"There is twixt thou and us a great gulf which no man may cross." Abraham to Dives.
In a comments section about Obamacare and the Supreme Court, a "director of films" named Anton someone, a self-described immigrant, excoriated all those who wanted OCare to go away as "racist cunts" who forgot that they were all also immigrants, except Blacks and Indians. And that even bringing the 2000+ page law no one has read, before the Court was "a crime". The man is clearly a hysterical moron who should go back to whatever place he was born. (See what I mean about universal suffrage?)
Aside from its other practical flaws, it gives the Federal Government the power to require each American to enter into a private contract for purchase of a service and to make criminal penalties against any who don't. Most of the Justices, it seems, found this, to say the least, novel.
If the Government can make you do this, what can't they make you do?
2 comments:
Racist c-nts? »How you gonna keep 'em down on the farm after they've seen desublimation?«
—Sam M. Lewis and Joe Jung in 1919
... And as usual the benefits accrue to white men. As evil and having total karmic volitional agency and responsibility, we may compose our own opinions on ObamaCare and any other topic or question.
Women and subaltern males who think freely on this or any other question are de-agency'd, e.g. pathologized (deny'd real volitional responsibility), e.g. a white liberal authority who diagnosed Thomas Sowell as a "self-loathing" black (I guess because Sowell wishes to make clear that blacks were thriving and improving their situation prior to the Great Society "government programmes" and this despite great hostility and unfavourably prejudice). Similarly non-liberal women lack the strength to think for themselves, and regret the days when, as they suppose, strong men took care of women.
White guys have to put up with being vilify'd (usually by our own, that is by liberal white males) as the willers of the long drawn-out war crime that is western or white history. But then as "evil" in the psycho-drama we really have the beau role: cf Nietzsche on "good and bad" vs "good and evil" in Genealogy, first essay.
Non-liberal women and non-liberal subaltern males are fail'd persons -- persons who fail'd to brave the freedoms and responsibilities that come with being "agents of change" (sc liberal good change only). But non-liberal white men aren't fail'd persons: we are evil persons.
And we bear all the rejected karma of the Man since we don't take the easy absolution offer'd by the liberal system, namely saying liberal stuff and blaming Christian fundamentalist low-class whites plus maybe corporations and elites for all the injustices etc.
In an aiôn where all reality is evil, we are most real. The realness of the good person is an after-thought, as Nietzsche reveals. Bull Connors and Oliver Cromwell are real, in a way that Noam Chomsky is not. The realness of the good person, agent for change, etc, is only to call for evil men not to do evil. ... Originally the Christian aiôn achieved some real admiration for the believer in Jesus Christ who mortify'd the lust of the eyes, the pride of life and the lust of the flesh. But today's liberal good person is only a not-hater. The conservative hater is the really real. QED
Post a Comment