First , I would like to thank you for all your posts bring a clearer insight into our tainted history and why things in our country are in the dire shape there in. If there was just one of you that each of us could have had as a history / civic teacher in our grade, elementary and high school years.... this mess we're in could have been prevented. That would have required allot of you's..... and all we received were a lot of deaf, dumb and blind ones.
so thank you, Better Late than Never.................................................
As a student of yours, I would like to offer my 'take' on the ' how' these Devils think the way they do. Actually, these ideas come from the mind of Taylor Sheridan whom I believe is trying to educate us in that hypothesis.
If anyone who reads this.... watched the series
'Yellowstone' they would surely agree that the Dutton family is one ruthless and clearly one murderous family. Still, the audience of that show still likes them. Mainly, I surmise because they mostly fight against Corporate America whom most Americans find utterly
deplorable. But, if you keep an open mind in following the scripts of each episode.... both rival factions share the same filthy qualities.
Both have coveted someone else's properties... In the Duttons case it was the Indians.... And now Corporate America wants the Duttons Empire. Their both ruthless, unmerciful and regard human life lightly.
In my mind, Taylor Sheridan is describing America's role in it's foreign policies. Two devils fighting for dominance over this World Resources.
But to learn why they act that way, Taylor gives us the 'Back Pre- History' to the show Yellowstone with his shows 1883 + 1923.
Specifically, I would like to bring into focus
the 1923 series Disc 2, Episode 1
In this scene Elsa, whom we're introduced to in the the earlier series 1883 is now dead but Sheridan is using her as a haunting mouthpiece to describe the 'sins ' behind the Dutton's family history.
In this scene, Cara, whom is in the wife of her husband Jacob... who is the great -great grandfather of John Dutton III in the present Yellowstone series. ....... Is seen praying to the sky after her husband is left almost dead, his cattle stolen and her ranch " ravaged by the wolves" of society- - - and her whole life is under attack by those whom which mean to harm them.
Sheridan allows Elsa to explain to the audience what she sees and knows about her family:
"Elsa: there are only 3 answers to a prayer:
"Yes","not yet", and "I have something else in mind for you". Man's greatest challenge is trusting "not yet" or "something else".. And avoiding the foolish notion of Hope. Wishing to nothing that your unanswered prayer is granted. Hope is the surrender of authority to your fate and trusting to it to the whims of the wind. MY FAMILY DOES NOT HOPE.
We FIGHT for what WE BELIEVE until we have it or we are destroyed by the pursuit."
So, at first ,this declaration of bravery sounds honorable. Their not going to take NO SHIT from anyone.... We'll Fight to the Death before we succumb to your evil will.
There will be no compromise. Only one winner and one loser... It will be All or Nothing.
But here is where Taylor Sheridan demonstrates a 'slight of the hand' at his poker table of explanations.
Because in his series Yellowstone both adversaries have evolved into devils... Both factions filled with murderous and guileful deceit. In the 1923 series this adversary was a 'wronged' Have-Not sheep herder who mingled with a lawless " Have official". And in 1883 series, the Duttons were thrown against the adverse Nature of the environment and other sinful men .......yet in some unexplained way managed to gain the land of the Indians who never believed the Land was theirs too buy or sell.
So in my mind Taylor Sheridan is saying thru Elsa that the Dutton Family does not and will not ever Trust in God.... But only in themselves to ever save themselves from their adversaries
John, I would concur that one fundamental error of the Marxist critique, broadly taken, is the inherent assumption that a centralized government will be benign if populated with Marxists, or those purporting to be Marxists. This has not, at least in this stage of history, been true. Agreed. I think that two things are in play here. One is the over-reliance on centralized structure and the other is the historic corruptibility of those in power, you know, "power corrupts . . ." So, the Founding Fathers were onto something vital when them put checks and balances in the Constitution, but wee unable to find a way (very understandable) how to prevent those very checks and balances themselves from being corrupted by the wealthy class. Our present reality on that rings like a bell, and not the Liberty one!" There is wisdom as well as criticism to be found in a Marxist critique. We need to rescue the baby from the dirty bathwater, as it were. Jon
Would you care to identify the specific wisdom that is in what is unique to Marxism? I ask this question because I believe that what is UNIQUE to Marxism is its theory of social change, and this theory of social change is based on the dangerously wrong notion that social change occurs IN SPITE OF, NOT BECAUSE OF, the subjective values and aims of working class people, specifically in spite of the fact that working class people (according to Marx) do NOT have any subjective aim for a classless society and therefore (according to Marxists in the Soviet Union and now China and Cuba) when Marxists are in power they should NOT allow ordinary people to have the real say in society. This is the reason--Marxism itself!--why Marxists regimes are always profoundly anti-democratic.
So I wonder what part of this fundamentally anti-democratic theory is in your opinion, "the wisdom." (I write about this anti-democratic BASIS of Marxism's unique content at https://www.pdrboston.org/communism-no-socialism-no).
One glaring piece of evidence for what I say about Marxism is this. You will never find a Marxist individual or organization or article that says what I say about ordinary people: The values and aims of most ordinary people are the values and aims that should shape all of society and making this happen is the purpose of revolution. Marxists flat out disagree with this view of ordinary people. Marxists say essentially the following: "The values and aims of ordinary people are the same selfish values and aims ("we want more for ourselves"--trade union mentality) of capitalists because ordinary people lack class consciousness and their thinking is dominated by the hegemonic ideology of the capitalist ruling class; only when led by Communists do working class people act properly and until Communists transform them into new Socialist Man and Socialist Woman in the future will ordinary working class people be fit to have a real say in society." For Marxists, the importance of the working class has nothing to do with its subjective aims and values but rather the fact that it was at the bottom of the social hierarchy and its advance would entail the advance of all others as well.
Where is the "wisdom" in this uniquely Marxist theory?
Regarding the Founding Fathers, the something that they were onto (to use your phrase) when they put checks and balances in the Constitution was this: a way to prevent too much governmental power from falling into the hands of a single person or a single group of people. The Founding Fathers in this regard were thinking about how to prevent the re-emergence of a monarchy (all power in one person).
The mistake we make is in ignoring the fact that the Founding Fathers DID want ALL power to be in the hands of their wealthy propertied class, and definitely not in the hands of ordinary people whose efforts to achieve genuine equality (such as the Shays's Rebellion which the Constitution was written in response to and for the purpose of making sure that the upper class would have a strong federal government to suppress) the Founding Fathers feared. G. Washington as president suppressed with federal troops the Whiskey Rebellion (a rebellion against class inequiality) that broke out shortly after the Constitution was written. I wrote about this at https://johnspritzler.substack.com/p/the-us-founding-fathers-were-enemies?r=1iggn .
John,
First , I would like to thank you for all your posts bring a clearer insight into our tainted history and why things in our country are in the dire shape there in. If there was just one of you that each of us could have had as a history / civic teacher in our grade, elementary and high school years.... this mess we're in could have been prevented. That would have required allot of you's..... and all we received were a lot of deaf, dumb and blind ones.
so thank you, Better Late than Never.................................................
As a student of yours, I would like to offer my 'take' on the ' how' these Devils think the way they do. Actually, these ideas come from the mind of Taylor Sheridan whom I believe is trying to educate us in that hypothesis.
If anyone who reads this.... watched the series
'Yellowstone' they would surely agree that the Dutton family is one ruthless and clearly one murderous family. Still, the audience of that show still likes them. Mainly, I surmise because they mostly fight against Corporate America whom most Americans find utterly
deplorable. But, if you keep an open mind in following the scripts of each episode.... both rival factions share the same filthy qualities.
Both have coveted someone else's properties... In the Duttons case it was the Indians.... And now Corporate America wants the Duttons Empire. Their both ruthless, unmerciful and regard human life lightly.
In my mind, Taylor Sheridan is describing America's role in it's foreign policies. Two devils fighting for dominance over this World Resources.
But to learn why they act that way, Taylor gives us the 'Back Pre- History' to the show Yellowstone with his shows 1883 + 1923.
Specifically, I would like to bring into focus
the 1923 series Disc 2, Episode 1
In this scene Elsa, whom we're introduced to in the the earlier series 1883 is now dead but Sheridan is using her as a haunting mouthpiece to describe the 'sins ' behind the Dutton's family history.
In this scene, Cara, whom is in the wife of her husband Jacob... who is the great -great grandfather of John Dutton III in the present Yellowstone series. ....... Is seen praying to the sky after her husband is left almost dead, his cattle stolen and her ranch " ravaged by the wolves" of society- - - and her whole life is under attack by those whom which mean to harm them.
Sheridan allows Elsa to explain to the audience what she sees and knows about her family:
"Elsa: there are only 3 answers to a prayer:
"Yes","not yet", and "I have something else in mind for you". Man's greatest challenge is trusting "not yet" or "something else".. And avoiding the foolish notion of Hope. Wishing to nothing that your unanswered prayer is granted. Hope is the surrender of authority to your fate and trusting to it to the whims of the wind. MY FAMILY DOES NOT HOPE.
We FIGHT for what WE BELIEVE until we have it or we are destroyed by the pursuit."
...................................... ............................
So, at first ,this declaration of bravery sounds honorable. Their not going to take NO SHIT from anyone.... We'll Fight to the Death before we succumb to your evil will.
There will be no compromise. Only one winner and one loser... It will be All or Nothing.
......................................................................
But here is where Taylor Sheridan demonstrates a 'slight of the hand' at his poker table of explanations.
Because in his series Yellowstone both adversaries have evolved into devils... Both factions filled with murderous and guileful deceit. In the 1923 series this adversary was a 'wronged' Have-Not sheep herder who mingled with a lawless " Have official". And in 1883 series, the Duttons were thrown against the adverse Nature of the environment and other sinful men .......yet in some unexplained way managed to gain the land of the Indians who never believed the Land was theirs too buy or sell.
...............................................................
So in my mind Taylor Sheridan is saying thru Elsa that the Dutton Family does not and will not ever Trust in God.... But only in themselves to ever save themselves from their adversaries
....................................................
But my takeaway is;
Always Trust in God to Save You.... He Will
But know when you are dealing with DEVILS
or just misguided Children of God..... The actions that you take will certainly make a major difference in the desired outcome.
Just saying............
John, I would concur that one fundamental error of the Marxist critique, broadly taken, is the inherent assumption that a centralized government will be benign if populated with Marxists, or those purporting to be Marxists. This has not, at least in this stage of history, been true. Agreed. I think that two things are in play here. One is the over-reliance on centralized structure and the other is the historic corruptibility of those in power, you know, "power corrupts . . ." So, the Founding Fathers were onto something vital when them put checks and balances in the Constitution, but wee unable to find a way (very understandable) how to prevent those very checks and balances themselves from being corrupted by the wealthy class. Our present reality on that rings like a bell, and not the Liberty one!" There is wisdom as well as criticism to be found in a Marxist critique. We need to rescue the baby from the dirty bathwater, as it were. Jon
Hi Jon,
Would you care to identify the specific wisdom that is in what is unique to Marxism? I ask this question because I believe that what is UNIQUE to Marxism is its theory of social change, and this theory of social change is based on the dangerously wrong notion that social change occurs IN SPITE OF, NOT BECAUSE OF, the subjective values and aims of working class people, specifically in spite of the fact that working class people (according to Marx) do NOT have any subjective aim for a classless society and therefore (according to Marxists in the Soviet Union and now China and Cuba) when Marxists are in power they should NOT allow ordinary people to have the real say in society. This is the reason--Marxism itself!--why Marxists regimes are always profoundly anti-democratic.
So I wonder what part of this fundamentally anti-democratic theory is in your opinion, "the wisdom." (I write about this anti-democratic BASIS of Marxism's unique content at https://www.pdrboston.org/communism-no-socialism-no).
One glaring piece of evidence for what I say about Marxism is this. You will never find a Marxist individual or organization or article that says what I say about ordinary people: The values and aims of most ordinary people are the values and aims that should shape all of society and making this happen is the purpose of revolution. Marxists flat out disagree with this view of ordinary people. Marxists say essentially the following: "The values and aims of ordinary people are the same selfish values and aims ("we want more for ourselves"--trade union mentality) of capitalists because ordinary people lack class consciousness and their thinking is dominated by the hegemonic ideology of the capitalist ruling class; only when led by Communists do working class people act properly and until Communists transform them into new Socialist Man and Socialist Woman in the future will ordinary working class people be fit to have a real say in society." For Marxists, the importance of the working class has nothing to do with its subjective aims and values but rather the fact that it was at the bottom of the social hierarchy and its advance would entail the advance of all others as well.
Another key aspect of Marxism's social change theory is the notion that capitalism is a necessary stage of development. This is why Marx said that despite being undeniably brutal, British Imperialism in India was necessary. Read his letter saying this at https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1853/06/25.htm . This is why the Communist Party of China--which is indeed Marxist--promotes billionaire capitalism that horribly oppresses workers, as I discuss at https://johnspritzler.substack.com/p/xi-jinpings-and-joe-bidens-good-cop?r=1iggn .
Where is the "wisdom" in this uniquely Marxist theory?
Regarding the Founding Fathers, the something that they were onto (to use your phrase) when they put checks and balances in the Constitution was this: a way to prevent too much governmental power from falling into the hands of a single person or a single group of people. The Founding Fathers in this regard were thinking about how to prevent the re-emergence of a monarchy (all power in one person).
The mistake we make is in ignoring the fact that the Founding Fathers DID want ALL power to be in the hands of their wealthy propertied class, and definitely not in the hands of ordinary people whose efforts to achieve genuine equality (such as the Shays's Rebellion which the Constitution was written in response to and for the purpose of making sure that the upper class would have a strong federal government to suppress) the Founding Fathers feared. G. Washington as president suppressed with federal troops the Whiskey Rebellion (a rebellion against class inequiality) that broke out shortly after the Constitution was written. I wrote about this at https://johnspritzler.substack.com/p/the-us-founding-fathers-were-enemies?r=1iggn .