The heroes and villains get all mixed up

In Quantum of Solace, Mathers says to Bond:

But I guess when one is young, it seems very easy to distinguish between right and wrong but as one gets older, it becomes more difficult – the villains and the heroes get all mixed up.

If you go to the authors and/or publishers of these articles:

… you get this on the first one:

I am a freethinker who supports the American constitutional system of ordered liberty within the context of western civilization. My primary concern is to increase individual liberty as much as possible in the face of statist efforts to restrict it from both the right and the left.

Anti-statist, yes? And yet he writes in the post:

But what happens if scarcity is at long last banished? What if some combination of Artificial Intelligence, nanotechnology, and exploitation of the resources of the solar system results in such an abundance of wealth than no one need work at all to maintain the lifestyle a billionaire enjoys today?

That is a tough one for most people to grasp, since it is so far beyond anything in our history. In fact, one could make the case that we are genetically adapted to cope with scarcity, not abundance. But there is no human “need to work.” Hell, a sizable percentage of our own population doesn’t work, and most of the pathologies that crop up there involve a lack of individual wealth.

Where does one even start with a mind thinking like that? The premise is that work is oppression in history, therefore a “post-Singularity economy of abundance” allows humans not to work to death, that there is no nobility in work.

What he fails to explain is what that euphemism “singularity” actually means, what it entails. He also fails to explain from where this sustenance of all will come.

On both points, I lived in the former USSR for some years and saw what it did to this so-called “free thinking”. I saw the ultimate result of the meagre handout but do-as-you’re-told state he says he’s against but which his post-singularity world is all about.

This is the thinking behind AOC, he supports this thinking by failing to point out why it is flawed, he is as dangerous as the minds behind AOC because of the “fluid thinking” which fails to see the good outcomes of a society which believes in industry and the property which accrues from an enterprise economy, despite its severe drawback in its tendency to monopolies, crony capitalism.

The second article is written by an ANC communist who went to Israel, saw abundance, liked it and wanted some of what ee az too please.

On what grounds would this Tower run an article by a mind which sees blacks as never indulging in any atrocities against women and children, really fine guys, the ANC blacks, he tells us.

So I started exploring this Tower magazine and its philosophy, this came up:

The Tower is owned by The Israel Project, which is known as “Israel’s most effective nongovernmental public relations agency.”

Supported by this organisation:

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) is a nonpartisan policy institute (or think tank) based in Washington, D.C., focusing on national security and foreign policy. Its political leanings have been described variously as nonpartisan,hawkish and neoconservative.

Now we’re getting into a most fluid area indeed. I’d support the right of the people of that land which has the catch-all title Israel to exist in the face of Hamas rockets, Hezbollah, Iran state terrorism and the manufactured construct of a Palestine which is a highly politicised entity dedicated to wiping out Judaism and Chistianity.

Yet there are sufficient posts at our place to question what exactly “Israel” does mean … and to whom? If you go to the Israel Supreme Court with its pagan fertility symbolism, if you go to the garden named after the Rothschilds, then it becomes quite murky indeed what you’re supporting.

And sufficient has been written of global left jewry – see Alinsky, Benjamin, that lot – to see that there’s some historical chasm here which continues to fail to be explained. Hitler sends an SS man to escort a Rothschild to the border and freedom? Explore that one.

What’s a neo-con anyway? Supports a strong national military? I do too. Supports interventions like Blair’s and the two Bushes’? That’s a different matter as you know. Look at Abu Ghraib and the newer Manchurian Candidate film, its middle-east scenes.

What I’m getting at in this post is that you have to be sure what the people we count as friends do actually support. As for AOC and her controllers, she’s every bit as wrongthinking and oversimplistic as she appears, I for one cut her no slack on things like a state-handout future for all comers, paid for by bunnies still paying their taxes.

Also, look at her under-the-table activities she’s now being called out for.

The easy logic of communism/socialism/left liberalism? No thanks, I saw the results in Russia and yes, the third one there equates to the other too, leads to it at least. Someone has to pay for it all – who?

The gung-ho interventionist ra-ra-ra of the neocon? No thanks, it’s just as mindlessly accepting of a Blair or Bush, although powerful home defences are another matter. And I’m no Rand Paul in my opposition to wars – some are essential, e.g. a new Reconquista to rid the land of the violent invaders.

Put our own Harrier replacements back on our own carriers? Yes please – divert foreign aid currently flowing to rich nations into this, far better use of resources.

Defence or warmongering? Defence please. Rothschild or the Jewish left? Israel or Iran? The choices are not straightforward. The Wall or the constitutional power of the House? No deal or WTO?

New tech, AI-assisted handout future for all or a culture of industry and growth? National salvation or personal redemption? Good questions, eh?

In Quantum of Solace, Mathers says to Bond:

But I guess when one is young, it seems very easy to distinguish between right and wrong but as one gets older, it becomes more difficult – the villains and the heroes get all mixed up.

[H/T the N.O. crew]

Oh, just one more on moral fluidity, pointed out by Anna Bacon on Twitter:

Beto O’Rourke supports the Green New Deal and takes “No Fossil Fuel Money” pledge while accepting hundreds of thousands in contributions from the gas and oil industry.

One of her readers, Gnome, added:

Lol and promptly sends money to start caravans This guy is a joke.

’Nuff for now.

2 comments for “The heroes and villains get all mixed up

  1. March 12, 2019 at 03:07

    Not trying to be flip but Mathers had it backwards.
    No wonder he wound up dead.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.