Top of the day James Wilson,
Thank you for your candid remarks to my blog. For the sake of perspective, I would welcome an exchange of ideas with you. From time to time, I read your comments, which are thought provoking and reasonably insightful. Conversely, there are times when they are accusatory and defensive. In fact, there are even incidents, when you resort to name calling & passing judgment. Nonetheless, this is merely an attempt to remind you of the inherent theme in the Blog entry/title, “You Need To Vote.” And, the rationale for my personal selection and a summation of what the other “Party” proposes to deliver to the American people. With that as a premise, “I” felt a need to reiterate the condition of the ship when the new Captain boarded the vessel, and his efforts to establish a ‘heading’. (… Hint - Metaphor) Clearly, the analogies & metaphors that reference water in the desert and the game of CHESS were included to illustrate a “bigger-picture,” and how people conceptualize struggles & personal hardship, as well as, one’s vulnerability to distractions & clouded perceptions when overwhelmed with personal stress.
In closing, let the dialogue continue . . .
Please note: Respondents should read the Blog entry, "You Need To Vote," and use Sir James Wilson's response as a springboard
I have several points to make to you:
(1) I'm not "Sir James Wilson." I am not imbued with, nor impressed by, British cultural traditions. I am not a "Knight." I did not grow up on a British colonial plantation. Therefore, I don't know if you're trying to be respectful, or sarcastic, with the "Sir" piece.
(2) If you wanted feedback, you wouldn't have prevented feedback to your post. But I'm clear on why you don't want feedback -- you know you ain't standing on nothing.
(3) My issue with your post is not your encouraging people to vote. I have no issue with that. Particularly, since I know that your (or anyone else's) urging people to vote / or not to vote is useless in the real world. People will make such a decision based on their own perception of self interest. Unfortunately, for those in your camp, millions of African Americans don't see voting as being meaningful to their self interest. That's a problem you should have thought about from the begining, instead of insulting people and telling them to "shut up, stop whining, stop complaining, take off your [welfare queen] bedroom slippers," and other blatant insults before the whole world. And what did the African American community do to deserve such codescending insults? They simply cried out for help. And what help were they crying out for? They simply wanted relief from the 50+% unemployment rate, $200 billion lost in assets due to home foreclosures between 2009 and 2012 (according to Black Enterprise magazine), etc. There should be no need to further explicate here. Indeed, the facts are well known, except by zealots.
What I concern myself with is zealotry delirium, a psyhcologically maladaptive condition that politically, socially, and economically prevents African Americans from exercising group agency in their own interest. As I have defined previously, this condition prevents too many Blacks from facing reality via the avoidance (in fact, loathing) of specificity necessary for critical thinking when it comes to their object of personality-cult worship.
In terms of "name calling," I do not name call for the most part, I do diagnostic impressions. If you are referring to my use of the term "permed pimp" in relation to Sharpton, I did not give him that name. The Black community gave him that name, resulting from his years of "pimping and playing" in the name of "civil rights." I use it because I see it as highly accurate and descriptive. Moreover, no one has named called (used abusive ad hominems) more than the zealots. I ( and others) have been called the "N' word, "Uncle Tom," "Aunt Jemima," "Swine," "jealous," and a host of other names by child-like folks. None of it bothers me, however, because I know when people are uninformed -- allowing personality-cult worshipping to suffice their intellectual limit - they can do little else other than name call or post comments and hide as you did, or tried to do before I called you out.
(4) As I said previously, what caused me to offer feedback to your post was not its urging people to vote, but the clear disconnection from reality it manifested.
Let's briefly review some of the key points.
(A) You deliriously wrote that African Americans were complaining about a lack of presidential reciprocity (which is true). And then you analogized such complaining with people stranded in the desert and complaining about their water not being "cold" enough and asking for "ice." Are you out of your mind beyond situational delirioum?
First, people stranded in a desert don't complain about not having "cold" water, they instead suffer from "no" water. And that is the situation in Black America, there is no water! Due to present public policy, people are losing their jobs by the millions, losing their homes, stressing about where they're going to sleep, how they're going to pay their bills, losing their pensions, losing their minds and killing one another in the streets wholesale.
You seem tremendously out of touch. And that assessment doesn't even take into account dictatorial revoking "civil liberty" issues. If you don't understand basis day-to- day survival issues, how in the world do we expect you to understand higher level issues.
(B) You contended that your idol of worship is powerless to help people, then immediately (after telling that lie) exhorted them to vote. But you fail to conceptlize that by telling people that a candidate is "powerless" to meet their social / political / economic needs is all the reason for them not to vote. You seek to inspire people by using a paradoxical argument. You are not ready for this level of political debate (although you're probably a very nice person).
(C) You argued that the president is playing "chess." An old, worn out, bromide. A parodoxical platitude that raisies the question to critical thinkers --" if he's playing chess, then how come the people who voted him into office are the only ones suffering from his chess game? Maybe he's not good at it? Maybe we need some who's better at the game? But the reality is, he wasn't elected to play "chess," but to govern in a fashion that benefits more than just Wall Street. Maybe that's the problem, he's playing chess while unelected people are running everything.
Finally, in the above piece, you countered with the standard uninformed / zealous nonsense about his "saving" the country from a depression. The only thing that has been saved is Wall Street. They were the ones who wretched the economy with their deregulated gambling, and they have recovered to the point of enjoying the greatest profits in history. In fact, doing the first 2 years of this adminstration, they had profits of $85+ billion. Such profits are more than in the entire 8 years of Bush II's administration. Indeed, the recession has been over for 3 years now (Dec. 2007 -- June 2009), yet people are suffering more than ever, poverty is growing exponentially, along with other economic woes.
My advice to you -- inform yourself before you allow Sharpton to send you into the public sphere pushing already disproven nonsense.
I agree with you, people should vote (if that's what they want to do). I'm not against voting, I'm against zealotry delirium, which is manifested in lying to protect an object of personality-cult worship.