Rich Hoffman's Blog, page 473
October 4, 2012
Bringing Nothing to an Everything Fight: How Romney Destroyed Obama
Thankfully—slowly, political candidates are learning not to be so nice, and to stick to the facts when debating a progressive, emotional candidate. We have covered this topic in great detail here at this sight, especially in regard to public schools run by progressive labor unions. But on the big stage of the Presidency, politicians have regulated themselves to nice hand shakes and careful jabs marred in politeness since Ronald Reagan was president. That is, until October 3, 2012 when Mitt Romney decimated the hapless Barack Obama in a debate that clearly showed what a businessman with a successful background looks like next to a political activist raised on communism by his parents, grandparents, college professors, and community agitators in Chicago with no experience in even running a fast-food restaurant—let alone an entire country.
I am not a fan of machine politics, and I am not particularly excited about the kind of government that Mitt Romney wishes to bring to The United States. But as far as having an understanding of how the economy works, and business in general, he is clearly the better candidate over Barack Obama, and this was displayed vividly in the first Presidential debate of the 2012 elections. Credit for the victory belongs to Romney. If anyone watching the debates still wishes to vote for Barack Obama it is because they are simply too stupid to understand what was they were hearing.
The reason that Barack Obama lost the debate is because Romney forced Obama to answer factual questions and to stay out of economic theory based on emotion. Romney never let Obama even come close to an emotional argument, and this left Obama defenseless, and alone standing on a stage in front of millions of people utterly decimated. No progressive, not even Bill Clinton can win a debate if they are forced to stick to facts. All progressives require emotional decisions in order to advance their cause, which is why women tend to support Barack Obama over Mitt Romney, because they tend to vote with emotion as they are traditionally more emotionally motivated between the two sexes. In the political game of rock-paper-scissors, facts always smash emotion—100% of the time. The key to beating all progressive causes is to use facts to dismantle the opinions of emotion.
The Romney/Obama debate will forever be the skeleton key that reveals how logic can be used to win debates, and elections. I have used the very same method to beat down the aggressive levy advances of my local school district as the teachers union typically uses emotion to capture the argument without any facts to back their statements. When I forced the topic to logic, they could not win, and they continued after many attempts to maintain their emotional position even when the facts were grossly evident, and at that point the discussion evolved into ridiculousness. When the topic of why a public school was in financial trouble it was not because the state took away funding, it was not because the kids needed the money, it was not because the school needed to hire the best teachers–it was because the school board laid down at the feet of the teachers union and ate out of their hand, which caused the financial crises. There was no other reason which was revealed by sticking to the facts.
When men and women argue typically as husband and wife, the husband usually complains that he loses because he allows the argument to devolve into an emotional one. He loses because he does not stick to the facts, but allows his heart-strings to be yanked and pulled needlessly. This is notoriously prevalent in younger couples who are still immature in their thinking. Older couples tend to learn not to play such games which is what leads to a successful marriage. Progressives have for years used the same perilous tendency to advance socialist causes by using emotion to position their statements in much the same way that women use emotion to beat men in arguments.
But as men who do not allow such emotion to govern their actions, they learn that the best way to maintain their integrity is to stick with the facts of an argument without being pulled into the emotional fray of the women they argue with. They learn that their women actually respect them more for maintaining their integrity without emotion, and such men will learn that their sex life will increase proportionally.
The same rules apply to every facet of life. No business can succeed built of pure emotion. They only succeed with the facts of the matter, the bottom-line numbers. They do not succeed based on theory, they succeed based on fact. The same holds true in an argument between husband and a wife. Yes Aunt Millie will be upset if the wife and her husband do not attend the birthday party for Millie’s second child who lives on the other side of the country. No the couple cannot afford the plane trip at that stage in their marriage. The man should not cave into the crying wife stuck between loyalty to her sister and her husband by charging the plane fair just to keep his emotional wife happy. It might be the nice thing to do, but the couple could not afford it, and no level of emotion can change the fact. No argument can change the fact either. The goal of the argument on behalf of the wife is to convince her husband to let her have things both ways, peace with her sister, and peace with her husband who doesn’t want to fly across the country for a birthday party. The man might gain anger from his wife by stating that her sister should have not moved to L.A when the rest of the family lives in New York and still expect the family to be close, but the sex will be better later, because the wife will respect his honesty.
And the politician can learn an important lesson in that metaphor. Politicians would gain more respect if they were just honest, and didn’t try to pander to the emotions of the voters. Nothing ever gets done with emotional progressives, and the conversation is pointless because they are never rooted in any facts. Politicians who try to play nice and be the good guy either way will end up being crushed by the politician who uses the emotional argument because the opponent will surrender the facts to emotion, which is equivalent to giving up the strategic high ground in favor of kindness, to avoid the conflict. Romney won the debate because he did not allow emotion to dictate the conversation leaving Obama as defenseless as a sobbing woman who is stuck between loyalty to her sister and her husband. Obama is stuck between his communist instructors and the genuine expectations of his supporters. Because he could not fight the facts, because Obama has routinely ignored the facts, he was extremely vulnerable and he was defenseless to debate Romney and this will continue because so long as Obama does not face the facts of his presidency and the economic conditions that surround it, he cannot win a single one. Obama can only win if people chose to ignore the facts. And this is true for virtually every conflict.
Politics will improve dramatically when we are no longer impressed that a politician stuck with the facts and made a compelling argument. I yearn for a day when a politician like Romney and another politician also arguing the facts have a debate that actually is productive instead of a one-sided slaughter like what happened on October 3, 2012 with the emotional Barack Obama. Debates are intended to discover the truth by looking at the facts, not distorting them through the lens of emotion. If Romney continues to debate with facts on his side, the Presidency will clearly be his. This first debate is only the tip of the iceberg of the type of misery dictator Obama is in for between now and the election.
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them. Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:
October 3, 2012
Want to Make Barack Obama……….MAD: Go see ‘Atlas Shrugged Part II’ on October 12th
Obviously too many people took communism for granted during, and after the Cold War. Because it is shocking how many wrong thinking people have bought into the communist philosophy of collectivism. The more that President Obama speaks, and the closer to Atlas Shrugged Part II comes to opening in movie theaters all over The United States, it becomes more and more obvious that radical collectivists such as the writer of the below article at The Guardian in the United Kingdom are terrified that those of us who do not want or need collectivism desire to cancel our subscriptions which would leave them lost in an ocean of politics without a paddle or pot to piss in.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/oct/02/pity-the-billionaire-thomas-frank-review
Collectivists have performed the ultimate scam, they being completely dependent upon our efforts; have positioned themselves to be our slave drivers by simply using the kindness of our natures against us. The reason that author of The Guardian newspaper hates Ayn Rand so much, and presumes that she is the darling of the right-winged political movement in America, is because such collectivists fear that writers like Ayn Rand will wake up people to the scam communist advocates like that Guardian writer supports. So here is a lesson to those collectivist types, The Guardian does not represent my beliefs in any way. Barack Obama represents nothing of my political affiliation. CNN, MSNBC and all the prime time news stations do not represent my philosophic principles. In most cases, Fox News is too liberal for me. Yet the fools like that Guardian reporter would have people like me believe that I am in the minority, that I am wrong because I am not on the side with the most democratic support. The communists believed that if they dominated democracy with mass numbers, then they would earn the right to rule over the bourgeois with a dictatorship of the preliterate. They call people like me evil for not wanting to spend my entire life sacrificing on their behalf. That is the meaning of The Guardian article, and all those who criticize with such fury the author Ayn Rand.
Those people do not represent me, those communist/progressive political advocates who hide themselves in the Labour Parties under seemingly legitimate politics, or in the media newsrooms taught by radical university professors with their pony tails and dandruff flakes fresh on their unwashed pot infested sweaters. What does represent my point of view, and millions who share my sentiments is stories like Atlas Shrugged, who just had their premier in Washington D.C. where the following clip was released to a hungry public. In the following clip, the message is the exact opposite of what the communists have been telling the world in their not so obvious attack on capitalism. But what those communists didn’t know was that people like me would take that attack personally. Some like me took it so personally that they have invested their life fortunes into the film version of Atlas Shrugged Part II in order to defend capitalism from the leeches of capitalism.
I would say that the most evil thing in the world–the least freedom oriented motive is the utterances from collectivists who have embedded their lives into mine. I resent deeply having to pay taxes toward organizations I find detestable. I find it appalling that I am forced to pay thousands of dollars each year off my property tax to keep a government school open that is run by a labor union I do not support, that teaches children values I don’t share. It is evil to compel my participation through force into such activity, because with collectivists’ attack on pure capitalism they have pulled my participation into their lives against my will. That is evil. If I do not pay my taxes, my property will be taken, which is forceful confiscation.
Collectivists have criticized Mitt Romney for evading his taxes by only giving 14% of what he made as a millionaire. What they fail to understand is that Romney’s 14% is a lot more than any village of workers if they contributed 100% of their entire paychecks for a year they still would not come close to the amount of money that Romney spent in taxes. Romney is called names for being a smart business man, for knowing how to avoid paying some of those looting taxes, because who says it’s good but the collectivist to pay taxes at the levels the collectivists set? The measure is created by collectivists. The implementation is done by collectivists. Only collectivists will call it evil for those who try to get a tax bargain, because it’s their system of communism that they wish for everyone else to be compelled to contribute. But if Romney doesn’t agree with the policies of welfare, the policies of big government, the way public education is taught, he is compelled by force to give money. The only defense he has is a “no” vote at the polls, or hiding his money in a tax shelter, because only a fool would pay their share of taxes deemed by looting politicians for mooching causes.
Out of all the entertainment that is available, not much of it reflects the viewpoints of people like me. Collectivist in their distorted mirror of viewing the world think that I am evil for not feeling compelled to provide a livelihood to the parasites of existence. But in my life, I do not ask others to live their lives on my behalf. I avoid such debts like any sane person would circumvent a deadly disease because to me, they are one in the same. I reject what collectivists determine is my “fair share” and I applaud anyone who avoids paying their taxes by $1. The person who avoids paying millions in taxes I consider a hero! Such a person has avoided the looting collectivists and put harm toward their parasitic ways and that makes them great. The collectivists who call people like me names for wanting nothing to do with their bloodsucking lives are not my friends and they do not share my values.
But authors like Ayn Rand do, along with film makers like Harmon Kaslow, John Aglialoro and Christopher Nolan. They do represent my values. And those values are not evil or even decadent because they are not widely accepted by a class of parasitic people who proclaim that they cannot live their lives without my assistance, compelling me to waste parts of my life on their lives because they don’t understand the value of living. Collectivists are like people caught in quicksand and they wiggle and move grabbing onto anything that’s stable determined to drag others under just so they can save themselves. They get themselves into all kinds of trouble all on their own yet they expect others to save their lives with our own, and call us evil for desiring to leave them stuck. Collectivists expect others to spend their lives helping them out of the quicksand of their own making, which to me is a deplorable evil.
It’s evil to me because every day of life is precious. I enjoy every single second of every single day, and I seldom ever waste my time. I could have 1 million years of life and I would never be bored for one single second of any single day in that entire span of time, because life is meant to be lived, and loved. And I resent when collectivists attempt to hold me up, or waste my time with their trivia, and expect to take my money when I worked hard to make it. It is evil because they stole away the time it took for me to earn my money with my time. The collectivist is evil because they willingly steal from me to serve their valueless needs that are infinite in their expectations. Atlas Shrugged is not a movie designed for collectivists. It is a movie intended to be enjoyed by individualists. Communists will hate it. Communists will call it names. Communists will attempt to keep people from seeing the film with the same vigor that they put up the Iron Curtain to keep their own people from seeing any hints of light from capitalist countries, so they could manage to keep their own people in the dark and loyal to their party rule. Communists who hate Ayn Rand are like an insecure husband who is ugly beyond belief but is married to a beautiful woman, desiring to keep the woman locked up in his bedroom so she cannot see what an ugly fool he truly is, because he knows his wife will leave him for something better if she sees it. Atlas Shrugged is the “other” choice, and collectivists know that if people see it for themselves, that they will eventually feel the way I do, and desire to be left along, to pay the fewest taxes possible and to live life separately from the masses who cast themselves recklessly into the quick sands of life. I am happy, and proud that finally a movie that speaks to people like me has found its way into movie theaters and I will go see Atlas Shrugged Part II multiple times just because I can, and because it angers people like Barack Obama and the writers at The Guardian.
Join me on October 12th to see Atlas Shrugged Part II. Click here to find a theater near you!
http://thegulch.atlasshruggedmovie.com/events/
Visit the Official Atlas Shrugged Movie Web Site!
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them. Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:
October 2, 2012
Demise of China Part 2: Madame Fatale’s ‘Cavern of Terror’
This is part 2 of an article I wrote previously. CLICK HERE for a review.
I was thinking of Hong Kong, communism and China in general while my wife, daughter, son-in-law, and I spent the weekend at the Halloween Haunt at Kings Island. I love the Kings Island amusement park best during the cool October evenings, with the fog machines creating an eerie atmosphere as dressed up monsters roam around the park terrifying people. This year new to the park, is an attraction called Madame Fatale’s Cavern of Terror. As I stood in line I thought of how Lakota—my home school district could justify with a straight face sending public employees to China while opening the doors to that communist country in a mutual exchange. I had to remind myself that the public unions that run Lakota and every other school in the country are in love with the communism of China, and without question Lakota sees such outreach programs with communist China to be wonderful, and beneficial to children everywhere. As I looked around at the fantastic attraction at Kings Island I couldn’t help but think that China could not produce a Kings Island on their own. As a communist country, they didn’t even think of such leisure activity for their population until they took over the lease of Hong Kong from the British government in 1997.
Disney built an amusement park in Hong Kong and since then, China has been attempting to copy the idea of amusement parks slowly trying to accept little bits of capitalism. China didn’t have a choice. Hong Kong was a capitalist city in their homeland but run by the British government seized in the Opium War (1839-1842). England developed a flourishing economy while the rest of China stayed committed to communism 100 years later in 1949. This caused economic drudgery for the 1 billion people living in China except for the fortunate 5 million people living in and around Hong Kong benefiting from capitalism. Since 1997 China has been letting reluctantly the influence of capitalism expand their economy financially, but socially, they are in serious trouble leading them to a cliff of which their country will not avoid.
These thoughts brought me back to my question, why does Lakota pride itself for a relationship with China? Why has The United States allowed itself to become indebted to China’s economic wealth? Unfortunately the reason is that the communists in America currently calling themselves progressives wish for The United States to be more like China, but what they don’t understand is the reality behind that decision. 
The evidence of such a fatal flaw in recognition can be seen in the kind of amusement parks America has as opposed to the copy cat regime of China. Kings Island would not exist in China under their own ingenuity. Because of communism, the people of China would have to see it done first. As a communist country short on imagination, they would never come up with a concept for a Halloween Haunt like Kings Island did.
Wild economic creativity is a very specific benefit of capitalism, and America in general. The kind of ingenuity that was on grand display at Madame Fatale’s Cavern of Terror was easy for the capitalist producers working at Cedar Fair Amusements. Not so easy for amusement park workers in China who have to look at American websites to figure out what’s cool and what’s not. Of a particular note was a new trick used in a haunted house that I had never experienced before. One of the monsters in the maze said my name as I walked by, which did cause me to give the guy a double-take. I saw that he didn’t attempt to make eye contact with me and as I was going up the stairs out of the pit of catacombs I noticed that he made no further attempt to communicate with me. Instead I saw a woman speaking to the monster with a sheet of paper in her hand. I spent the rest of the evening trying to figure out if I knew the guy from somewhere and if I did how he could have recognized me so quickly in such poor light. As I reasoned through the events leading up to that particular confrontation I realized that the attraction which was entirely indoors had used some type of face recognition software similar to what the TSA are using to match my face with the records they have in the Kings Island season pass database. The woman would tell the monster the names of a particular person as she got them off her computer between groups passing through that zone. It was a neat trick that certainly got my attention.
But in China, doing such things takes great effort, whereas in The United States creativity is actually taken for granted. China is feared all over the world because of its land mass, and its vast numbers of population, but they are in serious trouble because of their communist, collectivist oriented society. After adopting communism from The Soviet Union the Chinese have imposed upon themselves the same kind of economic restrictions that crushed Russia two decades prior. Additionally their social engineering policy of only one child per family is having devastating consequences. Currently China is full of males looking for war with Japan over some territorial islands for the primary reason that there are not enough females to domesticate the males. The men do not have the ability to have their own woman to share a life with, and have sex. They have to share women like all communist societies advocate so strongly. But that doesn’t exactly work, so the male population in China is strung up very tight. Currently in China there are between 120 to 130 males for every 100 females. There are more than 35 million people missing in China according to birth records, and the logical belief is that those people were girls born into families who wanted a boy, so they killed the girl. One thing that the communists didn’t consider in their masterful social planning is that fathers would want a son to carry on their family name, and if the State only allowed them to have one child per family, they didn’t want to waste that on a girl. That kind of culture is what public schools like Lakota are promoting to young students learning the merits of communism.
Using the same reasoning ability to add up the facts as I did over the haunted house name identification incident, it is not difficult to see where China is headed. They have a heavily male population that must pay for sex in brothels, because not all men can have a woman, or they must become homosexual—which is another communist platform item. Homosexuality is advocated by communists because it destroys the traditional family and gives the state the authority role over young people. This has created some very unusual internal problems in China which can be explored more deeply in the article below.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/02/chinas-great-gender-crisis
When President Obama speaks of putting America to work building bridges and roads, and hiring more teachers, cops and firefighters, he has in essence copied what communist China has been doing for a number of years, especially since taking over Hong Kong. China to keep its citizens working has been building many “ghost cities” which are giant public works projects designed to keep the economy moving along. But the trouble is nobody lives in them. There are not companies to fill them, and no people to reside there. They are just constructed cities designed by master planners for people who will never arrive. They were built to cover up a serious economic problem that China is about to be crushed under—the failure of communism.
1.1 million workers in China work for Foxconn who probably makes your iPhone if you have one. Foxconn had to close one of its factories after major riots over oppressive working conditions broke out recently in Taiyuan, leaving 79,000 workers out of a job. The reason companies like Apple and other global electronics companies, including Hewlett-Packard, Dell and Microsoft use the Foxconn factories in China to make their products is because the union jobs in America would simply be too expensive. I don’t blame them as American companies one bit for seeking out the most competitive advantage to their profit matrix. I blame the communist government of China because they don’t give people a choice of economic options. Thorough China’s collectivism they have socially engineered themselves into destruction. They work where they’re assigned. End of story. The State controls virtually everything even down to the sex life of its citizens. When the pressure becomes too great, the citizens simply kill themselves or riot out of desperation. Read more about this terrible situation below:
Communism is failing China in a huge way and the media in The United States along with the President and other academic types are keeping the failures quite because they are in denial. Many of them have long advocated the utopia of communism in The United States and refuse to see the facts for the facts. I suspect many of them would go through Madame Fatale’s Cavern of Terror as I did and would be shocked when a monster called their name out of the fog infested darkness. But they would probably leave it at that, and not pursue the truth any further by adding up the facts to figure out how the monster knew their name. They would simply accept the act without figuring out why it happened, and this is what all communists are guilty of. This is why millions of people are dying in China right now—today! This is why the worst civil rights abuses in the entire world are happening in China with the killing of millions of young girls. If the crimes against women in China were added to the crimes against women in Islamic faith, women’s rights groups all over the earth would be in a deserved outrage. But they are not, because they are not advocates for individual rights of women, but collective rights of humanity, and they cannot turn their attention against collective based organizations like the Islamic religion or the political philosophy of communism. 
There is no place on earth where worker rights are so extremely oppressive as in China right now, today in that far away land where communism rules with an iron fist, accepting crony capitalism so long as their business partners outwardly support progressive causes—so everyone can sleep well at night.
That same night my family and I attended the Halloween Haunt at Kings Island we also went to Skyline Chili at Kings Mills, a delightful restaurant featuring Cincinnati’s world famous chili. From the dining room window I could see the Eiffel Tower of Kings Island and all along the circumference of the room a model train ran around the parameter. I enjoyed watching the train as we ate our dinner and I contemplated how wonderful capitalism is. Around the counter the employees waiting to serve a new customer talked casually. Their minds were not on riots like the conditions at the Foxconn plant in China instigated. They simply wanted to get off work in time to play World of Warcraft meeting up in cyberspace with their guild friends. For the young people working at Skyline Chili the world is open to them, and there are limitless options for them to fill their time. At the Foxconn plant in China where the riots took place, the workers live, work, and play all the same facility in service to the State, like all good communists must do without question.
[image error]
I would support public education in America if they publicly denounced their affiliation with labor unions and disguised communism. I would feel better about my district of Lakota if they did not send employees on “goodwill” missions to a communist country that is currently killing millions of their current citizens behind smiling faces and letting American youth believe everything is alright. 
Nobody gives a damn so long as their iPhone works, and they have the latest addition. As I watched the train round the tracks at Skyline Chili I realized that what I hate most about labor unions—all labor unions—is that they use communism to erode the world of what’s good and wherever they gather they bring misery. Even where they don’t gather, they bring misery because it forces people to flee their collective wrath. In the case of companies like Apple seeking to offer a good product at a good price, they can deal with the communism of labor unions in The United States or they can deal with the communism of China and their forced work labor restrictions due to economic limitations. American companies have the upper hand in China because the communist country has no ingenuity on their own, so they rely on America to give them their jobs which can be produced cheaper in China than in the United States. But China with all its power or its population cannot make a haunted house like what was found at Kings Island in Madame Fatale’s Cavern of Terror. And for me, that is the most frightening thought I had all evening.
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them. Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:
Contact me personally at:http://www.linkedin.com/pub/rich-hoffman/30/92b/832
October 1, 2012
Demise of China Part 1: The History of Communism and why it grows in Public Education
While it is true, I have less patients for the public education system in America now than I did when I first started fighting school levies, the reason for it is in the diagnosis that in its current form, schools as they function now cannot be saved. Government schools should be erased from the board of thought and reinvented without the influence of labor unions or any government involvement. If you send your child to a public school, you are destroying their minds. That is my opinion after much research. The evidence of my research has revealed without question that communist infiltration into the America public education system in the 1940’s and 1950’s has caused many of the social and economic problems we see today in 2012. The modern labor union’s social/political position and what they desire to teach students, and how they wish to erode away the value of private property through taxation—incentivizing non-ownership, apartment dwellers and other lease agreements as shelters of taxation–public housing like what Russia had in Petrograd are all too clear the strategic intentions when taken in historical context.
[image error]
It is unlikely that a school district’s modern superintendents or their administrators know anything of the history I am about to unleash upon these pages in a two-part symposium focusing on why China wishes war with Japan, and the true modern cost of communism that China is currently experiencing. It is unlikely that they have thought too much about the communism they are advocating in their modern politics—the attempt to teach the American youth of the struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeois, the importance of “green technology” (modern communism) or the dangerous breakdown of family values advocated by intelligentsia in America and how this breakdown occurred through subtle communist propaganda. The participants probably know very little of what they are really doing, or why they do it. They have accepted collectivism as their social role so they only look at their responsibility in that collective, and do not consider the philosophic implications because such a thing would require thought, and they have surrendered that ability. The communists attacked America in the period after World War II not directly, but subtly and that attack can be felt to this very day in any child in any school in America. And every American who pays taxes off their property has been forced to accept that communism just a little each year with every increase in school levies gradually sapping off the wealth of property ownership by attacking the bourgeois and redistributing that wealth to the proletariat. Teachers are not paid so much money through their unions because those positions are socially important. They are paid so much to shut their mouths, not ask questions, and teach what the state tells them to teach. For me the final straw came during the Chicago Teacher’s Union Strike of 2012.
But to understand how this communism came to our communities in 2012 we have to study the events that led up to it, to the Russian Revolution, which was an event that the political left has salivated over for 100 years. By understanding how communism spread, and why it was appealing, one can then see how we found it in our own back yards and why. The history below is a bit dry and encyclopedic. But it is necessary in understanding the modern political landscape.
Russian Revolution
Russian Revolution, series of events in imperial Russia that culminated in 1917 with the establishment of the Soviet state that became known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). The two successful revolutions of 1917 are referred to collectively as the Russian Revolution.
For centuries, autocratic and repressive czarist regimes ruled Russia, and most of the population lived under severe economic and social conditions. During the 19th century and early 20th century, various movements arose aimed at overthrowing the government. Russia’s unsuccessful involvement in World War I (1914-1918) added to popular discontent, and in 1917 these events resulted in revolutions in February and October.
The February Revolution
The immediate cause of the February Revolution was the collapse of the czarist regime under the strain of World War I. Russian industry lacked the capacity to arm, equip, and supply the millions of men who were sent into the war. Soldiers went hungry, and casualties were enormous. Goods became scarce, and by 1917 famine threatened the larger cities. The czar, Emperor Nicholas II, ignored warnings of social and political unrest, and in February 1917 workers occupied the streets of Petrograd (now Saint Petersburg), demanding an end to the war and the removal of the czar. The troops of the Petrograd garrison were called out, but after violent clashes, the workers convinced the troops to let them pass their line of defense. Nicholas dissolved the Duma, the lower house of the Russian parliament, but the deputies elected a provisional committee to act in its place. On February 27 the revolution triumphed. The Petrograd garrison joined the revolution, and the united workers and soldiers took control of the capital.
Two new bodies exercised effective political power. They were the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies and a provisional government formed by a committee of the Duma. The Soviet tried to cope with the problem of food supply and issued its famous Order No. 1, which placed the military under its authority. The Soviet was composed primarily of Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries. Led by this moderate majority, it recognized the newly established provisional government as the legal authority in Russia.
The Provisional Government
After Nicholas II abdicated on March 2, the provisional government took power. The revolution then spread throughout the country, as soviets functioned with authorities in communication with the provisional government. The government was led primarily by Pavel Milyukov and generally favored an immediate constitutional monarchy and ultimately a republic. Aleksandr Fyodorovich Kerensky, the minister of justice, was the only representative of moderate socialist opinion in the provisional government. The provisional government enjoyed widespread popularity at first as it disbanded the czarist police and repealed limitations on freedom of opinion, press, and association. Its power was limited, however, as it had no firm basis of authority.
The provisional government pledged itself to win the war, but the Petrograd Soviet called for peace. The antagonisms between the government and the Petrograd Soviet resulted in open conflict. The soviets throughout the country became an instrument for revolutionary socialism, as the government continued to postpone action on pressing problems and as the workers and peasants became increasingly convinced that their problems could be solved only by the soviets.
Growth of Bolshevik Influence
The revolution had surprised even the working-class parties that had been agitating for revolution, and only in April, after the return from Switzerland of their exiled leader, Vladimir Ilich Lenin, did the Bolshevik Party assert itself. Lenin advocated opposition to the war and proposed that the party establish a proletarian dictatorship. He declared that the Bolsheviks should issue propaganda to convince the workers of the soundness of Bolshevik policy before seizing power. Revolutionary Leon Trotsky agreed and joined the Bolshevik Party, which was in the minority in the Petrograd Soviet. Events favored the Bolshevik cause. Milyukov, by continuing to support the war, provoked armed demonstrations by workers and soldiers, and the Soviet ordered all troops to remain in their barracks during the protests. Milyukov resigned, and the government was reorganized to include representatives of the socialist parties.
The Bolshevik Party was still a minority at the first all-Russian Congress of Soviets in June. The government, like its predecessor, subordinated all problems to the prosecution of the war, leading to a massive demonstration in July by workers, soldiers, and sailors. The demonstrators converged on the Tauride Palace, where the Congress of Soviets was in session. Caught by surprise, the Bolshevik leadership at first attempted to restrain the masses, but then placed itself at the head of the movement. The Congress of Soviets denounced the Bolsheviks and summoned troops to disperse the demonstrators. The support from the troops in effect recognized the Soviet as the supreme governing authority in the country. Kerensky became prime minister, and a second coalition government was formed.
The July demonstration produced a wave of political reaction. Lenin was denounced and went into hiding in Finland; Trotsky and others were arrested. Because the Kerensky government took no steps to improve the economy, unrest continued, and Bolshevik influence again increased. After a failed attempt by the military to take the city, the Bolsheviks, supported by the soldiers and workers, secured a majority in the Petrograd Soviet, leaving the provisional government virtually powerless.
The October Revolution
On October 24 the Military Revolutionary Committee, under the direction of Trotsky, stormed the Winter Palace, headquarters of the provisional government. Kerensky escaped into exile. While the insurrection was in progress, the second Congress of Soviets, with a Bolshevik majority, began its deliberation. Most of the Menshevik and Socialist Revolutionary delegates withdrew from the congress.
In November the Congress of Soviets took up the issues of peace, land, and a new government. First it proposed an immediate armistice. Then it abolished most private property. Finally, the congress, led by the Central Executive Committee, became the country’s supreme authority, with decisions to be carried out by the Soviet of People’s Commissars. Among the leading Bolsheviks elected to this council were Lenin, Trotsky, and Joseph Stalin. The congress gained widespread support, and banks and industries were nationalized.
The new government ended Russia’s involvement in World War I by signing the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk on March 3, 1918. The treaty, which surrendered the Baltic states, Finland, Poland, and Ukraine, infuriated many Russians. Opposition to the Bolshevik Party, by then called the Russian Communist Party, erupted into a civil war that lasted until late 1920. Lenin’s government, operating out of the new capital in Moscow, began a policy of crushing all opposition in the so-called Red terror campaign. Suspected anti-Communists, known as Whites, were arrested, tried, and executed.
After winning the civil war, the Russian Communist Party took strict control of the country, crushing all opposition. On December 30, 1921, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) was formally established when the ethnic territories of the former Russian Empire were united with the Russian Federated Socialist Republic.
As communism spread across the largest landmass of the world in Russia Mao Ze•dong (mou¹ dze¹dòng¹) also Mao Tse-tung (tse¹-t¢ng¹) bought into the theories of Karl Marx and Lenin and started a revolution of his own. Mao was born in 1893 and died in1976 as the premier Chinese Communist leader and theorist. He founded the Chinese Communist Party (1921), he led the Long March (1934-1935) and proclaimed the People’s Republic of China in 1949. As party chairman and the country’s first head of state (1949-1959) he initiated the Great Leap Forward and the founding of communes. He continued as party chairman after 1959 and was a leading figure in the Cultural Revolution (1966-1969). In the 1970′s he consolidated his political power and established ties with the West. To see more on the history of China and the impact of this communist uprising, CLICK HERE.
In America while all this activity was going on in the Soviet Union and China spies and communist infiltrators into Hollywood, book publishing, the media, and government positions ushered in new concerns for the poor (Harrington’s Other America, 1963) helped lead to Pres. Johnson’s “Great Society” programs (Medicare, Water Quality Act, Higher Education Act, all 1965). Concern with the environment surged (Carson’s Silent Spring, 1962). Feminism revived as a cultural and political movement (Friedan’s Feminine Mystique, 1963; National Organization for Women founded 1966), and a movement for homosexual rights emerged (Stonewall riot in NYC, 1969). Pope John XXIII called the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), which liberalized Roman Catholic liturgy and some other aspects of Catholicism. All these movements were set off by insurgents working within The United States in the fashion that Ayn Rand warned about in 1947, in much the way that the Bolsheviks came to power in Russia.
Opposition to U.S. involvement in Vietnam, especially among university students (Moratorium protest, Nov. 1969), turned violent (Weatherman Chicago riots, Oct. 1969). New Left and Marxist theories became popular, and membership in radical groups (Students for a Democratic Society, Black Panthers) increased. Maoist groups, especially in Europe, called for total transformation of society. In France, students sparked a nationwide strike affecting 10 million workers in May-June 1968, but an electoral reaction barred revolutionary change.
The seeds for communism were planted by the time Ronald Reagan became president, the names were changed to protect the Cold War fears from the public, and were advocated in America by the Democratic Party funded by labor unions with money stolen from the property of tax payers to fund their own demise. The intention of communism under Lenin was always a worldwide conquest of the proletariat over the bourgeois. He managed in just a few short years to spread communism to almost the entire landmass of Asia and most of Europe disguised as socialism and mixed market capitalism to gain gradual acceptance over time. And yes, the communists came to America to plant their seeds and they started in Hollywood where they still work closely in relationships established closely with politicians to “shape” society into the beliefs of communism.
[1]Excerpted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
[1]The World Almanac® and Book of Facts 1997 is licensed from K-III Reference Corporation. Copyright © 1996 by K-III Reference Corporation. All rights reserved.
Stay Tuned for Part 2 on October 2, 2012
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them. Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:
September 30, 2012
“Who is John Galt” : A superhero for the Intellectual Producers
The question that everyone is asking no matter what side of the political aisle they find themselves on is Who is John Galt, because of the new controversial film Atlas Shrugged Part II. The answer is that John Galt is a superhero to the productive intellectuals who have for many years enjoyed other superheroes such as Batman, Superman, Indiana Jones, Luke Skywalker, Spiderman and many others without having a specific hero rooted in reality that articulates their views. John Galt is a superhero because without weapons, special powers, or any interplanetary aid he holds within him the ability to save the world. He is able to do this with the personal realization that he alone is responsible for his own life, and due to that reality he is able to unleash tremendous creative potential that others benefit from. Through his life, the level of creative potential that is sapped off of humanity through collective philosophies is increasingly evident. John Galt with only his independence and his intellect is able to unlock a treacherous secret that has befuddled humanity since its inception, the tendency to revert philosophically backwards after great technological breakthroughs had been achieved. John Galt is the ultimate superhero because it is his intellect that crushes his enemies without ever declaring war, but by simply preventing them from robbing his merit in life, to sustain themselves.
The controversy over John Galt however is that his enemies are unfortunately all too real in the day to day lives of the modern world. When people proclaim that “They are John Galt” they are declaring their right to their own minds, their own creative potential, their own lives independent of the collective whole of society. By doing this they actually strengthen civilization in ways that humanity has never before realized, because the act of such a proclamation places the responsibility of living squarely on the shoulders of those doing the act and not allowing collective bodies of society to hide the faults of their unproductive lives. John Galt is the creative force that breaks through the unspoken barrier which restricts the intellectual producers who for so long been ridiculed as “greedy,” “selfish,” “right-winged,” “bourgeois” and “upper class.”
This whole idea of John Galt as a superhero of course infuriates all the advocates of collectivism. Unlike the traditional superheroes mentioned above who have villains using diabolical powers in an attempt to take over the world, the villains of John Galt could be the next door neighbor who roams around the neighborhood collecting fees for their homeowners association proclaiming that a homeowner is in violation of the rules because their garage door is open. The enemy could also be the school levy advocate who demands higher taxes on a community so their child can have a free education but in doing so they feed a tyrannical labor union advocating socialist teachings to the children and society at large. Or perhaps the villain is a family member who wants to know why their loved one dropped out of college to pursue an entrepreneurial enterprise instead of brown-nosing alums for a future job in a future office cubical of no real productive worth. The villains of Atlas Shrugged are too real for the masses that live their lives through collectivism and they often feel guilty upon reading Atlas Shrugged the classic novel, or watching the films that are currently being released. So their reaction to the material is anger, and castigation.
The collectivists deep in their minds, because they have not done as John Galt has–and that’s take personal responsibility for the quality of their lives, feels deep guilt when they realize how much they rely on other people. They lack the courage to face the trials and tribulations of daily life alone, and this makes them a burden on the intellectual producers who create all the jobs in society, and drive all the materials that produce the best culture. They hide their personal fears behind collectivism and mental evasion. The message of the superhero John Galt is one that personally calls collectivists out and puts the light on their behavior, which goes against the entire reason they built their lives around collectivism in the first place. When Galt declares at the end of the Atlas Shrugged, to “get out of my way,” he is saying that he does not need anybody, that he alone has the ability to do the job at hand if only the parasites of intellectual ineptitude would get out of his way and allow him to live to his full potential.
To understand what Galt is talking about, the best comparison would be to consider three hikers who are backpacking 10 miles into the rugged mountains of West Virginia. Everything the backpackers need would have to be placed inside the backpacks for the week that they would remain in the mountains. Each backpack would weight between 20 to 40 pounds. Metaphorically speaking John Galt is one of the backpackers and before starting out, he volunteers to carry the tent for all three hikers because he is stronger than the other two. They resent the fact silently that Galt thinks he is stronger than they are, but they say nothing because they don’t want the extra weight on their own backs.
Two miles into the hike one of the two weaker backpackers complains that they don’t think they can keep pace with Galt because he is going too fast for them. They ask Galt to slow down so they can keep up. This forces Galt to walk slower to appease the weaker hiker. Another two miles into the hike the other hiker complains that the straps on their backpack are hurting their shoulders. They have incorrectly packed their equipment putting not enough weight on the hips, leaving most of the heavy lifting done incorrectly by the shoulders. John Galt then volunteers to take away some of the weight and carry it himself to relieve the pressure on the fatigued hiker. Another two miles in both of the weaker hikers complain that Galt’s pace is too brisk, that they need to stop and rest once in a while to catch their breath. Of course this irritates Galt. The weak hikers tell Galt that if he has so much energy then why doesn’t he carry the weight of both their packs so that they can keep up with Galt, then they wouldn’t have to stop so much over the next four miles. They rationalize that each according to his ability each according to their need, that Galt has an obligation to take away their burden since they are not as strong as he is. Galt then tells them that they will never become strong themselves if they don’t learn to carry their own weight, and to fight through their struggles for their own good and benefit. But this sounds too hard to the two weak hikers, so Galt in frustration throws off all the extra weight he had been carrying and proceeds on without them.
As the sun sets much later that day after 10 more breaks from the two weak hikers they arrive at the camp that John Galt has already set up. They discover that Galt had arrived 6 hours earlier, had pitched the tent, found enough wood to build a fire, start a fire, begin cooking dinner, and read two chapters of a book he had been studying. Galt well rested and content could only manage a smug wave at the two weak hikers as they staggered into camp sweating profusely, overcome by exhaustion. The hikers demand of Galt water since they had depleted the contents of their canteens. Galt points to the creek that runs alongside the camp, as if the solution should be self evident, yet the tired hikers complain that they are too tired to filter the water for themselves and they complain that Galt is so selfish for not spending his extra time filling jugs of water for them since he obviously had time instead of wasting his time reading a book.
For those who are the intellectual producers, not the parasitic intellectuals that we find in our public schools and colleges, but the actual producers of society—John Galt is their superhero–their kind of representative in the art of literature and now motion pictures. Of course for the two hikers and the others who think like them John Galt is a terrible person who has treated them unfairly because he thinks his “shit doesn’t stink,” that he “considers himself superior.” They find the message of John Galt appalling, because John Galt makes them realize what burdens they truly are, and how parasitic they are to the creative minds of existence. Those who hate Atlas Shrugged with great passion are no different than the two hikers who wanted Galt to carry all their equipment for them, to move through the hike at their pace, so that they could believe they are equal to John Galt as they would all arrive at the camp at the same time. Since they outnumbered Galt two to one, they believed they held the majority of opinion which compelled Galt to carry their gear and make them feel included in the successful experience of a hike into the mountains, instead of a couple of weaklings who packed too heavy, were not determined to carry their own weight, and showed no interest in arriving at camp in good time so they could fill their minds with the contents of a good book in the rustic mountain setting, as was Galt’s goal.
The name of John Galt does incite anger among those who know they are parasites to creativity and if a genie could grant these people three wishes of anything in the world that they could want or desire, they would spend all three continuing the illusion that collectivism works so that they could hide their true worth from the eyes of the true producers—the intellectual producers of individualism. The reason is that no amount of money can hide the value of these people. These types could be given $10 million dollars and within 5 years they would have spent every bit of it on women, homes, boats, cars, and charity because their minds are not equipped to think on their own, they are the weak hikers of our lives and will not be able to carry their own load through the mountains of West Virginia even with the help of money, because they lack the intellectual capacity to do so.
What the two hikers, and all the people who hate John Galt, Ayn Rand, or the great book Atlas Shrugged fail to realize is that their lives were enhanced greatly because Galt made them carry their own load up the mountain, that he did not deny them the experience of the merit of their labor. Because deep down inside, as does every intellectual producer, they all know that in the next morning when the sun rises that the weak hikers will be sore to their bones, but the water they scoop out of the stream will taste so good, because they earned it, and it wasn’t given to them. People like John Galt live every day in this fashion, so when they declare “I am John Galt,” they are saying they understand what John Galt is, what he represents, and why he is important.
In the reality of the real world, this is why John Galt is considered a superhero, because it takes superhuman strength to resist the temptation of succumbing to the weak hikers of the world, to the parasitic collectivists, and help them when they cry and beg for it. It takes superhuman strength to know, over their protests, that if collectivists are forced to carry their own weight, that they will be better people for it and that by helping them, you actually hurt them more than their little minds can fathom. It takes superhuman strength to resist the comfortable blanket of collectivism when the entire world advocates it, except for those few who understand fully who John Galt is, and why he’s so important.
So the answer to “Who is John Galt” is known easily to those who are intellectual producers. The answer will infuriate those who are not intellectual producers, but John Galt is not a superhero for those types of minds. He is not interested in the collective acceptance of their opinions. He is a superhero functioning from an inner strength that is completely foreign to them, John Galt knows that the way he can help the world best is by dropping the extra gear he’s carrying on their behalf and moving ahead at his own pace so they can benefit when they finally arrive to where he is mentally, and enjoy the experience of the camp site he has already built. By dropping their gear, the metaphorical John Galt can provide them with a nice tent to lay in to rest their bones, good food to eat which they didn’t have time to prepare on their own since it took them all day to hike up the mountain, and the inner victory of forcing them to hike the mountain on their own, in their own time without robbing from them the wonder of a drink of water of which they fully earned through the struggle of their labor. It takes a real superhero to do all of that and know inwardly that it was the correct thing to do when the only thing the hikers could say in kindness to him was a complaint at having to get their own water when they first came into camp exhausted.
John Galt is a modern answer to the welfare culture that has allowed politics to rob from them the benefit of living their lives. John Galt is a superhero in a culture of collectivists who wish that John Galt would just carry their gear up the mountain so they can pretend they are also intellectual producers who are important to the world. That they can also climb up the mountains of life and arrive at camp at the same time as John Galt. Only their strategy is to hold the John Galts of life back from arriving too early so the complacency of their existence is not shown in the light of their lives. Rather than struggle to become more like John Galt, and the other intellectual producers who know and love the message of the superhero John Galt, they instead complain that their water should have been given to them upon arrival, and that Galt was a selfish, mean man who forced them to toil needlessly out of pure spite.
That’s when John Galt, the superhero did the unthinkable, the most courageous thing a man in his position could do—he encouraged the men and women who thought like he did to drop the gear of society and to stop carrying them on their backs, and show the world where they were wrong in their subscriptions to collectivism. It truly takes superhuman strength to say NO, but in John Galt’s case, and increasingly more intellectual producers are beginning to acknowledge in spite of the howls of protest, they are beginning to say NO too, to the collectivist who require the work and effort of the “producers” without being able to contribute equally the other way with the efforts of their own lives. Without John Galt’s refusal to say NO to the looters in his own life, the parasitic nature of those in a collective society never are addressed, and society arrives late to it’s destination of achievement, which is a crime against everything that breaths. John Galt is a superhero because this is the crime he fights, the one where collectivists become parasites on the fate of the human race and hold it back only so their feelings aren’t hurt with the realization that they are not like John Galt, but are the un-intentional enemies to his very existence.
Who is John Galt? He is everyone who realizes that they are the intellectual producers who make the world move. They are the creators of the world’s campsites. It is through them and by them that everything happens. And it is they who have to help everyone become better by forcing them to carry the weight of their own life, keeping them from the slavery of their own philosophy, because the waters of life taste best when it is earned through the effort of one’s own existence and not the unspoken debt to another human being.
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them. Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:
Contact me personally at:http://www.linkedin.com/pub/rich-hoffman/30/92b/832
September 29, 2012
What Samuel L. Jackson Really Means: Go back to sleep, just like his ‘Star Wars’ character Mace Windu
I found it ironic to see that Samuel L. Jackson put his namesake on a Obama advertisement targeting the immature youth of America with subtle inclinations of socialism in a catchy, gutter-strewn, Wake the F**k Up video that is circulating around YouTube. I have sat in the outdoor restaurants of Brand Blvd in Hollywood and spoke with entertainment types about philosophy till the small hours of the morning on occasion and what they believe is essentially communism as it was passed down to them from mouth to mouth during the Cold War. To their credit, they believe they are doing the right thing for humanity in advocating “fairness” but in reality they are simply mouthpieces for communism. Jackson’s role in this Hollywood position of socialist propaganda is ironic because one of his best roles over a long career is that of the Jedi Master, Mace Windu from the Star Wars films, a role that he appears to be living out in the real life.
[image error]
In Star Wars the Jedi Order which Jackson’s character was one of the elite caretakers of, allowed itself to be seduced by a Sith Lord hungry for power who simply wanted to dismantle the Republic in favor of a dictatorship. The Jedi for all their wonderful intuition, special powers, and discipline could not see it coming because as a group of social protectors, they had fallen into neglect due to their collectivism, which allowed a Sith Lord to become Emperor of the entire galaxy right under their noses.
It would appear that Jackson was the perfect man to play such a role in Star Wars. Mace Windu was an outwardly strong man, just like Samuel Jackson, but his philosophy was flawed because he failed to act correctly due to his philosophic position. Jackson, like most of the Hollywood political left have been “seduced” by communism called now by the name of “progressivism” and they have paved the way to dictatorship through their philosophic ignorance.
But looking deeper this new Obama advertisement cleverly produced with Hollywood production standards reflects just how deep and how desperate Obama supporters are. It also shows exactly why many who oppose Obama wish to take the nation back to a period of time before progressives destroyed the values that made America such a unique place, void of European collectivism and communist philosophy. The Obama socialists of today must target the young and immature young people in America in the same way the Vladimir Lenin used the strain of World War I to motivate the young people of Russia to form the Bolshevik faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party to overthrow the government and usher in world-wide communism.
Democrats and any member of any Labour Party in the entire world are advocating socialism as their political philosophy. France just recently openly elected a socialist president so finally after many years of hiding their belief in communism and the embarrassments of Russia and China, communists and socialists are dusting off the name from behind the masks they have been wearing like “Democrats,” “progressives,” “Labour Party,” and other soft names for hard-core collectivist philosophies. Hollywood during the McCarthy hearings were not a witch-hunt as card-carrying communists in The United States cried out as they used the First Amendment to hide their true intentions of destroying American capitalism from within so the spread of global communism could flourish as Lenin had advocated on behalf of writers such as Karl Marx, Bernard Shaw, and H.G.Wells. Hollywood was seduced by the “fairness” of Russian communism as Lenin advocated it. Because of the independence culture in America, there was a lot of resistance to such collectivism, so it arrived later and much more slowly through the youth culture communicated through labor unions and actors like Samuel Jackson.
Like the Jedi in Star Wars actors such as Jackson have failed to see the threat of communism as it bloomed right under their noses under a weak philosophy of collective fairness. To this very day on Brand Blvd, and bars all over Santa Monica, California it is socialism that the creative types in Hollywood are advocating, but because they have little personal knowledge of history, they do not know that the Democratic platform of Barack Obama is not open communism because the names have been changed and hidden by the Civil Rights activism of the candidate’s skin color, using race guilt to usher in Lenin’s communism through mindless actors who simply read scripts for a living.
In Star Wars the threat to society is the Sith Order. The Jedi failed during The Clone Wars because of their sensitive, collective policies of “fairness” and the Sith use this to their tactical advantage. Order is restored in Star Wars when strong individuals join the battle to restore freedom to the galaxy that has become embroiled through collectivism under a tyrannical empire. Darth Vader does not become evil because of his brash and reckless ways; it’s because of his commitment to sacrifice himself for the sake of his pregnant wife. The Sith Lord uses this to turn Darth Vader into service to the state which he controls. Star Wars is a work of philosophy, not simple science fiction.
The failures are in philosophy. The Democrats like Jackson and his fellow actors are wrong in their position, just like the Jedi were wrong in the Star Wars films failing to see the Sith Lord they were helping to maintain power. Obama is the anti-colonial Sith Lord of communist reality to the Samuel Jackson’s of the world. Young people are particularly infected such as the actress Natalie Portman and Anne Hathaway because they are too immature to know better, and the tyrannical Obama regime understands this, and they exploit it with ads pandering to their rebellious zeal.
My son-in-law and I had a long talk the other day about politics and the role of philosophy in the day-to-day lives of all people. As I told him, people can have differing opinions and the spirit of debate is wonderful for getting to the heart of the matter, but there is only one right answer. People can argue and debate on how to get there, but there are not multiple correct answers to any given problem only different ways at arriving at the correct answer. History shows us that the communist were very wrong in their utopian beliefs and the world has suffered for it in dramatic ways for over 100 years. That philosophic path must be rejected completely and scrapped now. The path toward a fully functioning society that advances instead of declines is along the lines of the video below and that is the most up to date trend in politics.
Samuel Jackson and those like him are behind the times following a flawed philosophy that can only lead to a dictatorship of the proletariat. This doesn’t make them bad people, it just means that their philosophy which governs their lives is a foolish one, because it has been proven incorrect, and one that is crushing the world wherever it rules. America, because of its roots in capitalism has held communism off for a very long time as the only bastion of freedom for the human race in the entire world. If America falls to the political labour parties masking communism humanity will regress backward in precisely the same manner as shown in the great American novel Atlas Shrugged. The people who hate Ayn Rand and that great classic book feel the way they do for all the reasons that Samuel Jackson showed in his pandering video advocating Obama socialism for America. It’s not that they want America to Wake the F**K Up. They in reality wish them to Go Back to Sleep, and to not pay attention to the work of the Sith Lords who wish to overthrow our Republic with mechanisms the touchy, feely Hollywood actors fail to see. Jackson like his Star Wars character Mace Windu has been tricked into supporting a dictator hungry for power with intentions nobody but a Sith Lord could know behind the layers and layers of manipulation that is disguised beyond masks of philanthropy and good tidings.
[image error]
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them. Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:
Contact me personally at:http://www.linkedin.com/pub/rich-hoffman/30/92b/832
September 28, 2012
‘Only in America’: Larry the Cable Guy visits ‘Tail of the Dragon’
Only in America starring Larry the Cable Guy filmed an episode that will be shown in January 2013 on The History Channel with my friend Ron Johnson who runs tailofthedragon.com. Ron took Larry on the ride of his life in his Mustang down the Tail of the Dragon and back again in what will surely be a hilarious episode of that upcoming television show featuring unique places and people of America. The Tail of the Dragon, which is the featured location of my new novel of the same name, captures this same spirit only in a literary format that is part of a trend pointing Americans to their cherished landmarks in a rash of patriotism that has only recently been appreciated due to the threat of modern politics to eradicate it.
As Ron was telling about his weekend adventures with Larry the Cable Guy Justin Binik Thomas was reviewing my book version of Tail of the Dragon. Justin Binik Thomas readers here might remember I covered as a victim of the IRS because of his involvement in the Cincinnati Tea Party and the Cincinnati 9/12 project. Justin has attended some of the exclusive Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom meetings in the past and I saw him again at FreePac in Cincinnati where I was signing copies of my new book while also working the Atlas Shrugged Part II booth. I gave Justin a copy since the book had just come out, and I thought he’d enjoy it. He took a week to read it, and then sent me the following email with a blurb that he posted on Amazon.com.
Rich – Your book is exceptional. The race/chase scene had me on the edge of my seat. “Tail of the Dragon” is a dynamic action-packed thriller seamlessly integrating love for America, homage to our history, and true liberty. We ‘live’ it first hand through NASCAResque race through the hills of Tennessee and North Carolina – a trip that captures the hearts of the citizens and even the President of the United States
- Justin Binik-Thomas, Owner, Conservative Media Group
His comments meant a lot to me because like Larry the Cable Guy’s fascination with the Tail of the Dragon as an actual place on the Tennessee/North Carolina border, readers of my novel understand the intent of the story without any difficulty. I didn’t tell Justin much about the book, I simply handed it to him as a gift. Justin didn’t know what to think. He was essentially in the same situation as the average Amazon.com buyer knowing very little about the book or the plot line before reading it.
Needless to say every time a new reader expresses their enjoyment of Tail of the Dragon it gives me great delight, especially when they are coming to the material for the first time. The common reaction that many new readers have is they immediately detect the feeling of Americana that I intended to portray in the story without getting particularly political. The focus of the story is to celebrate what makes an American, not to appeal to any particular political class. Another recent review that showed up on the Amazon.com site in response to another previous comment captured this sentiment.
LucyLouise says:
I recently read “The Tail of the Dragon” and found the book truly exciting. The author takes the reader on an exciting race for justice that really takes your breath away. I could not lay the book down. My pulse raced as I read to make sure that Rick Stevens completed the race. Normally, I am not a race car fan, but this book kept me right in the car. Mr. Hoffman’s writing skill created visual reality. I hope this book is made into a movie. The ending was perfect. We are looking for a real hero these days and Rick Stevens sure filled the bill. I am buying copies for gifts. Thank you, Mr. Hoffman, for hope. Hope for real patriots that believe our nation is worth saving.
Well Lucy Louise, you are very welcome. The best part of that comment is that the reviewer intends to pass out copies of Tail of the Dragon for presents which is the ultimate compliment. Christmas is coming up and it fulfills my deepest wishes to know that fans of the book think enough of it to give as a present to others. Because the message of Tail of the Dragon is clear, and is often only hinted at in television programs like Larry the Cable Guy’s Only in America. The essence of being an American is an elusive quality that has allowed the meaning to be hijacked by foreign philosophies and it has always been my hope that readers of Tail if the Dragon the novel would find themselves understanding better that rare quality which makes Americans—Americans. By the early comments I have great hope that this task has been executed fully. The story of Tail of the Dragon whether we’re talking about the real place that Larry the Cable Guy filmed his television show at or my fictional novel which explores the concept of freedom demanded by mankind derived uniquely through American philosophy is essentially about the celebration of Americana. The source of the material is the mythical place called Tail of the Dragon located deep in the mountain hills of the Great Smoky Mountains on the western frontier. It is there, where America is as alive as anywhere in the entire country and a place where freedom cries out loudest. The battle lines of politics are as articulate and well-defined there as anyplace on earth.
So thank you Justin and for everyone else who are leaving nice comments on the Tail of the Dragon’s new Amazon.com site. It is for the reasons revealed in those comments that I wrote the book with high hopes to capture an elusive truth known Only in America. So in January look for Larry the Cable Guy’s new TV show featuring the actual Tail of the Dragon from the seat of my friend’s Mustang. But until then and after then, the novel Tail of the Dragon will dig deeper than any cinematography can explore, into the roots of what makes such a place possible, into the heart of an American, and the blood called freedom that feeds them.
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them. Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:
Contact me personally at:http://www.linkedin.com/pub/rich-hoffman/30/92b/832
September 27, 2012
See the Movie ‘Won’t Back Down’ : End the rule by teacher unions over education
In case you haven’t heard by now, teacher’s unions all across the nation are in an absolute conniption fit over the release of the new film Won’t Back Down directed by Daniel Barnz and staring Viola Davis, with Maggie Gyllenhall as parents and teachers who stand up to an evil, vile, and selfish teacher’s union. The union is run by Evelyn Riske, played by Holly Hunter—the union president of a failing Pittsburg school. Teacher unions took to the streets at a premier of the film declaring that the movie is a “corporate” attack on the fundamental worker rights in America, which from the union standpoint is to fight for a living wage by running a massive government monopoly that directly extorts tax money from the public using children as the manipulated bargaining chip. The Blaze recently did an article on this subject over a specific protest that occurred a week before the film’s release on September 28, 2012.
If you belong to a trade union public or private, you are a part of an organization that has its roots in communism. The history is irrefutable. I have covered this topic in greater detail in many other articles especially the one from yesterday. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. There is no reason to play patty cake with the issue any longer, we must call them what they are. Unions = communism. End of story! Liberal advocates no longer call it communism in the United States, they call it progressivism. In Europe, because communism started there and they are not protected by The Declaration of Independence or The Constitution they call it by the name of socialism, communism “light.” For instance, France just elected a socialist president who immediately declared that the bourgeoisie pay their fair share of taxes, up to 75% of their income, as determined by the preliterate of democracy. Unions in America are functioning from this core idea which was founded in communism, the idea that the bourgeoisie must surrender their assets to the proletariat (the working class) all in the name of fairness.
But in America with the exception of labor unions, the people reject such ideas unless it is disguised to trick them. Many union members, particularly cops and firefighters believe they are flag waving patriots when in fact they are communist advocates through their IFA memberships because they play Xbox all day at the firehouse instead of reading books about history. They don’t want to think such things because they are paid well; it’s an inconvenient bit of information that is a reality nobody wants to consider. So they get mad at those who point out the truth. If you support organized labor, you support communism, because they have the same ideas about how the world works.
The unions have pushed for years communist ideas about how business should be entangled with a community embedded with powerful unions who support progressive/communist causes. I have personally tried to work with my local school to bring their costs down through my school board, and they have clearly sided with the powerful teachers union, and no matter how many elections we had, or how much public debate we engaged in, the school board refused to budge off their defense of their teachers union. Protecting the teacher’s union are hoards of immature, neurotic parents just a few short years out of their post partum chemical fluctuations who are a terribly insecure lot of humans. They want what’s best for their children of course and they allow emotion to dictate their political actions. When the union members tell mothers at a PTA meeting that their child needs a socialized teacher with a Master’s Degree in education to teach the children about “global awareness,” the parents don’t question the information at all. The PTA parents just repeat like a parrot what the union tells them. I have tried to deal with those types of people reasonably, but they don’t listen—they just behave like mindless robots what the radical unions tell them to utter and I am personally done trying to reason with them. For an example of the type of person I’m talking about check out the former PTA mom who wrote her opinion of the movie Won’t Back Down at the link below.
http://beccarama.com/2012/09/08/wont-back-down-movie-review-my-ex-pta-presidents-point-of-view/
My current opinion about teacher’s unions in government schools is that they should be eradicated completely. They have no right, or no place embedding themselves into our children, or the tax money of our communities. Until teacher unions are removed from public education, our society will continue to be under-educated, education will be too expensive, and education will never improve because unions will not allow ANY reforms. For the most recent proof, all one need do is look at what the Chicago Teacher’s Union did to the government of Chicago. Those teachers of socialist and outright communist supporters didn’t give a damn about the kids or their parents who had a schools shut down because of the very greedy labor strike. The proof is in the actions.
The union protestors at the showings of Won’t Back Down are upset that a movie is being done that exposes them for what they really are. They will call it propaganda, but what is it that “they” do when they use our children and the fates of their futures to sell communism to a public too busy and too shallow to know any better? Won’t Back Down doesn’t have a social obligation to show a bunch of teachers sitting down with parents to collectively discuss anything, as the PTA mom in the article above wished for. Won’t Back Down is not about pandering to the political left, it is about going after the money that is left on the table in Hollywood by giving people on the political right the kind of movie they want to see. What the teacher’s unions and other communist advocates who have captured the message in Hollywood are afraid of is that this film Won’t Back Down is not the only film being released out of the film industry that is going after the money left by producers who have for years made movies only for the political left, with the intention of converting those otherwise conservative minds to a message that runs counter to their logic. Atlas Shrugged Part II is coming out in a couple of weeks, and the very popular film 2016: Obama’s America has done wonderful box office numbers on track with Michael Moore’s socialist propaganda films of the last 20 years. All those films have a conservative message intended for the conservative movie ticket buyer who has been left out of the entertainment business for nearly 40 years.
When people wonder why Obama is so high in the polls, it’s not because he has a superior message. It’s because his political party rooted in communism has captured the thoughts and minds of America through Hollywood, so that only one side of the story—the sensitive plight of the proletariat worker being exploited by the evil bourgeoisie–was told time and time, and time again. Films and books that offer other viewpoints have been crushed out of existence by an aggressive Screen Actors Guild Union who takes up the same positions in the movie business as the teacher’s unions do. And if the SAG Union doesn’t do the trick then the Writer’s Guild of America will. Believe me, I know from personal experience. I’d rather walk from a deal with the rights to my story intact than to join a union, not because of the people involved, but because of the process that it takes to sell the story under the union rules. They are all on the same team and they all have their roots in communism, which I personally despise and I despise progressives even more for attempting to hide the truth of what they are by changing their name. They are even worse.
The protests against the film Won’t Back Down is not because the movie represents the views of Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, or any other corporate interest. The protests are over discouraging other filmmakers from exploring these topics so the unions can continue to control the message they are advocating which is the bourgeoisie class is against the proletariat as Karl Marx outlined it in his book The Communist Manifesto. In America, at least half the country has rejected that message, and filmmakers are beginning to see that there is a lot of money to be made by making films for those people. That is why Won’t Back Down was made, and why it will do good business. And behind it are a bunch of other films with conservative messages that are on the tables of producers’ desks waiting for the box office numbers to come in off these conservative films being released in the third and fourth business quarters of the Hollywood product. The unions are hoping those will come out flat, so they are protesting in an effort to keep people from going to the movies because they know their futures depend on keeping people in the dark as to their real intentions.
So if you want to see the public unions out of your life as much as I do, you’ll go see this movie not just once. I would encourage you dear reader to vote with your wallet and give Won’t Back Down your weekend business. There would be nothing better than to hear the complaints coming from the bell bottomed, cackling hens on Monday in the teacher’s unions crying over the success Won’t Back Down has had at the box office. Because the writing is on the wall, and things will change, so long as movies like this one continue to get made to be released in an effort at competing with all the George Clooney/Sean Penn socialist propaganda films that are being made in Hollywood with a message that reflects more accurately the beliefs of the entire country instead of just New York City and California.
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my new book Tail of the Dragon along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find one at:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15995766-tail-of-the-dragon
Visit me at Goodreads! Check out my list of top 50 favorite books.
http://www.goodreads.com/RichHoffman
Contact me personally at:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/rich-hoffman/30/92b/832
Bring ’Justice’ to your life on the Kindle or Nook within minutes:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15995901-the-symposium-of-justice
September 26, 2012
The Reality Behind American Education: What “Let’s Party” means and where it came from
It doesn’t happen often, but I read something the other day that set my mind ablaze with a sudden revelation that is beyond dispute. I have explored at this site the idea that KGB spies during the Cold War had infiltrated intelligentsia in The United States with the idea of spreading communist philosophy to the free market country of America. (CLICK HERE TO SEE ACTUAL FACTS ON THIS) Recently when Obama poked fun at Mitt Romney for referring to the Russians with the old Cold War suspicions, it struck me as curious, then I remembered that Obama is a member of that intelligentsia group, and is marching to the party line invoked over decades to steer the shallow minds of generations into gradually accepting global communism which the Soviet Union had planned on the outset of their Revolution in 1917. Many people think that it is only their generation that matters, so they forget history and neglect to connect the dots from the past to the present. But what I read in Ayn Rand’s 75 year old novel We The Living it shocked me to my very core. One of the trends in Petrograd, Russia in 1924 during The Purge in the newly formed, U.S.S.R was to break down the traditional family structure and to encourage the youth to “PARTY” in an attempt to psychologically break the youth away from their parents and look to service of the State as their guiding light. By encouraging evasion through drunkenness, and stripping away the morality that the parents taught their children, the Soviets hoped to create through communism a society of dedicated collectivists who would put the state before anything, even family. The reason this shocked me is because the same thing has been happening in The United States, especially after World War II climaxing in the 1960’s. The Soviets were intent to spread communism to every corner of the globe—especially The United States and they planned to do it slowly over time as articulated wonderfully in this video by Bill Whittle.
I have always felt that the term “Let’s Party” was a subtle attack on America culture, but I didn’t have context to make the statement verbally. I always despised any history of The Soviet Union and glimpses behind The Iron Curtain didn’t even become possible until the late 1980’s largely due to President Reagan’s battle with collectivism that went a long way to breaking down the Berlin Wall in 1989. Today’s youth have no memory of these events, and their parents have been eroded away into caricatures of their former selves after years of “partying” designed to strip away their “ID” and replace it with “collective salvation.”
It is not by accident that it is public education and colleges where this culture of “partying” emerged along with much of the Karl Marx philosophy that has infected Americans for nearly 9 decades now—slowly over time—with the intent to global communism. Even I thought the communist threat was over when the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet Union broke up into the economically impoverished country of Russia once again. But what happened is that communism went underground, and it came to America through the Department of Education and filtered through to the education unions, and directly to each and every student in The United States attending a public school or a university. The great Soviet threat of communism had never went away, and was in fact stronger than ever—and for the most part every single American is tainted just a bit with the corruption of communism, as it was intended in 1924 Petrograd.
When a young person or even an adult says, “Let’s Party” they are carrying out a plan created for them in the former Soviet Union to strip away their individuality and mass their minds into collectivism. The strategy was used on their own people to unify the country behind the state through the destructive ritual of non-thinking evasion perpetuated through drunkenness. The Soviets knew that if young people slept loosely with other mates, that it was good for collectivism since they abhor property rights. Communism is not a culture of having, “my wife,” or “my husband,” or even my “girlfriend.” Communism seeks to destroy all forms of possession and much to their own demise it destroyed the benefit of ownership which contains in it the value of all things.
Without ownership there is no value and in America the neglect of ownership has destroyed the American family, destroyed our education system, destroyed our once great economy, destroyed our tendency toward innovation and it has done it slowly over a long period of time. Partying has become so accepted in American culture that if one does not partake in these mindless activities they are looked upon as “non-social” and “undesirables.” Such terms existed in 1924 Petrograd to describe people who did not “party” their way into social standing within the collective of communism, and for me this is a shocking revelation. Stunning even, because for my entire adult life I thought that the term “Party” was invented as a result of the counter-culture of the 1960’s. Now I know without question that the Hippie Counter Culture that emerged in the 1960’s and 1970’s was the direct result of a massive KGB attack designed to destroy America from within.
While the world focused on nuclear weapons on both sides America used economic superiority to crush the Soviet’s by simply out-pacing them in finance. The Soviet’s however infiltrated the American education system with KGB plants to subvert the American resolve away from capitalism. The primary mechanism used was labor unions, since unions are by their very nature collective organizations seething with communism. In this way the Soviets were able to use school teachers and college professors as their primary weapons against America. This is why so many in the education industry support anti-capitalist financial policies, because they were created through intelligentsia to be advocates of Marxist communism in a KGB plot to destroy America and spread global communism that is now disguised as the “Green” oriented environmental movement.
The KGB was able to do this by implementing a tendency in education institutions to have the students “Party” and engage in collectivism through sex, degrading episodes of human exhibition, stripping away the idea of individuality to be replaced with group cohesion. To this day every block party in every neighborhood has its roots with the KGB as drunken neighbors root for their favorite college football team and save all their pennies to send their children to the school of their favorite team. Like moths we send our youth to the light of education to be incinerated not by an electric zapper in the lure of a pretty light, but the breakdown of individualism through “partying” into collective beings that no longer have the courage to act on their own without group consensus.
Ayn Rand is hated by collectivists because of books like We The Living. The book’s characters are fictional, but the circumstances are historically real, and were lived by Ayn Rand herself. Kira is simply a version of Ayn Rand as an 18-year-old girl trying to escape Petrograd and the clutches of communism that was destroying the world around her. She came to The United States and reported that the Soviets were fresh on her heels and was in fact already in our trade unions, in our government, and especially in our schools. She wrote books that people understand are truthful, and reflective of her experiences. But We The Living was written in 1936 about events that took place in 1924 through 1926. It is over 75 years old and was written well before the modern language or terminology for things we accept today were put in place. That is why it shocked me to see that the term “Partying” was commonplace in Petrograd in 1924 as the communists were using this trend to pull the youth away from the traditions of their parents in a collective grab for their very souls in service to the State. As I look around America comparing what happened in the Soviet Union in the 1920’s through the 1980’s, The United States is on the same—exact path—even down to the terminology. And it was placed into our culture through our education system which we fund with tax dollars. The Soviet KGB implemented the ultimate weapon against America, they convinced us to fund our own destruction through an education system that they penetrated with their communist influence, and the damage has been incredibly severe.
The chances are people like Obama know that this has went on, however he is only a few years older than I am, so he may not know much beyond the fact that he has been taught to think a certain way by those KGB agents who used his professors to deliver him into his current line of thought. To him, the Russian people of today are not the communist threat of yesterday because the Iron Curtain has been lowered. But the flow of capitalism is not going into the country, as we were led to believe, but communism is flowing out through an organization called Socialist International, which has taken up the torch of spreading global communism to every corner of the earth as the Soviets in 1924 intended to do to first their own people, then the entire world. That resolve has not been reduced over time, but has only increased; switching from a quick strategy to one that is implemented over a long period of time. Collectivists do not care about decades since their identity is not individually based, so goals obtained in their lifetimes do not matter to them, since service and sacrifice to the great State are their focus. This is how they were able to do it, and it all starts with the concept of “partying.” The goal of “partying” is to get youth to practice “evasion” and to separate them from the moral teachings of their parents. It is this simple practice that threatens America most in a plot that was hatched as far back as the 1920’s in the far away land of the U.S.S.R.
For confirmation of what I just said read the book for yourself. We The Living is a fantastic book that takes readers behind the Iron Curtain in a way that I can’t recall ever being done before. It is because of the experiences in this book that Ayn Rand hated communism so intently, and why her later works reflected this hatred. And she had good reason to hate it—because unlike her peers, she never accepted the practice of partying and evasion to numb her mind to the threat of communism. She saw it for what it really was, and could therefore see it clearly as it was implemented in The United States over time—very, very, slowly—starting in our schools with our own children.
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my new book Tail of the Dragon along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find one at:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15995766-tail-of-the-dragon
Visit me at Goodreads! Check out my list of top 50 favorite books.
http://www.goodreads.com/RichHoffman
Contact me personally at:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/rich-hoffman/30/92b/832
Bring ’Justice’ to your life on the Kindle or Nook within minutes:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15995901-the-symposium-of-justice
September 25, 2012
‘Tail of the Dragon’ on Amazon.com: A wonderful review from a new reader
It took a few weeks after the initial release of my new novel to get the sales links up for Tail of the Dragon at Amazon.com and Barnes and Noble.com, but they are now up, and slowly reviews are beginning to come in from people who have bought and read the book. I do a lot of work here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom that I do out of a love of independence and because it’s the fight of our day—and I charge nothing for the service. I do it because I want to, and because I know people want, and need the information. But it makes me feel very good when I learn that people thank me for my work by purchasing one of my novels because it tells me that the people who read here value my efforts and they wish to back it the way we determine value in our society—with financial support.
More than money though comes comments like the very first one that went up on the new Amazon link. I was delighted to read that someone picked up Tail of the Dragon and read it, and understood exactly what I was trying to accomplish as a writer, and wrote a review that invoked much passion. Upon reading the comment, I did not expect such articulation, and it means a lot to me to see such words composed on behalf of Tail of the Dragon.
While it’s true that I wrote Tail of the Dragon to be a good ol’ throw back to the fun car chase stories out of the 1970’s, intended to appeal to anyone who played with Hot Wheels cars as a kid—both men and women—I always write with an extra layer of meaning for those who wish to look with deeper eyes. For those who don’t I would say that Tail of the Dragon is a very entertaining work that demands a second read just because the pace of the novel is very fast, and very intense, which is very much on purpose. But I personally enjoy the added layers of meaning in anything I read or write. I always look deeply into every subject, even if it means walking across the street. So it gives me great pleasure to see that one of the first readers who bought Tail of the Dragon off Amazon was able to see the added meanings that I placed within the storyline.
Even better is that the review appears to be from a woman, which gives me great hope that the audience for Tail of the Dragon will be diverse and not gender specific, which has always been my hope. Women typically aren’t interested in car crashes and high speed, mountainous roadways, but they are interested in the kind of men who are. The plot of Tail of the Dragon explores the reason, and that insight was not lost on the reviewer, which for me is the highest compliment. The review can be seen below:
“I just finished this book this morning and it evoked such feeling that I wrote this review immediately. This book speaks to what the “American Spirit” is. It’s not tangible or even fully describable, but we all know it when we see it. I think most of the people in this country have become scared and miserable because we suppress it. We are so worried about offending someone or becoming socially exiled that we fight against the light that shines within. We turn that light off so that we can conform and become socially acceptable to the masses. What is lost in this is our individual greatness. This greatness in each of us is what has fueled American ingenuity and progress throughout history. It created American exceptionalism. Now, we are all expected to be equal. No one is better than anyone else. We are all supposed to take our place and shut our mouths. It is this mentality that will put out the American fire. The fact is that we are NOT all equal. Some people ARE better than others. And that is okay. This is what makes us great. By attempting to level the playing field and give every person an equal chance, we bring down those who are great. The sky is no longer the limit and we all fail equally together. What Rich Hoffman has done in this book is materialize in fictional characters what all Americans, whether they admit it or not, wish they could do; throw caution to the wind and “flip the bird” at the proverbial “man.” His characters speak true to the corrupt collaborative nature of today’s politics and offers a view into how the tides could change if we defy today’s culture. Bravo and well done!”
The link to the Amazon site and the original review is:
Comments like that make all the hours and thought that go into a novel worth the time and effort. If a hundred people told me that they didn’t like the novel, it would not matter because I know that there are people like that reviewer out there in the world who can read a book like Tail of the Dragon and see clearly the emotions it evokes, and that gives me great hope for the human race.
It is not good to always do what one tells you to do. It is good and healthy to thumb your nose at the law from time to time. It is healthy to worry first about the contents of your spousal relationships and not give a damn what societies opinion is of it. Those and many more are the types of themes explore in Tail of the Dragon and while I explore many factual diatribes here at the OW just learning facts and figures won’t help alter the course of the human race, which is needed due to the problems of the day.
What is needed is a focus on stories that powerfully exhibit individuality over collectivism, because the human race must relearn the art of independence. And it is the task of the artists to provide content that starts the thought process in that direction. As a writer to receive a review like the first one at Amazon.com it means more to me than any amount of sales receipts, because it tells me that one person in a large ocean of curious minds understood my deeper meanings set against a middle-aged couple in a fixed up old Firebird running for their lives not from the law, but toward freedom at any and all costs.
Thank you!
I learned recently that Amazon.com will not allow comments unless a recent purchase has been made from their website. Not sure why they do that, but that’s the policy they are working under. If you dear reader have read Tail of the Dragon and would like to leave a review, and find you are having a hard time at the Amazon site, it is because of this policy. However, Barnes and Noble.com does not have such a policy, and your comments would be greatly appreciated. You can find the comment section of Tail of the Dragon at the Barnes and Noble link below:
Rich Hoffman
If you like my work at this site then check out my new book Tail of the Dragon along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find one at:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15995766-tail-of-the-dragon
Visit me at Goodreads! Check out my list of top 50 favorite books.
http://www.goodreads.com/RichHoffman
Contact me personally at:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/rich-hoffman/30/92b/832
Bring ’Justice’ to your life on the Kindle or Nook within minutes:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15995901-the-symposium-of-justice
