Quote of the day—Kevin Baker

To surrender completely to the control of others – either a secular government or a religious one – control that invades every waking action, requires people unwilling to do for themselves. The first step is and must be the destruction of education. People must be prevented from thinking for themselves, from reasoning. George Orwell explained it with “Newspeak” in his novel 1984:



That preparation started in the early years of the 20th Century. Thus today we have “politically correct” speech. With destruction of language skills comes the destruction of logic skills – if you can’t read, you can’t integrate ideas new to you. In fact, new ideas are gibberish – words that have no meaning. “Politically free” is a null value to someone planted in the fields of politicism. It’s a weed.


A free society requires an informed and virtuous citizenry.


“Free,” “informed” and “virtuous” have become null terms.


The 21st Century will be a century of struggle between freedom and politicism. Polticism has two competing versions – Marxist and Muslim. Freedom?


Null term.


Kevin Baker
July 4, 2011
TL;DR
[Kevin has some good points. There are even some points that he doesn’t directly address that support his pessimistic outlook. For example, the title, “TL;DR”, is very telling. Our society changed dramatically with instant entertainment. I’m certain that television and even radio are factors in the transformation of our culture into a more ignorant one. We can be mindlessly entertained rather than improving our minds and/or our bodies or producing something of value. The idiot boxes are such a great temptation that instead of doing something productive we take another hit of the entertainment drug. And there is so many “drugs” to chose from. If one doesn’t grab you in the first 15 seconds you change the “channel” until you find one that does grab you. Instant gratification is critical to success of a “channel”. Who in their right mind would be willing to read and understand, let alone write, books like those of Locke and Hobbs (unless it was Calvin and Hobbs) when you have Grand Theft Auto, Entertainment Tonight, and meth available? Those are so much easier to understand and offer near instant gratification. Who has the time to even read a Kevin Baker post? Understand it? Bah! In the grand scheme, it’s almost no one.


The fraction of the population that is capable of that is so small and the fraction of those that would care even if they could understand it that the blip on the vote tally would be impossible to detect in the statistical noise let alone the voter fraud. And the voter fraud will always be aligned against the likes of Kevin.


I understand all that. But I still have, perhaps perverse, optimism for the outcome. While the upside of our near instant communication isn’t as obvious as the downside I still think the potential exists to ultimately prevail. Because we have the ability to communicate to thousands across vast distances at nearly the speed of light and publish we have a incredible advantage over Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and Samuel Adams. They were part of a nation of just three million people and built the foundation of most powerful economic and military force the world has ever seen. We have three million or more like minded people in our country now. I wouldn’t be surprised if there are ten times that many. The problem is that those people’s voices have been drown out by the noise from the parasites clamoring for “social justice”, or “their fair share”.


There have been many great civilizations before us that collapsed and some of the causes may even be common to our own. Internal and/or external enemies, exhaustion of natural resources, over population, or even climate changes (you have heard of the little ice age, right?). But our current crises is mostly due to internal enemies with some added pressure by external enemies. As Kevin points out these are the cults created centuries ago by Marx and Mohammad. I think the Marx cultists is doing most of the damage and is the bigger threat. But I think it is possible that even they have reached the zenith of their power and may soon experience a catastrophic collapse even more rapid than our society as a whole.


What the socialist/communist/progressive masses don’t understand is that they are, as Ayn Rand pointed out, looters. And the life of an unhindered looter is only great as long as there is someone left to loot that doesn’t offer meaningful resistance. And they just looted the last “store” on the planet.


The Marxists always describe people in terms of “class”. I think there is a grain truth to be harvested from a class division of people. But it’s not the class division taught by Marx and his cult. The class division I find useful is of producers and looters. And as the economic realities of discovering the last store on the planet has already been looted the looters will either become producers or they will die off. I suspect there will be lots of dead. Most from starvation and disease and a few from being shot by the producers that finally start doing what should have been done a long time ago—protecting their property from the looters.


The instant communication channels will allow us to find other producers and identify looters. This will give us hope and it will enable our cooperation. This is the upside to our technology and may yet save our species from the great endarkenment looming over us. This is an ace-in-the hole that no civilization before us ever had available.


The looters of the future will not be so well camouflaged as the looters of today. Today they have a few leaders who wear suits and smile as they wave to the camera and ask for your vote. In the not so distant future their leaders are likely to live lives that of the last couple of years of Saddam Hussein and meet similar ends. The looters will be hungry, dirty, and run in wild packs. Without the camouflage producers will recognize them for what they are and appropriate action will be taken.


I don’t know the end result of the coming final class struggle. Maybe the looters will destroy the last of the producers and it will be another ten thousand years before a civilization can rise from the ashes. But at this point I don’t think that is a forgone conclusion. I think the producers may have to look the other way as millions of looters become beggars and then finally corpses. They may be millions of tons of rotting flesh to be cleared but the producers may be able to survive the coming apocalypse and end up with a much stronger society two or three generations from now.


Some lessons are very, very difficult to learn. But sometimes you cannot advance to the next level until you master the current level.



I just hope Gerard Vanderleun is wrong and our society can learn the lesson of this level before we have lost all our lives and it is game over.—Joe]

6 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Kevin Baker

  1. TL;DR is one of the main reasons why I’ve basically stopped writing about issues, politics etc…

    Because even my generally intelligent, informed readership, isn’t willing to take the time to read the several thousand words required to address any subject in even the most cursory way.

  2. That’s a new one to me; I had to read the comments to find out what the title actually means. I guess it sounds like an argument some people might make, but I can’t imagine anyone taking them seriously after that revelation. I sure wouldn’t. At minimum, you’ve got to at least read the introduction, the conclusion, and the main arguments in a piece if you are to know what it says; an intelligent response requires a more detailed knowledge of the arguments so as to respond to them appropriately.

  3. I can understand not reading it because the argument is too dense/technical for the reader to understand, but in that case you have to either educate yourself a little. For example, I occasionally like to read stuff on philosophy or economics. It’s more of a hobby than anything. Some of that stuff gets pretty dense, esp if I go to the original guys. So if it gets too hot & heavy, & if I have some time, I’ll read commentary *about* the work I’m struggling to understand, preferably from several competing authors. If you know where to look, there are usually volumes of that alone. Or once I read a novel, I might read the literary criticism about it, which helps to pick out themes I might otherwise have missed. In some cases, like Kant or Kafka, these steps are pretty essential. But I grew up doing that sort of thing (home-schooled; both parents were historians). Who else does that any more?

  4. @Rob, I just added the book to my wish list on Audible.com. I’ll probably download it after I finish the Monster Hunter series I’m working on right now.

    Thanks.

Comments are closed.