SwiftVets.com

[NYCnative]

On WNBC yesterday, they were reporting that Iran assisted in bring the muscle men of the Sept 11 attacks through to Afghanistan for training. The reporter had the gall to say, "Unlike Iraq, Iran really had ties to Al-Queda". I was furious! How do we get the media to stop feeding the general public this garbage? What do we have to do?

Unless you are able to get thousands of people to this march, the main stream media will treat it as a bump in the road. I'm trying to get on as many political web sites as I can and forward all the documented information I get from this site out to the other undecided voters.

You have to go on these webs and confront the foul mouthed, Bush haters. Not because we want to change their minds, but there are hundreds of "browsers", who don't post. These are the people who are seeking debates but don't necessarily want to participate. They must see the opposite point of view.

It has gotten to the point that the anarchists are activly planning to disrupt the NYC Republican convention. They are deadly serious. You wouldn't believe the plans they have. It gives blow by blow instructions on how to create diversions for the police and the bomb sniffing dogs! It instructs you on how to infiltrate the convention and then throw pies in peoples faces. Throw marbles underneath the hoofs of horses. etc.... This is not funny stuff! Guess what terrorists are hearing this too. What a great opportunity for them to be standing by with a real bomb. I'll going to get these webs sites and post. One was called RNC go home or something like that. This is a real problem...

Guess what, the Kerry campaign should come out and condemn this type of behavior. BUT NO!
_________________
"From time to time, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." -- Thomas Jefferson

"Proclaim Liberty throughout All the land unto All the Inhabitants Thereof." -Inscription on the Liberty Bell

[garb1015]

You are right that the Kerry people should speak out about disrupting the convention. But they should have spoken out against Whoopi and Chevy and they didn't (at least that fat little check from SlimFast won't be in Whoopi's mailbox anymore).
There's no way of knowing how many will be able to make the trip to Washington. Some people here have asked if there will be a letter or petition that those who can't go can at least sign.
I am also going on other websites with discussion boards and responding to the "Bush was a deserter/Kerry was a war hero" posts.
As far as talking to people in person, I try not to deprogram a Bush hater but try to get them to look at the other candidate. On kerrylied.com there is a link to Viper's Viet Nam page which is a good compilation of Kerry facts. It prints out to 27 pages and I have made copies and given them out to people I know. I told them to pass it on after they've read it. I know that's not a lot, but every little bit helps.

[NYCnative]

[PhD candidate]

I wonder what makes you think the left is working towards a utopian socialism? Can you explain to me how Kerry is advocating socialism? I wonder do you think that because left leaning individuals favor social programming, welfare based program as well as tax cuts that favor the poor and not the wealthy that equals socialism? How is Kerry, a very wealthy man, anything but a capitalist? And yes, it has been a while since I studied political philosophy but isnt capitalism the enemy of socialism?

One thing I do know from psychology is that our society as a whole is individualistic particulary when compared to the collectivism of the western world. If you compare American and Japanese culture you can see these differences. For instance, in American culture we seperate our children from us almost immediately. The same is not true in Japanese culture. Also, consider that the Japanese family remains close knit and includes its elderly members. American culture values the individual and individual goals.

Who wouldn't argue that socialism was a failed experiment? Yes, there are some from the radical left that advocate for socialistic values. But to compare the ideals of liberalism with socialism is a bit of a stretch don't you think? Hobbesian philosophy argues that man in a state of nature is a brute. That is, he will tend to look after his individual needs, if given the opportunity.

I often complain about the lot of the poor and the homeless in our society and how we should continue welfare programs to assist them. But that costs money. My father once argued with me that until I am willing to give up my car until everyone has one that I am a capitalist and embrace capitalistic ideals. Yes, I think that is essentially true. I want, like everyone else, to be able to have things. However, I think that I do my part by doing what I consider good work by counseling those that would not be able to afford it.

Socialism wants everyone to be considered equal. There is really no chance for that to work because groups will always create a hierarchy. Think a bit about group dynamics--- when running a psychological support group I find that someone always emerges as the leader, some follow and there are always a few that are held in contempt by the others. The group naturally tends to polarize in the direction of either the facilitator or the loudest member of the group. Socialism failed because people continued to strive to have more than someone else. Also, I think it is fair to question whether or not socialism in its pure Marxist form was ever truly tested. Can you really argue that Lenin and Stalin did not bastardize Marxist socialism? Still, I think even in its purest form... everyone knows it doesnt work.

Liberals and conservatives alike spent decades fighting the cold war did they not? War against the Soviet Union--- a country that stood completely opposed to the American notion of the capitalism and the individual. In fact, Eastern Block countries had much propoganda about America and how unlike in say, East Germany, poor people in America stayed poor because they had to deal with the evils of capitalism. I had the rare opportunity to be in East Germany just about a year after the wall came down and I was a teen-ager at the time. Many of the East German teens that I met were dismayed that the wall came down because now no one had any certainty of a job or future. They had been taught that our capitalistic values made life uncertain. But would liberal Americans every trade their personal freedom for socialist values? They are not willing to get on the bandwagon with the conservatives that support the Patriot Act, which I would consider a terrifying erosion of personal freedom, and in supporting the act does that make conservatives supportive of socialistic values? The principal behind the Patriot Act may be one of defending our nation but the civil liberties it violates could be considered a great equalizer could it not?

As someone that has studied developmental psychology I know that all the greats advocate for the ideal of individualism. Consider Freudian theory for example--- although he is schooled in Austria and not an American his work focuses on the development of the individual and has influenced American psychology even today. His concept of the ego in a constant struggle between the Id and the Superego is reflective of our desires to strengthen our individualistic needs while fighting against our impulsive whims (I want what I want when I want it) and the authoritarian rule based needs of parents and society. The ego (the self) is in a constant battle between these two forces. Also, Levinson and Erickson have threads of Freudian concepts. They all talk about the development of the individual with Erickson talking about the adolescent identity crisis and the need to develop autonomy. Levinson focuses on the development of ego strength and our various levels of development at the individual level. It is clear that the message received by students of the field of psychology is that a strong, individual center is the goal. Liberals and conservatives alike are indocritinated with these kinds of teachings. If there is an American ideal I would say that it would be individuality. I don't think that it matters whether you have a liberal or conservative political outlook.

It seems to be our nation was founded on individualism. Didn't we the Pilgrims come here looking for freedom from religious oppression? Liberals may attempt to level the playing field by giving access and opportunity to everyone but that is not the same thing as socialism. I have never heard a liberal say that they would give up their individual freedom so that everyone could be equal. I haven't heard Kerry ever say that if elected he would give away all his money and become a common man and make himself equal with the lowest man on the socio-economic strata. The only people I ever hear talk about eroding individual freedoms are the conservatives... The Patriot Act may take away freedoms and civil liberties but it is for the good of the country. That smacks of nationalism to me. Could we equate that with the ideals of socialism? The good of the whole outweighing the needs of its individual members?

Be careful who you accuse of being a socialist... or have you forgotten the days of McCarthyism? You could be next....

[ASPB]

Ms. PhD Candidate,

I'm glad you posted this in our open forum. You may be flamed by a few but, I suspect, over the next couple of days you'll get some enlightening responses.

FDL, Wardog, Me#1; Where Are You? Help! My fingers are tired!
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[carpro]

[NYCnative]

[GoophyDog]

[Indianbaboon]

If socialism is about setting everyone exactly equal in terms of wealth, then isn't liberalism a form of mitigated socialism? Liberalism compresses the wealth differences to the point where my parents on their 6 figure income live exactly like our next door neighbor construction worker pulling in 60k. Our welfare and financial aid system means that while his kids' college was paid for, mine came out of pocket. while my parents pay close to 50% in taxes he pays closer to 15%. Isn't this a form of ameliorated socialism? Or look at welfare, a welfare life is a pretty good one. I know this because for a while, our income level was lower than what a welfare family takes in. More socialism.

Whoever brought up the point that socialist leaders have always been rich was extremely inciteful. If you look at every modern socialist 'revolution' it's been led by a relatively rich city guy who claimed to sympathize with the poor. Lenin the doctor (although sometimes i think he actually was an idealist) is a good example. He does it for POWER. HE pulls on the poor's heartstrings, and leashes them to him. He doesn't have to BELIEVE in socialism to advocate it.

And as for american culture? I was brought up in west texas in a town that wasn't quite a city and wasn't quite a farming center. The americans i knew there, most of the women waited till their kids were old enough for school before they got jobs...as did my mom.

Patriot Act was bipartisan passed by a WIIIIIIDE margin and bipartisanly reviled.

Your little spiel about individualism, it's nice. But i'm reminded of the South Park episode where the Goth kids become nonconformist conformists. We spend all our time in education 'self-actualizing' (there's another psych term for you ) these kids and teaching them about a "strong individualistic core" but we both know that's a lot of hogwash. It really is about indoctrination under the guise of growth. Otherwise wouldn't it be enough that I had developed coherent political ideas by senior year of HS? Why then in a class that was supposed to be a debate between the two sides did the conservatives all get yelled at by teachers AND students for being wrong? In a historically conservative city at that!

Why did my graduate teacher in genetics and development tell me that there was no logical reason for voting for Bush at all? Is that something you learn while teaching students about the molecular bases for signalling pathways?

Why then was I called Nazi, women hater, and even recieved veiled death threats for my quite moderate conservatism at school?


America, to me, has been about personal responsibility and freedom, two sides of the same coin. Freedom is an intersting word. Ever been free climbing? THat means no ropes, no partner just a cliff, those amazing rubber shoes and certain death if you screw up. That's what freedom is. Freedom to succeed, freedom to fail. A levelled playing field, social welfare, social security, all those are safety devices. Free climbing wouldn't be free climbing with a rope, and freedom isnt' freedom with social welfare.

"The price of freedom is the prospect of failure"-Nikhil Rao (me)

[hist/student]

retracted

[NYCnative]