tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3997277018771097849.post3074399047586729910..comments2023-07-05T09:41:55.011-07:00Comments on Robbservations: Dodging the ApocalypseRobbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15326559345621533658noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3997277018771097849.post-11185300955266748832011-08-14T20:10:00.041-07:002011-08-14T20:10:00.041-07:00The danger of a Christian theocracy is decades fro...<i>The danger of a Christian theocracy is decades from now, not the next election.</i><br /><br />There is no danger of a Christian theocracy. The Objectivists that make this argument are ignorant of the demographic trends of America. America is likely to become a majority Hispanic country by the second half of this century. White people will be the minority. The Christian theocracy assumes that the country will be dominated by old school white, European Christianity. But that is not what we will get. What we will get is an increasing Hispanized culture; ie an egalitarian Leftist culture with Christian window dressing. The future of America if nothing changes and if it has a future is something like Mexico or Brazil.<br /><br />The great danger was and is from the Left. Conservatives like Bachmann are not going to implement a religious theocracy. They will me-to the Left and assist in the ever growing transformation of America into an egalitarian, "social-justice" nation. The version of altruism that dominates the West right now is the secular, egalitarian Leftist version NOT the old-school Christian version. That version is dead. Objectivists are beating a dead horse. <br /><br />Also, as far as secular Leftists ever putting up a non-statist candidate - forget it. The secular Left is hellbent on civilizational destruction. There is nothing good about secular Leftism. They are EVIL. Leftism is something that has to "burn itself out" and that will likely mean the destruction of the West and a muli-century setback. <br /><br />Bachmann is a wacky Conservative but she is no theocrat and she will implement no theocracy. That's pure nonsense. At best she might be a Reagan type. At worst she is another George Bush. Was Bush a theocrat? He wasn't and neither is Bachmann. I would pull the lever for her over Obama in a heart beat. Where you are definitely right is that America and the West can not survive an Obama second term. At least not without massive damage. <br /><br />D. BandlerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3997277018771097849.post-8590573370516054452011-08-14T17:26:29.075-07:002011-08-14T17:26:29.075-07:00"[Obama's second term] may well lead to t..."[Obama's second term] may well lead to the complete end of all businesses in America, mass starvation, rampant riots (the riots in Britain are barely a taste), world war and death on a scale you can hardly imagine."<br /><br />I'm sorry, "the complete end of all businesses in America"? This is just completely, completely implausible. You leave aside some important facts: <br /><br />1. Should Obama be re-elected, Republicans will likely retain control of Congress (if not expand their control). Four years of gridlock will not lead to the apocalypse you describe. <br /><br />2. Republican control of Congress (very likely) combined with a Republican president (your preference) doesn't have a great track record. People like to complain that it was Obama who saddled us with so much of the latest debt, but the truth is that a huge portion of it was chosen by Bush and his GOP Congress. Gridlock, again, seems like a far better option. <br /><br />3. Your apocalypse (except for the war) didn't even happen during the Great Depression or World War II, when almost all of the economic statistics were worse. There was no end to all businesses in America, even though FDR was supremely more dictatorial than Obama (and even the war was, arguably, someone else's fault). <br /><br />4. You say "re-read Atlas Shrugged," and that Ayn Rand was as pessimistic as you are. Atlas Shrugged is not and was never intended as an accurate prediction of our future, because it is based on a premise which by Rand's own admission is unrealistic. It is unrealistic for a single man to convince all of the barons of industry to go on strike. I'll agree with you that if someone does that, things could get pretty bad. But no one will do that, many intelligent people will remain in business coping with the latest government intrusions, finding work-arounds, even creating new innovations (look at Apple), and we will continue to muddle through. This muddling will be extremely painful for many (I will likely be out of a job, for instance). Apocalypse is a good literary device, and some of us with a flair for the dramatic like to make ominous predictions of it. But in history the end usually comes with a whimper. <br /><br />5. Capitalism is amazing and has created an enormous amount of wealth in decades after World War II. I don't say this to condone it, but to state a fact: it will take a long, long time for an inept bumbler like Obama to destroy it all. Your apocalyptic scenario gives them man credit for genius he does not possess. <br /><br />I'm not trying to argue for a vote for Obama. But I would certainly caution against a vote for Bachmann, especially when there's a third option you've neglected to mention: sitting this one out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com