[detbuch]

Originally Posted by scottw

http://www.people-press.org/2013/11/...ide-continues/

the question is what will happen when the "state" can't keep it's "promises" as it further exceeds it's boundaries, we've seen "three more years" scapegoat just about anyone/everthing for his failures...the most obvious scapegoats will be those "benefitting" from the phony stock market bubble and anyone that threatens all of these "entitlements"....

It's difficult to determine at what stage the growth of the progressive State is in. But the method which has remained the same throughout has always been to "double down" when predictable failures occur. Failure is not due, in their view, to the progressive idea, but to inadequate implementation of it. So when promises appear to have been broken, it is explained that obstruction has stood in the way of fulfillment. And the target of blame has always been to accuse the "wealthy" and those who supposedly support them. Scapegoating, lying, are merely the necessary means to clear the path to their ultimate goal--the completion of the administrative State.

What will happen next depends on how successful they have been in transforming enough of the population to accept their "message". What happens after that depends on how much longer progressivism can expand before it collapses.

Originally Posted by detbuch

..."I think he believes in the progressive message, and that it is separate from the medium of lying.(it's still lying, whether or not you think it is separate from the medium because the message/purpose is noble in your mind.... the progressive message ignores reality and trounces the principles that we live under as a result of our founding, it requires lying or ignorance)

That's true, and he must know that he is lying (merely expanding the truth), but that the "good" he is trying to accomplish merely makes lying a tactic. Lying is one of the peculiar functions of language. Without language of some sort, lying would not be possible. Since the whole progressive idea is built on language rather than reality, all the possibilities of language are its tool.

Now, one might say that our constitutional founding was built on language. But the distinction is in its use of language to tell the truth. Truth being based on experience. And to arrive at "principles" dependent on human nature and that aspect of it which desires liberty. When language is based on its initial function of describing and communicating the observable "real world" it is fact or truth based. When language is removed from experience and drifts into pure theories of what is "good" it is already in a state which can lead to falsehood. It is merely one more step to use falsehood to achieve a desired theoretical end. And, yes, ignorance on the part of those you wish to deceive is necessary. But the desired end (whether they realize it or not) is supposed to be for their own good.


He is good at it. (convincingly distorting truth)His handlers and his party seem to be better at it than their opposition. He and they are very successful. (when you operate, as a group, without conscience, not bound by the rules that you require others to adhere to...it's easy to be good, in fact, you should win most of your battles against those that will not descend to your level , I guess we should take solace in the fact that history shows us that while they win many battles and cause great misery it doesn't always end well -)

Yes, the noble truth is difficult to defend against massive ignorance. Conscience being "the faculty of recognizing the distinction between right and wrong in regard to one's own conduct" is defenseless against those without principle who appeal to mass ignorance, the very ignorance they create with their lies and promises. And yes, all humanly constructed things, good or bad, eventually come to an end. Even Madison predicted that the republic the founders created would only last a hundred years. Though it has lasted longer, in some respects he was right. The gnawing away at it began after about a century and the final bites are taking place. But the true believers will fight to the end....

At some point the charade will be up and forces will require an accounting, it can't continue...they are wallowing in a mess , none can point to anything that indicates a sustainable or sufficient recovery to maintain the current levels of spending and promises let alone the additional future promises to be made as they double down on their "progressive message".......

And "what will happen" when the end comes may be "good" or "bad." Whether we return to a foundation built on experience and has individual liberty as its goal, or continue on to some new theory on how to rule the people may be a toss-up. In the meantime, the battle rages. If the minority who still see the value of our founding can convince enough with their "message" then the end of the Republic may be put off for a long time. If not, welcome brave new world.