Rob Burns wrote:
"We enjoy personal rights and freedom of
movement unsurpassed by any other nation in the world."
I'm wondering, Rob: have you ever worked and lived in a foreign
country? Canada doesn't count. It does give one a different
perspective.
This is simply untrue. You have been raised in a country which constantly
tells you this, and you believe it. Patently absurd.
It also depends on who you define as "we." In many places, you can
get pulled over by the police for "DWB" (Driving While Black). That's
"freedom of movement?"
Tell that to Wen Ho Lee, who was jailed for nine months for backing
up data that was only classified AFTER the fact. If you're black or
Chinese, or whom ever the "bad guy d'jour" is, be very careful about
how you express your freedom. The US has a long history of oppressing
different points of view, such as the Indian Wars of the mid-1800's,
the WWII Japanese internment, and the McCarthy-era Communist witch
hunts.
But more troublesome is the erosion of democracy by big corporations.
Forget the government as an oppressor!
For example, the Constitution includes the right of freedom of
association, to "peaceably assemble" for any lawful purpose, yet the
big banks (through their lobby influence on Congress) have severely
restricted that right by placing rather onerous restrictions on
credit union membership. What's next, Safeway shutting down the local
food co-operative? Please, take my gun, but give me my credit union!
:-)
In the US, we only have the "freedom" of two parties with minor
differences, both backed by corporations, who more often than not,
give each side similar amounts of money. Helen Caldicot (from
gun-hating Oz, co-incidentally) calls it "a one party system with two
right wings." The US State department has yanked her visa. Ah yes,
"freedom of movement" is only for those who agree with the party line!
For example, it's been recently revealed that the pharmaceutical
industry has spent nearly as much "soft money" -- $330 million -- on
the presidential race as either the Democrats or Republicans have!
Noam Chomsky calls them a more effective "third party" than either
the Reform or Green party, and calls this an "engineered concensus."
And guess what the major candidates are both for? Government
subsidized pharmaceuticals! I wonder why...
Regardless of whether you like or dislike the idea of
government-subsidized pharmaceuticals, all freedom-loving people
should be troubled about HOW this is happening. We are being told
what to think, and we're largely going along with it.
--
: Jan Steinman <mailto:Jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
: Bytesmiths <http://www.bytesmiths.com>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|