Sunday, September 10, 2017

Middle American and the Hypocricy and Bigotry of Hillary and the Corporate Media

Imagine growing up in the Midwest or South today, imagine being the kid of an unemployed auto worker or steel worker or manufacturing worker who voted for Trump because they wanted their jobs back and hearing day in and day out in the media that your father is a bigot, fascist and racist because you voted for Trump and he was the only one saying he would try and get your dad's job back. I want you to think about that.

The corporate media and the establishment are creating a hatred for themselves by constantly attacking those who complain that we are killing jobs in the Midwest. They are losing any trust with these Midwest kids whose parents voted for Obama and then Trump. They see the lie, they see the hypocrisy and that is why they are listening to alternative voices. What do you think these Midwestern kids will grow up to think about the establishment?

I will speak personal experience and I am a very educated coastal socialist. When I went to university in Boston, I found more bigotry by coastal elites against minorities than I ever did from southerners. I also found that Midwesterners were more bigoted than the easterners or southerners and found the west to be the least bigoted against minorities.

Lets look at women and men's perspectives on each other. What do coastal young men want from women? Just sex. I mean that's it, they don't want kids or families. The only value coastal young men see in women and the well to do too, is sex. The more they have, the less young men care about women other than for sex and they seek no commitment. The coastal women assume that because it is just for sex, their relationships have no other meaning and that it should be enough for a relationship. The modern feminists see no value in being a woman, only value in seeing being the same as men.

The coastal educated establishment sees no benefits in being either sex, no give, no take, no reason for commitment, just sex. The value of human relationship and commitment, unity, they see as limited to sex for a minute or two. The only value young coastal elites see in the opposite sex is the orgasm that they can achieve by being with them. They see no innate value in the opposite sex other than sex.

What could possibly be sadder than growing up in a home where your parents argue over who has to raise you and neither wants to be a parent? Why have kids when the only reason a man and woman should be together is for sex and not procreation?

Consider this, kings and queens inherit their wealth, status and power because of who their parents had sex with, not because their parents raised them to be better or deserving of trust by the rest of us. The exact same is true of our oligarchy. The whole idea of inherited wealth is due to the belief that who you have sex with should determine who owns the world. Why should who have you sex with determine who will own the earth or control a company or control an industry?  I could ask this question of the Rockefellers or Fords; but, they would say that they tried to be deserving of it and trained for it. That is how oligarchies used to justify their position; but, now they don't bother justifying it other than saying they are better than the people who got screwed in the Midwest.

The benefits of having a stable society should go to those who benefit that society the most. What a concept. It is however a very old one and one that good kings used to understand. My professors begged me to become a professor and wanted me to be the world's expert on Polynesia. There are other ways to live and organize people. There are ways to organize society to benefit members based on how much they benefit the society. Not communism, under that everyone gets the same. Communism is stupid and based on the idea that all labor has the same value. It doesn't.

I doubt many will understand what I am about to write and it may seem totally disconnected from what I have just written; but, it is not. If you read the Unabomber Manifesto, you will find that he was really focused on one point. He was focused on what happens when we live in a world where your labor is no longer needed and his fear was that we would cease to have innate value because we were incapable of making a difference in any real way. He missed the point of our lives. He believed our lives only had value proportional to our ability to "achieve" more than others. Did you know that our tech leaders have written volumes on his writings? They have, you should research it.

If one were to actually bother learning from history, one would learn that technical achievement is meaningless and that human joy does not come from it. Human meaning comes from human interaction of a positive manner.

I met a missionary, I wrote about her once or twice on this blog. She moved to Papua New Guinea about 45 years ago and went to a place where the people had no written language and whose primary food source was a tree sap they made drier. The hardest thing she found teaching them was forgiveness and she was responsible for putting an end to a war that had gone on longer than they had recorded as they had no written language and only knew that they hated this other group. Still, there lives were meaningful and they continued to grow and get better and eventually made peace and enjoyed that peace with the other tribe. By the way, they are not Polynesians, they are black. Not all islanders are Polynesian, not even in the pacific. Australians are not Polynesians either. They are Melanesians.

The tech giants and Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, see life about them and not about society. Life is not about what you can do to improve your situation unless you are starving to death, it is about what you can do to make things better for everyone and we are not even trying and seem to have stopped caring.

I do not expect children, sheep or the average person to understand the ways of the world. The establishment however expects them to follow right into the slaughter cages and then congratulate themselves that they won the game. This is why we teach children musical chairs is a good game when it is the opposite.

In the past a husband was expected to take care of the needs of the family, while the wife was expected to take care of the emotions and remind the husband of why what he did had value, that it had value to the family. That is the lesson of the middle class and now we are told that the only value of relationships is sex. Are we advancing as a society or in anyway when all we believe in is self?

No comments: