PDA

View Full Version : An American's Creed



Amadan
8th March 2009, 04:29 PM
I was reading the Star today and came across the interview with Karpal Singh. Right in the first paragraph of the article, the reporter observed a framed copy of Dean Alfange's 'An American Creed.' hanging near Karpal Singhs office.

What struck me was this. This is actually the solution out of the Rat Race and to end being manipulated by the system. If enough people believe this of themselves. Here it is:

I do not choose to be a common man
It is my right to be uncommon...
If I can. I seek opportunity... Not security.

I do not wish to be a kept citizen,
Humbled and dulled by having the state to dream and build, to
Fail and succeed.

I refuse to barter incentive for a dole.
I prefer the challenges of life to the
Guaranteed existence; the thrill of
Fulfillment to the stale calm of utopia.
I will not trade freedom for beneficence
Nor my dignity for a hand out. I will
Never cower before any master nor bend
to any threat.

It is my heritage to stand erect,
proud, and unafraid; to think and act for
myself; enjoy the benefits of my
creations; and to face the world boldly
and say, "This I have done with my own hand,
I am a man. I am an American.

Insert any nationality into the last line. I doubt Mr Alfange will have a problem with that.
I much prefer this to 'Malaysia Boleh'

pywong
8th March 2009, 06:57 PM
Very apt, Amadan. But first we have to restructure the Rat Race to give everyone a fair go. Today, we have a class of parasites squatting in the Ruling Chair and sucking the blood of the people, while screaming Ketuanan Melayu at the top of their voices.

They use greed, fear, jealousy and hatred to control certain groups of Rats.

Amadan
8th March 2009, 07:32 PM
They are the few. And we are legion.

It is unfortunate that the many will always allow themselves to be ruled by the few.

"...stand erect,proud, and unafraid; to think and act for
myself;"

Very few people are proud(in the true sense of the word) and unafraid. Even less think for themselves.

Another quote comes to mind. "Ask not what Government can do for you but what you can do without Government."

This crisis will collapse many govenments. Lets see what happens then..

pywong
9th March 2009, 01:16 AM
They are the few. And we are legion.

"...stand erect,proud, and unafraid; to think and act for
myself;"

"Ask not what Government can do for you but what you can do without Government."

Amadan, I thought you are a goldbug. You are beginning to sound like a politician. ;D

Amadan
9th March 2009, 10:14 AM
lol! Politician? Arrghhh..They creep me out.

No, I am a political atheist...

pywong
9th March 2009, 02:42 PM
"Ask not what Government can do for you but what you can do without Government."

Government has an immense ability to mess up our lives if left to their own devices. To paraphrase your quote, I would suggest:

Ask not what Govt can do for you.
Ask what you can do to make sure Govt don't do you in.

Amadan
9th March 2009, 08:24 PM
"Ask not what Government can do for you but what you can do without Government."

Government has an immense ability to mess up our lives if left to their own devices. To paraphrase your quote, I would suggest:

Ask not what Govt can do for you.
Ask what you can do to make sure Govt don't do you in.


Exactly what this quote meant and takes it one step further.

Government can't mess you up if there is no government.

pywong
9th March 2009, 11:27 PM
Exactly what this quote meant and takes it one step further.

Government can't mess you up if there is no government.

Amadan, anarchy won't work. We need a social order and a govt but minimal govt. Currently, ours is suffocating. To top it off, they suffer from bad breath through too much shouting of Ketuanan Melayu.

Amadan
10th March 2009, 11:49 AM
Amadan, anarchy won't work. We need a social order and a govt but minimal govt. Currently, ours is suffocating. To top it off, they suffer from bad breath through too much shouting of Ketuanan Melayu.



"Most people do not consider the problem of government: it is not a person, nor a family, but a detached bureaucratic thing by which a few must rule over others they have not met. It does not consider the finer points of individual cases, but creates rigid abstract rules which inevitably come into conflict. For this reason, most governments spend their time in internal conflict over interpretation of rules, and inevitably oppress their citizens by forcing them to obey detailed regulations which fit an "average" citizen, yet apply to no actually living human being.

An anarchist is someone who agrees that civilization should exist, but believes that government is a parasite not necessary for civilization. Government both oppresses the citizens and takes from them the responsibility of making society work. Instead of taking it into their own hands, citizens are trained to sit back and call some distant acronymous agency to help them out. By this method, we domesticate ourselves and make even the best among us weak and passive. Even worse, we hand power to the bureaucrats, who are by definition people who could not succeed in actual work, and therefore take paper-pushing jobs so they have power over others.

The average person considers anarchy a state without order, but when looked at practically, it can be seen as a different kind of order. Centralized authority requires we all obey a single authority, but anarchy requires decentralized governments in which we are each our own authorities, and responsible to each other to collaborate and maintain what is needed for civilization. In centralized government, you have to convince a bureaucrat or jury that what you are doing is correct, but in decentralized government, you must maintain cooperation with your fellow citizens by showing them constantly that you are doing what is right. Centralized government is like watching television: you sit back and relax and pay attention to the show, but you are not actually part of it, and until it gets so bad you change the channel, you put up with its mediocrities."

http://www.anarchy.net/anarchy/anarchy_manifesto/

pywong
10th March 2009, 06:39 PM
Anarchy: In theory good. In practice, no. Too many idiots around. What we need is a minimalist govt. Just enough to keep basic functions running and for self-defense. The challenge is to find out how little is enough. There will always be a greedy guy who grabs power in the name of the people and for the sake of the people.

Amadan
11th March 2009, 10:40 AM
sigh..you're probably right.

It is an impossibility for sheep to govern themselves and take responsibilty because sheep will always fall prey to the wolf in the name of progress.

“All progress depends on the unreasonable man. The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.” - George Bernard Shaw

And that wolf is always the 'unreasonable' man.

pywong
11th March 2009, 11:37 AM
“All progress depends on the unreasonable man. The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.” - George Bernard Shaw

And that wolf is always the 'unreasonable' man.

It behoves the reasonable man, who is more fortunate in the progress of life, to contribute to the well-being of the sheep. We cannot afford to stand by and watch society deteriorate to the extent that our very existence is threatened.

Amadan
11th March 2009, 03:16 PM
LOL! :). This conversation is getting better and better...

Yes. Exactly. What can the reasonable man do? Firstly, by default, the ‘reasonable man’ is the sheep. And sheep cannot protect other sheep. It is the ‘unreasonable man,’ who will do the protecting and because they are all ‘idiots’ as you put it, in one way or another, tribute and ‘leadership’ for protection will always be exacted from the sheep.

I am afraid that at any given point in time since the beginning, society/civilization/ has no option but to deteriorate The greatest civilizations began with an idea and thus became empires. But then again, all empires will fall. And they will fall hard. Never to be seen again. Napoleon's French Empire.The Ottoman Empire. The Islamic Empire. The Hellenistic Empire of Alexander the Great. The Persian Empire. Babylon. Assyria. Egypt of the pharaohs.

And in our near past, we saw the British empire dissolve amid great destruction and death that was WWII.

If there is one constant, ALL empires fall, and by association, all governments and ideas will ultimately fail. So, that is why you needn't worry about your nemesis, the BN coalition. The seeds of their destruction have already been sowed at it’s inception. It is just a matter of time.

However, I just pray that the entity that replaces it will not turn out to be worse than the first.

Let’s get back to our original question. What can the reasonable man do?

What did the reasonable man do in times of the great turmoil that occurred during the death throes of a mighty civilisation? There are 2 answers to this question.

1)They died. They died fighting for the very idea whose time was over. Or they just…died. In their beds, in the fields, on the streets beneath the club of the mob or the sword of the barbarian who possessed no ideology to speak of except to take, to burn and to destroy.

2)They ran. They ran with their families to far corners of the Earth and they lived.

This is what any reasonable man would do.

pywong
12th March 2009, 02:29 PM
2)They ran. They ran with their families to far corners of the Earth and they lived.

This is what any reasonable man would do.

Amadan, maybe this is up your creek...

This is a form of Dean Harry’s ultimate means of protection. Dean Harry teaches that ultimate protection lies in a 3 step life style; "Citizenship in one country, body in another and money in a third."