From: komos	Date: September 19th, 2003 06:03 am (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: Political Dissent

I can honestly say that I've not advocated armed revolt, though I'm not sure I agree. Even the authors of The Federalist recognized the need for periodic revolution.

No, really I'm just tired of folks saying that speaking or writing about the current regime is pointless. It was bad enough when the neo-cons tried to convince us that dissent was unpatriotic. Having others dismiss discussion out of hand as well just reinforces that informal gag.

	From: shelbyg	Date: September 23rd, 2003 12:02 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: Political Dissent

I would have to expect supporters of the current administration to poo-poo dissent. Let's face it, the current administration does not hold up well to scrutiny or historical comparison. So supporters would do well to stop any such activity before it starts.

However, for the apathetic to be spreading their insidious and destructive complacency to others by quelling dissent for the sake of naps. That is TRULY wrong and an insidious evil.

	From: komos	Date: September 23rd, 2003 01:15 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: Political Dissent

Supporters would have us believe that the world began in 1991. Since I can remember farther back than that, I feel it's necessary to dis-illusion them.

And your thoughts on the complacent are precisely what I'm talking about.

	From: shelbyg	Date: September 23rd, 2003 02:22 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: Political Dissent

The trouble is that I am tired, and I do like to nap.

I thought that the current regime thought the world started in 1980, and was glorious and unspoiled untill 1988 when it was not quite as shiny and new, but still nice. Then the dark days came in 1992...

Shelby

	From: komos	Date: September 24th, 2003 06:14 am (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: Political Dissent

The 1980's are a time of legend. Any ackowledgement of them takes the form of worship of that Arthur-like king, Ronald Reagan, who made America a fertile paradise and brought untold prosperity to his people.

Talking about the 80's as an historical fact becomes difficult since then you have to acknowledge that the US actually helped to create the likes of Hussein and Bin Laden. At that point, there's a whole string of "why's" that can't be addressed without just falling back on the shrugging, "Well, geopolitics is complex..." There's also no answer to the very real question, "Since the US has been actively mucking around in the Persian Gulf since the late 1940's and has done nothing more than create a progressively bigger mess, what makes you think that the creation of the American Occupied Territories will be any more successful?"

No, it's much easier to point out how Hussein was a very bad man, invading his innocent neighbor and dropping nerve gas on his own people. If there's no grey area, there's no further thought required, is there?

I don't mind that you like to nap. But you have never once told me that I needed to do, too.

	From: komos	Date: September 23rd, 2003 09:41 am (UTC)		(Link)

Just cry "Havoc!" and let loose the dogs of war.


On first reading, I thought you had written "Furries," which is another thing entirely.

	From: grashupfer	Date: September 24th, 2003 08:01 am (UTC)		(Link)

Heh. Furries and Furies? Same thing certain times of the month.