Green Mtn
location: Observing the Progressive madness with considerably less amusement.
listening to: Grandchildren, the best reason for saving the future.
registered: 2004.04.03
posts: 2617
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
Thank you Andrea, mostly I sleep very well.Frankly, I doubt the net as we now know it will be saved. There's too much at stake in the way
of societal stability, worldwide.Thom Hartmann, a Progressive radio host I often disagree with as to solutions(effective
responses) but often agree with as to the nature of the problems made a fascinating case for
why the middle class must be eliminated, and in fact has rarely existed in human history, and
only twice in North American history(to the extent the baby boomer generation has known), in
order to insure the status quo, meaning societal stability(manageability),Just as a vibrant, independent economy supporting a large middle class is inimical to the
status quo, so is the widespread dissemination of uncensored information. Both, unmanaged
information and the unmanaged economy, are a threat to those who hold the most significant
cards. And who, it probably needs be added, want to hold on to their familial position.So from my standpoint, logistically speaking, those opposed to human liberty(scientific
socialists, who are also monopolist capitalists(which terminology IS an oxymoron just as the
people who support that form are ...ic)). Those who favor the status quo, and most
particularly those who support the status quo and have the means to do something about it,
will tame the internet to their liking, they have to, they are threatened(as a potentiality, a
statistical probability).Keep in mind too, not unlikely major media outlets(& often they are one in the same!) there too
are a limited number of major ISP providers, who practice, and will continue to practice the ole
corporate standby, "if you can't out compete em, buy em". And eventually they do, because
really big corporations never die. [I've never been able to find the documentation to support
Mr Hartmann's claim that Thomas Jefferson wanted an anti mercantilist Amendment in the Bill
of Rights, but I think that was a splendid idea. Meaning, we suppose, that corporations
shouldn't have super personhood, and should expire, and so on to far afield to explore here.]And as with the previous paragraph, there are only so many trunk lines. And again, we may
own a few shares but we do not have the final say on corporate decision making ... that is, UNLESS, we start organizing and utilizing our collective economic power as a weapon
the bean counters understand. Economic boycott seeming the obvious choice. For instance,
by dumping Comcast, who is charging meter fees in some areas and filtering content and
spying on Americans.I believe it an uphill battle, but a worthy fight. And! Organizing sooner, rather than later is
advisable.It may not be a very good one, but that is my argument, and a key battleground, if we are to
save and expand human liberty as we know it from statist scientific socialism. peaceably
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
G
Green Mtn
(view)
Thank you Andrea, mostly I sleep very well.Frankly, I doubt the net as we now know it will be saved. There's too much at stake in the way
of societal stability, worldwide.Thom Hartmann, a Progressive radio host I often disagree with as to solutions(effective
responses) but often agree with as to the nature of the problems made a fascinating case for
why the middle class must be eliminated, and in fact has rarely existed in human history, and
only twice in North American history(to the extent the baby boomer generation has known), in
order to insure the status quo, meaning societal stability(manageability),Just as a vibrant, independent economy supporting a large middle class is inimical to the
status quo, so is the widespread dissemination of uncensored information. Both, unmanaged
information and the unmanaged economy, are a threat to those who hold the most significant
cards. And who, it probably needs be added, want to hold on to their familial position.So from my standpoint, logistically speaking, those opposed to human liberty(scientific
socialists, who are also monopolist capitalists(which terminology IS an oxymoron just as the
people who support that form are ...ic)). Those who favor the status quo, and most
particularly those who support the status quo and have the means to do something about it,
will tame the internet to their liking, they have to, they are threatened(as a potentiality, a
statistical probability).Keep in mind too, not unlikely major media outlets(& often they are one in the same!) there too
are a limited number of major ISP providers, who practice, and will continue to practice the ole
corporate standby, "if you can't out compete em, buy em". And eventually they do, because
really big corporations never die. [I've never been able to find the documentation to support
Mr Hartmann's claim that Thomas Jefferson wanted an anti mercantilist Amendment in the Bill
of Rights, but I think that was a splendid idea. Meaning, we suppose, that corporations
shouldn't have super personhood, and should expire, and so on to far afield to explore here.]And as with the previous paragraph, there are only so many trunk lines. And again, we may
own a few shares but we do not have the final say on corporate decision making ... that is, UNLESS, we start organizing and utilizing our collective economic power as a weapon
the bean counters understand. Economic boycott seeming the obvious choice. For instance,
by dumping Comcast, who is charging meter fees in some areas and filtering content and
spying on Americans.I believe it an uphill battle, but a worthy fight. And! Organizing sooner, rather than later is
advisable.It may not be a very good one, but that is my argument, and a key battleground, if we are to
save and expand human liberty as we know it from statist scientific socialism. peaceably
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
