.. the ultimate prize.
Lyrics:
Our eyes, they don't see each other There's no way to know If you're my brother The mist will hide you.. Your uniform disguise you And if I call your name, I'll draw fire
Eleven days ago That's when I came to know Somehow a bullet will find it's way Over hurdles of kinship Breaching walls of faith Somehow a missile ends the day
Somehow we must end this madness There's an empty hole.. there's sadness I've held on for so long How can everything go wrong?
I'll throw down my gun Though they'll shoot me if I run I heard the call.. the battle cry As bodies fall and resolutions die It seems to me when faced with walls and we respond It's violent
The prize Peace is the prize
The places I've been And Oh the hell I've seen Lost to the wind my senses fly With my hands reaching for the sky They'll have my blood Back to the earth my bones return
Please play a few of Phil Och's songs: "I Ain't a Marching Anymore," "Is There Anybody Here?" and "What Are You Fighting For?" You could also play: "Love Me, Love Me, Love Me, I'm a Liberal." Thank you.
Thom, I am flummoxed by the audacity of Mr. Walker. I say mister because we need to remember he is not just a temporary (or potentially permanent) public figure of politics. He is also a man who is willing to play a metaphorical, all-in-hand of poker with his 'political career.' As a mathematician, I understand what is called game-theory. In the game of chicken, if neither entity diverges, an impact would render both parties at a COMPLETE loss.
As a society we have seen this before with Kennedy's famous Cuban Missile Crisis speech. He said to Russia, we will not diverge, so Russia diverged because life out-weighed the risk of supplying missiles to Cuba. So Walker thinks that a game of chicken with the public unions is justifiable. But why isn't he worried about the thought of losing all governing privileges?
Here is the rig:
If Walker wins: he is on a political course to controlling the legislation regarding the taxation of his private constituents. And as John Nichols just said, he will gain A LOT of control.
If Walker losses: he will land a life long career in the PRIVATE political game worth million's annually from one of the private constituencies he regulated a budget-breaking tax cut to prior to his misleading rhetoric about the public labor unions.
It is VERY important to understand that Walker does not have to worry regardless of the outcome - it is borderline (however I think obvious) unethical behavior! He has found a way to play chicken without sacrificing anything. If he losses, the next republican talking head will continue to act out the beheast of the privatization order of G.H.W. Bush in E.O.#12803 - an order to privatatize the entire federal government.
Have you seen this:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/21/947947/-The-Koch-Brothers-End-G...
I am not hearing anything about this anywhere...
you are doing a great job, we follow you on FSTV and listen to am950 in Mpls, MN
Thank you!
Freedom Isn't Free Tonight - Jesse Dyen
http://www.sonicyouth.com/prmp3/FreedomIsntFreeTonight.mp3
Republicans such as Scott Walker have a tendency to emulate history's losers, whether it's blocking Internet access to procedures a la Mubarek, building an Iton Curtain across our southern border, or deregulation like Hoover. It's part of their DNA.
Christian Soldier by Kris Krstofferson
Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore by John Prine
Universal Soldier By Donovan
Walker cut off Internet
Thom characterized Gov. Walker as being like Mubarak for cutting off Internet access. Forget Mubarak, I'd say he's like Ahmadinejad.
REPUBLICANS ARE SOCIAL DARWINISTS -- they believe the government should help the rich live long and prosper! THE government should let the rich exploit the working classes until they die from hard work and exhaustion!! AND should let the poor die off from starvation and disease because they will never amount to anything and are a drain on society!!!
""Social Darwinism is a belief, popular in the late Victorian era in England, America, and elsewhere, which states that the strongest or fittest should survive and flourish in society, while the weak and unfit should be allowed to die. The theory was chiefly expounded by Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), whose ethical philosophies always held an elitist view and later received a boost from the application of Darwinian ideas such as adaptation and natural selection.
According to Darwin's evolutionary theory, nature is a "kill-or-be-killed" system. Those that cannot keep up are either left behind or cut off. The strong survive, and those best suited to survival will out-live the weak.
The seeds of Social Darwinism were actually planted before the publication of Darwin's "The Origin of Species"(though of course the name didn't originate until after). Herbert Spencer, the father of Social Darwinism as an ethical theory, was thinking in terms of elitist, "might makes right" sorts of views long before Darwin published his theory. The concept of adaptation allowed Spencer to claim that the rich and powerful were better adapted to the social and economic climate of the time, and the concept of natural selection allowed him to argue that it was natural, normal, and proper for the strong to thrive at the expense of the weak. Whether it be humans, races, or the state, Spencer's thoughts were clear: "If they are sufficiently complete to live, they do live, and it is well they should live. If they are not sufficiently complete to live, they die, and it is best they die." In its simplest form, Social Darwinism follows the theory of "the strong survive," even in human issues.It is the application of the theory of natural selection to social, political, and economic issues. According to Social Darwinism, those with economic, physical, and technological strength flourish and those without are destined for extinction. This theory was used to promote the idea that the white European race was superior to others, and therefore, destined to rule over them.
Social Darwinism was used to justify numerous exploits which we classify as of dubious moral value today. Colonialism was seen as natural and inevitable; people saw natives as being weaker and more unfit to survive, and therefore felt justified in seizing land and resources. Finally, it gave the ethical nod to brutal colonial governments who used oppressive tactics against their subjects.
At the time that Spencer began to promote Social Darwinism, the technology, economy, and government of the "White European" was advanced in comparison to that of other cultures. Looking at this apparent advantage, as well as the economic and military structures, some argued that natural selection was playing out, and that the race more suited to survival was winning. Some even extended this philosophy into a micro-economic issue, claiming that social welfare programs that helped the poor and disadvantaged were contrary to nature itself. Those who reject any and all forms of charity or governmental welfare often use arguments rooted in Social Darwinism.
Social Darwinism has been used to justify eugenics programs aimed at weeding "undesirable" genes from the population; such programs were sometimes accompanied by sterilization laws directed against "unfit" individuals. The American eugenics movement was relatively popular between about 1910-1930, during which 24 states passed sterilization laws and Congress passed a law restricting immigration from certain areas deemed to be unfit. Social Darwinist ideas, though in different forms, were also applied by the Nazi party in Germany to justify their eugenics programs. With the development of the notion of eugenics — not only could you prevail over the unfit by making war on them, but you could improve the breed by applying "enlightened" notions of selection and genetics.
At its worst, the implications of Social Darwinism were used as scientific justification for the Holocaust. The Nazis claimed that the murder of Jews in World War II was an example of cleaning out inferior genetics. This view embraced the assumption that the strong were superior, and thus ordained to prevail. Social Darwinism applied to military action as well; the argument went that the strongest military would win, and would therefore be the most fit. Casualties on the losing side, of course, were written off as the natural result of their unfit status. Thus, if two countries were to make war on each other, the victor was biologically superior to the loser. It was therefore right and proper for that victor to subjugate or even eliminate the inferior opponent. Not only was survival of the fittest natural, but it was also morally correct. Indeed, some extreme Social Darwinists argued that it was morally incorrect to assist those weaker than oneself, since that would be promoting the survival and possible reproduction of someone who was fundamentally unfit. A second way pseudo-evolutionary concepts were applied to human interaction was in the development of cut-throat capitalism in the United States. Here the ideology was that the cream naturally rose to the top; the successful made a lot of money simply because they were superior to the unsuccessful. Those who found themselves in poverty were poor because they were intrinsically inferior. It provided a justification for the more exploitative forms of capitalism in which workers were paid sometimes pennies a day for long hours of backbreaking labor. Social Darwinism also justified big business' refusal to acknowledge labor unions and similar organizations, and implied that the rich need not donate money to the poor or less fortunate, since such people were less fit anyway. This political philosophy resisted suggestions like universal education, welfare, minimum wage; in short, anything which interfered with the business of the "superior" ascending to the top of the heap and squashing the unfit beneath their expensive shoes.""
http://www.allaboutscience.org/what-is-social-darwinism-faq.htm
http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/eh4.shtml
"Ohio" - Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young
The state officials should take a budget cut from their paychecks instead of laying off workers!
per the above post: The request an anti-war song isn't working, but I do have a request.
Could you please play some Deeeetroit rock and roll: Bob Segar's "2+2".
Love's In Need of Love Today-Stevie Wonder
Hand of Doom-Black Sabbath
A House is Not a Motel-Love
The Windows of the World-Dionne Warwick
Grave New World-The Strawbs
The link to request an anti-war song isn't working, but I would ask for "Buy War Toys for Christmas" (or whatever it's title is) by the Foremen from their album Live at Luna Park. It has lines such as "...have a very merry military day." and "oh by golly, let's be jolly, deck the hall-ocaust" topped off with "singing happy happy birthday to the Prince of Peace." It's very sarcastic.
The Prize by Admas (a local D.C. band from Ethiopia): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=to46WhBylPk
After the secession of Eritrea from Ethiopia in the mid 90's, a bloody border war ensued, pitting brother against brother. This is a song by Ethio-fusion band Admas, and it's about how war can hit even closer to home than losing a loved one - when being responsible for that loss becomes a reality. Many of us Abyssinians know that if we were in our homeland at the time we may very well have been forced to be on opposite sides of the battle lines, fighting our own kin... and it's hard to make sense of that kind of an absurdity. We're additionally saddened to be aware that this scenario is not peculiar to just one part of the planet. Here's to peace.. the ultimate prize.
Lyrics:
Our eyes, they don't see each other
There's no way to know
If you're my brother
The mist will hide you..
Your uniform disguise you
And if I call your name, I'll draw fire
Eleven days ago
That's when I came to know
Somehow a bullet will find it's way
Over hurdles of kinship
Breaching walls of faith
Somehow a missile ends the day
Somehow we must end this madness
There's an empty hole.. there's sadness
I've held on for so long
How can everything go wrong?
I'll throw down my gun
Though they'll shoot me if I run
I heard the call.. the battle cry
As bodies fall and resolutions die
It seems to me when faced with walls and we respond
It's violent
The prize
Peace is the prize
The places I've been
And Oh the hell I've seen
Lost to the wind my senses fly
With my hands reaching for the sky
They'll have my blood
Back to the earth my bones return
The prize
Peace is the prize
Oh and of course "Cops of the World" by Phil Ochs! and "Knock on the Door"!! Actually all Phil's anti-war songs!
Could what be the beginning of the end of our democracy??
Please play a few of Phil Och's songs: "I Ain't a Marching Anymore," "Is There Anybody Here?" and "What Are You Fighting For?" You could also play: "Love Me, Love Me, Love Me, I'm a Liberal." Thank you.
Best anti-war song:
The Band Played Walzing Matilda by Tommy Makem and Liam Clancy
Steve Earle - The Revolution Starts Now
No more War by Eddie Vedder
Hoist That Rag Tom Waits
Real Gone CD
The sun is up the world is flat
Damn good address for a rat
The smell of blood
The drone of flies
You know what to do if
The baby cries
Hoist that rag
Hoist that rag.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQlo5HxbRxk
Well, there are several, probably already been chosen here, but here goes:
Eve of Destruction - Barry McGuire
Fish Cheer - Country Joe and the Fish
Universal Soldier - Donovan
Thom, I am flummoxed by the audacity of Mr. Walker. I say mister because we need to remember he is not just a temporary (or potentially permanent) public figure of politics. He is also a man who is willing to play a metaphorical, all-in-hand of poker with his 'political career.' As a mathematician, I understand what is called game-theory. In the game of chicken, if neither entity diverges, an impact would render both parties at a COMPLETE loss.
As a society we have seen this before with Kennedy's famous Cuban Missile Crisis speech. He said to Russia, we will not diverge, so Russia diverged because life out-weighed the risk of supplying missiles to Cuba. So Walker thinks that a game of chicken with the public unions is justifiable. But why isn't he worried about the thought of losing all governing privileges?
Here is the rig:
If Walker wins: he is on a political course to controlling the legislation regarding the taxation of his private constituents. And as John Nichols just said, he will gain A LOT of control.
If Walker losses: he will land a life long career in the PRIVATE political game worth million's annually from one of the private constituencies he regulated a budget-breaking tax cut to prior to his misleading rhetoric about the public labor unions.
It is VERY important to understand that Walker does not have to worry regardless of the outcome - it is borderline (however I think obvious) unethical behavior! He has found a way to play chicken without sacrificing anything. If he losses, the next republican talking head will continue to act out the beheast of the privatization order of G.H.W. Bush in E.O.#12803 - an order to privatatize the entire federal government.
-Adam.
Citizens in Michigan are screwed by a Republican governor.
http://www.windsorstar.com/news/Michigan+about+budget+deserves/4323798/story.html
Please always remember that people get what they deserve!!!
My new favorite is "Weight of the World" by Amy Speace. Check it out on this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la7ISvtKs-g
Bob Dylan's Masters of War
Rage Against the Machine: Wake Up
Alice's Restaurant Massacree by Arlo Guthrie