posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 04:24 PM
I thought this was a cartoon people here would like, and would hopefully generate some good discussion:
So, what do you all think? I believe unraveling this dichotomy
is key to establishing a healthier and freer society (as well as brining together seemingly disparate groups that equally despise what they call the
true powers that be).
If I had to say, clearly Huxley's vision is much more the type of oppression I recognize in modern day america. However, it was under Bush where
clear steps were taken towards an orwellian style of dominance. It is interesting that it was the liberals (aside from Ron Paul) who were most vocal
in response to the qushing of civil liberties under the bush regime. When many of the less-educated teabag types yell about 'freedom this and freedom
that,' it kills me that they don't seem to realize that there is nothing free about being consumerist automatons....
On the other hand, fascism would probably be even more horrible, so I do understand the fear many libertarians have of big brother. However, I don't
think it helps the cause, in the long-run, to equate stalinism and fascism w/ any type of system that doesn't let corporations do whatever they want
to whoever they want. Humans are somewhat collectivist in nature, and at least at the moment, cultures that seem to have figured that out are poised
to be the super-powers of the next generation.
CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE, THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT PROVIDE CORPORATIONS WITH UNALIENABLE RIGHTS.
Believing the above does not make me a socialist or a communist. In fact, people who want a true free-market system would have to agree that many more
market errors today, in the usa, are a result of corporatism run amok, as opposed to over-regulation. If anything, our regulatory agencies are either
way overwhelmed in terms of man-hours, or corrupted by the lack of a firewall between lobbyists and those that are supposed to be the regulators of
the agencies they represent.