Posts
The change which Mr. Obama is always talking about is not visible to me till now. But it looks very discouraging specially for native Americans to see that USA has begun to look towards other emerging forces to give some support to its limping economy. The present inclination towards India is a visible example. America is now beginning to show the signs of failure as it is holding hands of India and Israel just to pull itself on the track again. But the result of this trust is far devastating than expected. The stimulus plans are not working well for native Americans, all because of the reason that these native Americans are not being benefited by it, they are already the biggest losers in this drama. Today, Indians and Israelis haven't lost any major jobs but ironically all new recruitments are mostly done from India and Israel. Thus it is an alarming situation which people of America would realize after sometime. Those native Americans who were dramatically laid off are not called back, instead, cheaper Indian workers and professionals are hired and the pace of this recruitment is alarmingly fast. Many American firms are either purposely recruiting Indian workers or they are moving their head quarters and business offices there. This trend is making USA barren for jobs for the poor natives.
http://www.rightsidenews.com/200906285282/energy-and-environment/millions-will-loose-jobs-as-largest-tax-increase-in-us-history-passes-house.html
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?title=US offshores 22,000 green jobs to India&artid=IDyD1IXSM1c=&type=
The above links are eye opening and mind blowing. This is more than a nightmare and most importantly Native Americans are being hanged on naked wire in this situation. What I believe is that, the Change which Obama was screaming is the one we see now. No jobs in America but more jobs for India and China!! What a Change. Native Americans, especially black Americans are subjected to enormous economic pressure due to this situation. One cannot understand why USA is not concentrating on its own ailing economy and trying to appease India and their economy so religiously. The inside game is much cruel which will show its bitterness to people in the coming days. This matter is serious and needs strong consideration.
Presently Israel and India are at the top agenda of USA and the inclination is beyond understanding to many. But still there are many answers which are visible and clear. Israeli influence in US economy was quite immense until Indians joined hands with them. Now American business scenario is completely dominated by native Israelis and Indians. Slow but gradual creeping of this influence was facilitated by Israeli who already had strong connections in the state department and Government network in USA. Today Obama's administration has many Indians and most importantly they are influencing the decisions very wisely and keeping full understanding of Indian interest.
America is now seeing with full hope towards Israel and India and sees them as the force to pull the economy back on track. Promises were made and assurances were given to America but at what cost??? US signed a deal with India to support enhancing its nuclear capabilities for that many relaxations were given to this huge country. More importantly the shift of Job bank to India is also a very alarming signal. Further the inclusion of more Indian natives in US administration has been allowed and this is continuously increasing.
This situation is not clear to many native Americans who gave Mr. Obama votes with high expectations. Mr. Obama's inability to take decisions puerly of American interest can be seen time and again when his declaration of pulling wars off in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been met. The Guantanamo's closure is still in hanging. The resolution of Palestine Issue is still in hung position. He also promised to resolve the Kashmir issue which has now been erased from his priority list. But above all, the promise to bring derailed economy back on track cannot be met as every month millions of jobs are lost and people are unsure how they would get them back??? But when they will come to know that their jobs were lost just to clear the entrance of Indians and Israelis, then they would see that as a nightmare.
The time will tell that for how long this nightmare would continue and when will Americans themselves be able to understand this game themselves.
About the Author:
Creator of Blog "Pakistan Hopes" http://pakistan_hope.bravejournal.com
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Monday, July 13, 2009
Roland Burris Jumped Into a Shark Tank
Despite facing federal corruption charges, one thing Illinois Governor Rod Balgojevich has demonstrated is a profound skill in how to manipulate people and opportunities to create a smoke screen for personal and political survival.
When he tapped Roland Burris for the US Senate appointment, society was shocked at the brazenness of the move. However, people soon became more curious about the individual who would accept such a position despite the controversy and allegations surrounding the tainted senate seat Blagojevich had for the giving.
No doubt Roland Burris had a distinguished political record as Illinois State Attorney General up until 1995. However, he has not been directly involved in politics for the last thirteen years aside from unsuccessful campaign runs for City of Chicago Mayor and Democratic Governor nominee. He is currently the CEO of Burris & Lebed Consulting, LLC, which is a consulting firm providing services in public relations and governmental representation – a lobbyist.
However, you really have to question the level of common sense that Roland Burris would bring to this senate seat.
It stands to reason that anyone seeking a political office would engage in deal making with any individual who is currently under federal investigation. Relationships of these sorts represent political land mines and Burris willingly stepped on it for nothing other than what appears to be self gain – “I want to be a US Senator and I’ll do anything to get it.”
Burris had to know that if he did accept the position that he would become nothing short of a political pawn to satisfy Blago’s need to give the media something else to focus on other than his (Blagojevich) looming indictment. In so doing, Burris epitomizes the idea of a morally weak politician and will most likely follow the same path as that of Blagojevich and the like; embroiled in some future investigation for impropriety or corruption.
Whats more troubling is that Burris seems oblivious to the profuse amount of political toes he has managed to step on up until this point.
After the news of the appointment hit the street, Burris became as politically isolated as Blagojevich. Every single democrat in the Illinois assembly and US Senate was against the appointment. However, he turned a blind eye to his potential political allies and proceeded on his way to taking the senate seat. This alone will undoubtedly create a groud swell of resentment among his fellow democrats. The resentment will surface as a lack of support when and if he tries to accomplish anything in his political career.
Burris has already received the smack down from US Senate majority leader Harry Reid in refusing to initially seat Burris. However, despite this, Burris will eventually be seated for the simple fact that the law is the law and despite Blago’s looming conviction he is still the Governor empowered to appoint someone to the vacant US Senate seat. But, if you think Harry Reid among other senior democrats will forget being put in this awkward position – think again.
Once Roland Burris finally does take his seat in the US senate the reality of what happened will probably hit him pretty hard. The reality being, Blagojevich convincing him to take the position on the premise that he is jumping into a tank of friendly dolphins only to find out that they are sharks instead.
About the Author:
Eric Kaad is a Political Enthusiast favoring independent thought featured on http://averagejoeknows.blogspot.com
When he tapped Roland Burris for the US Senate appointment, society was shocked at the brazenness of the move. However, people soon became more curious about the individual who would accept such a position despite the controversy and allegations surrounding the tainted senate seat Blagojevich had for the giving.
No doubt Roland Burris had a distinguished political record as Illinois State Attorney General up until 1995. However, he has not been directly involved in politics for the last thirteen years aside from unsuccessful campaign runs for City of Chicago Mayor and Democratic Governor nominee. He is currently the CEO of Burris & Lebed Consulting, LLC, which is a consulting firm providing services in public relations and governmental representation – a lobbyist.
However, you really have to question the level of common sense that Roland Burris would bring to this senate seat.
It stands to reason that anyone seeking a political office would engage in deal making with any individual who is currently under federal investigation. Relationships of these sorts represent political land mines and Burris willingly stepped on it for nothing other than what appears to be self gain – “I want to be a US Senator and I’ll do anything to get it.”
Burris had to know that if he did accept the position that he would become nothing short of a political pawn to satisfy Blago’s need to give the media something else to focus on other than his (Blagojevich) looming indictment. In so doing, Burris epitomizes the idea of a morally weak politician and will most likely follow the same path as that of Blagojevich and the like; embroiled in some future investigation for impropriety or corruption.
Whats more troubling is that Burris seems oblivious to the profuse amount of political toes he has managed to step on up until this point.
After the news of the appointment hit the street, Burris became as politically isolated as Blagojevich. Every single democrat in the Illinois assembly and US Senate was against the appointment. However, he turned a blind eye to his potential political allies and proceeded on his way to taking the senate seat. This alone will undoubtedly create a groud swell of resentment among his fellow democrats. The resentment will surface as a lack of support when and if he tries to accomplish anything in his political career.
Burris has already received the smack down from US Senate majority leader Harry Reid in refusing to initially seat Burris. However, despite this, Burris will eventually be seated for the simple fact that the law is the law and despite Blago’s looming conviction he is still the Governor empowered to appoint someone to the vacant US Senate seat. But, if you think Harry Reid among other senior democrats will forget being put in this awkward position – think again.
Once Roland Burris finally does take his seat in the US senate the reality of what happened will probably hit him pretty hard. The reality being, Blagojevich convincing him to take the position on the premise that he is jumping into a tank of friendly dolphins only to find out that they are sharks instead.
About the Author:
Eric Kaad is a Political Enthusiast favoring independent thought featured on http://averagejoeknows.blogspot.com
Friday, July 10, 2009
The Relationship Between Business and Politics
How powerful is politics in business? The connection between the two is often hard to explain, but somehow they are closely connected. Did you ever happen to lose a job or a promotion in favor of a person who hadn’t worked harder than you, or made more significant contributions that you? Was it that person’s character that got him/her the job, the fact that he/she knew everyone around there, or could it be that you simply did not understand the politics going on around that business?
When we hear the word ‘politics’, we naturally think of politicians, political parties, political strategies, and so forth. But have you ever considered the term ‘politics’ from a business point of view? When it comes to politics in business, the former means the difference between failure and success in the latter. And, more often than not, politics can define one’s personal career. You can enjoy benefits or suffer penalties as a result of the way politics influences every business. If you happen to be among the most appreciated employees, decisions may go your way, but if you are ‘invisible’ to your bosses or they have nothing but ill feelings for you, some penalties may be coming your way.
When it comes to business decisions or work environments, we often hear expressions such as ‘it was nothing but politics’ or ‘that place is very political’. What do these expressions mean? And how can you be part of the game, and know how to play your politics? When you have managed to build a strong relationship with your customers, you understand the business thoroughly, and you are respected throughout the organization, but your superiors still think that you’re not doing well enough, this could be a clear example of people using politics to drive their own personal agenda.
It’s only fair to say that there’s no business without politics, and that its level of sophistication depends on the size of the organization. It’s understandable that the complexity of politics is proportional with the size of the company, because, after all, politics means power, and the more players are involved in the game, the more there is at stake.
Like everywhere else, we can speak of bad politics and good politics in business. Good politics refer to building strong networks at all the levels of that company or organization, spending time with employees from all levels, having a solid understanding of the keys to the success of the organization, and so forth. Good politics in business is about sharing information and encouraging other people to do the same thing. Bad politics refers to exactly the opposite. In the end it all comes down to driving your own agenda, as mentioned before. However, deft leadership should not be confused with bad politics in business. The two are very different.
Unfortunately, it seems that bad politics has got its share of businesses, and we see more of that than of good politics, because there are more bad politicians than there are good, and the former still continue to make the rule. But, in the end, it is up to you how you play the game.
If you want to find more information on different business or politics subjects please visit http://www.articletimesonline.com
When we hear the word ‘politics’, we naturally think of politicians, political parties, political strategies, and so forth. But have you ever considered the term ‘politics’ from a business point of view? When it comes to politics in business, the former means the difference between failure and success in the latter. And, more often than not, politics can define one’s personal career. You can enjoy benefits or suffer penalties as a result of the way politics influences every business. If you happen to be among the most appreciated employees, decisions may go your way, but if you are ‘invisible’ to your bosses or they have nothing but ill feelings for you, some penalties may be coming your way.
When it comes to business decisions or work environments, we often hear expressions such as ‘it was nothing but politics’ or ‘that place is very political’. What do these expressions mean? And how can you be part of the game, and know how to play your politics? When you have managed to build a strong relationship with your customers, you understand the business thoroughly, and you are respected throughout the organization, but your superiors still think that you’re not doing well enough, this could be a clear example of people using politics to drive their own personal agenda.
It’s only fair to say that there’s no business without politics, and that its level of sophistication depends on the size of the organization. It’s understandable that the complexity of politics is proportional with the size of the company, because, after all, politics means power, and the more players are involved in the game, the more there is at stake.
Like everywhere else, we can speak of bad politics and good politics in business. Good politics refer to building strong networks at all the levels of that company or organization, spending time with employees from all levels, having a solid understanding of the keys to the success of the organization, and so forth. Good politics in business is about sharing information and encouraging other people to do the same thing. Bad politics refers to exactly the opposite. In the end it all comes down to driving your own agenda, as mentioned before. However, deft leadership should not be confused with bad politics in business. The two are very different.
Unfortunately, it seems that bad politics has got its share of businesses, and we see more of that than of good politics, because there are more bad politicians than there are good, and the former still continue to make the rule. But, in the end, it is up to you how you play the game.
If you want to find more information on different business or politics subjects please visit http://www.articletimesonline.com
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Kirk Dillard Throws His Hat in the Ring for Governor of Illinois
Republican State Senator Kirk Dillard will officially announce his candidacy for governor of Illinois on Wednesday July 8.
Before anyone gets too excited about his candidacy, you might want to read an article posted in the Illinois Review that will enlighten you on just who Kirk Dillard is and how he has represented Illinois over the last 20 something years.
Read more HERE
Would we be seeing anything different than the current stalemate going on with the Pat Quinn governorship?
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Politics: the Ugliest Fascination on Earth
No matter where you live, politics probably plays a part in your day to day life. You might not immediately deal with political issues, but you can be sure that politics plays a part in what you do! Whether it is office politics deciding who gets that raise you've been hoping for; city politics determining where you are allowed to park downtown; county politics dictating your quarterly property tax or even nationwide politics deciding how your schools are funded, politics plays a part in your daily life.
It is important then that you understand what politics really is. Politics, at its core, is defined by Wikipedia as the process by which groups of people make decisions. At its core, politics sounds quite simple. What makes it complicated are the individuals involved in making the decisions. Because human beings are not perfect, the political system is never going to be perfect. This is something that most people don’t understand about politics. You can put all of the pomp and circumstance into politics that you want, in the end; it is more about human beings getting their way than about the process itself.
It has been said quite often that politics is a dirty business. In the United States Congress, for example, politics has taken on an air of hatred and manipulation. Many citizens of the United States feel that they are left out of the process of politics and that their elected representatives are more interested in scoring personal points than in working toward the betterment of their states and districts. In the last few decades special interest groups have taken on an entirely new role and lobbyists have become particularly vilified.
This disillusion toward politics is nothing new. Plato—the famous Greek philosopher—believed that all political systems were corrupt at their cores and that societies leaders should be chosen from an elite group of individuals who were began leadership training at birth. Aristotle argued that man is inherently political and that personal and political ethics are often the same thing.
One of the most famous political philosophers, Machiavelli advised that leaders of politics be brutal and manipulative and do whatever they could to retain their power. Machiavelli is studied today and his work is considered to be one of the leading authorities on how to behave in politics. Is it any wonder then, that the political systems of so many nations look corrupt?
The heart of politics is good: it is how laws are made and how individuals are judged by the societies that surround them. Without politics, nobody would know what was allowed and what was not allowed when they left the house. Unfortunately, many people view politics as a way to get ahead or to gain some sort of power over the people they live and work with. It is because of these "bad eggs" that politics has become regarded as an evil and ugly business.
For more information on politics, visit http://www.politicsmicroblog.com and http://www.englandmicroblog.com
It is important then that you understand what politics really is. Politics, at its core, is defined by Wikipedia as the process by which groups of people make decisions. At its core, politics sounds quite simple. What makes it complicated are the individuals involved in making the decisions. Because human beings are not perfect, the political system is never going to be perfect. This is something that most people don’t understand about politics. You can put all of the pomp and circumstance into politics that you want, in the end; it is more about human beings getting their way than about the process itself.
It has been said quite often that politics is a dirty business. In the United States Congress, for example, politics has taken on an air of hatred and manipulation. Many citizens of the United States feel that they are left out of the process of politics and that their elected representatives are more interested in scoring personal points than in working toward the betterment of their states and districts. In the last few decades special interest groups have taken on an entirely new role and lobbyists have become particularly vilified.
This disillusion toward politics is nothing new. Plato—the famous Greek philosopher—believed that all political systems were corrupt at their cores and that societies leaders should be chosen from an elite group of individuals who were began leadership training at birth. Aristotle argued that man is inherently political and that personal and political ethics are often the same thing.
One of the most famous political philosophers, Machiavelli advised that leaders of politics be brutal and manipulative and do whatever they could to retain their power. Machiavelli is studied today and his work is considered to be one of the leading authorities on how to behave in politics. Is it any wonder then, that the political systems of so many nations look corrupt?
The heart of politics is good: it is how laws are made and how individuals are judged by the societies that surround them. Without politics, nobody would know what was allowed and what was not allowed when they left the house. Unfortunately, many people view politics as a way to get ahead or to gain some sort of power over the people they live and work with. It is because of these "bad eggs" that politics has become regarded as an evil and ugly business.
For more information on politics, visit http://www.politicsmicroblog.com and http://www.englandmicroblog.com
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Dictatorship and Democracy
The Penguin Encyclopedia says 'dictatorship' as 'Government by absolute authority' - the term may correctly be used to describe rule by a group or class but is generally confined to circumstances in which absolute power is wielded by a single person, under the form of a republic. Also, authority similarly wielded by any coporate body or community.
There are three types of dictatorships namely:
(1) totalitarian dictatorship
(2) military dictatorship and
(3) autocratic dictatorship.
Communist and socialist nations use to practise the totalitarian dictatorship. Military dictatorship is practised by junta (group of army officers who have seized power by a coup d'`etat). A person fully controls the whole regime is known as autocratic dictatorship.
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines 'democracy' as:
(1) government by the people;especially:rule of the majority
(2) a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.
Article Source: http://marketing.article24h.com/category/politics.html
Author: Thuriya
A Burmese Student
There are three types of dictatorships namely:
(1) totalitarian dictatorship
(2) military dictatorship and
(3) autocratic dictatorship.
Communist and socialist nations use to practise the totalitarian dictatorship. Military dictatorship is practised by junta (group of army officers who have seized power by a coup d'`etat). A person fully controls the whole regime is known as autocratic dictatorship.
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines 'democracy' as:
(1) government by the people;especially:rule of the majority
(2) a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.
Article Source: http://marketing.article24h.com/category/politics.html
Author: Thuriya
A Burmese Student
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Is Affirmative Action Reverse Discrimination?
Claims of reverse discrimination have been around for a while; however, recent events have brought it back into the forefront. With the Supreme Court’s decision regarding the New Haven, CT white firefighters reverse discrimination case, the election of President Obama and the nomination of Sonia Sotomayo, the first Latina to be nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court, some are claiming white men are being discriminated against despite the fact that seven of the nine justices are white men. I recall seeing a photo of then Presidential candidate John Edwards on the cover of Esquire magazine, with the caption, “Can a White man still be President?” There have been 44 Presidents, 43 of them have been white men. I think it’s a sure bet that we will see at least one white man as President again. Instead of asking such a silly question, we should be asking ourselves why has there only been one non-white President and no women?
I recall reading a quote by Barry Switzer, “Some people are born on third base and go through life thinking they’ve hit a triple”. That profound statement truly sums up the essence of racial privilege and what it is to be white in the United States. It demonstrates that some people are given a head start while others have to work much harder to get to the same place. There is no denying every President had to work hard to earn the highest office in the land. However, President Obama had additional challenges to overcome due to his color.
To continue the baseball analogy, affirmative action is not about taking white players off the field. What it means is that they are no longer given the advantage of starting on third base but must take their turn in the batter’s box along with everyone else. It’s about creating a level playing field where everyone must earn their way on base and where everyone has a chance to step up to the plate.
There was a time in our history in which African-Americans were prohibited from competing in Major League Baseball and were relegated to the separate but unequal Negro League. In 1947, Brooklyn Dodgers general manager Branch Rickey, motivated both by the ideal of racial equality and the desire to win ballgames, added a black player to his team. The player was the legendary Jackie Robinson. In doing so, the pair ended the baseball color line of the sixty-year era of segregation. Branch Rickey wanted the most talented ball players and was smart enough to know that some of the best players were not white.
Today, there are many Jackie Robinsons so to speak, who deserve a chance to demonstrate their exceptional skills and talents. Affirmative action is not a perfect solution, but does provide the best opportunity for people of all backgrounds to be given the chance to compete.
At times affirmative action policy is not implemented to its true intent. There are white people who are passed over for positions they deserved. They have every right to be upset at the injustice.
Yet for every one of those instances where a white person falls prey to discrimination, there are ten times the numbers of People of Color who experience such discrimination.
This is how I make sense of claims of reverse discrimination. For simplicity, the black team represents all People of Color.
America’s Favorite Pastime
White vs. Black
The white team is allowed to field three times the numbers of players than the black team.
Instead of three outs, the white team gets six outs.
The umpires are employed by the white team and use to be members of the white team.
All the games are played at the white team’s home stadium where they are cheered and supported while the black team is booed and taunted.
The white team has all of the latest and greatest equipment while the black team has to settle for the white teams discards.
The white team grew up playing baseball in organized leagues and attending private baseball camps.
All of the previous 43 commissioners of baseball have been from the white team. Now the first black commissioner is attempting to appoint a black umpire. Yet the white team is claiming it is unfair.
Discrimination is discrimination not matter which direction it is pointed. However, it would appear that the only time many whites condemn such behavior is when the bus is backing up on them.
Racism in America still results in a disproportionate number of white people getting on base because they were walked while many people of color were hit by a pitch. The end result is the same, but one is much more painful.
About the Author:
Dr. Maura Cullen is the author of the bestselling book "35 Dumb Things Well-Intended People Say: Surprising Things We Say That Widen the Diversity Gap". She is a highly-acclaimed diversity trainer who has educated and inspired people worldwide in over 400 universities and organizations on how to be more inclusive and authentic when communicating with others. She is widely considered one of the nation's foremost authorities of diversity issues today. www.TheDiversitySpeaker.com.
I recall reading a quote by Barry Switzer, “Some people are born on third base and go through life thinking they’ve hit a triple”. That profound statement truly sums up the essence of racial privilege and what it is to be white in the United States. It demonstrates that some people are given a head start while others have to work much harder to get to the same place. There is no denying every President had to work hard to earn the highest office in the land. However, President Obama had additional challenges to overcome due to his color.
To continue the baseball analogy, affirmative action is not about taking white players off the field. What it means is that they are no longer given the advantage of starting on third base but must take their turn in the batter’s box along with everyone else. It’s about creating a level playing field where everyone must earn their way on base and where everyone has a chance to step up to the plate.
There was a time in our history in which African-Americans were prohibited from competing in Major League Baseball and were relegated to the separate but unequal Negro League. In 1947, Brooklyn Dodgers general manager Branch Rickey, motivated both by the ideal of racial equality and the desire to win ballgames, added a black player to his team. The player was the legendary Jackie Robinson. In doing so, the pair ended the baseball color line of the sixty-year era of segregation. Branch Rickey wanted the most talented ball players and was smart enough to know that some of the best players were not white.
Today, there are many Jackie Robinsons so to speak, who deserve a chance to demonstrate their exceptional skills and talents. Affirmative action is not a perfect solution, but does provide the best opportunity for people of all backgrounds to be given the chance to compete.
At times affirmative action policy is not implemented to its true intent. There are white people who are passed over for positions they deserved. They have every right to be upset at the injustice.
Yet for every one of those instances where a white person falls prey to discrimination, there are ten times the numbers of People of Color who experience such discrimination.
This is how I make sense of claims of reverse discrimination. For simplicity, the black team represents all People of Color.
America’s Favorite Pastime
White vs. Black
The white team is allowed to field three times the numbers of players than the black team.
Instead of three outs, the white team gets six outs.
The umpires are employed by the white team and use to be members of the white team.
All the games are played at the white team’s home stadium where they are cheered and supported while the black team is booed and taunted.
The white team has all of the latest and greatest equipment while the black team has to settle for the white teams discards.
The white team grew up playing baseball in organized leagues and attending private baseball camps.
All of the previous 43 commissioners of baseball have been from the white team. Now the first black commissioner is attempting to appoint a black umpire. Yet the white team is claiming it is unfair.
Discrimination is discrimination not matter which direction it is pointed. However, it would appear that the only time many whites condemn such behavior is when the bus is backing up on them.
Racism in America still results in a disproportionate number of white people getting on base because they were walked while many people of color were hit by a pitch. The end result is the same, but one is much more painful.
About the Author:
Dr. Maura Cullen is the author of the bestselling book "35 Dumb Things Well-Intended People Say: Surprising Things We Say That Widen the Diversity Gap". She is a highly-acclaimed diversity trainer who has educated and inspired people worldwide in over 400 universities and organizations on how to be more inclusive and authentic when communicating with others. She is widely considered one of the nation's foremost authorities of diversity issues today. www.TheDiversitySpeaker.com.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
A Lonely Socialist
A socialist is lonely because he realises that -
(a) God has given his power to, that God has shared his power with, God’s political friends, the state and capitalism, and that God hasn’t given his power to, shared his power with, the true nature of the political concept of socialism.
(b) He can't find any inspiration, any morality, in the ideology of existing parties which call themselves socialist.
(c) He wants to give the political concept of socialism morality, but doesn't find a willingness to give the political concept of socialism morality among existing parties which call themselves socialist.
(d) Existing parties which call themselves socialist never wanted to make a political friendship with a true socialist. For to make a political friendship with a true socialist, you would want to reveal the true nature of political reality and the true nature of the political concept of socialism as a premise, a starting point for political friendship. Existing parties which call themselves socialist never sought to do this, to reveal the true nature of political reality and the true nature of the political concept of socialism as a premise, a starting point, for making political friendship with a true socialist.
As such, a socialist is lonely, and thinks of the idea of the Lonely Peoples' Socialist Aparty as a means to trying to attain political friendship with another lonely socialist on the basis that you would want to reveal the true nature of political reality and the true nature of the political concept of socialism as a premise, a starting point, for political friendship.
Article Source: http://marketing.article24h.com/category/politics.html
Author: Lonelysocialist
(a) God has given his power to, that God has shared his power with, God’s political friends, the state and capitalism, and that God hasn’t given his power to, shared his power with, the true nature of the political concept of socialism.
(b) He can't find any inspiration, any morality, in the ideology of existing parties which call themselves socialist.
(c) He wants to give the political concept of socialism morality, but doesn't find a willingness to give the political concept of socialism morality among existing parties which call themselves socialist.
(d) Existing parties which call themselves socialist never wanted to make a political friendship with a true socialist. For to make a political friendship with a true socialist, you would want to reveal the true nature of political reality and the true nature of the political concept of socialism as a premise, a starting point for political friendship. Existing parties which call themselves socialist never sought to do this, to reveal the true nature of political reality and the true nature of the political concept of socialism as a premise, a starting point, for making political friendship with a true socialist.
As such, a socialist is lonely, and thinks of the idea of the Lonely Peoples' Socialist Aparty as a means to trying to attain political friendship with another lonely socialist on the basis that you would want to reveal the true nature of political reality and the true nature of the political concept of socialism as a premise, a starting point, for political friendship.
Article Source: http://marketing.article24h.com/category/politics.html
Author: Lonelysocialist
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)