A discussion of politics, society, and laws of the land, from an LDS or Mormon perspective.
Here are some other ideas you may be interested in:http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/07/19/conspiracies/slideshow.html
I assume your implication is that the above shared article is conspiratorial and therefore false. I am not about to make a statement either way on the two links. But I guess I am interested to see that people interpret conspiracy theory = false. Why is that the impression that people have? Some conspiracy theories can be true. In fact, I tend to think that there is some truth in both sides of a conspiracy theory and it is best to follow the best of both sides. Lets face it, Obama is not to be trusted. But that doesn't mean by default that the individual who put GWH's link is right by default. I am able to take hype for what it is, and truth for what it is.But I hardly appreciate the implication that conspiracy theories are false by default.
So two rather obscure scholars outside the mainstream of Democratic Party politics wrote an article for a magazine 40+ years ago and it is the strategy being used by Obama to impose tyranny? The idea that using a crisis to force massive anti-freedom changes in America was used by one George W. Bush following 9/11, it isn't a socialist idea, it is a fascist idea. I am not at all averse to conspiracy theories, but there needs to be at least a shred of credibility somewhere in the mix.
Fair enough Charles. So what in the presentation from GWH is false? Or what is lacking credibility from your perspective?
So for how long do we continue to reject a potential reality.......? At the point it's too late and Obama takes control? I mean we can continue to live in ignorance..... or we can prepare for a potential outcome. I don't see anything in there that doesn't add up, I mean how many times have we looked at what Obama is doing fiscally and said, "well that just doesn't make sense." It doesn't make sense if the objective is economic recovery.... if the objective is to fundamentally change the United States forever, then perhaps what he's been doing makes perfect sense. -GWH-
Cloward and Piven developed a strategy in 1966 to address the question "How can the poor be organized to press for relief from poverty?" Their goal was legislation "for a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty." While I'm sure you do not share their goal, they and poor people in general have every right to peacefully pursue whatever political goals they want in a free country. Their critique of federal welfare programs was quite apt "public welfare systems try to keep their budgets down and their rolls low by failing to inform people of the rights available to them; by intimidating and shaming them to the degree that they are reluctant either to apply or to press claims, and by arbitrarily denying benefits to those who are eligible." In the years since, particularly since Clinton ended welfare as they knew it, their assessment has been proven true. To the point of the alarmist video however, there is simply no connection between Cloward and Piven and the Obama agenda. In fact, I would bet that Dr. Piven is highly disappointed with the Obama presidency. The agenda being pursued is a corporatist, pro-war, repression of dissent agenda much like that of GW Bush. Obama is doing nothing to move toward the Cloward Piven agenda in any way.What we have here is another right-wing smear on some progressive group that is trying to help poor people exert their rights. It is part and parcel of an effort by extreme right-wingers to turn America into a cheap-labor third-world repressive state.
Charles, would you be willing to accept the idea that while you may not interpret Obama's actions to be the same methods that Piven and Cloward endorsed, mainly the corporate - war agenda you refer to, but in the end they will have the same result?Also, the conclusion that Piven and Cloward have been "proven true" due to Clinton actions is a responsibility dodge. Truth is proven if not self evident. We are not dealing with truth in this case, we are dealing with a position or arrangement of society. The success or at least the realization of two socialists' ideas given the pile of evidence (possibly circumstantial) that these individuals have been seeking to see their ideas come to fruition is not "proving" anything true. It simply means that they had an idea, made a plan, they executed the plan, and the results became reality. This does not make them right just because their plans exist or are coming to fruition.Hitler had ideas or assessments that whites were superior, he wanted those ideas to come to reality, just because many of them did does not mean that his ideals were "proven true". Piven and Cloward had theories about future economy, but they made efforts to see those come to fruition. These were not passive observational economists that "got it right". They were clearly activists who sought to create the environment that we see becoming more and more the reality of the United States. Consequently, their efforts have contributed to what is wrong with this country.So in multiple ways I hardly find their actions defensible.
The "proven true" comment was in regard to government's desire to curtail and even stop welfare programs and other support to the poor, which for the most part, they have done. Perhaps it wasn't so much a prophecy as an astute observation on their part.I do agree that our government is moving toward tyranny, but that seems to be the agenda of both parties, and Obama is no better or worse than Bush on that score. As our government asserts the right to summarily execute people without trials, to kidnap American citizens and hold them without charges indefinitely, as our police forces become trained counter-insurgency soldiers, we move closer and closer to tyranny.
Thanks for your comments! Comments are now being moderated to eliminate the massive amounts of spam comments we get and have slipped through the cracks. If you have an opinion that is clean (no vulgar language) then we will post it.