The Radicalization of America

Originally posted by Apsaroke
I think the shift of this adminstration to focus on radical Islamists was to give this country it's new enemy and focus on aggression. Since the Cold War ended, we really have had nothing to focus on in that regards. I'm not going to go so far as to say it is completely unwarranted. There is a threat there, but I'm not so ready to say it is an imminent threat as it is being sold to me by this administration.

Trans-national terror has been on the rise since the end of World War 2. It is facilitated by a lot of things. Here in the 21st century, with instant global communications, its now possible for criminals and terrorists around the world to talk with each other at a moment's notice. That means that people who live in different countries can still have the same axe to grind...and...they can coordinate their efforts.

It's true that some national governments do sponsor terror. It's also true that many stateless terror groups carry out attacks every day. the threat is real, but it hasn't been represented for what it is. In this respect, our last four Presidents have done a poor job of educating the American public.

Originally posted by Apsaroke
Yes, we did sustain an attack on our soil. But I'm still out on the root cause of those attacks. I will venture to say that I am of the opinion that in order to justify a war and a military effort on the scale of which we do currently have, this country needed to have something "jolt" it to supoprt that kind of action. Without those attacks, this population would have never supported a "war on terror".

The simple truth is that if you posess anything worth having, somebody will try and steal it. If somebody oposses you so utterly, they will eventaully try and kill you. They might use suicide bombers, or they might use...commercial jet liners.

I look at the Islamist threat as a reaction to an overall clash of civilizations. The fundies now feel sufficiently threatened to act. Never mind that their actions are by and large NOT going to change what happens next. They are an old guard fighting to hold back a wave of change that they can't hope to stop. In some ways, I pity them.

Originally posted by Apsaroke
I love Ben Franklin's quote that you used and I agree whole-heartedly with it. Unfortunately, it seems that we have reached a point in our society where people are much happier living "comfortably and safe" than they are with living "free" and they are ready to support whatever it placed in front of them in order to ensure that comfortable and safe environment.

Freedom isn't free, but its very easy to take for granted. Politicians know this. As long as they can keep you happy, they can stay in power. If they can't win you over with prosperity, they'll be just as happy to scare you in to granting them the power they couldn't take from you.

Originally posted by Apsaroke
I'm of the opinion that this government (over a period of decades and across both aisles) have done a marvelous job of creating a "Welfare State of Mind" in many Americans - even those never having been on government assistance. When bad things happen, it appears that the initial reaction of the overall populace seems to be "When will the government fix this for me?" as opposed to "How Can I fix this?" I think this is exactly where they want the minds of Americans to be.

Once upon a time, our leaders asked us to be observant and brave. Self-reliance was a virtue, and self-sufficiency was what you tried to be so that you could have enough extra to help others. Today, we are urged to be compliant and afraid. We are told that perserverance is a sign of selfishness. We are conditioned to think that self-sufficiency is a form of anti-social behavior. If you're look for proof of conspiracy, I'd say that this was it.

Originally posted by Apsaroke
I consider myself to be a watcher of people and human behavior is fascinating to me. I watched the events of Hurrican Katrina and the human behavior that went with it. It was really very intriguing to me. What I found by watching the media reports was very disappointing in how a population can mentally arrive at a place where they feel unable to fend for themselves. People thirsting to death in a flood zone. That to me is amazing. People with both feet working clamoring becuase they are "trapped". People stuck on front porches waiting to be resuced as large drifting material floats by. And so on.

One of the simplest truths of life is that our leaders often set the priorities that the rest of us live by. If the urged us to be brave and observant, we would be. If they asked us to be self-sufficient, we would be. If they rewarded civics insstead of self interest, we'd all be a lot better off. They wouldn't have so much power over us, but the majority would be happy-er.

Originally posted by Apsaroke
I don't think that people are capable of thinking for themselves anymore on a whole. And while I agree with you that it things will have to get much worse before action is taken, I'd wager that the action we will then see will be the people turning against each other before we see them tackle the real source of the problem (IE the government). You mentioned before that we are divided, and Yes, we are. Horribly divided do much that we as a society cannot even come together to face a common enemy in our own country. Our time is spent with bickerings over "liberals" vs. "conservatives" and "republicans" vs. "democrats, and most definately we stay divided on any myriad of moral issues the government tosses out to us to keep us bickering amongts ourselves. These ploys work and have worked for decades. And I see those ploys continuing to work. I don't see in human nature what you see. Perhaps it's my point of visibility.

As I've said in other parts of this forum, I think think that the Republican party as we have know is...finished. That's too bad because we're about to lose an important voice. In the past, Republicans have advocated for smaller government, and they've also urged fiscal responsibility.

I share many of your concerns over the religious right, but I think they too are on their way out. They've destroyed the political party that has supported them for so long. It's only a matter of time until they come back, but we won't have to worry about that for at least ten years.

I would like to point out one thing. If people on ATS like what you have to say, they'll give you a star on your post, or flag your threads. Keep an eye out for those things. That's how you'll "know" that others are paying attention to what you say. May, just maybe, you educate of change a few minds along the way.

posted by Justin Oldham
In the modern context, radicalism will result in home-grown terrorism that will be exploited by our leaders. In the same way that Federal officials “fail” to act decisively against terrorism abroad, they’ll fall short here at home until they’ve achieved all the power there is to have. Then, and only then, will they crack down just hard enough to suppress what they’ll call “fanatical opposition” here at home.

I warn everyone here about TWO unmentioned but super-important issues.

1) ALL volunteer Armed Forces. The men and women in our Armed Force are already or could be constantly subjected to pro-government propaganda, and are vulnerable to being co-opted by being informed on matters not circulated to the general public. Making them “insiders” privy to knowledge held by only a few.
Q. To who do you believe they owe primary loyalty, to the people who sign their paychecks and hold their economic future in their hands? Or to some far off document that none of them have read and many cannot spell?

2) Urban warfare. All and I say again, ALL our Armed Forces are now highly trained and practiced in URBAN warfare. They are much better now then a few years ago, as this story will exemplify.

On December 4, 1969, tactical unit of the Cook County, Illinois State's Attorney's Office, in conjunction with the Chicago Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation MURDERED Mark Clark and Fred Hampton, and wounded others. Hampton's body was dragged into the doorway of the bedroom and left in a pool of blood. The officers then directed their gunfire towards the remaining Panthers, who were hiding in another bedroom. They were wounded, then beaten and dragged into the street, where they were arrested on charges of aggravated assault and the attempted murder of the officers. The Panthers had fired one shotgun blast as the door was broken in. All the other 43 holes in the apartment were put there by police bullets.

At a press conference the next day, the police announced the arrest team had been attacked by the "violent" and "extremely vicious" Panthers and had defended themselves accordingly. In a second press conference on December 8, the assault team was praised for their "remarkable restraint," "bravery," and "professional discipline" in not killing all the Panthers present. en.wikipedia.org...

Or, how far is it from Baghdad and Fallujah to Cleveland and Little Rock?

In their day, the leaders of the Soviet Union didn’t totally eliminate political opposition. They pushed just hard enough to keep the opposition in check. They kept the radicals in play so that there would always be an enemy for the loyalist people to fear. Partially defeated terrorism amounts to job security for the 21st century political party that can maintain majorities in the House and the Senate. Don’t mistake this for anarchism. It’s too premeditated to be random. No society survives that kind of polarization without paying an extreme price.

I am not exactly calling you to task Mr J/O, on your perception on the USSR and its homegrown opposition, but it was my impression that Stalin did not tolerate even potential opposition. Neither was Lavrenty Beria ever mistaken for a nice guy. Nor did anyone ever book into the Lubyanka prison thinking it to be the Moscow Hilton.

As for your pertinent remarks on “partially defeated” terrorism, I dispute this hokum called the War on Terror is a valid response to the Nine Eleven Event. I see it as a political sham and extreme opportunism invented on September 12, 2001, to secure the ‘04 election for Bush43 who had already shown he was in way over his head. I’m sure (as I can be) that by 2 PM on THAT day, Bush Sr called Bush Jr and said “Son, if you’ll kick every ass on the planet, your re-election is assured.” And the rest is history. I pray the WoT can be ended January 20, 2009.

OK, so I’m not much into prayer, I’m sort of like the fellow Voltaire quoted, “Oh God, if there be one, Save my soul, if I have one.”

As for the House and Senate, there is only ONE solution. CFR!

Our first civil war was fought for a combination of economic and political reasons. Our next internal conflict will also be fought for economic and political reasons. The integrity of the Union will be at stake, too. There will be one vital difference. The outcome won’t affect “some” us. It’ll affect “all” of us. Federal supremacy might very well become the new slavery.

“Federal supremacy might very well become the new slavery.” This sentiment reminds me more of John C. Calhoun that a 21st century author.

I say that not meant to be harsh, but because I see the strong Federal government as the ONLY way to A) avoid the calamity or B) to come out of it WHOLE. As I see it, we are still fighting the Civil War - officially labeled the War of the Rebellion - and as I have lamented elsewhere, the Union won the war but the Rebels have won the peace. At least up to now. Believe you me, if I were king for day, I’d restore Reconstruction until those people - whites in the 11 Old South states - did like the Austrian emperor who walked across the Alps to Rome on his bloody knees.

We can’t stop this radicalization from over taking us, but we can prevent our leaders from exploiting it if and only if we can insist on responsibility and civic accountability to such an extent that the social considerations become an acknowledged political factor that our leaders can’t ignore. They will serve us, or we will serve them.

Accountability? Huff! No one above the rank of corporal is ever held accountable. Recall the Japanese CEO after a plane crash, committed hara-kari? That’s ACCOUNTABILITY. Over here, at worse, they get a multi-million dollar golden parachute. Accountability? That's a JOKE! It only served as a diversion tactic. Yes, I’d like to see public officials held accountable, but I will not live that long.

Perhaps we’ll see another In 1789, Revolution was brewing in France. The traditional monarchy was in trouble. Running out of money, Louis XVI called a meeting of the French Parliament (the "Estates-General") to consider a tax raise. [He had bankrupted France by making many loans to America.]

On June 21, however, the Estates-General declared itself a National Assembly, and the French Revolution was underway. On July 14, a Paris mob stormed the Bastille, and on August 28, the new French Republic issued the Declaration of Human and Citizen Rights. On August 10, 1792, a Paris mob overran the royal family's residence, massacring the Swiss Guard that protected the royal family. Soon afterward the revolutionaries overthrew the monarchy and guillotined Louis XVI, proclaiming a French Republic on September 25, 1792. From Wikipedia.

North Vietnam ran re-education or re-indoctrination camps for the South Vietnamese who had made all the wrong choices. After all, you don’t want them to keep making bad choices. They need to LEARN what are good choices and what are bad choices. Group good, self bad, and etc.

[edit on 1/28/2008 by donwhite]

Shucks, Don. You're starting to sound more like me all the time.

Stalin, Beria, and later Breznev and Andropov...were not nice men. AFter STalin was gone, they recognized that it was 'wise' to leave a few rebels lurking in the weeds so they've have something to find and extinguish whenever the people got too complacant.

I have no doubts that a large percentage of the battle tested U.S. Army is now "loyalist" to the Federal government. In theevent of a revolt, that fact will take its toll on any resistence. Any government that would indoctrinate an all volunteer force so that it COULD turn on its own is something we should fear.

One of my earlierst threads on ATS touched on the matter of U.S. troops being used against Americans on our own soil. In that same time period, I brought up the small matter of the Posse Comitatus Act, and its prohibitions against the use of Federal force.

I don't make many threads, but when I do...

reply to post by Justin Oldham

Shucks, Don. You're starting to sound more like me all the time. Stalin, Beria, and later Brezhnev and Andropov . . . were not nice men. After Stalin was gone, they recognized that it was 'wise' to leave a few rebels lurking in the weeds so they've have something to find and extinguish whenever the people got too complacent.

Mr J/O, I am in no position to dispute what you say about the old USSR and its need to have local enemies at the ready to overshadow a dismal economy compared to anywhere. Point for Justin.

I have no doubts that a large percentage of the battle tested U.S. Army is now "loyalist" to the Federal government. In the event of a revolt, that fact will take its toll on any resistance. Any government that would indoctrinate an all volunteer force so that it COULD turn on its own is something we should fear.

A draft will end that real potential and highly tempting threat. We had a fair draft in WW2 because we took durn near everybody. 16 million. Korea was barely 4 years post-War 2 and war sentiment was still high especially in those my age who were piqued at having missed the Grandest Event of All Time. As you may already know from my other posts, I enlisted in the Army National Guard in 1949 and in the US Air Force in 1952. The Universal Military Training and Service Act - UMTS - became law in 1953, requiring every able bodied male to give 8 years service to his country. 2 years active and 6 years reserve in the Army and MC Infantry draft. 3 and 5 in Army and MC enlistments and 4 and 4 in Navy and Air Force enlistments. Sleep in the mud for 2 years or on clean sheets for 4 years. I’m a clean sheet warrior!

Obedience. It is essential that all lawful orders be obeyed quickly and correctly. Otherwise you don’t have an army, you have a mob wearing the same color clothes. But what is “lawful?” we dealt with that question in my AF basic training in 1952 at Lake Seneca NY. As bottom level soldiers or airmen, we were counseled to first OBEY the order THEN report it to superiors. If you opt to DISOBEY and it turns out to have been a lawful order, you can see you’re looking at 90 days in the stockade at best and 20 years at Leavenworth at worst. Part of the training in the Army and MC is to get AUTOMATIC responses from superiors. The mission of the Navy and AF does not require such predicable and reliable responses. And I was never good at taking orders so for self-protection why go where there is danger?

I brought up the small matter of the Posse Comitatus Act, and its prohibitions against the use of Federal force. I don't make many threads, but when I do...

The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction. [Google]

U.S. Code as of: 01/19/2004 Section 1385.
Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly
authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses
any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or
otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Well, there is the PCA. Basically worthless. Let’s forget any reliance on this law. If I was Commander-in-Chief for Life as Bush43 imagines himself to be, then I’d use the NAVY and the USMC for my devious dealings and be safely OUTSIDE the law’s proscriptions. Even a legal scholar like Alberto Gonzales could have thought of that.

Plus, recall reading about the Pullman strike? The Lead, CO strike? The Bonus March in W-DC? An act honored in its breach?

I'm well aware of the strike busting that used to be done with Federal troops. Thank you, T.R. I also understand that we're likely to see Federal forces used on U.S. soil tome time during the next decadate. Just one one thing that will contribute to that trend in radicalization that I'm warning against.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

I'm well aware of the strike busting that used to be done with Federal troops. Thank you, T.R. I also understand that we're likely to see Federal forces used on U.S. soil tome time during the next decade. Just one one thing that will contribute to that trend in radicalization that I'm warning against.

Well J/O, recall also the recent squabble over patrolling the Mexican border? As a compromise the US has activated some NM National Guardsmen to "watch" the border. Worse, the DEA and USAF and USCG have collaborated to intercept Columbian coc aine. Not with much success but at HUGE expense to taxpayers probably unaudited. Secret, you know. And training in all kinds of civilian intercepts by military types. Aside: We have wrecked Columbia. Like Iraq, most Columbians wish we'd get the heck outta there. Still worse, Venezuela is claiming the Columbians - WH ordered under CIA direction? - are planning to invade ostensibly due to the recent incursions by Venezuela to release hostages.

Columbia is a failed state despite US Army, CIA and DEA involvement for decades! Sweet Jesus! Come Quick!

[edit on 1/30/2008 by donwhite]

Like so many things done in recent decades, Uncle Sam has done half a job when it comes to Columbia. Gang-cartels like MS-13 now have networks and pipelines that stretch from Columbia to the United States.

There is no doubt in my mind that U.S. policy around the world has been ineffective for the last three deaces. Those failures will come home to haunt us as gang-cartels evolve in to movement-sponsored terror groups.

The next decade will be a mess of our own making.

In my humble and all too uniformed opinion we started to loose a lot of our freedoms when diversity hit the scene. As I discussed with J.O. in a previous post. When we are no longer all citizens of one country united we will become a bickering bunch of diverse cultures fighting over who is right. I believe we cannot stop the flow of hatred that is only beginning to flow and that is just what the powers that be are wanting. If we cannot stop fighting amongst ourselves we cannot focus on the real problem. I do not see real immigration reform and I also see on the horizon a growing racial resentment from all races. We already have the islamic/arabic resentment as well as a growing resentment towards hispanics illegal or not. Couple this with an already volatile issue with the african american people and we have a disaster waiting to happen. When the economic meltdown finally hits rock bottom we will blame the other races for it and not the real culprits of corporatism[i.e. fascism] that are currently running amok in this country. We as a people need to unite under one purpose to ever defeat the threat we are now facing. I just don't think that there is a movement afoot that is capable of leading us back to a unified people. As it is said "United we stand divided we fall."

respectfully

reluctantpawn

reply to post by Justin Oldham

There is no doubt in my mind that U.S. policy around the world has been ineffective for the last three decades. Those failures will come home to haunt us as gang-cartels evolve in to movement-sponsored terror groups. The next decade will be a mess of our own making.

Where does anything start? I think World War Two was a sufficient watershed event that we can look back no further than 1941 or 1945 in any of our foreign adventures. The US was isolationist after the 1919 debacle over the League of Nations until 1941. Except for our ‘colonies’ in Central America and the Caribbean. We’ve ‘watched’ over them ever since James Monroe. NOT to their advantage as is obvious if you look at any of them.

The Cubans ran us out around 1903 and again in 1959. We killed over 100,000 Muslim terrorists in the Philippines (Mindanao) in the first decade of the 20th century. I don’t know how many times we have invaded Haiti and it is still the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere or so we have said.

Ike first screwed Iran in 1953, for which we are still paying, and in 1954, Ike threw Arbenz Guzmán out of Guatemala when he offered to do real land reform. A no-no when United Fruit Co owns the land. Pres. Kennedy had the Diem brothers assassinated in South Vietnam in 1963. President Johnson had Ernesto Che Guevara assassinated in 1967, in Bolivia of all places. Kennecott Copper tin mines. President Nixon had Chile’s Salvador Allende assassinated in 1973. Reagan and Bush Sr broke the law in Nicaragua but a much older and wiser Daniel Ortega finally got to take the office the people wanted him in.

We fomented the Hungarian Revolt in 1956 but failed to back the rebels as promised on the VoA - Voice of America. Reagan illegally invaded Granada and we lost 34 men all to friendly fire. Bush Sr illegally invaded Panama and we still hold Manuel Noriega in prison. In June, 2006, Bush Jr had Abu Musab al-Zarqawi assassinated in Iraq.

For each one of those stories there are 10 more we don’t hear about. It looks hopeless to me.

[edit on 1/30/2008 by donwhite]

Our situation doesn't look hopeless to me. It's true that we've got to work off a lot of bad karma, I do think that we still have the power to learn from our mistakes. The radicalization we face in the next decade will be part of that learning curve.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

Trans-national terror has been on the rise since the end of World War 2. It is facilitated by a lot of things. Here in the 21st century, with instant global communications, its now possible for criminals and terrorists around the world to talk with each other at a moment's notice. That means that people who live in different countries can still have the same axe to grind ... and ... they can coordinate their efforts. It's true that some national governments do sponsor terror. It's also true that many stateless terror groups carry out attacks every day. the threat is real, but it hasn't been represented for what it is. In this respect, our last four Presidents have done a poor job of educating the American public.

One man’s terrorist is another man’s hero. Terrorism is the weapon of last resort. Now called “asymmetric” warfare, it recognizes the advantage of both surprise and the use of indigenous personnel. Locals.

We surely must have learned in our long and costly involvement in Vietnam that terrorism cannot survive without the covert support of the local population. Ignoring the obvious, we instead are running around like headless chickens shooting here, shooting there, as often hitting non-combatants as hitting those who threaten the STATUS QUO we seek to impose and maintain. We would be better off FINDING leaders the locals know and trust and supporting them in a legitimate government. Instead we make all the wrong choices. Over and over. No, we prefer lackeys and brute force. It is as if we have NO institutional memory?

If you do not honor your history, you must repeat it.

[edit on 1/31/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by Justin Oldham

Our situation doesn't look hopeless to me. It's true that we've got to work off a lot of bad karma, I do think that we still have the power to learn from our mistakes. The radicalization we face in the next decade will be part of that learning curve.

Hope 1. In the past, America’s universities were one place where truth was openly sought if not always found. With the rise in faculty salaries and the need to publish, the in-born honesty poverty often generates is missing. My alma mater, the U of Louisville, has a $25 m. annual inter-mural athletics budget. And that is so small a budget Louisville is barely able to keep a top 25 team in both football and basketball at one time. I don’t know but I’ll bet the library budget is not even half the inter-mural budget. Choices and priorities.

Hope 2. Which brings me to another reliable place to find intelligence well used for the greater good. Our libraries. Our librarians. Library science. It is the last redoubt of liberals. The Right Wing Thought Police - who never read anything not written by Tim Lehay - have overlooked the wonderful work still done by librarians who have to choose from a half million titles every year, on 10,000 volume budgets. I don’t want to bring it up too often because it is as I have said, the last place where knowledge weighs in heavier than ideology.

So there’s your 2 “HOPES” as I see it.


Post Script. In 1956 when Ike was running against Adlai Stevenson for the 2nd time, some people had impiously accused Ike of philandering during his long stint in London prior to D-Day. Ike could have flown back anytime to see Mamie but he never did. A book had been written by a young woman named Kay Summersby. “Eisenhower Was My Boss” was it’s title. A 7 X 9 format of some 175 pages. Not much of a book, physically. But dynamite in its contents! When Ike was given the Overlord assignment - 1943 - the British politely furnished him with a local driver, a young woman private newly inducted into the British Army Motor Service. Ike's new and attractive chauffeur.

When Ike flew to Cairo for a Big 3 conference, Ms. Summersby accompanied him. In fact, you did not see Ike unless you also saw Kay. In her book she denies having sex with Ike, but not convincing to me.

Let’s put it this way:
Q. How many young Brits enlisted as a private in the British Army in War 2, and left the service 4 years later as a CAPTAIN in the American Army and with US citizenship?
A. One. And that was Kay Summersby.

This book was surreptitiously removed from the Richmond Ky library by an ardent Republican who claimed to have lost the book. Out of print, we heard from around the country that most libraries had “lost” the book under similar circumstances. Yes, I have read the book. A Democrat librarian at Eastern Ky State College (Richmond) kept the copy in her desk for carefully controlled circulation. No GOPs thank you. DW

[edit on 1/31/2008 by donwhite]

I think it's more a case of polarization, rather than radicalization, Justin. But that is more semantics than anything else.

America has always been divided over many issues since it's founding two plus centuries ago. Nothing new there. Those issues have ranged from racial/ethnic, religious, school busing, integration, oh so many others. It's just with the advent of instant media, such as ATS, blogs, talk radio, etc...it's never been more out there to see.

It's not neccessarily a bad thing either. Social change and political change all occur because of this polarization. It's a pendulum going first one way than another. You can't have a dynamic society without polarization of views. IMHO, of course...

Hello Seagull:

The polarization you refer to have been steadily tracked since the 1980's. It's already here. The next step in political devolution would be radicalization, which is starting to happen now. It'll take us 2-4 years to see it 'bloom' to the point where it can't be denied.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

The polarization you refer to have been steadily tracked since the 1980's. It's already here. The next step in political devolution would be radicalization, which is starting to happen now. It'll take us 2-4 years to see it 'bloom' to the point where it can't be denied.

John McCain, if elected, would definitely PUSH the country towards violent radicalization, IMO. Duty, Honor, Country. The West Point motto. McCain has made that his mantra. Who said “Patriotism is the last refuge of fools and knaves?” He has already declared himself to be the PRO war candidate. He urged the SURGE before Bush43 thought of it. It fitted in to Bush43s need to distract the public from the seating of Congress in January ‘07, to the end of the fiscal year, September, ‘07. Running out the clock. Bush43 succeeded in avoiding Congressional hearings all summer long. Now, as far as his Second Punitive Expedition to Iraq is concerned, it’s too late to do anything about the War. Now John McCain says he is ready to pick up the torch! Bring on the 100 Years War! He truly wants a war of religions. Bad, bad and bad.

OTOH, to have domestic violence on any significant scale, you need a cover group and an excited sub-group. For better or for worse, the only such group is the African Americans. Although they are constantly disabused of their right to participate and are cut out of 90% of the prosperity white Americans have enjoyed the past 7 years, they are not as yet sufficiently injured so as to protect home-grown dissenters.

We are not in the 1960s, Y E T.

[edit on 2/1/2008 by donwhite]

I think we're going to see a substantial re-write of the radical's handbook over the next ten years. As I've said before, we face a) economic radicalization, b) political radicalization, and c) religious radicalization. They will feed on each other. I think they will occur in the order I've listed them, too.

Don posted: OTOH, to have domestic violence on any significant scale, you need a cover group and an excited sub-group . . the only such group is the African Americans . . they are disabused of their right to participate and are cut out of 90% of the prosperity white Americans have enjoyed . . they are not as yet sufficiently injured so as to protect home-grown dissenters. We are not in the 1960s, Y E T.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

I think we're going to see a substantial re-write of the radical handbook over the next ten years. As I've said before, we face a) economic radicalization, b) political radicalization, and c) religious radicalization. They will feed on each other. I think they will occur in the order I've listed them, too.

A) Your c) I agree in part, disagree in part. Religious radicalization has been pushed hard by Bush43 at every opportunity. Others of supposedly brighter lights have copied him and pronounce this a War of Culture, a War of Religions. Say hello Pope Urban 2. Your cause lives! (Urban fomented the First Crusade in 1095 AD).

B) Your b) The Patriot Act is the shot across the bow of the political radicalization of the United States. Extraordinary rendition is another. Secret detention is one. Classification as an enemy combatant is yet one more. ALL are the product of the legal genius of Texas native son AG Alberto Gonzales. Him of 154 executions. It is also Gonzales who easily convinced Bush43 that the Constitution’s Article 2 post of Commander-in-Chief made him in effect the lineal successor of Oliver Cromwell as Lord Protector of the country. For quick reference here it is: Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1: The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; END of related quote. But See Note 1.

C) Your a) Economic radicalization is guaranteed to get worse as GOP tax strategy is further implemented. Notable example: to excuse the R&Fs from paying an inheritance tax (estate tax) is one more shot across the African American’s already taking-on-water ship, as they have NO estates to pass on to later generations. OK, so it’s 99.44% that have NONE. Yet, I do not believe the level of economic discrimination is yet at the “gun-powder” flash point stage, it is inexorably working its way towards that very predicable Big Bang!


Note 1. and see also Article 2, Section 1, Clause 6: “Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

[edit on 2/3/2008 by donwhite]

In the not too distant future, Democrats will once again be in charge of our national policy. They will hold the White House and they'll control the House and Senate. You'll have to re-phrase your anti-Republican argumetns when President Clinton starts to do more of the same badness that is taking us down the wrong path.

As I've said in many of my threads, the overall trend is such that traditional labels no longer need apply. The Democrats and the Republicans are equally ruinous to our country at this point. having won so many of my points in open argument at this time, I won't have any trouble calling this for what it is no matter who takes the big chair.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

In the not too distant future, Democrats will once again be in charge of our national policy. They will hold the White House and they'll control the House and Senate.

On another thread I said the “GOP is racing to nominate a man too old, a man who has promised to stay in Iraq ‘100 years’ and who will work hard to raise the Defense budget and cut taxes at the same time.” The country will be hard pressed to add another 4 years of counter-intuitive governance to 8 years just finished.

Then I added this foreboding sense of the times. The Dems may well be about to nominate a candidate who cannot win, a candidate who will give the race to the GOP, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity missed.

You'll have to re-phrase your anti-Republican arguments when President Clinton starts to do more of the same badness that is taking us down the wrong path.

Well, I’m not anti-Republican because I don’t like the people who have subscribed to that unworkable philosophy, hey, we all make mistakes. I do constantly challenge the world that GOP vision would produce if left to its own devices. “Trickle-down” economics was phony at the beginning and will not work in its current incarnation. Generational shifting of the tax burden.

We are seeing money that should have been paid in taxes instead put into the hands of the R&Fs who in turn, buy US Bonds to pay the cost of government, then collect interest on bonds that should not have been required, and finally, are able to leave the bonds to their children tax exempt which will only perpetuate and enlarge the gulf between the have’s and have not’s. Which is the GOP plan. And is why I never miss a chance to bash the Republicans.

As I've said in many of my threads, the overall trend is such that traditional labels no longer need apply. The Democrats and the Republicans are equally ruinous to our country at this point.

But not in the same way.

Having won so many of my points in open argument at this time, I won't have any trouble calling this for what it is no matter who takes the big chair.

Amen!

[edit on 2/5/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by Justin Oldham

I think we're going to see a substantial re-write of the radical handbook over the next ten years. As I've said before, we face a) economic radicalization, b) political radicalization, and c) religious radicalization. They will feed on each other. I think they will occur in the order I've listed them, too.

I am listening to a book, “New World Coming: The 1920s and the Making of Modern America” by Nathan Miller, 2003. The book is available as RC 62083.

The author recounts how the turmoil in the US during our time in War 1 and the immediate aftermath, could be the precursor of the radicalization of America. The AF of L - which I never liked - I’m a CIO man - under Samuel Gompers was allied with employers, local and Federal official to break the first General Strike in the US, at Seattle, sparked by horrible working conditions in the shipbuilding industry.

Andrew Carnegie - the much honored industrialist and founder of USSteel - once the richest man in the world before John Rockefeller - had African Americans brought by trains from Alabama and Mississippi to his giant steel mills in Gary, Indiana, to break a workers strike. For the most part, the transported blacks neither knew of their new employer’s purpose nor understood the issues between owners and workers. For them, it was just a job that paid in cash! But the incident soured previously non-existent relations - no blacks lived in Gary - into one of bitterness felt by whites which survives to this very day!

The author recounts the Boston police strike. Working 12 hour shifts six days a week, buying their own uniforms and paid $28 a week. Much violence and looting occurred, so that MA governor Calvin Coolidge ordered the MA state police into the city. That broke the strike and Coolidge became a hero of the main stream press which hailed him as a “protector” against Bolshevism. Aside: Almost all of America’s newspapers coupled labor agitation or unrest to the new (1917) Soviet Bolsheviks. Unions were labeled as puppets of Trotsky and Lenin. (Stalin did not appear until 1926). Coolidge went on to win the 1920 GOP nomination for VP with Warren G. Harding as president, both running against James Cox for president and Franklin Delano Roosevelt for vice president. You know the rest.

America and Racism. There were 76 lynching in America in 1919. 10 blacks were lynched while still wearing their WW1 US Army uniforms. 14 blacks were burned publicly, 11 while still alive. The local newspaper in Jackson MS, on June 26, 1919, announced “the jailer was going to release a black suspect at 4 PM and it is expected he will be burned.” They did and he was.

In Duluth MN in 1920, a young (white) girl was raped. 3 young black men were immediately arrested. A crowd (mob) went to the girls home and asked the mother about her daughter. “She’s in bed,” the mother replied, but the crowd misheard her to say “she’s dead.” The mob rushed to the jail, took out the 3 blacks who were immediately strung up on a lamp post on the main street. Pictures were taken of the three hanging suspended by the neck and made into postcards which were popular tourist items as late as the 1940s. The 3 were memorialized in a song “Desolation Row” by Bob Dylan.

All told, between 1918-1927, there were 454 lynchings in America. 38 victims were white men (all were lynched by white mobs). 11 black women were lynched, 3 of which were pregnant. 32 blacks were buried alive and 8 were hacked or beaten to death.

Politics and the First Amendment. Victor Berger, a short history. A German born immigrant turned socialist was elected to Congress in 1918 from Milwaukee. He was denied his seat by the US House. Running again but losing in the 1920 GOP landslide, he was finally reelected in 1922 and this time he was allowed to take his seat. Shortly after arriving in W-DC, he was run over and killed by a streetcar.

In 1919 the newly formed American Legion - I knew there was a reason I don’t like the AL - attacked an IWW (International Workers of the World) meeting hall in Centrailia, WA. The "wobblies" as they were called, were armed and exchanged fire with the AL. The others surrendered but Wesley Edwards fled and in the process killed one of his pursuers. He too was captured and was severely beaten and taken to jail.

That night the lights went out all over Centrailia. A party of men broke into the jail, took Edwards out. He was again beaten and this time also castrated. He was then driven to a nearby bridge over a river and thrown over the side with a rope around his neck. He was hauled up 2 time to see if he was dead, then dropped into the water again. To make sure he was dead, they pulled his corpse up, left it suspended and used it for target practice. The body remained there for 2 days. A warning to anyone stupid enough to join a union

The coroner reported: “He escaped from jail, fled to the bridge, put a rope around his neck, jumped over and then shot himself to death.” Ruling: suicide.

Conclusion. America was radicalized in 1919-1920. Anti-immigrations laws were passed that stayed on the books until the 1960s. The US government, local police, and America’s money making newspapers claiming First Amendment protections conspired and prevailed to QUASH the “revolt” of the poor and workers. It was work well done with lots of (worker's) blood shed around the country in the process.

I’d admit the US main stream media - the top 10 papers and AP, UP and INS - did a passingly good job informing on the issues, from the mid-1930s until the 1963 assassination of JFK. From that time onward, it has been all downhill. Although I endlessly berate Rupert Murdoch, he is the CONSEQUENCE of the yellow press and not the cause. I still hold him in disdain as the best-worst symbol of all that is bad in the media, including FOX tv. I hate him because he espouses all the things I oppose.

[edit on 2/5/2008 by donwhite]