Neoconservativism as I now see it a non-experts point of view
"Howdy-doo, we is th' Straussian Trotskyite neoconservatives.
We do'nt believe in a God, but we believe religion an' patriotism is useful so long as us atheists corntrol th' govment an' th' religious varmints. We believe thet us atheists, who corntrol th' govment, hafta lie t'th' varmints in o'der t' git them t'do th' wise thin's.
We're hankerin' yo' t'less rule yo', so thet we kin use yo' in wars thet we pretend is fo' th' purpose of redistributin' power t'th' common man, as enny fool kin plainly see. So we pretend thet th' wars is fo' th' purpose of redistributin' power t'th' common man, whut's wrong wif thet? Af'er all, a key principle of neoconservativism, is thet th' varmints hafta be lied t'so thet th' wise atheist philosophers who rule on over them, kin further expan' an' cement their power. Let us become th' lyin' masters of yo' slaves...."
Such is my amateurish idea of what neo-conservativism might be about.
The problem with Straussian Trotskyite neoconservativism, as I now see it, is that it simply assumes that the national and the world interests are best served when atheists control the government and lie to and control the people.
To this one can posit several possible alternatives: atheists controlling the government but not lying, non-atheists controlling the government and not lying, non-atheists controlling the government and lying.
Where is the proof that for example, non-atheists controlling the government and not lying, is not a superior form of advancing the world and national interests than neo-conservativism? The experiments in atheist, lying government, are few compared to the experiments in non-atheist, honest government. Yet one can readily see, that atheist, lying governments, have in some ways damaged the world even though in some ways they have helped it.
The non-atheist, generally speaking, fears retribution from God for his sins. Thus he strives to live in accordance with his conscience. The atheist by way of contrasts, lacks the inhibitions which prevent men from plunging into uninhibited selfishness.
As for the practice of lying, lying has been condemned by almost all of the world's religions and systems of law. One of the reasons for this, is that liars, use lies as a tool to, for selfish purposes, unfairly deprive men of life and property. It is hard to deprive a man of his property or his life, if you are honest with him, because men do not agree to policies that deprive them of life or liberty.
I do not see how a political theory such as neo-conservativism, can be so decisively enthroned, on the basis of theory alone, with no attention paid to the practical empirical observation of how non-atheist, honest governments compare to atheist, lying governments in terms of the effect on the national and international communities.
Then you have the question of souls...what is going to happen to the souls of the citizens of the nation and the world, when atheists, who believe that religion can be useful when it is subservient to atheists, rule over a nation or the world? What kind of religion are we going to end up with? What kind of anti-religious forces will be unleashed, while a public display of approval of religion is made?
Honesty and the fear of God, are obstacles that stand in the way of those who want to simply cast aside morals to enslave and destroy other persons. What happens when such obstacles are cast aside? What does it say about the character of those who want honesty and the fear of God to be cast aside, that they are people who want such things to be cast aside?
The Straussians see the fall of the pre-nazi government, as a classic example of the type of government that they oppose and seek to avoid. The fall of the pre-nazi government, led to misfortunes for large numbers of persons. Problem with their viewpoint, is that they fail to see how factors that have nothing to do with the fall of the pre-nazi German government, ended up resulting in misfortunes for many persons at the hands of the German Nazi government. They fail to see how the ideas that the Straussians themselves spread, are ideas that could have caused weakness in the pre-nazi German government, ideas that might have led the the defects in Nazism, ideas that might have led to the destruction of the victims of the Nazi government.
"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works; There is none that doeth good."
~Psalms 14:1
~ Proverbs 6:16-19:
These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
@2005 David Virgil Hobbs
We do'nt believe in a God, but we believe religion an' patriotism is useful so long as us atheists corntrol th' govment an' th' religious varmints. We believe thet us atheists, who corntrol th' govment, hafta lie t'th' varmints in o'der t' git them t'do th' wise thin's.
We're hankerin' yo' t'less rule yo', so thet we kin use yo' in wars thet we pretend is fo' th' purpose of redistributin' power t'th' common man, as enny fool kin plainly see. So we pretend thet th' wars is fo' th' purpose of redistributin' power t'th' common man, whut's wrong wif thet? Af'er all, a key principle of neoconservativism, is thet th' varmints hafta be lied t'so thet th' wise atheist philosophers who rule on over them, kin further expan' an' cement their power. Let us become th' lyin' masters of yo' slaves...."
Such is my amateurish idea of what neo-conservativism might be about.
The problem with Straussian Trotskyite neoconservativism, as I now see it, is that it simply assumes that the national and the world interests are best served when atheists control the government and lie to and control the people.
To this one can posit several possible alternatives: atheists controlling the government but not lying, non-atheists controlling the government and not lying, non-atheists controlling the government and lying.
Where is the proof that for example, non-atheists controlling the government and not lying, is not a superior form of advancing the world and national interests than neo-conservativism? The experiments in atheist, lying government, are few compared to the experiments in non-atheist, honest government. Yet one can readily see, that atheist, lying governments, have in some ways damaged the world even though in some ways they have helped it.
The non-atheist, generally speaking, fears retribution from God for his sins. Thus he strives to live in accordance with his conscience. The atheist by way of contrasts, lacks the inhibitions which prevent men from plunging into uninhibited selfishness.
As for the practice of lying, lying has been condemned by almost all of the world's religions and systems of law. One of the reasons for this, is that liars, use lies as a tool to, for selfish purposes, unfairly deprive men of life and property. It is hard to deprive a man of his property or his life, if you are honest with him, because men do not agree to policies that deprive them of life or liberty.
I do not see how a political theory such as neo-conservativism, can be so decisively enthroned, on the basis of theory alone, with no attention paid to the practical empirical observation of how non-atheist, honest governments compare to atheist, lying governments in terms of the effect on the national and international communities.
Then you have the question of souls...what is going to happen to the souls of the citizens of the nation and the world, when atheists, who believe that religion can be useful when it is subservient to atheists, rule over a nation or the world? What kind of religion are we going to end up with? What kind of anti-religious forces will be unleashed, while a public display of approval of religion is made?
Honesty and the fear of God, are obstacles that stand in the way of those who want to simply cast aside morals to enslave and destroy other persons. What happens when such obstacles are cast aside? What does it say about the character of those who want honesty and the fear of God to be cast aside, that they are people who want such things to be cast aside?
The Straussians see the fall of the pre-nazi government, as a classic example of the type of government that they oppose and seek to avoid. The fall of the pre-nazi government, led to misfortunes for large numbers of persons. Problem with their viewpoint, is that they fail to see how factors that have nothing to do with the fall of the pre-nazi German government, ended up resulting in misfortunes for many persons at the hands of the German Nazi government. They fail to see how the ideas that the Straussians themselves spread, are ideas that could have caused weakness in the pre-nazi German government, ideas that might have led the the defects in Nazism, ideas that might have led to the destruction of the victims of the Nazi government.
"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works; There is none that doeth good."
~Psalms 14:1
~ Proverbs 6:16-19:
These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
@2005 David Virgil Hobbs
posted by David Virgil at 11:32 PM
1 Comments:
interesting point!
Post a Comment
<< Home