Where YOU can be a squeeky wheel!
Squeeky Wheels
June 02, 2023, 09:55:49 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to SMF For Free
  Home Help Search Staff List Login Register  

Understanding Recent Killings from the Perspective of the Progressive Agenda

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Understanding Recent Killings from the Perspective of the Progressive Agenda  (Read 43 times)
Jr. Member
Posts: 76

View Profile
« on: January 11, 2011, 10:27:10 pm »

There is a lot of discussion about the recent killings. Why do you think those caught up in the progressive like to argue?  Do you think it has anything to do with reasoning together?  If you do, you are sadly mistaken.  The reason is to further the agenda.

"Show me a sane man and I will cure him for you...."  Carl Jung

Unknowingly, Jung describes the aim of the agenda. The progressive agenda does not seek sanity.  It seeks its self justification. This doesn't require sanity. Consider Alinsky's Rules for Radicals:


2. Of Means and Ends [Forget  moral or ethical considerations]

"The end is what you want, the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. ... The real arena is corrupt and bloody." p.24

"The means-and-ends moralists, constantly obsessed with the ethics of the means used by the Have-Nots against the Haves, should search themselves as to their real political position. In fact, they are passive — but real — allies of the Haves…. The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means... The standards of judgment must be rooted in the whys and wherefores of life as it is lived, the world as it is, not our wished-for fantasy of the world as it should be...." pp.25-26

"The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means...." p.29

"The seventh rule... is that generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics...." p.34

"The tenth rule... is you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.... It involves sifting the multiple factors which combine in creating the circumstances at any given time... Who, and how many will support the action?... If weapons are needed, then are appropriate d weapons available? Availability of means determines whether you will be underground or above ground; whether you will move quickly or slowly..." p.36


Notice that right and wrong is decided by the "ends"  The "Means that further the agenda are right and what interferes is wrong. 

It doesn't matter if you are referring to the deaths of men. women, or children.  Their deaths as a group are unimportant to the agenda.  All that is important is how they can be explained to further the aims of the agenda.

Debate away.  just remember that what you say is unimportant.  All that is important is furthering the agenda in whatever way possible. There is nothing else for the agenda to understand.

Report Spam   Logged

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Pages: [1]
Jump to:  

Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy