Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

had_enough

Published Letters: 816     Editor's Choice: 48

  • @rendron...reality check

    [Read the article: What Fred Thompson means by the "rule of law"]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    rendron wrote, accurately enough:

    The vision dancing about in Republican's heads as they (wet)dream about money and power is "Government, of the privileged few, by the wealthy few, for the powerful few." The rest of us are there simply to serve their needs. If my job is

    **********

    Thing is, if you read the early history of our Republic carefully, including the Federalist Papers, you find pretty clear evidence that, in fact, your comment in quotes, above, is an accurate description of what the *founding fathers* intended to create. They wanted all rich white guys to be allowed to do anything they wanted, without interference, and they created a representative democracy as camouflage in order that they might never get busted for creating what amounts to a plutocracy.

    A simple perusal of the total political and economic history of this country proves beyond any reasonable argument that we live in a *stealth plutocracy* (thanks to Jay Hanson for that phrase). The wealthy and powerful do what they damned please, and when the people get to uppity, they marshall the forces of government and media to slap the people down.

    You don't think the Union movement in this country lost all that traction after 1970 or so just because of coincidence or corruption, do ya? You don't think middle-class wages have essentially stagnated since 1973 by random chance?

    Nope. The system works exactly as it was designed. Of course, capitalism being what it is, our economic system will, eventually, simply devour our political system, if it hasn't already..and we will live under the gentle ministrations of corporate authoritarianism..if we don't already.

    The idealism shown by various posters here, on both right, and left, is touching. But hardly realistic. We live in a plutocracy that is made more than tolerable by the enormous wealth of our country. Take away the wealth, and we aren't actually much different from Zimbabwe. Our politicians are as bought-and-paid-for as any politicians in any tin-pot third-world dictatorship. It's just that the United States has so plundered the rest of the world of its riches, and we are so incredibly affluent, from Warren Buffet and Bill Gates down to the street-person who pan-handles at 5th-and-Fig in Los Angeles, that we can't see it.

    And if you don't believe me, you haven't read enough history yet.

    Now, if you want to start a revolution to create a REAL representative democracy, I'm paying attention. But, ultimately, all our desire to realize the promise inherent in those camouflage documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, is like that of a child who wants the real candy in the candy store, but gets a japanese plastic copy, instead..

  • gop bootlickers

    [Read the article: A backdoor Iraq Study Group win? I don't think so]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    the bootlickers in congress simply want to have it both ways: attempt to prevent a terrible shellacking in 2008, while not alienating the kool-aid-drinking Base.

    It's as pathetic and contemptible a performance as has ever crossed the national stage. And if there were any justice, this bs would kill the GOP as a party forever. But it won't.

    Unless. Unless they really DO get whipped, badly, in 2008. A bad enough loss then might cause the party to reconsider what it's doing, and where it's going. A genuinely *conservative* party is a useful thing to have. A fascist party masquerading as "conservative" is nothing but destructive. As has been so clearly proven in the last 6 years.

  • no mystery. Sorry.

    [Read the article: Manufacturing belief]
    [Read more letters about this article: Here]

    another anonymous wrote:

    Love, in all its forms, is a mystery.

    **********

    sorry, this is plain wrong. There has been an enormous amount of careful clinical work done on human emotions in the last 50 years, and love, in ALL its forms, has been well-explained.

    Do your reading. In psychology and evolutionary biology.

    It's all neurochemical. Selected for its survival benefits. Anyone who believes love is a mystery hasn't been paying attention.

    Amazing how believers will say any damned stupid thing to justify their beliefs. It's one reason the world is so fucked-up, with us humans in it. We suffer from *confirmation bias.* We like to confirm what feels good, and deny what feels bad. With rational thought as merely an enabler. It's all selected, but it's still very frustrating for those few of us who see through all that. The confirmation-bias of human beings is one big reason why so many serious problems not only cannot be dealt with, they'll NEVER be dealt with. It's the problem of *denial* writ large.

    And it's why it's impossible to argue with someone who believes in the supernatural, of any sort. Belief feels good. The confirmation-bias insures that the good feeling will continue. No. Matter. What.