[lit-ideas] Re: double standards in modern society

Certainly not all revolutions are benevolent.  Maybe al quaeda is the
revamping of the whole system you seek.

maybe you can build remnants out of the destruction.  Isn't al queada
just another form of anarchy?

revolution is romanticism with power.  without a good leader, revolutions
are just another series of excuses for killing.

bush runs his campaign for re-election on the premise of his being a good
leader.

Is he?

what percentage of opinion polls influence what percentage of the voters?

it's a shame that in the politics of cliches, there can't be a Democrat
stong against terrorism.  Kerry won't win because Kerry is perceived by
the grunt of the majority precisely as the Republican Party wishes him to
be perceived.

Two lots: money to spend to influence public opinion.
public opinion easily bought through apathy.  direct debit ignorance
breeds a passive society.

Power at all costs is the governing rule of law.  Is there anyone to
disagree with this as a political reality?


Steve Chilson,
etc.

On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 12:41:58 EST, JulieReneB@xxxxxxx said:
>  At this point I just assume the political world is going to be corrupt.  
> Doesn't seem to be much point in hoping otherwise.  It's too built-in to
> the very 
> structure.  Maybe a revolution to revamp the whole system and start from 
> scratch....   
> Julie Krueger
> 
> 
> ========Original Message========
> Subj:[lit-ideas] double standards in modern society
> Date:3/31/2004 10:12:40 AM Central Standard Time
> From:Scribe1865@xxxxxxx
> To:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent on:    
> 
> 
> Has anyone noticed the grotesque trend of social double-standards,
> ironies 
> within ironies, getting more and more complex with each new year?
> 
> How about drugging and drinking Presidential candidates trying to appeal
> to 
> the electorate on the basis of their drugging and drinking?
> 
> Here's the Clinton/Gore/Bush example. Clinton, a man who (according to 
> classmate Christopher Hitchens) pounded down hashish brownies at Oxford,
> then 
> claimed he "didn't inhale"
>     -signed away important privacy protections to the drug war, 
>     -then used the "I did not inhale" routine to ingratiate himself with
>     the 
> section of the electorate who, at the base, identified with pot smoking
> as 
> sign of honesty and a good heart, 
>     -even as their taxes funded the drug war. 
> 
> Then the 2000 election where 
>     -Gore (who admitted pot smoking for the same reasons) ran against     
> -Bush (who made political capital from his "wild youth" AND the Texas
> ranch 
> he bought as an election prop). 
> 
> All the while: Hundreds of thousands of people in jail for drug offenses
> as 
> both Presidential candidates admit to some form of drug use.
> 
> C'mon, guys, how many double standards is that? Seven? Eight layers of
> double 
> standards?  No one sees anything weirdly wrong with that picture?
> 
> 
> Eric
> 
> PS: Been pursuing this thread on another list, and thought I'd drop part
> of 
> the topic here in case anyone is interested.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
-- 
  Steve Chilson
  stevechilson@xxxxxxxxxxx

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: