On Using Facebook, part one

Here is a short sample of a short thread on Facebook.
Here's the original post: "

Wishful thinking?

"Some national polls say yes, and a few say no. But more and more, the data at the state level point to some real movement in Democrats’ favor. At least for now.

Is the 2012 election tilting toward Democrats?

Here is the comment thread:

Mr. C - I have seen a whole lot of optimism from the democrats. To be honest, even given the recent repeated gaffes by Romney's campaign, I still think the optimism is unwarranted. We should not take anything for granted until the polls are closed and counted in my opinion.

Ms. R - I fear many will stay home and not bother. I have no doubt that Mitt's people will crawl to the polls if they have to. Folks have to understand that staying home is the equivalent of voting for Mittens.

Mr. M (me) - Why bother? Unsustainable welfare and endless warfare will be the result. You heard it here first.

Mr. C -  there you go again Mr. M., lol. I know we sort of had this convo before, and I know we actually agree on many of the negative aspects of this country's government, its policies, and influences. But we still disagree on the choice to not choose. I would ask you, what is the alternative? I said it before, the politicians and businesses would love for us to stay home on election day. They won't stay home, and the country will move on despite our inaction. I know you believe that the time will come when we as a populous will stand up and say no more. But I don't see it. Too much division, too much greed, too many who have given up, given in, or fallen by the wayside, and not enough who are fed up. To be honest I think the closest we will come in our lifetime is to break the two-party cycle. I do believe that we will get to a point where some independent will win or make enough of a dent to motivate real change. But there is no revolt coming, and people who just decide to opt out are doing no more than letting others decide for them. Mr. G will tell you as he's said many times... there WILL be other candidates on the ballots. Find out who they are and what they stand for. Vote for one of them instead, but vote. The revolt you're waiting for only begins when politicians see that we are disgusted with the popular choices, and when people see that there are other options to be had. If that revolution is coming man, let me know when you see it and I will be right there with you, but until then, show your disdain through participation, not inaction. I'm going to try and convince you every time you post brother!

Mr. M (me) - there are many alternatives Mr. P. These online dialogues we have are just one of the countless alternatives for us. We are people, fathers, humans, adults - all interested in some basic good things like family and community and non-violence. I don't think any of this has to do with the 'choices' at the ballot box. Look at election 2012. Obama = War, big bank, kill list, Gitmo, NDAA, Patriot Act, anti Muslim hysteria, TSA grope - and that's just what I can think of here at the table while my 3 girls are in the house - the baby sleeping in the next room. This 'choice' you speak of is, to me, not just a Hobson's choice, but an affront to humanity. These are our 'leaders'? Not in my world. I mean that in all seriousness. I don't necessarily see an 'uprising' of the electorate standing up and saying 'no more', I see people quietly breaking away from the force, fraud and coercion foisted upon them. My 'revolt' is working with young folk, getting them to question authority, think independently, and write their own scripts in life. Mr. P., I see some disgust already, as I've told you with many of our young people, so feel free to join in. There is much less pro Obama rhetoric from the teens, and they recognize a rigged game. Romney is a cypher - he barely exists. (if only it were true....) hahaha - and I'll work on you for the next 6 weeks to convince you to not vote!! I'll give you a pass if you write in Ron Paul.....

I have taken a position that echoes Phyllis Schlafly's from the '60's - that we should have a "choice, not an echo".  As a libertarian, the bedrock principle is the non-aggression principle, and neither candidate comes remotely close to such a standard.  Not only that, we touched upon the fallacy of ad Verecundiam, the fallacy of authority.  This was brought to my attention in college while studying the Milgram experiments, and then galvanized by Larken Rose and his calling it "the most dangerous superstition".  I think my views will win the day, as the speed of information continues to increase, and the establishment tightens its grip on power, clinging to the falsehoods and the violence.  Many people are realizing that the emperor has no clothes, and the numbers keep growing.

Here's a sample of Larken Rose's work: