Tuesday, August 14, 2012

"... the lethal stupidity of its pseudopods."

Jerry Bower observes how Americans are rebelling against the Big Government leviathan.


It’s not civil disobedience that I’m talking about. It’s the opposite: Civil disobedience is meant to be noticed. It is a price paid in the hope of creating social change. What I’m talking about is not based on hope; in fact, it has given up much hope on social change. It thinks the government is a colossal amoeba twitching mindlessly in response to tiny pinpricks of pain from an endless army of micro-brained interest groups. The point is not to teach the amoeba nor to guide it, but simply to stay away from the lethal stupidity of its pseudopods. 
The amoeba does not get smarter but it does get hungrier and bigger. On the other hand, we get smarter. More and more of our life takes place outside of the amoeba’s reach: in the privacy of our own homes, or in capital accounts in other nations, or in the fastest growing amoeba avoidance zone ever created, cyberspace. We revolt decision by decision, transaction by transaction, because we believe deep down that most of what government tells us to do is at bottom illegitimate.

The harvest of  the mindless colossal amoeba-- socialism-- is underway in Greece and Spain and the collapsing economies and civic cultures of Europe.

From the standpoint of the socialists, the chaos that socialism causes is a feature, not a bug. Poverty and chaos and hate are the oxygen of the left.

The left feeds on poverty and envy and violent contagion, on the "lethal stupidity of it's pseudopods". 


  1. Mike,
    I think the amoeba is an excellent analogy of what government is perceived to be: A giant, purely instinctive, growing, hungry amorphous blob with 'pseudopods' reaching out blindly to snag the passer by.
    In fact, I think it is probably a quite unkind comparison to any decent amoeba.
    Another comparison I have heard used quite effectively is 'the Borg' - obviously a Trek ref.

    But I am wary of blaming this condition on the 'left' or the 'right'. I would actually blame BOTH.
    I see the 'left' and 'right' polarization of politics and the fake synthesis they sell as 'crossing the aisle' and 'coming to a consensus' is often the predetermined goal. I see the whole concept of 'left' and 'right'as a modernist tool to control and create (or should I say 'release' or 'submit to'?) the 'amoeba' in the first place.
    In truth there is only good and evil.
    Right and wrong. Freedom and thraldom.
    Creating teams of intellectuals to subjectively back issues with subjective forms of political morality and highly selective science and statistics (they call it 'data'), is not a solution to those issues.
    Rather it is designed to create a kind of 'perpetual bullshit engine'; a system analogous to the the amoeba's food source.

    The double speak/think from both sides of the political divide is mind blowing.
    'Conservatives' who support police state measures? 'Liberals' who support eugenics?
    Left or right? No...All I see are teams whose morals bend to support whatever the coach tells them to.
    All that said, I find the team of the modern, self styled 'progressive left' to be the most obviously selfish, ridiculous, and self destructive political movement in all of recorded history. If all the subjective politics of today are shades of grey - the left is a VERY dark shade indeed.

    1. CrusadeRex,

      Actually, the comparison of government to an amoeba is a metaphor, not an analogy, similar to 'the world's a stage' (it isn't of course).

      I knew I could predict that you'd promptly agree with Michael, who is increasingly becoming more and more meschugge as time goes on. His acolytes are finding it progressively more difficult to find any comment agreeing with his increasingly bizarre posts.

    2. Bach,
      You must be drunk again.
      Have another read when you wake up in the morning.
      I am not agreeing with Dr Egnor.
      At least not, in the whole.
      Here's the two points I agree on:
      1)I think the amoeba is an excellent running analogy (call it/use it as a metaphor if you like) for a out of control government.
      2)That there is a lot of very nasty, self serving, and cynical people on the so called 'left'.

      As for your comments about people being crazy (your very 'worldly' Yiddish ref) it is par for the course.
      You don't understand something, disagree, or find something morally outrageous and it is 'crazy'. Typical bachfiend....

      As for calling the readers of this blog 'acolytes', again - typical of your projection.
      You NEED to belong so badly you have pissed on all your culture and traditions in order to 'fit in' and look 'intelligent'.
      So... you see any other group of people who agree - even marginally, or occasionally - as a similar grouping of sneering sycophants and habitual liars.
      All you are describing in such comments is what you see in the MIRROR bach...

    3. CrusadeRex,

      I wrote it this morning. I'm in Australia remember? 12 hours ahead of Michael. I'm also teetotal. You did agree with Michael's bizarre borrowed metaphor. And you are one of his acolytes, referring to him as 'the good doctor'

    4. 12 hours behind, I prefer to see it.

    5. Bach,
      "I wrote it this morning."
      I am not sure what this has to do with anything as far as you're concerned.

      "I'm also teetotal."
      Good thing, I guess...

      "You did agree with Michael's bizarre borrowed metaphor."
      Here, look: I will make it simple for your reductionist mind.

      Is the article about a metaphor? No.

      Or is the metaphor illustrating a point in the article? Yes.

      Does Mike add to that? Yes.

      Do I agree with ALL of the ideas put forward? No.

      Do I add my own two cents and explain some of those differences? Yes.

      If YOU want to call that 'agreeing', go ahead.
      I know people like you have a need to fit everything into neat sets...especially people.
      In reality, however, it is not an agreement you witness in my comment, but instead you see my perspective.

      "And you are one of his acolytes, referring to him as 'the good doctor'"

      I like Dr Egnor's nerve. I like the fact he has the guts to stick up for what he sees as true and moral.
      We do not always agree on specifics or methods.
      We do seem to agree where it counts.
      I like him and am generally friendly with him, that does not make me his acolyte any more than it makes you a catamite.
      Is it so unreal to you that two people could agree on several issues that you oppose?

      I hate to be the one to break it to you Bachfiend, but if you ever leave your cave to spend some of that millions you have - you will find most of the people in AUSTRALIA think very differently than you do.
      They are what we describe as 'individuals'. They make choices, have opinions, tastes, beliefs etc that will seem very different.
      If you want to get along with ANY of them, you had better learn to respect those differences and not simply assume that most people are 'acolytes' of some hypothetical ideologue or another.

  2. CrusadeRex,

    Idiot. You accused me of being drunk again (I'm teetotal) and suggested I reread it in the morning (I read it at 6 am, isn't that morning enough for you?). Comparing government to an amoeba is a metaphor, not an analogy. You don't have a clue as to the meaning of words, as demonstrated by your bizarre justication of Michael's similarly bizarre definition of the word 'imaginary', which he defined as the process of forming images, which may or not be true, in the mind.