In Dostoevsky's Brothers Karamazov, the above says to a silent Christ:
Oh never, never can they(the masses) feed themselves without us. No science will give them bread so long as they remain free. In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us "make us your slaves, but feed us."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
The ironic stupidity of this is, of course, that only the people CAN feed themselves. Somebody has to work in the fields, and it won't be the Grand Inquisitor. Even if this grand official joined the peasants his contribution would not be significant.
The point is that survival doesn't require a choice between freedom and slavery. It's not in the Inquisitor's interest that his slaves all die, because then he starves to death. So the real question is, who needs a grand Inquisitor? He adds no value; in fact his oppressions make things worse.
We conclude that only fools think they would be better off under tyranny. The advantages of Big Government as beloved by "liberals" are a delusion of people who never grew up. They are afraid to leave the nursery, where Nanny will take care of them. How pathetic.
We add to the previous comment that the Grand Inquisitor is a dishonest parasite. His creed is the Socialist Ethic: convincing his victims that they have no choice except to depend on him to force others to support them. The Inquisitor fosters dependency and stifles independent thought so that he can live without working on what others produce.
Seems to me that this is exactly what the Democrat Party promoting. Since they're smart enough to know better we have to assume that they are advocating this intentionally. Clinton and Obama are treating the American people like idiots. Let's hope their impression is mistaken.
We recall Eric Hoffer's 1950s work, "The True Believer". Much of current D-rat discourse reflects Officer Krupke in "West Side Story": "I've got a social disease!" "So take him to a social worker." Which way?" "That way-- you."
Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) seems a good clinical proxy for the attitudinal rubbish, the rancid elitist snobbery, spewed yesterday by one Barack Banana in San Francisco, to grumps and snorts of ur-liberal approval. Someone ("Dr. Helen"?) notes that every single weed in D-rats' current crop of wretched poseurs --MzBill, Banana; Gore, Kerry; Pelosi, Reid-- admits a dysfunctional relation with their family in general, their father in particular.
Regardless of appearance, even "distinguished" families may foster extreme-left infantile regression (look up Hitler, Stalin, Mao; perhaps McGreevy or Spitzer on much lesser planes). Such irrationality, willful ignorance, sociopathic tendencies to suicidal political/economic themes, are emblematic of mindsets at variance with historical experience, with irrefutable real-world results.
Against invincible arrogance founded on delusions of grandeur, cloaked in collectivist Statism with sapheads accorded overweening power, common citizens face true corruption-- "something for nothing" is a corrosive elixir. From Castro, Mugabe, the erstwhile Pol Pot, NPD types celebrate J.K. Rowling's death-eaters, acolytes of the Abyss.
MzBill and the Banana are bacilli of D-Rats' endemic "social disease". Lance those boils before their contagion infects YOU.
I don't understand why this blog is so negative, it's not necessary to understand your point.
Also, you need someone to argue against: right now, you are only arguing with one another.
I'd also perhaps watch with the diagnosis of 301.81 as you have applied here to the liberal scum of the earth, to whom it seems you now dedicate your every breath. I see four of the diagnostic criteria in these comments alone, and according to the DSM-IV, you only need 5 out of the 9 criteria to make the diagnosis.
Anonymous,
Pessimism rather than "negativism" might be a better term. America as an Idea --its Charter, people, national defense and sovereignty, economic opportunity and well-being in a fundamental sense-- over forty years have sustained direct assault. Quota vs. merit hiring, unaccountable bureaucracies infesting healthcare, education, environmental and pension sectors, failure-of-nerve amounting to a collective death-wish in confronting America's sworn enemies-- what are we to make of this?
Never since the 1850s, if then, has the electorate faced such a menage of hapless dolts: All wealthy partisan legislators hiding their true colors, dreary opportunists bereft of principle.
After the self-induced Vietnam debacle; after disposing of German imperialism, Nazis and Soviets; why face Islam's theocratic death-cult with any but a sense of literal revulsion, determination to extirpate this latest evil at all costs? Decisively "negating" Mullahdom's torturers and murderers is critical ... given nigh seven years from 9/11, Presidential candidates defaulting to vegetative states indeed does inspire pessimism.
Where will we be in 2012, 2016? If 2008's the best on offer, we'll count a couple fewer major cities, and Mexican drug lords will have re-conquisted our Southwest.
I'd argue that your America has been under assault since Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party. However, your choice of adjectives does sound, well, bitter? And are you saying that Mexicans are drug lords? Would we need to dispose of an entire religion (Islam)? What solutions are you proposing? Because your tone echoes the liberal eugenicism you supposedly denounce.
To reverse the tide we would need to start from where we are right now, as things have progressed to the point that reversing them is not an option. We will never be able to go back to the 1950's.
Post a Comment