Simplistically "Good", Alexis Ohanian, Karen H. Klein, Charity As Anti-Taxation Polemic, Absolution, Expiation and Injustice

If the American People are inherently simplistically "good" and charitable as the Co-founder  of
 reddit .com    Alexis Ohanian suggest, there wouldn't be Republican-Conservatives and their Intellectual-Liberalism.

In an attempt to explain the recent Karen H Klein  phenomenon, which reddit.com played a role in her receipt of over $500,000 in donations as a result of her being bullied by 7th graders on a Greece, New York school district bus.  Alexis Ohanian expressed the typical supposition that charity is objectively as a Political-Economy fact good and it's practioners good people.

Charity as an objective fact of American Political-Economy has always been a gambit of self-interest and it continues to fulfill it's primary role as an anti-taxation polemic.  As it applys in the Karen H. Klein phenomenon, where the 68 yr. old Karen H. Klein a grandmother was bullied with nasty cliches of core Americana by 7th graders.  We find once again an inability and unwillingness by the status quo narrative to view a phenomenon as being motivated by something other than myths of society, myths in this context of "good".

America is nihilistic and alienated, irrespective of critique and woldview.  Why people have donated over $500,000 to Karen H. Klein isn't quite inherently simplistically "good" and charitable as suggested by Alexis Ohanian, but it's a means a form of absolution and expiation.  The injustice experienced by Karen H. Klein at the hands of those 7th graders of Greece, New York is core Americana, replicated on a daily basis through out our national social strata.

Whether it's President Barack Obama, Democrats and their mortal struggle with Senator Mitch McConnell and Republicans or the Speculative-Value narrative of Reaganomics and it's War with middle-class public workers or the misery loves company dialectic of the hapless ill informed---the dynamic of injustice is bed rock Americana as the Bill of Rights.

Absolution, expiation and tokens of it's expression are as illogical as the logic of paralysis in the face of injustice which then stimulates the need to absolve oneself and atone for the averted eyes, the sealed lips and failure to pay attention and acquire the information necessary to combat the injustices with which we construct our American values.

By Apropos

The Criticism and Oppositionary Polemic Against Governmental Spending For Social Services and No One Human Owns The Creation Of Value

The criticism and oppositionary polemic against governmental spending particularly for social services and general welfare specifically by Conservative idealism and it's Intellectual-Liberalism has everything to do with subjectivity and supposition.  The criticism and it's polemic doesn't have a basis in objectivity of the Human Condition.

The idea of who is deserving of value in the Political-Economy sense has always been an approximation.  Just as no one human can lay claim to the originality of ideas, no one human owns the creation of value.  The Human Condition and it's valuation mechanism is a fact, an expression of continuum of relations.  The quantum process of an idea emerging is one, no one can claim as progenitor because it's dialectic requires exactly that, an activity of opposite.

Value and it's idea is an object of relations.  Relations that exist for a purpose as defined by need and want.  Seth MacFarlane, the creator of Family Guy explained during a recent Piers Morgan CNN interview, that Hollywood is predominantly Liberal and Progressive because and we paraphrase they create for artistic objectivity.

Conservatism and it's Intellectual-Liberalism on the other hand distorts by denying artistic objectivity as the essence of value and instead deals in Speculative-Value.

If, the Human Condition is to attain it's aspirational zenith this antagonism has to be resolved and the profane simplicity of the criticism and oppositionary polemic against Governmental spending for social services will not enable it.

By Apropos

Revisionist Narrative, The 2003 Invasion Of Iraq By George W. Bush, The Zionist Collaborator Hosni Mubarak and Gov. Jesse Ventura's Polemic Against Empire

Where is the push back from Democrats, serious thinkers and Progressives on this Revisionist narrative that the 2003 invasion of Iraq by George W. Bush, his military-industry henchmen and their Corporate Media stooge.  Birthed the open political action specifically in Egypt and the demise of the Zionist collaborator Hosni Mubarak, vis-a'-vis what is farcially coined the Arab Spring?

This current claim by the Intellectual-Liberalism of Republican-Conservatism that the toppling of North African dictators and their ouster is evidence of the validity of George W. Bush Iraq War military-adventurism is not only abjectedly pathetic, but it is clear proof of the illegitimacy of the Iraq War because of the startling level to which Apologist, sympathizers of the George W. Bush administration reach in revisionist narrative for it's reason.  Despite it's criminal obscenity "Weapons of Mass Destruction" has consequently found it's logic as epithet in Gov. Jesse Ventura's polemic against empires.

By Apropos

Mitt Romney, Business Is For Profit, Job Creation and Revolution As A Specific Type Of Speech

This current debate about Mitt Romney being best suited to be President of the United States because he is an adroit businessman, therefore has this qualitative supposition on job creation has---as of most debates based on Intellectual-Liberalism, wandered far off into the nether plains of American mental labor and as typical of such is mired in the aw shucks Rockwellianism of American Politics.  Meaning it is a sleight of hand in the employ of opportunity and Speculative-value.

First of all the correct purpose-definition of business is for profit.  Easily translated to mean to make money.  No one goes into business with the model or idea pushing employment maximation or job creation.  Employment and job creation as a business corollary is only a means, a tool to maximize profits meaning a businessperson employs people because he/she needs more hands on deck to enable profit realization.

The executive leadership of the Presidency on the other hand is based on an entirely different set of imperatives and it contends with dynamically complex variables that are specifically at odds with the simple business model of for profit specifity.  There is an inherent antagonism in business, which is between managment (ownership) and labor (workers).  An antagonism that cannot be permitted to exist    in a nation, state or society because revolutions and Civil Wars will move into existence.

So if Mitt Romney's claim to the Presidency is based on the antagonism dialectic between managment and labor then the question being posed and presented to the nation is:  Are we ready to reacquaint ourselves with the logic of revolution as a specific type of  speech?

By Apropos

Thomas L. Friedman, civil Rights and It's Re-litigation

The Writer Thomas L. Friedman ignores the fact or is naive to the fact that American Political-Economy post Civil Rights Act has been all about it's re-litigation as pushed by Republican-Conservatism/Tea Partyism and it's Intellectual-Liberalism and on this fact the Goldwater Lite of Clintonism continued the treachery of Reagan-Democrats.

By Apropos

Republicans, Class-Warfare and Government

Republicans and the Intellectual-Liberalism of Republican-Conservatism/Tea Partyism does not apologize nor consider it class-warfare for stimulating tension between government-public workers and society at large as if government isn't Off, By and For the People.

By Apropos

Barack Obama, CNN's Piers Morgan and The Bigots of the Health Care Debate of 2010

It takes gall and abject opportunity to criticize Barack Obama by the likes of CNN's Piers Morgan, whose entire world view is shaped by the idealistic anachronistic British caste system.

To Barack Obama's critics viz CNN's Piers Morgan where were you when bigots filled town halls during the farcial Health Care debate of 2010, hijacking the results of the 2008 Presidential elections?

By Apropos