I spend a fair amount of time surfing the interweb and am bombarded by information. I do my best to absorb it all, but alas, my powers of absorption are lacking.
I know I need to take a break from time to time and pontificate and reflect on the information. I have been trying to do that. The problem for me, as I've stated in earlier posts is that there are so many things that are of concern and that although they are all intertwined, they also are best explored individually.
I'll start with the possible revolution in Iran. I say possible, because at present, that's all it is. A lot of folks I know seem to think something huge is happening. Maybe they're right, but I dunno. I read all the updates put out by Stratfor and honestly, they are usually on the money, but not always. But coming from years of experience in intelligence gathering to include the 1979 revolution in Iran, I tend to take these guys a little more seriously than a blogger at HuffPo or some other rag.
Iranian Revolution 1979
I honestly feel for the Iranian people. They're culture has a strong history of independence. And yet with the "revolution" that made them an Islamic State run by Mullahs such as the Ayatollah, it is difficult to see them breaking free from that backwards ideology. I hope they can do it.
Contrary to popular belief, Iran is actually a huge country. And there is a large rural population. It seems to me, the rural denizens of Iran most likely don't twitter a whole lot, and only get what information they have from the cleric-controlled government.
I suspect they're not all that supportive of this "revolution" that's going on. Not cause they're evil Islamists, but because they are, for all intents and purposes, a simpler people that don't care for change of any flavor. We know that first hand here in America. We have something that suits us, and we don't want a "progressive" government telling us what to do. I suspect, neither do the rural citizens of Iran.
Look at how things are here. Usually, it is the urbanite, collectivists that scream and holler for change, etc. And it's the "backwards rural types" like us that don't see the awesomeness of what is being offered. It's a thin comparison to be sure, but not entirely inappropriate.
What strikes me as interesting, is that because of all these "student protestors", our left-wing moonbats are all about supporting a new revolution there. And because the story is plastered all over and seems to point to a demand by the citizens to have a recount and support a more democratic process, a lot of "right-wing" moonbats are doing the saying the same thing.
Iranian Election Protesters 2009
What everyone fails to see, is that no matter who wins, even if a recount puts Mousavi (sp?) at the helm of the presidency, there will be no significant change of power. Now to be sure, the simple fact that the people could force a recount is a sure sign of power to cause the clerics to let this happen is significant in it's own right. But from the way I see it, and of course I am not an Iranian, so my opinion is probably moot anyways, but still, the way I see it, if they get the other guy instead of Ahmadinnerjacket, they still have Sharia law governed by the Ayatollah and another Islamic fanatic, maybe less fanatic, but still a pretty serious Islamic in charge of the presidency. A revolution, perhaps, but is it really necessary? More bloodshed, for essentially the same thing. I hear stories of this guy being more moderate, but what does being more moderate entail? Unless they totally roll back a bunch of draconian laws on social behavior and human rights, which is highly unlikely, are the Iranian people really better off?
I think this "revolution" talk from the west is simply that, talk. And who does it benefit, at least in the short-term? The world in general and the west in particular. As long as Iran is in turmoil, they won't be launching nukes or missiles at anyone. I think that is the main reason this is getting play and that we are supporting it, not because anyone really believes significant change will be coming to Iran once this election protest gets resolved.
Would I personally like to see the people overthrow that fascist regime? Absolutely! Would I support a US effort to enable the people to take control of their destiny? Absolutely! But let's be frank here. Interference from any country right now would be a poor decision. Until the Iranians actually produce a real leader that would enact significant change, we need to stay the hell out of it.
Ok, that's all I got for now on the Iranian "revolution" fiasco.
There is another thing here that ties in nicely with the distraction theory I talked about in regards to Iran. While the American citizens are tuned in raptly to witness the "revolution" in Iran, we're also not paying attention to the threats to our own freedoms here in these United States. Along with American Idol and MTV and whatever other garbage is on the tube or the interweb. When Us customs is set to change the definition of a switchblade to include one handed opening knives, that will essentially outlaw a HUGE number of current pocketknives, without a congressional mandate or a review, arbitrarily exerting their power to fundamentally change something to deliberately outlaw a tool. Not a weapon, but a tool. F--ing ridiculous. Whether as a result of the new definition cause the LEOs to actually enforce the law on switchblades to include a damn pocket knife or not is irrelevant. I suspect it would be one of those "additional" type crimes added to something else if said "switchblade" were found on a suspect. But still people, that is still a right we would allow a government agency to take away from us because of "change" in definition.
I have long been offended by our society's willingness to accept new definitions of words and concepts that have existed in their "old" forms for centuries if not longer.
Take for instance, the word militia.
Traditionally, and for centuries the militia was literally the armed populace of a country, territory, village, town etc. The people were expected to be armed and ready to defend the country, territory etc. even when ruled by Kings. What people can truly be called free men and women that are systematically disarmed. Especially in the false premise of their own safety and well-being? They can't be called free. That's a simple fact.
American Colonial Militia
I won't ramble anymore on that particular aspect, but seriously folks, back in the 90's during the militia "craze/scare" the media portrayed citizens, regardless of ideology or intent of being extremists and dangerous because they were forming "militias"…oooh scary…yeah, not so much. McVeigh did more damage to the individual citizens rights simply because he was an actual extremist.
Terrorist Scum (McVeigh)
The numerous groups of citizens that believe in this country that were simply preparing to defend her, were lumped in with neo-nazis and white supremacist nutjobs. Who paid the price for his actions and the media response. Aside from the poor families and souls who were killed by his act of malicious intent, the American people as a whole were. He accomplished one goal, he terrorized us and the media aided and abetted him. Now militias are actually defined as anti-government paramilitary groups.
Look it up on wiki. I was shocked to find this out. There has been a long campaign against our freedoms by shaping our perceptions of things. This one egregious example.
Although I am not a real religious guy, I have a few other things that truly bother me. The religious symbols both Christian and Pagan that somehow have become symbols of white-supremacist hate groups. In fact to sport a tattoo of one of these symbols makes you a racist or even subject to being charged with hate speech.
Example one, the Celtic cross. How on God's green earth did that ever become a symbol of hatred? The Celtic cross is a beautiful symbol, I've always found it very attractive, and it's also very…well, Celtic. It boggles the mind. Which leads into example two…Odin's cross and the celtic cross are variants of the same, except Odin's cross is also refered to as the solar cross. The adoption of the Christian faith into pagan society showed a morphing of the original ancient symbols into Christian variants. This is true of Odin's cross and Thor's Hammer.
Example two, Odin's cross or Thor's hammer. Both Ancient Norse symbols. Now they somehow symbolize hatred as well. I am a bit leery of Odin, but not as a hater, simply as a deity. He's a bit of a mischief maker…kinda like Coyote. That however, is a subject for another time. Thor, he was the patron of warriors and craftsmen. Hence the smith's hammer that was also the weapon of choice for smiting Giants. I do realize that there are a lot of these Pagan groups that are into old pagan religion as an affirmation and a pride in being of Nordic descent and in some cases they are actual racists. But the symbols themselves do not denote this and they never have.
Pe-Christian influence Thor's hammer
Another interesting development in the last half of the last century was the steady undermining of the warrior class in our society. I think if we look at history, to actually be in the warrior class was desirable, if you were on the receiving end, not so much. But at what point did it become disgraceful to be a warrior. To join the warrior class, so to speak? Our progressive vision of a utopian collectivist society has a lot to do with that. Even those of us that are imbued with spirit of a warrior are sometimes misled about what it means to be a warrior in our society. It is sad really.
We've started to make a comeback. We have started to embrace our warriors for the heroes they are. But some do so in a patronizing way. Warriors are proud of their role in society and do not deserve to be patronized for their voluntary service. Do not show pity. Show support. Let them know that they truly are the defenders of this republic. And they we respect for what they are.
There are many tragedies in this world, one of the biggest is our denial of the natural order of things. People die, people fight, we will not ever all agree on anything. Human nature is a bitch to idealists. They just can't accept that we aren't all wired alike. I hear about the one tribe mentality. And to an extent the concept has merit. But when an actual tribal people can't get along with themselves, how can the world as a tribe expect any more than a small one? It is simply a fantastic delusion. Not accepting there are people that hate you and will do everything in their power to kill you for any number of idiotic reasons, does change the fact that said people are actually out there actively trying to do so. Until you come to that realization, you're blissfully ignorant of the world. If it makes you feel better, oh well. The warriors will be here to protect your asses too.
Feudal Warrior Class
Tribal Warrior Class
Constitutional Republic Warrior Class
Which Class would you rather be? Think on it.
I am done for now.
And on that note, Have a Great Weekend all!
And die with your boots on….