3 thoughts on “The New National Anthem: The Government Can”
I saw a quote recently, attributed to Helen Kellor, basically saying, security is impossible, it doesn’t exist in nature.
Government Can – lite. I hope that song wakes a few people up. Full strength government seems likely to be up next? I always used to think the rights outlined in a Constitution couldn’t ever be revoked, for any reason. These days it seems like it’s really easy for a government to revoke the ability to freely exercise rights, take the latest in Honduras for instance:
Honduras restricts liberties to prevent rebellion
The decree prohibits unauthorized gatherings and allows police to arrest without a warrant ” …
The government measures also permit authorities to temporarily close news media outlets that “attack peace and public order.”
Is that what’s in store for the US next? (Many say that is what is happening now, especially in light of the events in Pittsburg last week, or the various gun/drug/tax laws and restrictions across the nation.) It seems so effortless for the government to do so. As if a constitution never realy meant anything in the first place. There’s not too much holding back government from doing practically anything to their populations anymore it seems.
Populations of people are either demonized, or equated as livestock, more and more easily too. In support of a wish by many in the higher levels of government to sort, control and depopulate the planet, groups and individuals such as Mr. Polanski are treated to the same propaganda techniques as the Jews and other undesirables were in Germany before WWII by getting the general population to support the idea they are less equal than everyone else, less of a human, or not human at all
Poland okays forcible castration for paedophiles
Prime Minister Donald Tusk said late last year he wanted obligatory castration for paedophiles, whom he branded ‘degenerates’. Tusk said he did not believe “one can use the term ‘human’ for such individuals, such creatures”.
What of the innocent wrongly accused? [The Imperial Christians pipe in here, if it happens to you, you deserve it.] What stops this practice from being expanded to other crimes? An easily suspendable constitution? Whip up the mob mentality of an eye for an eye, or put a happy face on an action, sing a nice sounding jingle with some pretty colors and the general population will think anything is the right thing to do. And Off the cliff we go>>>
Well – this case isn’t literally about pedophilia.
It’s about forced sex or rape.
And to me the age of the person is less important than the manipulation and use of alcohol.
But the amount of attention given to it is way out of proportion to the damage involved –
I’m not a fan of the guy, but if he wants to be a satyr in his private life, it doesn’t bother me.
The girl made it public by going to the police, an act I’m sure she now regrets, because the publicity attached to the whole thing probably constitutes a second violation, probably worse in some ways than the first.
For me, this is a rape case that’s now turned into a privacy case. How long can the state continue to violate the privacy of the victim in the interests of satisfying some obscure or non existent public good?
I saw a quote recently, attributed to Helen Kellor, basically saying, security is impossible, it doesn’t exist in nature.
Government Can – lite. I hope that song wakes a few people up. Full strength government seems likely to be up next? I always used to think the rights outlined in a Constitution couldn’t ever be revoked, for any reason. These days it seems like it’s really easy for a government to revoke the ability to freely exercise rights, take the latest in Honduras for instance:
Honduras restricts liberties to prevent rebellion
The decree prohibits unauthorized gatherings and allows police to arrest without a warrant ” …
The government measures also permit authorities to temporarily close news media outlets that “attack peace and public order.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090928/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_honduras_coup
Is that what’s in store for the US next? (Many say that is what is happening now, especially in light of the events in Pittsburg last week, or the various gun/drug/tax laws and restrictions across the nation.) It seems so effortless for the government to do so. As if a constitution never realy meant anything in the first place. There’s not too much holding back government from doing practically anything to their populations anymore it seems.
Populations of people are either demonized, or equated as livestock, more and more easily too. In support of a wish by many in the higher levels of government to sort, control and depopulate the planet, groups and individuals such as Mr. Polanski are treated to the same propaganda techniques as the Jews and other undesirables were in Germany before WWII by getting the general population to support the idea they are less equal than everyone else, less of a human, or not human at all
Poland okays forcible castration for paedophiles
Prime Minister Donald Tusk said late last year he wanted obligatory castration for paedophiles, whom he branded ‘degenerates’. Tusk said he did not believe “one can use the term ‘human’ for such individuals, such creatures”.
“Therefore I don’t think protection of human rights should refer to these kind of events,” Tusk also said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090928/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_poland_castration
What of the innocent wrongly accused? [The Imperial Christians pipe in here, if it happens to you, you deserve it.] What stops this practice from being expanded to other crimes? An easily suspendable constitution? Whip up the mob mentality of an eye for an eye, or put a happy face on an action, sing a nice sounding jingle with some pretty colors and the general population will think anything is the right thing to do. And Off the cliff we go>>>
Well – this case isn’t literally about pedophilia.
It’s about forced sex or rape.
And to me the age of the person is less important than the manipulation and use of alcohol.
But the amount of attention given to it is way out of proportion to the damage involved –
I’m not a fan of the guy, but if he wants to be a satyr in his private life, it doesn’t bother me.
The girl made it public by going to the police, an act I’m sure she now regrets, because the publicity attached to the whole thing probably constitutes a second violation, probably worse in some ways than the first.
For me, this is a rape case that’s now turned into a privacy case. How long can the state continue to violate the privacy of the victim in the interests of satisfying some obscure or non existent public good?
How can I get more deeply into this serious conversation when all day long – and even now – I’ve had this silly song bouncing around my brain?