Staring Down the Forces of the Neo-Cons

Some points detailed in the discussion:

-Neo-liberalism / neo-conservatism relate to neither ‘liberalism’ or ‘conservatism’.  They are an ideology and form of religion and god-worship, based on self-interest and the whitewashing of memory.  ‘At the end of the day, it’s about power and money.’

Commentary:  Neo Conservatism is not an honest philosophy.  Have you ever heard of a Neoplasm?  For those of you in Rio Linda, that is a polite dressed up word for - Cancer.  Neo-cons are a cancer on the faboric of society at large.  Liberalism is an honest philosophy.  Conservatism is an honest philosophy.  However neo-conservatism is just a big power grab, devoid of any of the usual philosophical mooring that gives it any sort of moral credibility.   This is why it must be defeated and can only damage the country the longer it is allowed to continue.

-Declarations of ‘truth’ and ‘inevitability’ are two aspects of ideology highly prevalent in neo-liberalism/conservatism.

Commentary:  Neither inevitability nor truth is a bad thing.  In fact the persistance and eventual success of both could be indeed taken as a sign that "God was on their side", if you know my definition of God.  Even an atheist would be compelled to admit that "God" is a handy metaphor to explain the success here, even if you don't believe in one.  There was a nine year old kid who called the Shawn Hannity program today.  He was into the marshal arts, and also a straight A student and his goal is to become a brain surgeon.  He said something key.  He said "Yes, things come easily to me but that doesn't stop me from studying my subjects hard (dilligently) anyhow.  

-Neos claiming Edmund Burke as their ‘godfather’ indicates lunacy and denial of history; like other lunatics claiming Christ or Muhammad to justify other unacceptable things.

Commentary:  Stu Baby has long maintained that the basic History of Christianity and its near deification of the Apostle Paul as somehow the "Johnny Appleseed" of the church, and the basic "story" of Jesus- - are both essentially frauds.  They are not "history written in advance" like prophecy, but rather a bogus long after the fact "history" written as though it were the ongoing and continuing revelation of "God" when it is not, and denies the basic fact that the "seed of faith" in Christianity is essentially pythagarian and Marcionite Gnosticsm.  

-Adam Smith’s ‘invisible hand’ is a low-level image of the hand of god.  But when one talks to the neos about Adam Smith, one discovers they haven’t read him.  He isn’t taught.  People only know quotes.  They don’t know Smith was actually ‘incredibly distrustful’ of powerful businessmen and said things like ‘never allow them to be alone in a room together; they’ll combine and falsify the market’, etc.

Commentary:  Adam Smith employed the image of "The hand of God" or what have you as a "God metaphor" to explain a basic physical fact of math and accounting and how markets work.  Like all scoundrals, naturally these neo-cons misquote Adam Smith.

-At this point, [for example, as illustrated by latest Oxfam report], all of the promises made by neo-liberal globalization [summarized in discussion, 13:30] have collapsed.  None of them happened; it’s the exact opposite.  We are now in the most nationalist period we’ve seen since the 1930s, with all the dangers that go along with it.

Commentary:  The translation of this passage goes like this.  You never see old Sylvia Brown clips or reruns of old psychic "black hilocopter" ratio shows years after the fact because the stream of broken promises would pile higher than an urban land fill.