MSNBC Host: Your Kids Belong to the Collective

reply to post by beezzer

You ask that of someone that has immersed his family into different cultures and different countries?

Do you think I don't know any other people who've done the same? :-)

I know someone who lived a good long time in India - and never knew India

You don't trust public education - you fear the collective - you fear the progressives...the village you say should not be trusted with your child (what was that you just said about teaching divisiveness - and hate?)

You want to teach your kids about the world :-)

We can live wherever we want - surrounded by all different kinds of people, culture, worldviews - and still live our lives on an island surrounded by a moat

You don't own your kids beezzer - they belong to the world and in the world

same as you

Originally posted by Cherry0

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Someone who respects religion is not libertarian.

How do you figure?

Because libertarians are social liberals and financial conservatives. It's no secret buddy! Don't people research anything about politics before they vote? Or do they vote blindely like you?

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
reply to post by beezzer

 

You ask that of someone that has immersed his family into different cultures and different countries?

Do you think I don't know any other people who've done the same? :-)

You don't trust public education - you fear the collective - you fear the progressives...the village you say should not be trusted with your child (what was that you just said about teaching divisiveness - and hate?)

You want to teach your kids about the world :-)

We can live wherever we want - surrounded by all different kinds of people, culture, worldviews - and still live our lives on an island surrounded by a moat

You don't own your kids beezzer - they belong to the world and in the world

same as you

I'll speak for myself here, as an individual: no one owns me. No thing owns me. No, the world doesn't own me either. If anything, I'd like to own the world =)

If you desire to belong to some collective, just know that other people at some level own that collective. And they thus own you.

reply to post by RedDragon


You are a citizen of the world then?

All by your lonesome?

:-)

What does the word collective mean to you?

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


I don't own my child, but I'm sure as hell responsible for his education, NOT indoctrination.

I belong where I choose to belong.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Bioshock

 

Comparing our current crop of "liberals" to the Nazi's is silly. The Nazi's were not liberal. They were ultraconservative, ultra national. They were the perfect juxtaposition to the Communists.

Strangely enough, the "liberals" are frequently compared to the Communists. Strange how they seem to embody both extremes of the same spectrum in the allegations of the masses.

Instead of comparing current folks to prior folks, lets call them scoundrels in their own rights. The similarities between the modern US and the Weimer Republic are striking. But so are the differences.

The nazis were national socialists. The party was the nationalist socialist workers party of germany. Hitler himself was a failed art student who grow up in poverty in austria and he was a WW1 veteran fighting the alies for germany.

He was a progressive and a nationalist. He was not "ultraconservative" and further ultranationalism has nothing do with conservatism AS A WHOLE. Some left wingers are nationalists such as the nazis and facists, yes it has to do with racism to some extent.

Sometimes what you see is exactly what you get. Communism is extreme left wing politics and in reality has little to do with socialism. Socialism implies mixed economies, not full public economies. The government acts as proxy for the workers.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by coltcall

 

If robotics gets any more advanced we will all be out of a job.

All of these people complaining about welfare need to wake up and smell the technology. We will all be unemployed or relegated to menial customer service jobs while the majority of work is done by artificial intelligences. This isn't something to be scared of.

Early retirement for us all. The end of world hunger. The end of infant mortality. The end of death from old age.

So much to look forward to, because the times they are a changin'

There are those who invent robots. There are those who repair robots.

You know that world's biggest yacht I mentioned being launched last Thursday? A qualified engineer aboard that yacht can make five hundred dollars plus per day.

The guy scrubbing the dock makes considerably less.

The guy on welfare can maybe hitchhike out to the intracoastal waterway to wave at the people working on the yacht.

You are most correct. The world is changing....

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime

Originally posted by Bioshock


This is the liberal mindset. Your kids are not your kids. No, they belong to the state. Much like Hitler used to think. You, as an American citizen, are not even entitled to the children that you produce. No, the state OWNS your kids now.

So who here doesn't see the historical reference to Nazi Germany through the eyes of the brainwashed nanny state liberal? Because honestly, it's becoming more and more clear every damn day.

I wonder, why was that both parents had to work again? Oh right, so the state could raise your kids.

Real change, yes he did.

www.infowars.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Agreed, but let's not use the word Liberal, because these people are not Liberals. Other than abortion and gay marriage, what liberty do they promote? None. What they really are, are authoritarian progressives who hijacked the word Liberal because if they called themselves what they actually are they would scare people off.

They are NEO-liberals hellbent on globalism and yes they are authoritarian frauds! The UN is owned by the world bank and bilderbergers. The bilderbergers are the industrialists with old money and uncompromised power.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by olaru12

 

I still maintain the RightWing/consertatives has a more Fascist agenda.

I will disagree as the topic : MSNBC Host: Your Kids Belong to the Collective

From: Mein Kampf:

"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation." Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler, Publ. Houghton Miflin, 1943, Page 403

How does this philosophy not also work for the other, shall we say more conservative point of view? A point of view that is vying for control while simultaneously claiming that it's only real interest lies with the individual - and the rights of that individual?

A collective of individuals - if you will :-)

Children are so precious we should isolate them and teach them ourselves - away from the community? But not away from our community - the community of rugged individuals

They should only be exposed to my worldview? Or is it our worldview? I get confused - how does that work exactly?

They are mine - most precious - not for this world...

I'll protect them, save them - they'll be just like me

Or rather us - so long as it's not like them

:-)

it's for the children

You can always tell who are the Bilderbergs and who are the socialists on welfare.

The ones always complaining about the Bilderbergs are the socialists on welfare.

It's not rocket science to tell the difference.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Spiramirabilis

 

I don't own my child, but I'm sure as hell responsible for his education, NOT indoctrination.

I belong where I choose to belong.

It's been my experience that children actually own the parents....

This is yet another example of progressives and their desire for you to be in a collective controlled by an all powerful state. This is why Obama talked about collective salvation.

To progressives, the collective is more important than individual freedoms. Any individual freedoms that the state says is harmful to the collective they will try to "control." This can be made to apply to just about anything. This is also why Obama said the Constitution was fundamentally flawed.

Progressives don't like the Constitution because the Constitution takes away power from the state and says the individual has power over the state.

Progressives think we will be better off if we fall in line to some collective controlled by an all powerful state full of crooked and corrupt politicians. NO THANKS!

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Spiramirabilis

 

I don't own my child, but I'm sure as hell responsible for his education, NOT indoctrination.

I belong where I choose to belong.

Indoctrination is in the eye of the beholder I guess

home school - public school...

:-)

you pays your money - you takes your chances

I'm in a strange predicament.

I've done hte political compass. Here:
www.politicalcompass.org...

It looks like this:

.......Authoritarian (+10)
................^
(-10) Left Right (+10)
................v
.........Libertarian (-10)

I scored -3.25/-3.33 for Left/Libertarian.

This explains what the score means:
www.politicalcompass.org - Analysis...

Someone that's hard left wants the government to control the economy. Someone on the hard right is an extreme free marketer. Someone that's extreme authoritarian wants to control the individual. Someone that's extreme libertarian wants to give as much freedom as possible to the individual.

It might seem contradictory that a person can want extreme individual freedoms AND want extreme government control of the economy. How is the government telling you what you can do in the economy an example of individual freedom? But the distinction is supposed to be between economy and social values. Some people will accept control of what they can do economically but will not accept control of their own individual opinions and values; these people will be both leftist and libertarian. Basically, your opinions and preferences and values as an individual are important to a libertarian, but to an authoritarian, your opinions and preferences and values should reflect the state. The fact that this compass makes a distinction allows for better profiling.

So it looks like some people are collectivists only part-way. A person can also desire freedom only part-way. For example, a christian might desire economic freedom, but wants the state to tell them what they can and can't do because of their religious faith. For example. you can't have an abortion. Homosexuals can't legally marry. Essentially, anything that breeches their religious beliefs in a moral dimension must be enforced, just as we enforce the law to imprison murderers.

You can't just label someone liberal or conservative.

Technically, someone that's a rightist is an economic liberal! But this only tells half the story. Are they a social conservative? If so then they're not a complete liberal, are they?

I'd describe myself as economically conservative (some government control) and socially liberal (some individual social freedoms). So leftist here is really just a pseudonym for Economic Conservative.

Originally posted by Bioshock
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

I never compared modern liberals to liberals of the 40s, I compared modern liberals to those that worshiped Hitler prior to the 2nd world war, there is a difference. Simply watching those people worship the man as if he can do no wrong, defending him as if he did no wrong, all while ignoring facts in order to help his cause is literally the same as what the majority of modern liberals and American mainstream media are doing for Obama today. A prime example would be the story I linked above.

The Federal Government has one job in this country and that is to protect the rights of it's people. That's it. And the Federal Government has thus far failed miserably in doing so. We can see this when it comes to New York, as an example, banning soft drinks and playing nanny to the people that live there. THAT is where the Federal Government should be stepping in to prevent the encroachment on the rights of the people. But does it? No, it decides instead to purchase insane amounts of bullets and design plans to throw people in prison for defying their unconstitutional gun grab.

And where is the media? Not a damn word said. In fact, they call you, I and everyone on this site conspiracy theorists for pointing out the truth. And yet you can't get past your "team" long enough to open eyes to the history being replayed.

It seems to me here that you are ascribing to "liberals" the very thing that conservatives are also guilty of in certain respects. I agree wholeheartedly that the roll of the Federal government should be limited to maintaining a healthy infrastructure in addition to the points you refer to here. However, It would seem that it is the conservatives that would continue to support the criminalization of the very thing that got these parents arrested to begin with. So, is it only a problem when the rights being encroached upon are yours.

Penny

reply to post by Bioshock


What do you think a community is? A City? A County? A State? a COUNTRY!? These are all collectives. Nothing new. Stop making a big deal out of absolutely nothing.

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis



Teach your kids how to think - not what to think.

Oh my beautiful baboon.......have I told you how awsome you are this week?


That is a phrase taken right out of my list of pet phrases.


Public schools DO spend a lot of time teaching your kids what to think. That seems to be their role. My role, conversely, is to add to that lesson by instilling HOW to think.

Unfortunately, this means my kids tend to question just about everything their teachers say. They are scholarly skeptics. Outspoken critics of presumed knowledge.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis

How does this philosophy not also work for the other, shall we say more conservative point of view? A

So instead of talking about "kids belong to the collective" someone wants to talk about that "conservative view" but who was it that marched children on stage and passed "gun control" in their names?

The "Liberal" did exactly this

"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation." Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler, Publ. Houghton Miflin, 1943, Page 403

the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation."

As the current debate on gun control.

A collective of individuals - if you will :-)

No I won't key word there I as given a choice that in a "community" most people are never given,

Children are so precious we should isolate them and teach them ourselves - away from the community?

Never heard anyone say that but all I am hearing is "children are so precious" no worries just let the state take care of them,

They should only be exposed to my worldview? Or is it our worldview? I get confused - how does that work exactly

Dunno don't go around telling parents how to be parents or what to teach them.

it's for the children

I can take only so much of "its for the children" hypocrisy between abortion, and using them as political props to push agendas tired of hearing that.

"It's for the children has a fundamental lack of consistency.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

Howdy Tex - made my day. Would you feel the same if you knew that the baboon in my avatar is a boy?

:-)

My role, conversely, is to add to that lesson by instilling HOW to think.

Absolutely. My folks did that for me - and they did it without asking me to agree with them. To this day I'm not sure how they pulled it off - but I am grateful - ever so

An interesting mix of liberal and conservative - I had to think fast and defend my thinking. It was expected

So - good for you. My only issue with this is - you can't educate a kid in a vacuum. You have to trust that they can receive an education - slanted or otherwise (and I think there's plenty of room for debate there) and still work all of it out in their own mind. The greatest gift you can give a kid is respect and trust - and that includes trusting them to come to their own conclusions - even if we disagree with those conclusions

Unfortunately, this means my kids tend to question just about everything their teachers say. They are scholarly skeptics. Outspoken critics of presumed knowledge.

I got into a lot of trouble in school. Not really though - it just felt that way at the time. My teachers were good sports - I didn't lose many arguments :-)

Again - I owe that to my folks

I understand the concern of certain on this forum regarding the government trying to trick us into believing that their way is the best way ie.: we know what is best and this is what you should do and this is what you don't do...

However, I live in a society at the moment and I suppose you do too. The question here is not what the government is going to do, but what will you do as an individual for a better tomorrow? I say that in a society the neighbors child is not my child but, I have a certain responsibility as a mature adult to give the right examples, because we know that parents, especially today, cannot be present all the time to educate their child. Besides, it is not recommended for a child to be cut off from the world, not good for his growth. The parents are still the master source of the childs mental and physical growth, but I for one can remember a multitude of strangers or random acquaintances that have made a positive change in my life. If they would feel that I was not their child and that they shouldn't bother, I would not be the man I am today, I would be lacking certain things that the collective gave me out of compassion and care.

If I see a child in the middle of a mall crying and the tears have been flowing for a few minutes and no adults are attending to this child, I will help the little kid find his way. If I see a kid falling off his bike and scraping his knees, I will mend his wounds and take him back home. What would you do in those situations? Turn a blind eye? Or be part of that collective that would take care of him.

That is what I get from that video. That the collective is comprised of mature adults that will contribute to the growth of your child by giving the right example. It is not rocket science.

We are already doing it. Kids go to school and teachers show them certain things, then another adult will coach them on a sports team, then off he goes to a friends house where the friends parents can teach him something. So, really this is not a new concept. On paper it is always perfect, but reality is different. Right? A good communication is always important to root out the bad that a not so responsible adult can transmit to your child. This way of raising children is not perfect. Show me something that is?