Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:32 PM
truedelphi (30,705 posts)
A Little Tyranny Can't Be All that Bad... [View all]
A little Tyranny can't be all that bad.
It enables us to have Monsanto-fortified GM foods on our plates, and who cares if farmers find they must send all their profits to Monsanto, as long as we can believe the PR that it is helping to feed the world's hungry?
It enables us to have a Too Big To Fail system of monetary control wherein the Largest Financial Firms can do under-handed LIBOR practices, and also launder the drug cartel monies, while the rest of us have to look over our shoulder when we light that joint. And although some of the punks among us might resent that currently forty nine cents out of every dollar of profit generated in the USA goes to the coffers of the Biggest banks, we must remember that they need that money to keep control of the politicians. Buying a government continues to be expensive; inflation has cost the PTB that much more each year.
Tyranny means you can frame policies with impunity that leave over one million dead in a nation that never harmed us, and also drone away at the brown colored folks in the nations of Afghanistan and Pakistan. But I mean - does the world really need all those brown skinned people?
Tyranny shoves aside the older, weaker, sicker, less educated, and those run down prematurely by their decades of being working schmucks at lower paying jobs. Again, does our society really need older, weaker, sicker, less educated, and those who have been run down by life prematurely, when the higher classes of humans dress better and are more fun to be around?
Tyranny is proving to possess a more sophisticated well thought out system of "logic" that eternally is enabling itself, rather than silly old democracy ever did. If classifying the details needed to prove the existence of a program means no one can prove its existence, then how logical is it to return to the days of openness and transparency? Back when a policy either existed or didn't exist, but it couldn't be hidden from plain view, our various security agencies had to be rather devious. Do you remember Iran Contra? Do we really want the likes of Ollie North in our face every time we watch the news? Some here on DU want us to return to the Nixon era, when a President taped the conversations occurring in the WH, but if we returned to that time, wouldn't Al Queda be hearing things that might endanger us all? Once you think about all the unintended consequences of transparency, it's obvious that Tyranny might be easier, and then the Big Financial Firms might be able to launder less drug cartel monies, since they won't have to buy as many politicians.
Plus with all that transparency floating around, how would Glenn Greenwald make a living? Whistle blowers like Bradley Manning and Mr Snowden would have to find other methods of coming to national attention, such as making a video of themselves with a cat doing a stupid pet trick. Again, I think it is obvious from spending time on Facebook that we do need more folks doing stupid pet tricks.
Tyranny also makes it harder to tell the difference between the Two Parties. And since people want to spend their time watching stupid pet tricks on Facebook, that makes it simpler come election time. We need to forbid the money from Corporate Interests regarding the campaign coffers of candidates. Abolish both Parties. Just put it out there that if you wanna be President, get a pretty cool pet trick happening between you and your cat (or dog.) The person whose video scores the most YouTube votes gets the Oval Office.
Since the NSA dictates how the President, (er, I mean Top Corporate Spokesperson,) spends his or her time anyway, and much of what the President does is simply to make us Americans feel good about all the exciting things that are happening around the world, like the proliferation of Monsanto GM foods, the slaughter of brown skinned people by drones, and the elimination of many here in the USA through austerity programs, including lack of jobs, housing, education and health care, I think it's easy to see that having a President accomplished in pet tricks might be the next best thing since eliminating privacy.
Too much privacy has always allowed people to focus on themselves, which probably led to depression, and that led to all those annoying commercials about which anti-depressant to take. The Lord knows we would all be better off without those commercials.
Some of you might be opposed to this, but consider this: Elizabeth Warren seems smart enough to find herself a really cute pet and develop a killer dance set with a chihuahua and one or two movie stars. I am suggesting a chihuahua, because then, if elected, she can point out the dog's name is Paco, and that way, Taco Bell can pay her salary for the four to eight years she holds down the top spot in the nation.
After all, with Tyranny going hand in hand with Privatization, it won't be possible to pay for a President using money from the Federal Government. "Paco" will be key.
3 replies, 1036 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
A Little Tyranny Can't Be All that Bad... [View all]