Amerika - Latest Comments in Green conservatives

Re: Green conservatives

Brett Stevens — Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:29:36 -0000

Mr. Linkola features highly in our thought, although my methods deviate more toward the roots of deep ecology namely the need for cultural renewal. Glad to have you here.

Re: Green conservatives

Grant B. — Wed, 15 Jul 2015 05:07:23 -0000

Thank you for a thought-provoking piece. I will return to it. I come from the left but am starting to view it as hamstrung in addressing the questions of our time, especially ecocide. I came to this site searching for an introduction to Pentti Linkola's thought, and will be interested to learn more about Amerika.

Re: Green conservatives

Brett Stevens — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:07:33 -0000

Natural selection is a Darwinian term. Do you advocate Social Darwinism?

Please explain to me the methods by which Darwinism would not apply to a social setting.

Re: Green conservatives

Ken — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 08:40:15 -0000

You Say: "No foreign aid, affirmative action or subsidies. Let natural selection and the market regulate our populations, which will result in a reduced but more competent human species."

Natural selection is a Darwinian term. Do you advocate Social Darwinism?

Re: Green conservatives

Kinderling — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 15:25:13 -0000

"This is ideal: to each what he/she deserves, according to culture".

1563 — Justices of the Peace were authorised and empowered to raise compulsory funds for the relief of the poor and, for the first time, the poor were put into different categories

- those who would work but could not: these were the able-bodied or deserving poor. They were to be given help either through outdoor relief or by being given work in return for a wage.
- those who could work but would not: these were the idle poor. They were to be whipped through the streets, publicly, until they learned the error of their ways.
- those who were too old/ill/young to work: these were the impotent or deserving poor. They were to be looked after in almshouses, hospitals, orphanages or poor houses. Orphans and children of the poor were to be given a trade apprenticeship so that they would have a trade to pursue when they grew up.

Source: http://www.victorianweb.org...

Re: Green conservatives

Brett Stevens — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 09:29:57 -0000

But if we know what is deserving and non-deserving, then the beggar receives a portion of charity they deserve -and would be grateful.

This is ideal: to each what he/she deserves, according to culture.

Only kings get something for nothing, and even they are in bondage to perform when required.

Leadership is the hardest role, unless one is a sociopath. Then it's easy and inconsequential.

Re: Green conservatives

Kinderling — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:47:42 -0000

Well, if we do not start off balanced, but reactionary with the dad coming home and clearing out the house, then when he is gone, moma will bring it all back in again and worse.

"No entitlements" means nothing. If it means "entitlements are for some favored more than others" we're back to the socialism of "some people are more equal than others". If it means we show our fangs but do not really bite, we will soon be toothless. But if we know what is deserving and non-deserving, then the beggar receives a portion of charity they deserve -and would be grateful. Only kings get something for nothing, and even they are in bondage to perform when required.

Re: Green conservatives

Olive — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 07:22:34 -0000

@Kinderling,

I agree with everything you wrote, but I also agree with everything Brett Stevens wrote. I think both views depend on the situation the particular country is in at that particular time and place in its history. Sometimes "balance" makes good solutions lukewarm and ineffective at accomplishing the intended goal.

I didn't get the sense he meant the above as permanent written-in-stone solutions but as a way to stem the tide of America becoming Amerika becoming Amerikkka.

Re: Green conservatives

Kinderling — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:43:32 -0000

Can't you see how the Ayn Rand of politics, the female that cuts herself off from her emotional-intuition and becomes a cold intellectual, preys on men who want to think of themselves as spartans. These inadequate males calling themselves fascists. [As opposed to the male who cuts himself off from insight and becomes an intellectual, preys on women who want to think themselves as
independent single-parent matriarchs; these inadequate females calling themselves Socialists].

No man would say "No entitlements". The British had the Deserving Poor and the non-Deserving Poor and an Empire where the sun never set. Discernment. It takes a man to weigh the balance, but a femaled-man, a pederast, is without pity or justice.

No man would say "No equality". For some it is to protect, to others to tough-love. If the people were conscious they would prize virtue.

No man would say "No immigration" for the best of the world would not be welcomed when the socialists and fascists tried to squash them in their brilliance.

No man would say "Don't tax wealth, tax spending" for the poor will not eat or be clothed. A flat membership of 10% means the wise can build rooms the foolish can ponder in.

No man would say "Set aside land" as if nature could take care of itself. Nature destroys and decays by boom and famine.

No man would say "Increase R&D. ... into military and NASA research..." when there are medicines for prevention and universes much deeper than space and warfare.

No man would say "No foreign aid" when countries faced unexpected disasters.

This lack of balance, (which suddenly regains itself when a Republican's sodomizing son gets AIDS, or a Communist wants a liver transplant in an American hospital), is an ideology of the blind.

I argue a mixed economy, not a two-tier system of parallel lives, but mutually dependant for the best of the minds on Earth.

I argue the counter point too if I come across a liberal: http://teapotatheism.blogsp...

Re: Green conservatives

Citizen — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 09:14:57 -0000

How do you wake leftists up without making them run away screaming in ignorance?

Re: Green conservatives

CallistoRising — Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:30:21 -0000

It's gonna be a long time before significant numbers will listen to arguments based on evolutionary theory - 'isms' are more powerful ammunition in current political discourse, sadly. Those that are upset by it the most are ironically the ones tilting at windmills regarding the whole creationism 'threat'.