From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: Death of America
Summary: They're ba-aaack
Keywords: Interstices
Date: 17 Dec 92 01:42:00 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Dec15.014626.4666@athena.mit.edu>, 
cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes...

>In article <14DEC199215173220@utarlg.uta.edu> 
>b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Dec14.154053.17594@athena.mit.edu>, 
>>cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes...
>>>
>>>i still don't know about free trade. i have seen what it has done
>>>to canada, but then that was going to happen anyway due to all the
>>>things i talked about in that thread. one of the main reasons that
>>>i think NAFTA has been put into place is that if we make the mexicans
>>>richer, they will form a bigger market for us to sell to, and they
>>>will stop trying to illegally immigrate.
>>
>>I agree. Exactly. I'm working on my Spanish. Most mexicans won't
>>benefit though. Why would you as a producer give up profit margin 
>>to take their wages up? Simple fact, robotic manufacturing will be
>>cheaper to implement down there. It's an open door for the Japanese
>>as well, since it's still old-world bizness.
> 
>their wages *will* go up, as producers compete for labor.
>or, they could form a socialist government to do it for them.

Not that it matters to a robot.

>>>>Even though NAFTA is such an obvious illusion. Such as the free-market
>>>>inside of Amerika. The one that licenses broadcast companies, and
>>>>restricts cable and telephone companies, and such (food, drugs, health..
>>> 
>>>waxing rhetorical again, general? ah yes. are you sure your first name
>>>isn't "ragnar"?
>>
>>Hey, cut that out. The General's image is protected by copyright.
> 
>my apologies. besides, i meant "francisco" anyway.
>have you not met?

"Generalissimo Franco." Yo, el amigo de Bakunin. 
Hay no es possible, verdad. Pero...

Jacques Ellul, _In Season, Out of Season_ (Harper & Row p. 56)...

	I had seen the failure of the Popular Front in 1936;
	the failure of the personalist movement, which we
	intended to be revolutionary, and which we tried to
	start on a modest scale; the failure of the Spanish
	revolution, which had great importance for Charbonneau
	and me; and the failure of the liberation [of France
	at the close of World War II]. All of this formed an
	accumulation of ruined revolutionary possibilities.
	After this, I never believed anything could be changed
	by this route.

	
Blumhardt, _Thy Kingdom Come_ (Eerdmans, 1980, p. 121)...

	People are afraid of the collapse of the world.
	I am looking forward to it. I wish it would begin
	right now to crash and break apart. For this world
	of the humanly great is and remains the cause of
	all misery. They cannot do anything about it, these
	excellent prelates and popes. However much they try,
	they cannot. I would like to tell all of them,
	"You cannot do it!"


Vernard Eller, _Christian Anarchy_ (Eerdmans, 1987, p. xii)...

	... the exercise of worldly politics rest upon 
	a quite unfounded confidence in the moral compe-
	tancy of human beings -- and more particularly 
	upon a quite arrogant error in attributing cate-
	gorical moral superiority to partisans of the
	one "true" ideology over against those of any
	party else. This proud claim extends not only to
	moral wisdom ("We know what is right as no one
	else does") but also to moral authority ("Because
	we are right, that justifies our use of propa-
	ganda, demonstration, boycott, and all such 
	power tactics in imposing our `right' upon those
	people we know to be wrong.") Worldy politics
	is built upon pretentious claims of moral superi-
	ority -- of which the Christian gospel recognizes
	nary a one.

I echo the realizations of my progenitors.

Now as to monetizing debt (ie inflation, cf investment re taxes)...

>>Granted, barrel-loads
>>are easier to transport electronically. Let's just coin a new 
>>negotiable now -- the gigadollar. It'll cost 100 GD for a new vcr.
> 
>ah. i see now (watch those modifiers!)
>sorry for doubting you.
> 
>maybe we could put reagan's face on the 100 gigadollar bill!
>and bush's on the teradollar!
>clinton can go on whatever comes after that!

Bravo! El Presidente will adorn the fem'dolar, por supuesto.

Savings is already nearly meaningless, and all will have to qualifiy for
government care by doing something -- no fixed incomes, they don't heat
up the economy enough. The cities need a good clean-up crew anyway. And
a little action will keep the oldsters in good shape as they fix up the
inner city. Yes, the pattern is clear. 

As if there were no alternatives.

>>I've been thinking about the non-institutional-community... 

>>I could have said, eco-village, or academics, or
>>health nuts regarding sufficient reasons to "niche-out." The point is
>>a commonality of interest recognized a beneficial to society at large
>>and thus worth leaving alone for the most part, while they create new
>>wares, ways, and wiles. 
> 
>works great -- until the mob comes after you.

Ay, dios mio. But Senor, I am one of the "mob." Most of us want nothing 
more than a nice quite village or family farm, clean air, a quite library,  
health and sanity, and to be left alone. 

When those with frankensteinian machinations, seek to fly a babel of 
shuttles up to paradise, or count the angels ejected from a proton-proton
collision, while siphoning "small" percentages of lifeblood out of the
masses --- enough to pay for golf every day, chauffers along with
caddies, prep schools, fenced off estates, health clubs, and resort
vacations....

Well, it seems most of us really do want the same basic things.
And Herr Doktor Frankenstein didn't build that castle on his own.
It's an amazing thing though; educate people, and eventually they
come to understand how they're being screwed. They almost let us
get too smart eh.

>>What you haven't put out a classified asserting that you've divorced
>>yourself from the insanity of the federal government, and that the only
>>debts you'll cover will be your own?? 

>because i'm not a citizen. i can just move back to canada
>where there is no debt. you see? no problem.

Ah yes, the 52nd state. Washington DC being the 51st. 
Of course, I'm kidding, as you were.

The nationality issue is no real problem, since we'll just have an 
`economic union' everyone can have their own republic. Es faciles. 


-= Myself, I'm moving into the space between the lines =-
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,alt.sex