| Daniel Pipes Mobile Edition Regular Site |
|
| Home | Articles | Blog | Reviews | Search | |
Submitted by Sheerahkahn (United States), Nov 26, 2007 at 18:59
...I find the premise of the book to be...interesting...perhaps bold, but truth and boldness are not the same thing. neither is interesting and truth. Watching the two main political ideologues yell at each other over this long period of time, I think there are layers of motivations within the two camps, and as you peel away these layers you will find that the two groups, liberals and.../ahem...the "new conservatives" are really two sides of the same coin. Both want a strong unified government, both want a dedicated/fawning electorate, and the one thing that both want is a dependent electorate on their "wise governance."
To put as fine a point on the topic as possible, it is evident with the way the current policies of both parties having evolved from the halcyon days of "Camelot's" call for "ask not what you're country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" is that both parties feel that the only true way to govern is to govern with as much power as one can grab.
Hence, why our Congress is little more than a lickspittle to the wishes of the White House, and the Justice bench little more than a rubber stamp to the party bosses. And I think it's high time all of us come to grips with the simple, basic fact that we are no longer a Republic, we are an Empire...granted, a failed Empire due to our distaste for going Roman on our enemies, but that does not change our evolving political structure.
We are an Empire, and as an Empire our government will become more and more...absolutist in it's structure, regardless of political philosophy/label/affiliation because no one has rejected the underlying motivational premise that both our current political parties have embraced: To lead, one must rule, and to rule one must rule absolutely, and to rule absolutely, one must bend the will of those to be ruled to their own.
The problems of the United States political system does not stem from the end result of a bullet hitting a President in the 60's. The problem comes when people want something bad enough to do anything for it...some people are attracted to money, some attracted to fame, but there are some who are attracted to power...raw, untamed power, and nothing goes to the head faster than attaining the office of the President...and now imagine being the man, or woman sitting in that seat...of course, no man ever got to that seat by himself...And like Rome, there are always the patron's who need to be placated.
The premise is interesting, but then so is Lord of the Rings.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.
| Title | By | Date |
| he killed him for money case closed (revised) [305 words] | adel elkabany | Sep 17, 2008 08:02 |
| Not just JFK, but also MLK and Bobby K. [267 words] | DrRJP | Dec 18, 2007 13:24 |
| ↔ Idealism Is The Psychosis of Morons [81 words] | Winghunter | Sep 20, 2009 14:44 |
| Oh Good Grief [99 words] | Jon | Dec 14, 2007 12:28 |
| Another post Kennedy assassinations observation [548 words] | Homefront | Dec 13, 2007 07:42 |
| Oswald was a member of the pilgrim left [239 words] | Peter Herz | Dec 7, 2007 09:14 |
| Oswald Killed Kennedy? [10 words] | ploni | Dec 5, 2007 11:30 |
| ⇒ Two sides of the same coin [442 words] | Sheerahkahn | Nov 26, 2007 18:59 |
| why did Oswald kill Kennedy [68 words] | Robert L. Freedman | Nov 26, 2007 12:47 |
| ↔ Why Oswald killed Kennedy [109 words] | Peter Kauffner | Dec 2, 2007 10:41 |
| Ignoring The Obvious [310 words] | Seamus MacNemi | Nov 25, 2007 18:42 |
| Vietnam not Oswald [171 words] | Lars Nielsen | Nov 25, 2007 12:23 |
| ↔ Death of President Kennedy Emblematic of Those Times-But Points to Greater Tragic Legacy [936 words] | M. Tovey | Nov 26, 2007 15:09 |
| ↔ Vietnam Just Fuel, Not Fire [488 words] | Michael USA, Viet Vet | Dec 5, 2007 21:34 |
| ↔ Reply to Michael USA [233 words] | Lars Nielsen | Dec 21, 2007 06:03 |
| Nature vs. Nurture and a desire for votes [369 words] | jennifer solis | Nov 23, 2007 23:10 |
| The Book's Premise is Wrong - the Left has always been anti-American [619 words] | Steve Rogers | Nov 23, 2007 17:26 |
| The Legacy of Abraham Zapruder & Creation of Suicidal Liberalism [527 words] | James Burke,( Canada), CPA (Illinois), | Nov 23, 2007 08:46 |
| Disagree With "Oswald's Malign Legacy Hypothesis" [155 words] | Peter Stevens | Nov 22, 2007 23:13 |
| Also Explains the Mechanism of Denial: "Sixteen Other Assassins..." [94 words] | Karridine | Nov 22, 2007 19:41 |
| The Dead Kennedy's and Liberal regression [212 words] | Luta RD Belcher | Nov 22, 2007 15:04 |
| Oswald's Malign Legacy [113 words] | Tom Quigan | Nov 22, 2007 14:09 |
| tunnel vision [116 words] | David W. Lincoln | Nov 22, 2007 10:43 |
| Oswald's malign legacy? [270 words] | Leon Van Dyke | Nov 22, 2007 09:02 |
| "Liberal" today means illiberal [195 words] | Ian Campbell | Nov 22, 2007 07:30 |
| This is line of reasoning is certainly thought provoking [652 words] | Ken Besig | Nov 22, 2007 04:26 |
| With my own eyes [304 words] | zari namdar | Nov 22, 2007 04:14 |
| ↔ An interesting perspective [130 words] | jennifer solis | Nov 23, 2007 23:50 |
| ↔ I'll Sign On With That [18 words] | Seamus MacNemi | Nov 26, 2007 07:10 |
| ↔ He's a She [33 words] | jennifer solis | Nov 26, 2007 20:29 |
| Nexus not in Kennedy Assasination [353 words] | Stan Kreis | Nov 22, 2007 01:43 |
| Oswald [108 words] | Gunther H. Schiff | Nov 21, 2007 23:54 |
| US Treasury notes [167 words] | mea | Nov 21, 2007 22:47 |
| The Men Who Knew Too Much [268 words] | Rebecca Moulds | Nov 21, 2007 22:38 |
| Liberals are cultural marxists [61 words] | Rodger | Nov 21, 2007 22:31 |
| Lee Harvey Oswald [132 words] | Dannel R. Ballesteros | Nov 21, 2007 21:45 |
| simplistic [306 words] | John W. McGinley | Nov 21, 2007 21:10 |
| National Self-Hatred [186 words] | Paul Eidelberg | Nov 21, 2007 20:53 |
| A clear, concise and very true article... [475 words] | Ayasha | Nov 21, 2007 20:23 |
| ↔ Liberal Drivel and Capitalist Clap Trap [200 words] | Seamus MacNemi | Nov 25, 2007 20:38 |