posted on May, 25 2009 @ 03:36 AM
It would seem I am a bit in error. I mistakenly assumed that this man would at least attempt to resemble Paine's philosophies and convictions - since
he is using Paine's name and likeness. A short while ago I had the opportunity to watch a few of the videos with audio and I was shocked at the
contrast. Indeed, in many ways, this guy is a polar opposite of Paine's convictions. He's donning Paine's visage and reputation to whip up
nationalistic fervor and spread what.. appears to me... to be propaganda. He appears to be a bad stereotype of multiple various "Founding Father
Archetypes" and dressed up with a dash conservative spice. Now, this may be because the founding fathers were the vanguards of the old America - and
structure and tradition tend to be favored by the conservative party. Call it a natural affinity, not a conspiracy and it's necessarily a right wing
movement even if they have picked up on it for various reasons.
A few things of note:
1. Funbob makes reference to taking god out of government. God is a generic blanket term, and it's found in our Declaration of Independence - not
Constitution which is an official governmental document. The insertion of "God" into our currency and pledge happened many many years after the
nation's founding, starting I think during the Civil War - then deemed unconstitutional. It would later be adopted again in the 50's, I believe.
While it's true that Paine evoked scripture and biblical examples in his pamphlet "Common Sense", given Paine's attitudes towards the institutions
of religion I can only see this as being a case of Paine "Talking to the level of his audience". There's a reason why farmers in the fields were
stopping to read his pamphlet. Paine had a wonderful way of speaking directly to his audience in words they would understand, leaving out intellectual
jargon and references only the highly educated would be familiar with, yet still talking to them as intellectual equals. When he sought publication of
"The Rights of Man", it met with heavy criticism for being written in "Vulgar language". Vulgar meaning, in words the common man could understand
and relate to. Paine didn't want his dissertation to be mused in the intellectual circles and applauded, then ignored. He wanted to speak to
everyone. This worried the Monarchy, of course, as they saw him attempting to incite revolution against the crown by inciting the public.
His biblical references and quotations in Common Sense do not reflect an America as a Christian nation - or his own beliefs. They represent an
argument tailor suited to a population who were predominantly Christian. Any confusion regarding an apparent respect for the establishment of religion
is cleared up in Age of Reason. There's a reason why he wrote it in prison while awaiting the gallows. He knew that work would destroy his
reputation... and he was unfortunately right. Paine forever since has been ignored, or slanted as to remove AoR - promoting instead only those works
which reflected well on or were influential to the Revolution.
2. Funbob talks at great length about the unification of America under single banners, principals, and languages. Paine was against this, as he saw
diversity as a strength. Perhaps it was because his homeland executed him symbolically, France tried to execute him literally, and he was increasingly
marginalized and forgotten by his former friends and associates... but Paine seemed to consider himself not a citizen of America - but a citizen of
the Earth, and all men of all nations were his brothers. Paine believed in life on the edge of revolution and change to prevent new tyrannies from
taking root after spending much of his digging out the cancer of monarchies by debasing challenging the absurdity that is the right of kings. I don't
think he would have supported the rigid "Americanism" or form of patriotism which is now being promoted. I think he would have soiled himself at the
thought of the Bailout Bills and our national debt, but I also think he would have seen the ensuing Tea Parties and calls to revolution as pedantic
It's also interesting to note that while Funbob claims America should have ONE language, the English language... in all the years Paine spent in
France and after being given honorary citizenship... Paine never learned to speak French. The history of Paine's life betrays the very assumptions
that Funbob asks that we make of Paine in order to parade around his political agenda in Paine's image.
I'll end this here, but when I have more time I may revisit the thread and compile a comprehensive list of the differences between Paine's words and
his actions - and this mockery of him.
SpartainKing - I'm not concerned with your political affiliations or lack thereof, and I don't make assumptions as to it that invite a stereotype.
My comments only reflect my observation of the movement. While Funbob is likely not pandering to any political party for support, I still seem to
notice a heavy slant towards conservative support. As said, this is likely for two reasons. It speaks to the beginnings of the traditions and
structures our society was founded upon - which I noticed conservatives tend to gravitate towards. There's also a tendency among some within the
right-wing affiliation who are terrified of being out of power. They are concerned that public disapproval of Bush's administration will lead
to carte blanche authority for the liberals to run roughshod over the nation with their policies - having no checks or means of balance. I think
there's a definite strategy within the right-wing leaders to align the Republican party with anything that has to do with anti-government slander,
uber-patriotism, and ultimately calls of revolution. I think that some irresponsible idiots are trying to set up the image, now, that the government
is a corrupt and bloated tyranny that must be tore down so that they will appear to be the heroes and liberators of America. It's a way to recover
the loss of face and public trust after the abuses of the Bush Administration dealt them before mid-term elections.
Obama is not a savior, and he's not even particularly well qualified for the job. (Though, it can be argued, that no job can adequately prepare you
for the pressures of the White House) Yet some within the conservative party seem to be laying an undue amount of the blame for our current situation
on his shoulders. He's only been in office since the middle of January, going having to face the realities of two ongoing wars and an economic crisis
that NOBODY knows how to deal with. Yet we're seeing him blamed for the collapse of America - the antithesis position of those who project savior
complexes upon him. We are increasingly seeing conservative alignments with the NWO/FEMA conspiracy crowd, the ultra-patriots, and with the obvious
promotion of nutcases like Glenn Beck on an admitted conservative mouthpiece network.
Those caught in the middle are just being played, happy they can get some "rising support" for their ideas - but not really seeing (I think) that
should the movement prevail you will just see a return to the status quo.
Ultimately - The jury is still out on Obama for me. He hasn't really had enough time, but some of his decisions thus far do not inspire confidence. I
can at least see the rationale behind it being - we're either screwed now, or screwed later. Pushing it off till later at least might afford the
luxury of time to try to sort the mess out. It reminds me a bit of Kennedy during the October Crisis with the bogus idea of floating the possibility
of a trade - pull out Cuba's missiles and we pull back Turkey's missiles. Yet that move had devastating potential to promote appeasement and force
us into a war later. It was a risk, to avoid the assurance of a war which would come as a result of invasion.
Sorry for going OT. We can pursue this further via U2U or a new thread if you wish.