Originally published as a comment in response to Obama's Yin, Our Yang, an article by L.J. Holman on Dissident Voice.
The author forgets: Existence is suffering, suffering is caused by desire. What is imperialist capitalism if not a system powered by unfettered desire; how could it ever produce anything but a world of suffering? It is the whip and chain in this vale of tears.
Holman writes, "We wanted a change. We stood at a vortex of political, social and economic distortions and suddenly decided Yang was not working, that Yin was what we needed."
"We" did no such thing. Does he even for a minute think these leaders are not carefully vetted, selected, marketed, and then presented to voters as a "choice" - that the corporatist warfare policies of McCain, Hillary, and Obama weren't essentially the same?
Did Mr. Holman not notice how the only real anti-war candidates in the Establishment parties - Kucinich and Paul - were marginalized, vilified and pushed to one side? Or how the corporate media won't even acknowledge the existence of third parties?
Could he actually believe if given a real choice between love and peace, freedom and choice on the one hand, and war, death, and the tyranny of capital on the other, we the people would vote for blood and slavery every time?
Holman's examination of our democratic veneer is like critiquing the paint job on a Warthog ground attack aircraft, wishing it were a different shade of grey, while ignoring the armor-piercing, depleted-uranium spewing Gatling guns strapped under its wings of death.
This article is from a teacher of philosophy? Yet there is more wisdom in the words of a comedian - it was George Carlin who said, "Forget the politicians, they don't matter. They are put there to make you think you have a choice. You don't. You have owners. They own you."
Does he really think that Obama sets policies, that he is in charge of things? Look at the response to the Gulf catastrophe and ask what is the more likely scenario here: A responsible leader who is in control of the government and has the best interests of the people at heart; or a powerless puppet taking orders from international capitalists, participating in the cover-up, deception, and suspension of civil liberties on behalf of a multinational corporation with old and deep ties to the intelligence community and banking cartels? Occam's bloody razor wins again.
Yin yang, black white, red state blue state, left right - these are word games, illusions, phantoms - these are the false dichotomies created by the enemy to keep professional minds like Holman's obedient to the machine. He should read Susan Rosenthal, because obviously whatever he picked up at the philosophy department seems to have come from some sort of discounted New Age book rack.
The only division that matters is Up versus Down: the masses of humanity who only want peace and happiness and to be left alone, and the psychopathic criminal elite at the apex of the Imperium, armed to the tooth, psychologically incapable of love, and slavering at this new golden chance to rule the world.
The author concludes: "All policy decisions, all the needs of the American people, all the problems we face, demand Yang, not Yin."
Nonsense - the problems we face demand mass defections to third parties, peaceful non-violent resistance, and dismantling the capitalist empire that has reduced us to indebted wage slaves and made us complicit in global wars of aggression -- wars, I might add, which are cynically waged under the banner of the very freedoms we ourselves once held precious and which are being strip-mined away, one by one.
Yin and Yang, the eternal opposites, are but threads in the veil of Maya: the illusion of separation, the myth of otherness, when in fact we are all the same.
Eliminate a system that enshrines power and desire, and suffering, too, shall fade away.
The author forgets: Existence is suffering, suffering is caused by desire. What is imperialist capitalism if not a system powered by unfettered desire; how could it ever produce anything but a world of suffering? It is the whip and chain in this vale of tears.
Holman writes, "We wanted a change. We stood at a vortex of political, social and economic distortions and suddenly decided Yang was not working, that Yin was what we needed."
"We" did no such thing. Does he even for a minute think these leaders are not carefully vetted, selected, marketed, and then presented to voters as a "choice" - that the corporatist warfare policies of McCain, Hillary, and Obama weren't essentially the same?
Did Mr. Holman not notice how the only real anti-war candidates in the Establishment parties - Kucinich and Paul - were marginalized, vilified and pushed to one side? Or how the corporate media won't even acknowledge the existence of third parties?
Could he actually believe if given a real choice between love and peace, freedom and choice on the one hand, and war, death, and the tyranny of capital on the other, we the people would vote for blood and slavery every time?
Holman's examination of our democratic veneer is like critiquing the paint job on a Warthog ground attack aircraft, wishing it were a different shade of grey, while ignoring the armor-piercing, depleted-uranium spewing Gatling guns strapped under its wings of death.
This article is from a teacher of philosophy? Yet there is more wisdom in the words of a comedian - it was George Carlin who said, "Forget the politicians, they don't matter. They are put there to make you think you have a choice. You don't. You have owners. They own you."
Does he really think that Obama sets policies, that he is in charge of things? Look at the response to the Gulf catastrophe and ask what is the more likely scenario here: A responsible leader who is in control of the government and has the best interests of the people at heart; or a powerless puppet taking orders from international capitalists, participating in the cover-up, deception, and suspension of civil liberties on behalf of a multinational corporation with old and deep ties to the intelligence community and banking cartels? Occam's bloody razor wins again.
Yin yang, black white, red state blue state, left right - these are word games, illusions, phantoms - these are the false dichotomies created by the enemy to keep professional minds like Holman's obedient to the machine. He should read Susan Rosenthal, because obviously whatever he picked up at the philosophy department seems to have come from some sort of discounted New Age book rack.
The only division that matters is Up versus Down: the masses of humanity who only want peace and happiness and to be left alone, and the psychopathic criminal elite at the apex of the Imperium, armed to the tooth, psychologically incapable of love, and slavering at this new golden chance to rule the world.
The author concludes: "All policy decisions, all the needs of the American people, all the problems we face, demand Yang, not Yin."
Nonsense - the problems we face demand mass defections to third parties, peaceful non-violent resistance, and dismantling the capitalist empire that has reduced us to indebted wage slaves and made us complicit in global wars of aggression -- wars, I might add, which are cynically waged under the banner of the very freedoms we ourselves once held precious and which are being strip-mined away, one by one.
Yin and Yang, the eternal opposites, are but threads in the veil of Maya: the illusion of separation, the myth of otherness, when in fact we are all the same.
Eliminate a system that enshrines power and desire, and suffering, too, shall fade away.
0 comments:
Post a Comment