Ron Paul is rolling in huge amounts of money via the Internet. The media and other candidates are baffled. He always was considered a joke, a fringe personality - not fit for office (although he is a longtime member of the US Congress) nor discussion.

But is his current success really a surprise? Hardly. Ron Paul offers foremost a real alternative (in talking points) to the American public. His constitutional fundamentalism is a refreshing change to all the slogan bashers ("Those evil islamo-fascists!") and super christy vote hunters. He is a reminder of what Americas great founding fathers had written down and that the constitution is still valid and doesn’t need so much shady legal bending like in the recent years ("Waterboarding is not torture!" etc).

But people go to him in droves, because the Democrats are offering no encouraging alternative to the über-corrupt Republicans. If the DEMs would be worth anything they would have won the last election with a huge majority - but they didn’t. Almost like the Torris in Britain they have been weak for years - to weak to really exploit all the damage George Bush and his Neocon brethren have inflicted on the US.

Money isn’t everything in politics …

For many disappointed REPs and independent voters in the US Ron Paul is the only interesting and consistent candidate to vote for. He has a consistent voting record and politics in the US congress - and has been speaking truth to power for a long time. He has the spine that the DEMs so much lack. That is the secret of his success.

Will he succeed? Nope. The political establishment - especially the Republican Party can’t allow his success beyond the primaries. He will be stopped or has to run again as an independent - what will be his doom.

It’s all a political wet dream. Even if Ron Paul would become the next President of the US of A he would be a lame duck. He has no political support or established party system out in the wild, nor on the floor of the US senate or congress. He would be impotent without that apparatus. Although Dick Cheney has made sure the next President has a lot of executive power it won’t be enough. Similar to Oliver Chromwell he would have to become a democratic dictator to mend the US system.

Ah, the irony of Realpolitik …

More? Official Website

I am a proud polit-blogger, listen to me …

Thanks to blogging finally everybody has it’s little media outlet. Media democracy at least - so it seems. Time to celebrate? Nope. Overall you just find more of the same instead of a greater variety of ideas, reflections and inspiration.

Tribalism

First and all people love to form tribes and hordes - the liberal bloggers, the conservative bloggers, the gay bloggers, the farting bloggers. Stickers and links are the new medals and flags of the blogosphere.

Conformists

It is amazing how conform each tribe reports and argues it’s cases. It’s like the Reagan’s trickle down economy in the blogosphere. The A-list bloggers and media outlets fill the pot and it all trickles down to the lower sites. With each report, trackback and linkback the actual facts get more and more distorted - and more and more blabla added.

Hate

Even more amazing is the spiral of hate and anger that seems to drive the battle. Comments and actual postings are often full of profanity as well as insults and personal attacks. I can understand this confronting political figures - which one can’t touch. But how about some respect for your fellow blogger? So much about civilized discussions and cooperation.

Aimless

Polit bloggers are way to willing to continue dogmas and phrases. Instead of controlling and checking political agendas and programs they loose track of their own interests as voters. Instead of a war of ideas any society should concentrate on finding the best solution. So what happened to common sense and consensus?

Nothing is left alive …

Overall polit bloggers remind me of several different ant armies - aggressively devouring anything in their way down to the bones. Very short sighted, very selfish, very hysterical. Therefore they fulfil a role in the political ecosystem: to ‘check’ for errors and take away the garbage.

But so far I have only seen a few blogs of ‘enlightenment’, who add something to the process apart from word wrestling and dogmatic masturbation.

Image: The great Eadweard Muybridge

I am making here a little fun of the historical concept of Absolutism.

One of the major underlying difference between so called left/liberal and right/conservative (plus fundamentalist) dogmas is the conflict between ‘relativism’ and ‘absolutism’.

In a dogma of absolutism you have ‘true’ and solid values and ‘points’ in your world view that are not negotiable. (Wikipedia on political and moral absolutism.) Some of it’s heads are: Thomas Hobbes, Immanuel Kant and Aristotle.

With a relativistic world one thing leads to another, you hardly find solid positions to navigate, but a mere set of ideas that keep a network of borders that constantly shift. (Wikipedia on moral relativism.) Some of it’s heads are: Karl Marx, Jean-Paul Sartre and Martin Heidegger.

Absolute concepts and values are of course easier to understand and present, since their set of rules is less wobbly - hence the word absolute.

Karl Marx - bloody relativist communist scummmmm …

Here are some statements about Absolutism by Mr. Richard Hooker (taken again from here):

Political philosophers attempted to extricate themselves from these matters through two different, contradictory approaches: “natural law” or “the Divine Right of Kings.” According to natural law political thinkers, there were immutable natural laws which should govern states and their relations to their citizens and to other states. According to the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings, a system of thought derived ultimately from medieval theories of kingship, certain kings ruled because they were specifically chosen by God to be kings. Surprisingly, both of these approaches could yield the same result: the idea that the best form of government is an autocracy, or rule by a single person. This person was not to be questioned or disobeyed; this became known as “absolutism,” since the monarch ruled with “absolute” power, that is, unshared power.

Natural law yielded absolutism in the work of Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), who believed all things, including human society, could be understood using principles of geometry. Hobbes’ central argument was that all humans are driven by two and only two impulses: fear of death and desire for power. If left unchecked, human beings would act on these impulses and live violent, brutish, inhumane, and solitary lives. In order to keep these impulses in check, human beings, according to Hobbes, drew up a social contract, which ceded authority to a single person in exchange for a level of security. The single ruler would control the violent and selfish impulses of individual members in a society through brute force; individuals would lose their liberty, but they would gain security and community. Hobbes didn’t care what form this single rule might take, whether a monarch or a dictator, only that absolute power was required to keep society together.

Relative guilty? Absolute Guilty? Relative dead? Absolute dead?

This is of course a nasty rhetoric trick from my side, to mix modern conservative thinking with an 17th century ideology. But I can’t help the feeling that the overall attitude is very similar?!

But it is about time that we leave dogmas behind us as political tools and aspire to use whatever is the best idea for the problem. But that would again imply that that solutions are relative to the problem and it’s circumstances. So is life in the end relative and not absolute? Can one defend absolute ideas in the end? Read this christian refutation of Relativism.

If you are watching US politics these days and live outside the US - then this YouTube user will be of great help to you. He or she not only collects all the relevant CSPAN broadcasts, but also debates, interviews and pundits comments on all the mainstream channels including Fox, MSNBC and ABC etc.

Sure it’s all from a ‘libuuural’ viewpoint, but you simply watch the videos and form your own opinion.

By the way, it always so funny, when some Americans say their media is all right wing and the other political side complains it’s all left wing. From my European perspective it’s almost ALL bad news reporting.

Anyway, thank you CSPANJUNKIEdotORG!

The modern Anti-G8, Anti-WTO and Anti-Globalization movement is very mobile and well organized. These people travel all over the world to make their voices heard. Excellent!

May I suggest to you to fly to Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe next? These countries could use some real democratic protests and stone throwing. Make these governments realize their mistakes! The tickets are hardly more expensive then flying from London to Seattle or Genoa. I know you guys like to travel - I understand it’s for a good cause. Stone throwing is eco friendly, since it’s a sustainable form of violence. Stones get recycled.

A Saudi women - she can’t leave the house without a male, she can’t vote and she certainly can’t protest like you.

Saudi Arabia is still the richest and the most oppressive regime on this planet. Women’s rights are almost nonexistent. Saudi Arabia’s money supports terrorism all over the world. Saudi Arabian oils fuels global pollution. Plus Saudi Arabia sponsored terrorism - terrorism breeds war and causes even more waste of oil, dropped landmine’s …

Zimbabwe - or better say Mr Mugabe - basically plays the same stupid game like Mao/Stalin, trying to force his ideas onto a nation. But all he created is poverty and hunger on a grand scale. He could use some ‘green’ advice on how to build a functioning agricultural state. Why don’t you help your brothers and sisters down there with some protest advice and try to start a revolution there?

This is a HUGE smog cloud over China - any western protesters going there?

China - now there we have a colossal eco killer. The sky over China is so polluted you can see it in satellite pictures. According to the WHO about 100.000 Chinese citizens die from pollution each year. China’s industry could certainly use a lot of ‘green’ advice how to built an eco friendly industry and agriculture. Plus China is buying loads of assets in Africa - securing it’s share of resources - and they don’t care about any politics or human rights. They sell weapons whoever wants them and has something to trade.

So - next stop China, Saudi Arabia or Zimbabwe? I also recommend visits to Iran and North Korea.

Often I criticize your country, your government and even the whole of American society. Am I guilty of blatant Anti-Americanism?

No country is perfect - and hardly any remaining lonely HyperPower can be perfect as well. I think all countries are guilty of stupidity, selfishness, hypocrisy and nationalism. More vital societies are guilty of violence, terrorism and imperialism as well. China, Iran, Israel, Russia, Saudi Arabia are far from perfect.

But even when you Americans feel attacked by protestors in Baghdad, Berlin or Tokyo - know this: we pay attention to you, because we care. Friends do watch friends. And friends tell friends, when they think something is wrong or could be done better. And even your enemies might spot a truth about your country and shove it into your face. Nobody is perfect.

We hated Nixon, we loved the King - but who didn’t?

You would be amazed my dear Americans how many of your friends watch your internal politics very closely. Every US election is an important topic for almost any other country. The person who runs America is handed a global leverage. If your country makes big decisions the rest of us face it’s consequences as well. If your banks go bust - some of ours do too. If your economy gets shaky, ours wobble as well. If you attack someone, we also become targets, combatants and allies. America you don’t stand alone - you are deeply connected with your friends and your enemies.

Many people from so called industrial nations have traveled to your beautiful country, watched your movies, listened to your musicians, ate your food. We love American culture and sometimes we despise it. Hypocrisy? No, we don’t have to love and consume everything you produce - and you don’t love and consume everything of your own culture as well. We all choose what we like and we all find something stupid about our own cultures as well.

Culture? Imperialism? Americanism? Or simply a cheap and easy way to eat that appeals to everyone?

The Age of Enlightenment is the foundation on which American was built and Europe was transformed by it as well into a modern society.

We share the same admiration for rule of law, equal rights, freedom of religion, separation of power, social justice, human rights, capitalism, democracy and consumerism. Most countries on this planet aspire to follow that path - because it is so far the most ‘humane’ form of government we humans have created. Plus globalization transforms us all - brings us closer and makes us more the same.

In Tehran young girls have almost as many nose jobs as girls in LA or London. There are polish Country and Western singers, there are German Cowboy and Indian festivals and there is a McDonalds at almost every major street on this planet. American Idol is a British invention, Japanese people are crazy about Baseball and the best Cricket Players are Indians and Pakistanis.

We all laughed about Borat - because every culture has it’s own hypocrisy, oddities and funny bits. 

The credo of the future is Mix & Match. We take bits and pieces from each other’s culture and blend it with our own local affairs.

America has so much to offer the rest of the world.

Remember that my dear Americans. Remember all the good stuff you have developed and you can share with us. Remember that community and progress were always your greatest strengths. Remember to make friends and share the fruits of your civilization as we shall share ours with you. In the end there is only one planet and one people.

We love you America!

[Warning: long rant ahead ... skip if you are bored by politics ...]

For years now political blogs have branded the Bush regime as a fascist elite - transforming the US of A into a Brown State.

If you search Hitler+Bush on Google you get a gazillion articles and images - plus reports like that (father of a fallen soldier beaten up by pro war citizens) and this (student gets tasered by the police asking annoying questions) seem to support the argument. The US is slowly turning into a new Nazi Germany.

I think it’s fundamentally wrong to compare modern forms of Fascism always with old ones from the Hitler era. Like Democracy all forms of government change and adapt - even the bad ones.

For example: today society ‘exists’ more in a virtual form instead of ‘the street’. So you no longer need many thugs or brown shirts to push your agenda. Mental control and groupthink work today much better then 1933 - especially in a ever more complex and diverse media world. There is much more entertainment, hobbies and consumerism out there to distract you from ‘real’ life and politics then 1933.

Most people are afraid of real freedom and complexity. They love almost anything that ‘makes nasty stuff and thoughts’ go away. It doesn’t matter if it’s a pill against restless leg syndrome or immigrants - something easy to swallow is preferred over anything complicated or personal involvement.

Dude, this Democracy stuff is hard work …

Typical right wingers or conservative have this symptom ("We are the good ones, all others are bad.") as well as those who are so called green and progressive types ("Back to nature, modern science and/or corporations are destroying us!").

Read the rest of this entry »

This conflict has been ranging since 2003 longer then WWII - and it won’t go away any day soon. Hardly anyone supports this war in the US of A. Finally all american magazines, TV stations and almost all political pundits have turned from being pro-war to anti-war … or at least do some more serious reporting.

Europe has been much more critical from the beginning - since we cheese eating surrender monkeys had our fair share of it.

This is the first blogged war: soldiers, voters, journalists and civilians tell their stories in a gazillion postings. YouTube has tons of war pr0n and charming calls for peace …

I dare to ask: made it ANY difference?

The Bloggers have lost this war. No matter how well these arm chair activists have debunked every talking point of President Shrub and his cronies - the war is still raging. The political fallout was minimal, because the US Democrats are spineless and the american public mostly ignorant for what is done in their name.

Overall it is almost amusing how the political american left and right blogosphere has used the war to establish itself - celebrating it’s self proclaimed importance. This is satire at best when I read the continuing phoney rage against the war and the political opponents.

Muuuu … there is cash for you!

Discussing the war is now a business and therefore contributes to the economy of the industrial military complex. Daily Kos profited as much from it as Michelle Malkin.

Although politicians read blogs and have their own it is still money that makes the political system go round. Grass roots poltical funding has made the Howard Dean a phenomenon in the 2004 US elections, but it has turned just into another cash cow. And the biggest and baddest money fountains are still in the hands of companies and lobby groups.

So blogs are just political opinions and unless you can translate that into serious money and votes it won’t change ANYTHING.