Home » Blog » Failed Conservative Values: Violence and Brutality
Blog for America
Failed Conservative Values: Violence and Brutality
Linked to groups: What are Progressive Values? Study Group
What a piece of work is man... the paragon of animals. The paragon of animals? Six thousand years of brutality, murder, and slavery. An animal does not do this to its own kind. Byron: [Hamlet]
This article is a rather harsh critique of deeper Failed Conservative Values. In interviews, Richard Wagner told me he thinks thuggery is a failed conservative value and Herman Blackmon mentioned the lynch mob. I didn't think that either the lynch mob or thuggery were actually values. They seem more like manifestations of a value or perhaps of multiple values.
Sometime it's hard to know what is a value and what isn't. The largest listing of values that I have found is the Union of International Associations - Human Values online. They have a database of around 5,000 values. I checked and neither thuggery or the lynch mob are listed.
However, the dictionary definition of thuggery mentions both violence and brutality and they are listed as values. Violence and brutality seem to work as the values behind the lynch mob as well. We do see Failed Conservative Values of violence and brutality continuing to be manifest in domestic violence, school yard bullies, the beatings and killings of gays, the starting of an unnecessary war in Iraq and the ongoing conservatives support of torture.
Herman also talked about growing up in Texas and fighting against violence backed segregation and working for the progressive value of justice.
Failed Conservative Values: Richard J Wagner on Thuggery
Richard Wagner: Conservative values go back to the Romans, especially thuggery. Those who are strong and can take what they want because they have the strength to do it. This is a struggle going on for thousands of years.
In the old Roman Republic, the elite, strong, wealthy took what they wanted. They had slaves, enslaved whoever they wanted, who they could enslave they would enslave.If you want freedom you have to fight for it. All the history and struggle against feudalism in the Middle Ages through the Enlightenment and awakening of people’s rights in the founding of this nation on democratic principles is all part of the progressive struggle – progress for everyone, for freedom and prosperity for all.
Thuggery Definition
- A cutthroat or ruffian; a hoodlum.
- The brutal or violent act of thugs.
- One of a band of professional assassins formerly active in northern India who worshiped Kali and offered their victims to her.
http://www.onelook.com/?w=Thuggery
."It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty important."
Martin Luther King, Jr
Failed Conservative Values: Herman Blackmon on Lynch Mobs
Herman Blackmon: That’s a fairly easy one. If you look at the evolution of the true forms of social attitudes, conservatives are values which emanate from the lynch mobs and hysteria from the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries in this nation, based on a dehumanizing notion about any group other than whites.
Edwin: If justice is a progressive value, what do you contrast that with on the conservative side?
Answer: The conservative side has always been in opposition to the evolution towards a human and civilized integrated kind of society. They are almost diametrically opposed, despite what they say. So I don’t know how much sharper I can draw them.
Lynch Mob Definition
- a mob that kills a person for some presumed offense without legal authority
Progressive Values: Herman Blackmon on Justice
My name is Herman Blackmon. I've been on the central committee since 2000, prior to that I was active on the Hercules City Council as a member, as Vice Mayor for one term and as Mayor.
Like most terms, progressive becomes somewhat hackneyed. It means different things to different people. For me, having been in politics ever since I can remember back to the time I was a paperboy delivering the Houston Chronicle, it’s been pretty clear to me what progressive means, primarily as an African-American, to make progress in the real world, racial progress.
So if you can be progressive in that sense you pretty much can be progressive in most other senses of that word, economically, certainly socially, and politically. More specifically, if you want talk about political progressivism, I believe that you’ve got to be willing to integrate and incorporate other cultures into your party.
I don’t know if you recall the 1964 convention which marked my beginning with progressive Democrats. They weren’t seated by the regular blue-dog rightwing white racist Democrats out of the South. And for a long time, that group has prevailed. But for some reason there’s been a resurgence of reactionary elements within the Democratic Party.
Edwin: In one word, would the value be diversity?
Answer: More than that, I think it’s justice. One word might be too much of a distillation – maybe social justice across the entire spectrum that a society by definition must be made of. Certainly social justice, economic justice, full employment.
As a child, in Houston, which during the 50’s was very segregated and a very unjustly treated black community, and so I can recall long periods of strife, when the NAACP was always raising money at church to provide legal services for a black man who had somehow run afoul of white law, which was by definition unjust, because it had a duty to uphold the colored-white separation. And every Sunday we were collecting to defend a black who was about to be railroaded through the racist criminal justice system.
Specifically, I remember around 1955 the Johnny Lee Marlees, where a black man was sentenced to die ultimately for killing a white bus driver, because he attempted to force him out of the all-white seats to give the seat to a white man or woman. Incidents like that mark for me, they are riveting.
Edwin: Were you personally involved?
Answer: Well, he was a black man, and by definition.
I saw how people had to react and how they often had to go to extraordinary methods just to make sure that a black man received justice. So by definition it has to be a willingness to include social justice and justice within the criminal justice system for everyone, because there’s a great deal of prejudice in that system.
Violence
- a turbulent state resulting in injuries and destruction etc.;
- The quality or state of being violent; highly excited action, whether physical or moral; vehemence; impetuosity; force.
http://onelook.com
Wikipedia
Violence is the exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse. The word is used broadly to describe the destructive action of natural phenomena like storms and earthquakes. More frequently the word describes forceful human destruction of property or injury to persons, usually intentional, and forceful verbal and emotional abuse that harms others. Johan Galtung defines violence as "avoidable insult to basic human needs": survival, well being, identity, and freedom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ViolenceBrutality
- grossly ruthless or unfeeling
- the trait of extreme cruelty;
- a brutal barbarous savage act;
Some Questions To Ponder:
- What do you feel the underlying values of thuggery and the lynch mob are?
- Are criminals that lack empathy for thier victums and that use violence conservatives?
- Where do you presently see conservative violence and brutality manifesting itself?
- How have conservative values failed?
Failed Conservative Values
I ask for your assistance to systematically build the arguments and tell the stories that reveal how Conservative Values have Failed. Join in our effort to create a documentary and book on the subject by contributing articles, posts, chapters for the book and video clips. Check our website for more information and a growing outline of tasks that need to be done on this project.
http://progressivespirit.com/Projects/FailedConservativeValues
More Progressive Values Stories:
Edwin Rutsch
What Are Progressive Values? Documentary Project
http://ProgressiveSpirit.com
and Study Group
Show: Expand All Reply
There are several right-wing unions. They do exsist. Most of their members are white males and are registered Republicans. Several marched down to ground zero after 9/11 with Bush and support the war in Iraq. I don't care what the AFL-CIO has said. Some of these union's members still support the war. In several parts of California the total union membership is over 60% registered Republican and their leaderships is mostly male and very white. They also use thuggery and mob rule to keep it that way. And they also know how to lie, cheat and play dirty-tricks.
---
Pennsylvania & the Persistence of the Race Chasm: http://www.credoaction.com/sirota/2008/0...
It is wise to remember that unions win government contracts and make deals for their workers with government contractors and multi-national corporations.
This morning Hillary is talking about Iran attacking Israel with nuclear weapons because they have a "martyrdom complex"
She's killing two birds with one stone: (1) getting the Jewish vote; (2) fearmongering
Yesterday my dentist's secretary (who calls herself conservative) said she doesn't care who wins [in the Fall] "as long as it's not her"
Sheryl crow -
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/4...
Barack has some of the best looking endorsers! LOL
fred that is exactly why she made the iran comment, to scare people. every big state she comes out with some crap.
and we should "shun" the trolls.
Hillary is not getting THIS Jewish vote. Fer sher.
mary vb,
Bruce Springsteen, John Mellancamp and now Sheryl Crow. Wow. Those are absolutely some of my favs. I love Sheryl Crow.
Who cares about John Elton or whatever his name is.
FRED from Ashland OR
Wed, 04/23/08
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You know your ME stuff pretty good....my question to Hillary and BO for that matter, is that why hasnt Ahmadinajd killed all the Jews living in Iran............becasue they live there in peace........someone should betetr define his "wiping off the map"..........which simply i interpret as an end to the Zionist regime and a better Israel where all parties live in peace..............
The war machines wont have any of that tho............theyd be outta business
Rae
I find BOTH their foreign policies horrific. Are they just saying these awful things to not be labeled soft on terrorism or do they mean it?
Would either one of them be able to close Pandora's Box?
As long as we have an undereducated, poorly educated, nonthinking, prejudiced, fearful, trivial, materialistic citizenry, we will have the makings of bad leaders.
One of the most disturbing aspects, for me, in Hillary's campaigning is her high schoolish taunting, her snideness, her adolescent pandering with mean spirited comments, her smugness: all characteristics of teenagers, but when you have a population with the maturity and intellectual development of teenagers, of course it will work.
Bush's tutoring by Rove worked.
We will not have a better world, a more just, intelligent, compassionate world when we have an undereducated, adolescent citizenry and we keep them that way. When our mores are based on accumulation, money, status, entertainment, fear of outsiders, and the market, that's the way people will think and vote.
Please tell me I am all wet and totally wrong.
Am I now considered a "new troll?" LOL
Fred:
This morning Hillary is talking about Iran attacking Israel with nuclear weapons because they have a "martyrdom complex"
She's killing two birds with one stone: (1) getting the Jewish vote; (2) fearmongering
She's crazy. If anything, Israel has the nukes, Iran doesn't, so it would be, more likely the other way around.
That said, I think putzco will attack on his way out...either there or here.
seashell wrote "I find BOTH their foreign policies horrific."
You were a fan of candidate Howard Dean's foreign policy proposals I take it.
Hillary is a Neocon. She supported NAFTA; her husband supports the Columbia Free Trade agreement to the tune of being paid $300,000 to go to Columbia and support it.
She has voted for the war, co-sponsore the Flag Burning Amendment, said that she will attack with nuclear weapons any country attacked by Iran in the Middle East, says that we should not negotiate with Iran, etc.
Tell me she's one iota different from George Bush, John McCain and the Neocons, and what she says doesn't much matter. She'll say whatever she thinks is necessary to attain power, again, the same Neocon ethos. Come on. Let's get real.
Some of the front blogs are becoming longer than college entrance essays:))
seashell, IMHO I think Obama would use restraint, I don't think he would open Pandora's Box so to speak. When asked the same question where Clinton answered she was willing to obliterate Iran if necessary, Obama answered he would assess the situation.
I have never heard Obama off- handendly refer to human beings as collateral damage. I cannot state for a fact he has not.
To be truthful sea she scares the hell out of me. And I think she is very very cold. Look at her eyes.
Pat in Colorado
Wed, 04/23/08
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yup...........now lets jusy say, the US and "The Big Mama" (HC) attack Iran with even a limited nuclear strike, on Irans nuke facilites...........looking on a map,and calculating wind speed and drift of said radioactive fallout it simply goes smack dab on...........American troops in Afghansitan, not to mention India, China, Japan etc....................
Time to talk to leaders people.................like BO has suggested and Ill give him credit for that.
Richard Gere is on CSPAN2 talking about Tibet. He is speaking before a committee, committee Chairwoman is Sen Boxer.
Pat,
Well "said!" Indeed, Hillary should be in the Neocon party where she belongs.
btw, I enjoyed your critique of Hillary several threads back.
According to Obama's email I just received, Hillary claims she has raised 3.5 mil since her "win" in PA.
Probably not true, but who knows. They are still in debt.
Obama will need new money for IN and NC.
https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/dt2std?source=feature_postpa
Please tell me I am all wet and totally wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wish I could. . . . Why do suppose the Walton siblings are all for school vouchers? And willing to put their money where their mouths is?
Walton Foundation pours millions into school voucher crusade ...Walton Foundation pours millions into school voucher crusade from Church & State in Reference provided free by Find Articles.
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3944/is_/ai_n8953499 - 36k -
Clinton answered she was willing to obliterate Iran.
Did she use the word obliterate? I heard what she said but didn't here her use that word. Is there a link please?
What I'm trying to say, and say it poorly, is that I don't think any of the 3 cands will be in charge of our foreign policy. Pandora's Box is already open and the powers that be like it that way. If we were in charge, the withdrawal would have begun and the purse would have been closed, leaving plenty in the pipeline to get us out safely.
To quote a woman friend, a polysci major:
"No matter who gets elected, *they* will sit him/her down and tell them how it's going to be."
We are now a one war-party country. The coup was done when JFK was killed and then topped off when MLK and RFK were shot. The good ones don't survive anymore.
We need,perhaps, a parliament instead of one prez who now has unlimited power. I wouldn't even want Gore or Dean to have that much power.
Tom, Dean advocated for an even-handed approach in the ME. I liked that.
I've heard BO say several times that HC is world's better than McC. And that so is he.
So...is he lying or telling the truth?
We need to rally strongly around the nominee, no matter who. That is what Howard, HC and BO will want.
BTW, HC wants to "scrap" NCLB...last I heard, BO wants to "fix" it.
No perfect candidate but by god, if we love this country, we have to stop McC.
SUPREME COURT!!!!
seashell - good morning america is where Hillary used the word *obliterate*. I'll let you find the link but I've seen and heard it.
sea,
A British foreign minister said Wednesday that US Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton's threat to "totally obliterate" Iran if it attacked Israel with nuclear weapons was imprudent.
Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, a former United Nations deputy secretary-general and the foreign office minister responsible for Asia, questioned the comments by the New York senator, made in an interview broadcast Tuesday.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jEp2ukq1nzsx5QXn7Khdn7AqDPmg
Pat - I believe Bill was paid 800K for his Colombian trade speeches.
Thanks, rae, but that's his quote of what she said. I would like to see the direct quote from her.
We all know how incorrectly the "wipe Israel off the map" was. Translations and personal prejudice can be very misleading.
puddle
Think of what those millions could have done for the public schools in Arkansas. The Walton kids could easily fund all the private schools they wanted to without endangering the public school system.
These people are cr*p.
"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran (if it attacks Israel)," Clinton said in an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them," she said.
"That's a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic," Clinton said.
The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.
Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election.
seashell wrote "Tom, Dean advocated for an even-handed approach in the ME. I liked that."
It's the only policy approach to the Mideast that ever gained favor with me. That's why I'm so confounded by your anitpathy towards Obama's Mideast foreign policy, given the mistrust expressed by the Israel lobby and other pro-Israel factions of his positions and the people advising him.
"In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them," she said.
What is she saying? That Iran won't be able to attack Israel for 10 years? Would we NOT be able to obliterate them NOW should we want to?
So she's saying that we'll be able to "wipe Iran off the map" in 10 years. Not now? Not in 5 years? But only if they attack Israel
Gobblygook. Trying to get votes. Should make the Zionists happy.
She should have kept her mouth shut.
His own words, which I've posted again today tell me who he is. But then, he's trying to get votes too and is likely lying to do so. If he's not lying, he's also scary.
Which is it?
Bye for now. Things to do.
seashell wrote "I've heard BO say several times that HC is world's better than McC...is he lying or telling the truth?"
He's unequivocally telling the truth. Separating the concepts of who it is you support in the primary and who you would support in a general election should not be that taxing. There must be some independents who would help usher in the McCain administration by actually decling to vote for Clinton, but these would be people for whom the results of the 2000 election were exceedingly difficult lessons to learn.
The public schools are a disappointment to conservatives because they don't insist on obedience. What conservatives prize most of all is obedience. And, while being obedient is attractive in that it virtually guarantees that the obedient individual is always right, in removing personal accountability for the moral tenor of an act, conservatives also remove individual restraint. As a result, if a leader orders violent aggression and/or torture, there's nothing to make the individual think twice about doing horrific things. What seems to be happening to our troops is that when they get out of the obedience regimen, they fall appart psychologically. Which is why we now have over 6000 veterans killing themselves each year. Not enough what used to be called "natural born killers."
PS I'd like BO and the new Jewish lobby, J Street to openly present themselves to the public and then I'd like to hear a BO speech on even-handedness, with J Street backing him up.
Talking to AIPAC does not impress me. Talking to me about I/P and J Street and his solutions would. He needs to show he has courage to actually buck the system. He needs to stop talking and start doing and acting.
Go public with J Street and lay bare the power of AIPAC.
Tom, please tell that to the bloggers here who say they'd never vote for HC. They know who they are and even posted today.
Things to do.....
Yahoo's headline has a pic of Barack with a caption *Why can't he close the deal* with five points from Ron Fournier of why not.
----------
The Clinton's are winning this traditional media narrative - *not closing the deal* and *he's a wimp*. The Obama campaign needs to have some very good surrogates on all these media outlets to counter this garbage PRONTO.
seashell wrote "If he's not lying, he's also scary."
What's this in reference to, the following statements?
"Our country needs to have national security policies that protect the interests of the American people. To do that, those policies must keep us safe and well defended against the myriad threats we face. But they cannot succeed unless they also reflect the kind of people we are, the values we share, the hopes we have, and the ideals that hold us together as a nation.
"I am worried that many of the policies the Bush Administration is pursuing today do not provide the best means of defending our interests, and do not reflect the fundamental values of our people.
"In saying this, I am respectful of the pressures our leaders face. Safeguarding our national security in this era is a very complex challenge, to which there are no easy answers. The President deserves praise for rallying the spirits of our people after September 11 and for some of the measures he and others in his Administration have taken since. I know they are sincere, and that they want what is best for our country and the world.
"But I would not be doing my job as a citizen if I did not state my own conviction about where I believe we could do better.
"The stakes are so high, this is not a time for holding back or sheepishly going along with the herd.
" . . . .
"What happened to the war against al Qaeda?
"Why has this Administration taken us so far off track?
"I believe it is my patriotic duty to urge a different path to protecting America's security: To focus on al Qaeda, which is an imminent threat, and to use our resources to improve and strengthen the security and safety of our home front and our people while working with the other nations of the world to contain Saddam Hussein.
"Had I been a member of the Senate, I would have voted against the resolution that authorized the President to use unilateral force against Iraq - unlike others in that body now seeking the presidency.
" . . . .
"Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and their allies have murdered thousands of Americans and vowed to murder more.
"The threat they pose is imminent, constant and substantial. It cannot be deterred. Because it is global, it cannot be contained. It must be confronted until it is defeated.
"Eliminating the threat to Americans from al Qaeda and other terrorists is not simply a goal to put on a list with a lot of others. It must be the top priority of our government and the primary focus of our President."
seashell wrote "Tom, please tell that to the bloggers here who say they'd never vote for HC."
I just did.
vb wrote "The Clinton's are winning this traditional media narrative - *not closing the deal* and *he's a wimp*."
So then what's her problem? I don't see her closing any deals. I suppose she could complain that her money tap dried up after her first 30 losses.
Exactly, Tom. I think you'd do great on Hardball too.
Has anyone in Washington bothered to read the latest NIE report? It said Iran abandoned its nuke program years ago. Iran's President doesn't make the call whether to attack Israel or not. The Mullahs make that decision. Doesn't this remind you of the run-up to the Iraq invasion? First you demonize the leader, then you greatly exaggerate any threat?
The Mullahs know that if Iran attacked Israel with even 1 nuke, Israel would retaliate with 250+ nukes and reduce the Iranian population to vapor. Now add the recent retirement of Admiral Fallon into the equation. Get ready people! Part Two of the Grand Neo-Con scheme to re-shape the Middle East could be coming to fruition now. Their Nation Building by force experiment has already borne its bitter fruit for some time now.
The Bu$hCo crime cabal continues to listen to nobody but themselves.
Thankfully, we can count on our Congress to stop them this time.
Yeah, Right!!! Get your duct tape ready. JM in NY
The Clinton's are winning this traditional media narrative - *not closing the deal* and *he's a wimp*. The Obama campaign needs to have some very good surrogates on all these media outlets to counter this garbage PRONTO.
mary~ Let 'em *trash talk*, makes them look like the desperados they are. I surmise Barack will stay out of the fray, brush it off his shoulders and go on to talking about what the voters want to hear, what to do about the economy, gas prices, and the war.
btw, I've said it before and I'll say it again, I will never vote for HC!
Karen wrote "I've said it before and I'll say it again, I will never vote for HC!"
That's a slight improvement over Mike. He comes to the home of Howard Dean's former campaign site to insist repeatedly that it's better not to support any Democrat for president.
Add me to the list I will never vote for her, never, ever.
The Dem leadership better wake up, if she steals this election, McCain will be Pres. The African Americans who have come out in droves for Barack will be disallusioned, they will not faithfully vote Dem again, grassroot supporters and young people the same, Independents will go for McCain.
Hey, we get to oppose Betrayus again. His designation as head of the Central Command has to be approved by the Senate.
Do you think he's being kicked upstairs?
Rocket strikes Sadr City
rae wrote "The African Americans who have come out in droves for Barack will be disallusioned, they will not faithfully vote Dem again, grassroot supporters and young people the same, Independents will go for McCain."
Apparently, so will you.
I will never vote for Hillary Clinton. I would not vote for Joe McCarthy, Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, George Bush I and II, Dick Cheney, Tom Delay, and the list goes on. I will not vote for someone I do not trust, whose record shows they do not have the best interests of the citizens and the country as a priority, who lie, who cheat, who profit off public expense, who seek power, influence, and money, who are willing to violate the Constitution, whose ethical behavior is suspect or documented as unethical.
Interesting that Gail Norton, who formed a partnership with Abramoff, who was the Secretary of the Interior from Colorado, resigned for family reasons and was never held accountable in any of the Abramoff scandals, when she herself was a lobbyist for the mining companies. Just disappeared as if she never existed.
Wonder how many others fall into the "disappeared" category: no accountability, nor responsibility, no ethics, no answering, and they usuallly, like Skeeter Libby, have the protection of their various groups, will live a high lifestyle, will enjoy the rest of their lives as free agents.
Pat wrote "I will never vote for Hillary Clinton. I would not vote for Joe McCarthy, Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, George Bush I and II, Dick Cheney, Tom Delay, and the list goes on."
Few people could blame you, but this is like that comprehension test question in which you're asked which of these items does not belong with the others.
Does Hillary Clinton want to foil Barack Obama's Presidential Election in Nov 2008?
Please vote this SodaHead poll and leave a comment...
HERE: http://www.sodahead.com/question/77869/?...
Thanks!
All set for tomorrow, Tom... Wings vs. Avs, should be exciting! Talked to my brother, him and his wife will be at tomorrow's game.
-
By Susan Rowe on Apr 23, 2008 1:35 PMDean is first!