(no subject)
Dec. 29th, 2004 10:28 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lwoodblooReading Radzinsky's bio of Stalin again.
Radzinsky talks about "in depth language" a whole lot, and it reminds me of this administration. No. Bush is not a communist, but I am comparing him to one. If you read the WHOLE THING I'M ABOUT TO WRITE, NOT WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE, you'd know that.
Diatribe-ended.
In depth language means doing the exact opposite of what you say you're going to do. In essense, it tips you that you must consider the opposite when they say something. I believe that Karl Rove has read this book, honestly. It's too perfect. Too congruent.
When this administration talks about "resource protection", dig deeper. They're talking about how best to exploit the environment.
When they talk about "No Child Left Behind", I think that they're using it to justify leaving children behind in the future.
Don't think of what they do as compassion. Look at all of it as tactical. How does it benefit them, long run, and how does it keep them in office.
Radzinsky talks about "in depth language" a whole lot, and it reminds me of this administration. No. Bush is not a communist, but I am comparing him to one. If you read the WHOLE THING I'M ABOUT TO WRITE, NOT WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE, you'd know that.
Diatribe-ended.
In depth language means doing the exact opposite of what you say you're going to do. In essense, it tips you that you must consider the opposite when they say something. I believe that Karl Rove has read this book, honestly. It's too perfect. Too congruent.
When this administration talks about "resource protection", dig deeper. They're talking about how best to exploit the environment.
When they talk about "No Child Left Behind", I think that they're using it to justify leaving children behind in the future.
Don't think of what they do as compassion. Look at all of it as tactical. How does it benefit them, long run, and how does it keep them in office.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-12-29 07:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-12-29 08:36 am (UTC)Or lying?
no subject
Date: 2004-12-29 09:43 am (UTC)And it's more sophisticated than straight up lying. It's saying one thing, and doing the exact reverse, and making people do the reverse, too.
no subject
Date: 2004-12-29 01:17 pm (UTC)I don't know Orwell at all well.
I must admit to being a bit surprised by that.
no subject
Date: 2004-12-29 02:54 pm (UTC)I know other things better, doc.
no subject
Date: 2004-12-29 03:10 pm (UTC)You should give Orwell a shot. He's pedantic as hell, but wrote from a position of utter conviction and made some truely astute observations of human nature, especially when effected by power.