Google Groups
Join To Get Blog Update Notices
Visit the Hickory Hound Group

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Protesting is an exercise of the First Amendment - Silence DoGood

In my expansive internet readings, I’ve stumbled upon two new words that I simply have to share with you, learned readers. These two new words are political in nature describing, apparently for someone, new paradigms in political thought and expression. To what end they will be used in the future is quite beyond my grasp to comprehend, but I’ll tell you what they are.

Thugocracy: (thug-oc’ra-cy) “A system of government that follows no constitutional principles, propped up by union thugs, who make manufactured and transported goods more expensive, leading to a socialist/Marxist take over using force and the threat of force in which an illegal alien can circumvent the Constitution to become president of the United States elected by Ineptocrats.”

So, what do you think? Pretty cool so far huh? Of course, a quick and fast Google search of that word shows that it has been slathered across the web and certain media outlets by the likes of Glenn Beck, David Petraeus (talking about Iran), and appears on quite a few blogs with a rather, shall we say, slightly right orientation. And by slightly right, I mean if your middle of the road guy is Karl Rove. The other word, married to Thugocracy is

Ineptocracy: (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) “A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.”

(DoGood): If you think I might be making them up or just pulling them out of the air, the link where I found the definitions to the words can be found here:

While there is a reference to Merriam Webster and no doubt an attempt at giving validity to the words, there is no link to Merriam Webster on that sight nor are those words listed or available on Merriam’s website in their on-line dictionary. In addition, both seem to have made an appearance in the previous decade. 2002 for Thugocracy and 2006 for Ineptocracy seems to be the first references for both.

But in the sense of both or either, it would appear that the words are used to describe those with a more liberalized political viewpoint. Contrived by those with a slightly less tolerant temprament for people who are poor, in a minority classification because of their skin pigmentation, or perhaps even, because they’re professed democrats.

Why did we need these words? I’m not really sure. The nexus of beginning puts them squarely within the Presidency of George W. Bush and the absolute control of both chambers of Congress by the Republican party. Given the obvious view of the writer as to the meaning of those words, it would appear they do not appear to be aimed at that administration or the party of ‘right’.

So in the interest of levity, I’d like to offer up some different words. Words that have been around for slightly longer than the two new ones proffered. Words that have quite a bit more meaning, for quite a few more people, and nations.

1.a. Government by the people; especially, rule of the majority.
   b. A government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

2. A political unit that has a democratic government.

3. Capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States .

4. The common people especially when constituting the source of political authority.

5. The absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges.

(DoGood) - Notice that sentence contained under number 4 in the definition of Democracy? “The common people, especially when constituting the source of political authority.” But more about that in a bit.

Theocracy. First known to be used, 1622.
1. Government of a State by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided.

2. A State governed by a Theocracy.

Oligarchy. First known to be used, 1542.

1. Government by the few.

2. A government in which a small group exercises control, especially for corrupt and selfish purposes.

3. An organization under oligarchic control.

(DoGood) - I’m going to stop there and explain why I wrote a piece a couple of months ago that wasn’t that well received, steeped in language and meaning that apparently had all the appeal of a dentists’ drill. So why am I making another trip to the dentist? Look at the words folks. We communicate in language. Look at how they compare to the new ones I shared with you. Someone wants to attack things that we have a right to engage in, in this country, and someone(s) wants to strip you of that ability and paint those rights as sedition, communism, socialism, and being a traitor. It even says that in Thugocracy, there is no adherence to Constitutional ideals. That gives me pause to wonder what Constitution it is that this writer is reading or referencing. I have little doubt that some of you may have already seen those two words before today. I likewise realize that some of you may even agree with the meaning they convey. That’s between you and your conscience. But if you read the definition of Ineptocracy and look at the definition of Democracy, you can see that the Ineptocracy pundit stands directly against those who believe in Democracy. I’m not going to ramble on, I know, tissues all around for that, but I’ll merely leave you with the following picture, also borrowed from that same website, as testament to what is being railed against.

I look at that banner and I see a plea to stop funding the rich, the affluent, and the military industrial complex and create jobs that pay a wage so that people can earn a decent and respectable living for themselves and their families. I don’t see a demand for handouts, welfare, or food stamps. How dare they!


James Thomas Shell said...

The one thing I would like you to take a deep breath and step back and look at is what I have pleaded with the Commoners to look at.

The people squarely aligned with the Democrats whined, p!$$ed, and moaned about the Tea Party protestors. And the Tea party protestors promoted their right to first amendment freedoms to be heard and those who lust for all things Donkey wanted it shut down and called them "Tea Baggers" and made fun of them and did send out thugs to try to squelch those protests.

Now we come to two years later and the same people who railed against the "Tea Baggers" are out protesting and talking about their first amendment rights, while those who supported the Tea Party movement are throwing out the labels hippies, lazy, communists, etc.

I would like to use a word that has been taken out of the social lexicon, because it is purported to label the mentally challenged in a demeaning way, but I do not even mean this to have any correlation to those with congenital conditions.

I think that when it comes to politics and economics that the American people are for the most part Retarded. If it can't be said in a soundbyte or in a one minute presentation, then most peoples' eyes glaze over. They don't want to reason the issues. They don't want to think about complexity. They want pablum. They want marching orders. They want a white knight to ride in and save the day.

I understand DoGood. He is a commoner like myself. But look, he supports gun rights and a lot of other conservative issues. Look at myself. I have a degree in Finance, but I'm not going to march in lockstep with the Republicans, because I have seen how Wall Street is functionally raping this country and not looking out for the long term good of the marketplace or following fiduciary principles to look out for the good of their clients. I see it with Harry, who is devout in his beliefs and principles when it comes to his religiosity, but is also tolerant towards those who may not hold the same beliefs.

I have said it for the last twenty years. The role of politicians has been to pit groups against one another and to go right down the middle and take the wealth from the common folk who become dupes of the game.

On a side note: One thing I would like to see happen is for the straight ticket ballot option to be done away with. Make people go down and check each candidate that they are going to vote for.

If you truly stand for the common man, then you need to understand that we must stand together and end these petulant politics to nowhere. We don't need politicians. We need advocates. We need people who can stand up and explain why they support issues, not why the other guy is a dog. You want to start moving in a positive direction, then you need to build support, instead of always tearing other people down. Construction versus Destruction!!!

harryhipps said...

The basic problem as I see it is that the 'average joe" has little recourse for bad governance. The right to vote, while important, is scant power in today's governing world. A person is elected for either a 2, 4, or 6 year term. Then he can vote anyway he chooses. If his voting record is really bad, he will be booted out. If it's so so then he can raise money and spin it to fool enough of the sheeple to send him back for more of the same. And what is about as bad is that any political opponent is probably cut out of the same cloth so when the voter is presented with a choice of representation what real prospects for better governance are we really getting?
When you consider the hugh sums of money government spends, the regulatory authority they have, the massive institutions they control (health care finance, education, business regulatory bodies, and so on), are a few emails and a vote every few years enough control from the voter?
As far as polls go, many are "push" polls that are designed to give the "right" answer from the start. And the public, being led by the equally crappy media, will answer with an opinion on the question of the day, but how many real thinkers are asking whether the question of the day is the question we SHOULD be asking.
Our system of governance relies on virtuous, competent representation by people committed to doing the people's work. What we have are a bunch of self serving weasels who are dealing with way too much of our lives. Ross Perot said "It's time to get the shovel and clean out the barn." Well, unfortunately, when we do that we soon just get more doo doo. The government is too big, too invasive, and attracts the power hungry, not necessarily the good managers and visionaries. But again, it's something that a couple of generations of Chinese rule will probably take care of .

Silence DoGood said...

Guilty. Yes, I'm guilty of using the teabagger term. I confess. But I never would nor did advocate for their to be heard to be denied them. But yes, whenever one side expressed themselves, the other takes offense. Go figure. But I am for the exercise of rights... all of them. If we don't, we won't have them to exercise. If we relinquish them for a feeling of safety, we will have neither. I think that movement has morphed from what it was at first inception to what it is now with Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann as the poster children of that movement. Now whether that is factual, I can't say, but they are the ones who take the headlines on the Tea Party's behalf and every bad thing that has transpired in Congress since the mid-term elections has been attributed them that couldn't be blamed on Pelosi.

I want to thank you, Thom and Harry, for the equity in insight. I knew as I wrote this piece it was rife to be taken completely out of context. And to be honest, it could quite possibly be disinformation to point blame on the blameless. To cause a wayward eye to be cast on those that may be completely blameless. But to me, as someone who is quite common and humble, the notions that those terms spoke to was what inflamed my ire. Wars have been fought to extinguish the flames those words convey in definition. Which is why I wrote about them. I couldn't just let them quietly go about thier dirty and underhanded task of driving the wedge even deeper between the people of this country. And while we don't always agree on how to do it, we almost always agree on what needs to be done. But that's ok, a common goal and vision is necessary and the how can always be negotiated to the agreement of all. That is what is lacking in Washington, Raleigh, and 10,000 other places today. That all or none mindset is melting and rapidly killing off our way of life.

Silence DoGood said...

Alas, sometimes that knight in shining armor turns out to be a retard in tin foil. At a distance, it's hard to tell.