# haha Roseanne Barr is running for president



## Pheonix (Oct 24, 2012)

http://www.roseanneforpresident2012.org/

Since I don't really like Obama or Romney I think I'm going to vote for Roseanne.

She even wants to legalize weed and jail the bankers.


----------



## ped (Oct 25, 2012)

That's a risky position! What about ending landed property?


----------



## Pheonix (Oct 25, 2012)

ped said:


> That's a risky position! What about ending landed property?


 
I don't actually think she will win, it's just a funny way to throw away my vote since it doesn't really matter anyways.
But since I'm an Ohio voter I can't vote for her anyways since she ain't on the ballot here and they don't have the write in option.
Personally I think there are way more important issues then "landed property", is that really the issue that's going to decide your vote?


----------



## ped (Oct 26, 2012)

Yep!

I'll be voting for Romney.

We need to completely do away with social security, medicare, food stamps, medicaid, you name it. And especially deregulate markets, banking in particular.

It's obvious that you can't out gun the beast with a battle of wills. It's just not going to happen. It will have to be a battle of wits. You got to give the beast the rope it needs to hang itself....and it will. It always does. that's why it needs the regulation in the first place.

The only viable means towards any real revolution is going to be mass starvation and desperation. It has to get very, very ugly first. It needs to happen before before oil gets too high in the coming decades.

You have union members that are staunch conservatives. Alot of them, like at least 35% will vote republican no matter what. You have these old suburban women at tea party protests carrying signs saying 'keep your governent hands off my medicare' or C list celebs on TV saying things like 'when I was on food stamps the government never helped me.'

These people have to be woken up.

The main problem is making sure the rightists will keep their promises.

Worrying about legalizing pot or feminist issues, or whatever is like worrying about finding pop bottles to recycle when you're a jew in auschwitz circa 1941. It's a distraction. It defocuses the mind just like smoking too much weed. In fact the popularity of weed itself would not surprise me if it was being pushed by the government. It makes perfect sense to pascify the public with. LSD came about it wide use because of the CIA. Timothy Leary was getting all of it from them for the Harvard tests and had close relationships to Mary Pinchot Meyers in the late 50's and early 60's for instance. (she was fucking Kennedy and giving him acid she was getting from Leary. She was also murdered a few months after Dallas).

These "pseudo-leftists" movements to me are suspicious and always were. They're increasingly banal and schizoid. Pascifism at all costs. Sitting around smoking weed and bitching. The hippy movement has long been criticized as being developed by the government to caricaturize the motivated, rational anti-war leftists like the weather underground in the minds of middle america. It was psychological castration. The Rand corporation in conjuction with the cia setup many of the early communes to study game theory. They were interested in calculating human behaviour algorithmically in the 1950's for crying out loud. Imagine how sophisticated they are today! Do you really believe these radical shifts in consciouness post war are just random and happen stance?

Put yourself in the seat of government. What would be a fantastic way to nullify any revolutionary ramblings? How a drug that causes the brain to be dull, distracted, entropic, and pascified. Then you market it as hip youth culture through your public relations outfits like the recording industry and hollywood. It's not like that is a novel idea either. A Brave New World (written in 1931) was based on that concept. It's the same principle behind modern capitalism. That satiating the will to pleasure through consumption and thus perpetual debt gives rise to socio-political stability. Keep 'em fat and dumb, but happy. The same principle you use on dogs (treats) and cats (catnip).

These kids that think if only Obama gets [re] elected everything will start to get better. Then when nothing changes everyone is confused and despirited. They don't want to grasp the scope of the government or that the political party paradigm works as a mutual relationship. No contemplation on just how deep and sort of far gone we really are. And they really don't want change anyway. They'll become staunch statists in fact when you start talking about real alternatives. They like their state education paid for by republican taxes, working their trendy corporate jobs owned by republicans, to pay rent to their republican landlords and buy their groceries at the republican owned supermarket.

So if hypothetically the economy crashes and unemployment hits 50%, double the great depression, or about 125 million people, how would they survive? They couldn't unless the government is gracious enough to feed them. And why is that? Because the system is setup fundementaly to make the population completely dependant on industry. This is something radically new in human history. Our system promotes learned helplessness. Don't DIY anything, just go to the store for it. The way that happens is through restricting the publics access to the very means of supporting themselves. Which is land. They take it over and sell it to the highest bidder forcing the vast majority to sell their labor at a net loss for their survival. You cannot even participate in a market economy when you don't have fifty million to buy the lease to a coal mine for instance.

Proudhon wasn't the first one to write about it. Some of the founders talked much of the issue in the 1790's.


"Create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property." -Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice.


Why are these 19th century ideas relevant now? Because we're inevitably heading into a post-industrial age as the bottom drops out of the modern world. If populations aren't brought down and if there isn't a system aimed towards getting people back to the land there will be some serious issues. And it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. It's arithmetic.


----------



## Pheonix (Oct 26, 2012)

Well you got me sold, I'll vote for Obama so he will NOT be able to stop Iran from bombing Israel. There's no population control tactics any better then WW3.


----------

