Euphemysticism, and other Almighty Powers

I am, and have been for quite a while now, truth be known, a progressive liberal.

No, I am not a “classical liberal,” since that implies something has changed.  Nothing has changed.  Wicked people are still twisting language, and idiots are still falling for it.

Let others defend their moniker or change it – I am a Progressive Liberal.

“Progressive” as in “progress,” from the Latin progressus – to move forward as opposed to backward; and “liberal” from the Latin liberalis – liberty, bountiful, befitting a free man.

People like John Locke described “Liberalism,” like “libertarian” and “liberation,” as freedom from political oppression, and as the right to life and property; as opposed to the Divine Right of Kings.  To liberals of even as recently as a century ago, liberalism was advanced through the Rule of Law, which meant that nobody, including the King, was above a uniform, equal application of law.  All (meaning all humans) were to be treated as equals under law.  No special categories or classes whatsoever.

We still use liberal that way when speaking of other nations.  For instance, when China liberalized trade, that meant their government relaxed its iron grip on it.  When the former Soviet-socialist nations liberalized, they adopted free market and personal rights reforms.

That is liberalism, by history, etymology, and all but the most silly, recent, and USA-only use.  It is the opposite of authoritarian socialism.

People like Immanuel Kant invoked “Progressivism” as movement away from barbaric authoritarianism, and toward peace and technological progress.  Moving forward meant moving away from almighty government and its tribal-drum-beating conformists.  Experimentation and progress requires freedom, you know.  So “Progressive” and “Liberal” really go together very well in their proper use.

“Conservatives,” on the other hand, had always rejected notions of classless individualism and egalitarianism, and promoted hierarchy under a distinct ruling class; and often hereditary at that.

So, where are we today?  We have hereditary rulers, practically speaking.  We definitely have a ruling class we’ve empowered over almost every physical aspect of our lives; even allowing them to determine the value of our currency.  You and I have no “rights” they cannot seize for any number of political whims.  “The Patriot Act,” and other similar euphemysticism, is all about gutting the rule of law and everything our founders, as well as thinkers like Locke and Kant were all about.  With something cynically deemed “historic” every day now (literally historic, as in regressing to pre-Hammurabic barbarism), we’ve become lock-stepping, militarized, book-burning fascists.

I do not use that word “fascist” lightly or without cause.  Look up how Mussolini defined his corporatist variation of socialism, and you’ll see that the USA is and has been for some time, fascist.  Mussolini himself declared FDR a fine fascist.

I wish I were making that up.

But even “fascist” is just a repackaging of humanity’s ancient default state of brutish-dumb, tribal, Obey-The-Alpha authoritarianism.  Probably the best term for this is Regressive Conservatism, since it’s what we fall back to when we stop fighting what’s most stupid in all of us…

Since Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt started a “Progressive Movement” in the USA, that regressive conservatism is what “Progressive Liberal” in modern parlance has become.

In other words, our use of those labels has almost completely flipped.  I say “almost” because “conservatism” now means close to the same thing as it did before; which is to say it means the same thing as “progressive liberal” does to most people today.

In other-other words, what we now call “liberal,” “progressive,” “conservative,” “Democratic” or “Republican all means the same thing: stone-age authoritarianism, self-aggrandizing tribalism, misguided technology, and perverted “science.”  The supposed opposition of the various incorporated factions are based upon false dichotomies that work very well to manipulate y’all (our language’s only distinct second-person personal pronoun) and distract you from the massive corruption that’s lining the rulers’ pockets and consolidating their power.

Words are important.  Words start and end wars.  Words are laws and contracts.  Words can bring tears of happiness, or pain.  How we use words can wound or heal or kill or repair.  Words can enslave, and words can set free.

I think it’s time we reclaim our language.  We must start using our ears to hear and our minds to discern (I should be able to say, “discriminate,” but that word has become a twisted and destructive invective of late).

And, dammit, we must speak truth to power.

I, for one, intend to use words properly.  I am a true Progressive Liberal.  And I’m hoping that all who see the corruption and violence we call “government” as a threat, and who seek peace (the kind without theft and explosions…you know, real peace), justice (real justice), equality (real equality) and freedom (yeah, real freedom), will also reclaim that once-honorable moniker.

And now for something that’s very “politically incorrect.”

We need to start shaming people.

It’s already happening from the other side, of course.  They try to shame us for believing truth, speaking truth, or being human.  More than shame us, they invoke the heavily armed might of armies, jails, cops and fines to force their politifaith upon us.

It’s time we shame them for their lies, their absurd, violent, thieving and self-destructive madness.  They nullify our laws, our history, our culture.  Let’s nullify their lawlessness, amoral fantasies and oppressive self-indulgence.

We have allowed too much intrusion on life, liberty, contracts and property.

So, shame on those who put their faith in politics as some benevolent god.  Shame, shame on those who still intend to vote for this monstrous “Two Party System” puppet show.  And shame on those whose Newspeak has made wrong right and right wrong, as nearly all of us goosestep to the precipice.

In one way or another (and I’m hoping we use the peaceful means our founders bequeathed us), what we need is another 1776 to move us forward from all this horrendous, death-spiralling, 1984.

…They must be kidding me

I wasn’t going to blog about such things. I really do mean to focus on my primary objective and avoid wasting time on anything else.

However, just moments ago I just opened the Final Order/assessment of a $503.68 “civil” penalty to the Horning for Governor campaign for what was, perhaps, the all-time most trivial offense against Indiana Election Commission paperwork.

We failed to properly close-out our meagerly funded campaign and report the money we didn’t make by their deadline.  That’s it.

But  the whopping fine, amounting to a huge percentage of what my campaign raised, is not what I’m writing about.

And no, it’s not that I’m miffed that Obama or Charlie White got away with much more serious violations of campaign and civil law, while a poor schlemazel like me has to cough up the dough.

(though, in case you’re wondering, I am miffed about all that).

No, I’m really writing about the two (2) quarter-sheet notices slipped into the envelope.

The two sheets were identical, and said,


The styrofoam cube enclosed in this envelope is being included by the sender to meet a United States Postal Service regulation. This regulation requires the letter or package to be ¾ of an inch thick at its thickest point. The cube has no other purpose and may be disposed of upon opening this correspondence.

For any further questions or comments about the styrofoam cube only, please call 1-888-624-5990.

Now, there is so much wrong with this, that I hardly know where to start. Forget that StyrofoamTM is a trademark of the Dow Chemical Company and should …by law,  be so noted. Forget that the enclosed bit was not a cube at all (it was supposed to be a parallelepiped, but it was smashed into a rhombus). I don’t care so much about clumsy or incorrect grammar and such (“is being included,” or “disposed of upon opening”). And I’m assuming I was given two notices by mistake (may I never find out that this is another regulation!)

No, this is just one of those freakishly weird regulations that none of us could possibly know about unless we’re in the business of sending dangerously, criminally thin packages. I see this as analogous to having to duck under a sign that says “WARNING, Low Sign / ¡ADVERTENCIA, Señal de baja! placed in accordance with the Officious, Unnecessary and Badly-Worded Signage Act of 2010” 

I’m quite tempted to call that 888 number and…  No, strike that.  I don’t even want to know how many people staff that line at taxpayer expense.  I think I’ll just slip the “cube” and the little sheets into the documents I’m mailing to the Governor (  Maybe he’ll be amused.  Maybe the package will look suspicious and get “special attention.”


We must oppose this unregulated regulation/lawless lawmaking madness with all our wits and might; and we must not waste any more time in this important endeavor.

Please join me.

Huxley Only Imagined…

Well now.  Here’s something interesting

Not only is the Orwellian title attention-grabbing in its own right (and absurd, since experience hath shewn that governments by their nature do the opposite of “save lives.”), but just read this perversity and see if you don’t get cold chills.  Just think about the ramifications – our corrupt, foolish and selfish politicians collecting and owning all DNA data from everybody born in the USA:

  • Our politicians’ record with data security (from both hacking and plain old screwups) is just awful.  Mistakes will be madeHuge ones.  The United Kingdom, our apparent role model, already screwed up with DNA samples, among other things.
  • You think “pre-existing condition” exclusions are bad now!
  • What little good could come out of such a thing is certainly outweighed by sci-fi mischief and Keystone Cops incompetence.

Oh, but it sounds so well-intended and helpful, doesn’t it?  What’s the history of that as applied to politicians?

Anyway, it’s scheduled for debate in the House of Representatives.  Nearly all reps will vote on this without having read a word of it.  They may tell a 20-something legislative aid to read it for them, but most of those starry-eyed future congresscritters haven’t lived long enough to get through a history book and they’ve never heard about such a thing as constitutional limitation of powers.

It’s up to you to tell your reps what’s what and just who they work for.  Brave New World?  It’s still your choice.

Choose wisely.



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.