Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lexington Green]

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

[thistle]

Yup, even Claire had an article on the socialist roots of the Pledge of Allegiance.

You Pledge a Wha.. to Wha...
http://www.sierratimes.com/members/files/02/06/13/hardyville.htm

Unfortunately, Sierra Times seems to be down at the moment...and archive.org doesn't have a copy.

[Bill St. Clair]

I'm not sure how much credence to give to Rex Curry. Lots of information on his web site, and he sends out lots of emails. It wouldn't surprise me if it's all true, but I've never seen his stories anywhere else.

The Sierra Times web site is back up.

[iloilo]

A thought:
I am not saying anyone here is doing this stuff, but just to keep this in mind...

We must remember not to resort to argumentatum ad hominem, nor to be swayed by such arguments from others ("he was a socialist, therefore everything he says is bunk!"  --   "or she is an anarchist, therefore everything she says is right") nor to engage in this illogical form of persuasion.  Living as we do in a country of personalities, rather than reason, it is easy to fall into this logic trap.

I do it myself.  I think perhaps others (I had otters here, and started to leave it, just for the levity, but the clarity would have suffered...still, I like otters, so, remember, we are the otters of the universe.) may do it at times as well.  To refute any concept with an attack on a person is simply not a good argument, nor good training for your own critical thinking.  (See www.think.ws for more on thinking.)

I write this to say, or to type, that no matter what the political persuasions -- or any persuasions -- of any individual -- their offerings of ideas must be judged solely on the merits of the ideas offered.   Sure, after you have known some clown a while, and almost everything she says is comedy, you may have trouble taking anything said seriously, much less considering it, and that is called filtering, a perfectly acceptable human facility.

But don't dismiss ideas because they come from a feralfae, or accept them because they come from an Iloilo.  Or the other way around, or some other way, or something like that.

I guess I should send this to Rex....

But I hope it helps everyone with our thinking and how we evaluate concepts and their applications.  Okay, back to other things.

[Lotus Jack]

It is what you want it to be. It's that simple. Everyone has their own interpretation of
the meaning of the pledge. At least if you're thinking.

I could care less what the "socialist" brothers wanted it to mean.

Example: As a former Marine, I took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United
States. My interpretation of the Constitution is not governed by the courts or anyone else. I
am pretty much a literal kind of person. WYSIWYG. Apparently, the Bill of Rights means something
different to me than the government for the past 30 or so years. ( I've only been "aware" that long).

I try to pass along my thoughts and ideas to my children, expose them to multiple viewpoints,
and let them make up their own minds. Now they question most everything they hear in school
to the frustration of their teachers.  It's a start.


Jack

[iloilo]

Yes, I think my own personal pledge would say something like....
"I pledge allegaince to the concept of the sovereign, inviolate individual, and to that very same concept on which this nation was founded.
One person, autonomous and self-regulating, without allegiance to anyone or anything, under no one, but willing to live peacefully with all,  if left alone.
Yes, that is about it.

[Junker]

Howdy, Lexington Green. Good to see you posting. Rex posts regularly to the LRT elist where several people here are also members. Belamy, Lincoln, DiLorenzo, US history and its interpretation have long been part of the discussion here, which ya' prolly already noticed. IAC, welcome and enjoy.

[enemyofthestate]

Benton Partin claims that communism never died. He argues eloquently that all the above groups are singing from the same sheet
of music; not a theory or a plan, but a program called Trotsky's Third International After Lenin. I now have a copy and am reading it.

When I an feeling conspiracy minded, I will say something similar.  Communism did not die with the fall of he Soviet Union. All the Commies just moved to America and became Republicans.

[colby556]

The purpose of the salute, with your arm raised above your head in front of you, is to put the state above the human. Just like the nazi salute.

[Adventurer, Explorer, Inquiring Mind.]

The purpose of the salute, with your arm raised above your head in front of you, is to put the state above the human. Just like the nazi salute.

Yep, you're saluting something HIGHER, hence the raised face.  From a distance it looks like saluting the sky gods.

Its a form of psychological self diminution, originally practiced by psycho religionists, and then borrowed by the government form of psychosis which superseded the religionists once logic looked like it might risk taking a hold.  Fortunately for the psychos, logic DIDN'T take a hold and they're still living large like the rotten scum sucking, bloaded maggots they are.