What Is Your Political Ideology?

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

Simple question.  Requires a bit of reflection for most, not for some.  Not asking for the ideology of your country in particular, although you may wish to champion yours if you believe it superior.

Mine is rather simple (I actually first read it in a book by John Grisham, The Pelican Brief, and, being American, it seemed to align quite well with my personal feeling on the subject.  The beginning of that book, in a way that may be 10-20 years past, sort of sums up the American version of Freedom of Speech, in all its glory.).

Government over business, the individual over government, the environment over everything. And the Indians, give them whatever they want.

Grisham, John. The Pelican Brief (p. 2). Random House Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. 

(Excerpt)

HE SEEMED INCAPABLE of creating such chaos, but much of what he saw below could be blamed on him. And that was fine. He was ninety-one, paralyzed, strapped in a wheelchair, and hooked to oxygen. His second stroke seven years ago had almost finished him off, but Abraham Rosenberg was still alive and even with tubes in his nose his legal stick was bigger than the other eight. He was the only legend remaining on the Court, and the fact that he was still breathing irritated most of the mob below. He sat in a small wheelchair in an office on the main floor of the Supreme Court Building. His feet touched the edge of the window, and he strained forward as the noise increased.

He hated cops, but the sight of them standing in thick, neat lines was somewhat comforting. They stood straight and held ground as the mob of at least fifty thousand screamed for blood. “Biggest crowd ever!” Rosenberg yelled at the window. He was almost deaf. Jason Kline, his senior law clerk, stood behind him. It was the first Monday in October, the opening day of the new term, and this had become a traditional celebration of the First Amendment. A glorious celebration. Rosenberg was thrilled. To him, freedom of speech meant freedom to riot. “Are the Indians out there?” he asked loudly. Jason Kline leaned closer to his right ear. “Yes!” “With war paint?” “Yes! In full battle dress.” “Are they dancing?” “Yes!” The Indians, the blacks, whites, browns, women, gays, tree lovers, Christians, abortion activists, Aryans, Nazis, atheists, hunters, animal lovers, white supremacists, black supremacists, tax protestors, loggers, farmers—it was a massive sea of protest. And the riot police gripped their black sticks.

“The Indians should love me!” “I’m sure they do.” Kline nodded and smiled at the frail little man with clenched fists. His ideology was simple: government over business, the individual over government, the environment over everything. And the Indians, give them whatever they want. The heckling, praying, singing, chanting, and screaming grew louder, and the riot police inched closer together. The crowd was larger and rowdier than in recent years. Things were more tense. Violence had become common. Abortion clinics had been bombed. Doctors had been attacked and beaten. One was killed in Pensacola, gagged and bound into the fetal position and burned with acid. Street fights were weekly events. Churches and priests had been abused by militant gays. White supremacists operated from a dozen known, shadowy, paramilitary organizations, and had become bolder in their attacks on blacks, Hispanics, and Asians. Hatred was now America’s favorite pastime.

Grisham, John. The Pelican Brief (pp. 2-3). Random House Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. 

[Yoshiro Kamamura + 274]

As an old saying goes, there will be no peace, till there is justice and equal rights. If there are groups in the USA that are consistently ostracized, excluded, shorted on wages and denied opportunities, not to mention facing good old direct violence (even in 1960, when first black girl went to a white school, she had to have constant police escort), it is a sure recipe to destabilize the society. The other problem is income disparity. At the beginning of 20th century, a director of a factory had income that equaled ten times of the income of a common worker. Today? ten thousand, even hundred thousand times. It can only be descried as pure insanity.

Look at Activision/Blizzard in 2019, for example - they had a good year, and yet they laid off 1/8th of employees to artificially "improve" the financial results. The management did not care that this step gutted the company, because seeing this, much old talent has left the company, and it lost its ability to deliver good products. What mattered that after laying off all those hard-working people, the top management could pay themselves extra bonuses for "exceeding investor expectations".

These immoral excesses have of course lasting effect on the whole society. The original idea was that hardworking people have a chance to rise on the social ladder, today, hardworking people find out that no matter how hard they work, basic necessities like healthcare, adequate living or basic financial security are further and further away, as those select few who dictate the rules through bought politicians tighten up the screws. 

During most of the 20th century, western leaders tamed their greed, because they were afraid of the worldwide revolution of the working classes. Now that fear is gone, it seems. 

 

Edited June 21, 2020 by Yoshiro Kamamura

[Hotone + 412]

7 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Simple question.  Requires a bit of reflection for most, not for some.  Not asking for the ideology of your country in particular, although you may wish to champion yours if you believe it superior.

Mine is rather simple (I actually first read it in a book by John Grisham, The Pelican Brief, and, being American, it seemed to align quite well with my personal feeling on the subject.  The beginning of that book, in a way that may be 10-20 years past, sort of sums up the American version of Freedom of Speech, in all its glory.).

Government over business, the individual over government, the environment over everything. And the Indians, give them whatever they want.

Grisham, John. The Pelican Brief (p. 2). Random House Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. 

(Excerpt)

HE SEEMED INCAPABLE of creating such chaos, but much of what he saw below could be blamed on him. And that was fine. He was ninety-one, paralyzed, strapped in a wheelchair, and hooked to oxygen. His second stroke seven years ago had almost finished him off, but Abraham Rosenberg was still alive and even with tubes in his nose his legal stick was bigger than the other eight. He was the only legend remaining on the Court, and the fact that he was still breathing irritated most of the mob below. He sat in a small wheelchair in an office on the main floor of the Supreme Court Building. His feet touched the edge of the window, and he strained forward as the noise increased.

He hated cops, but the sight of them standing in thick, neat lines was somewhat comforting. They stood straight and held ground as the mob of at least fifty thousand screamed for blood. “Biggest crowd ever!” Rosenberg yelled at the window. He was almost deaf. Jason Kline, his senior law clerk, stood behind him. It was the first Monday in October, the opening day of the new term, and this had become a traditional celebration of the First Amendment. A glorious celebration. Rosenberg was thrilled. To him, freedom of speech meant freedom to riot. “Are the Indians out there?” he asked loudly. Jason Kline leaned closer to his right ear. “Yes!” “With war paint?” “Yes! In full battle dress.” “Are they dancing?” “Yes!” The Indians, the blacks, whites, browns, women, gays, tree lovers, Christians, abortion activists, Aryans, Nazis, atheists, hunters, animal lovers, white supremacists, black supremacists, tax protestors, loggers, farmers—it was a massive sea of protest. And the riot police gripped their black sticks.

“The Indians should love me!” “I’m sure they do.” Kline nodded and smiled at the frail little man with clenched fists. His ideology was simple: government over business, the individual over government, the environment over everything. And the Indians, give them whatever they want. The heckling, praying, singing, chanting, and screaming grew louder, and the riot police inched closer together. The crowd was larger and rowdier than in recent years. Things were more tense. Violence had become common. Abortion clinics had been bombed. Doctors had been attacked and beaten. One was killed in Pensacola, gagged and bound into the fetal position and burned with acid. Street fights were weekly events. Churches and priests had been abused by militant gays. White supremacists operated from a dozen known, shadowy, paramilitary organizations, and had become bolder in their attacks on blacks, Hispanics, and Asians. Hatred was now America’s favorite pastime.

Grisham, John. The Pelican Brief (pp. 2-3). Random House Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. 

 

2 hours ago, Yoshiro Kamamura said:

As an old saying goes, there will be no peace, till there is justice and equal rights. If there are groups in the USA that are consistently ostracized, excluded, shorted on wages and denied opportunities, not to mention facing good old direct violence (even in 1960, when first black girl went to a white school, she had to have constant police escort), it is a sure recipe to destabilize the society. The other problem is income disparity. At the beginning of 20th century, a director of a factory had income that equaled ten times of the income of a common worker. Today? ten thousand, even hundred thousand times. It can only be descried as pure insanity.

Look at Activision/Blizzard in 2019, for example - they had a good year, and yet they laid off 1/8th of employees to artificially "improve" the financial results. The management did not care that this step gutted the company, because seeing this, much old talent has left the company, and it lost its ability to deliver good products. What mattered that after laying off all those hard-working people, the top management could pay themselves extra bonuses for "exceeding investor expectations".

These immoral excesses have of course lasting effect on the whole society. The original idea was that hardworking people have a chance to rise on the social ladder, today, hardworking people find out that no matter how hard they work, basic necessities like healthcare, adequate living or basic financial security are further and further away, as those select few who dictate the rules through bought politicians tighten up the screws. 

During most of the 20th century, western leaders tamed their greed, because they were afraid of the worldwide revolution of the working classes. Now that fear is gone, it seems. 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2020 by Hotone

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

So far only criticism of the U.S., no personal ideology?

[Hotone + 412]

36 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

So far only criticism of the U.S., no personal ideology?

Listen to Charlie Munger

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

25 minutes ago, Hotone said:

Listen to Charlie Munger

"Find something that works, and do it."  That is good, but I don't believe upon reflection that Charlie and Warren are getting it from the right source.  I'd say the right source for that is simply "the Greatest Generation", their generation of Americans.  Our father's and grandfather's time.  Having been raised in the U.S., I was constantly exposed to "find something that works, and do it".  Having worked in and spent much time in Singapore, I find their system too stifling, to say the least.  However, I can see how their system, although individually stifling IMHO, works for their society as a whole, at this given time in history, while providing for above standard basic needs, cradle to grave.

[Hotone + 412]

14 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

"Find something that works, and do it."  That is good, but I don't believe upon reflection that Charlie and Warren are getting it from the right source.  I'd say the right source for that is simply "the Greatest Generation", their generation of Americans.  Our father's and grandfather's time.  Having been raised in the U.S., I was constantly exposed to "find something that works, and do it".  Having worked in and spent much time in Singapore, I find their system too stifling, to say the least.  However, I can see how their system, although individually stifling IMHO, works for their society as a whole, at this given time in history, while providing for above standard basic needs, cradle to grave.

That's true.  Yes, there was a lot of things the US got right, historically.  Until greed got in the way...  And when you swapped your WASP values (duty, fair play) and idealism, for 'Jewish' (amoral, money first) values.  😂 .. and Singapore is efficient but overrated.

Edited June 21, 2020 by Hotone

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 minutes ago, Hotone said:

That's true.  Yes, there was a lot of things the US got right, historically.  Until greed got in the way.  When you swapped your WASP values (duty, fair play) and idealism, for 'Jewish' (amoral, money first) values.  😂

I have read quite a bit about Lee Kuan Yew and the formation of Singapore, so I found your comment interesting, if not misguided as it applies to both the U.S. and Singapore.  Example:

Lee Kuan Yew | Biography, Education, Achievements, & Facts ...

www.britannica.com › ... › Prime Ministers

Lee Kuan Yew, politician and lawyer who was the first prime minister of ... When, in the early 1950s, constitutional reform was in the air in Singapore, Lee formed ... Lee's principal aims were to ensure the physical survival of the new state and to ... with a Singaporean force locally trained and patterned on the Israeli model.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

But, that aside, you're still not revealing your personal political ideology?

[Marcin2 + 724]

Political system that balances voices of minority with the need to efficiently govern the country.

- representative democracy,

- multiparty democracy with proportional election system, over 5% of votes in national elections for a party gives seats in national parliament, maybe propotional elections slightly skewed towards large parties to ensure easier establishment of parliamentarian majority. In such system you have 4-7 parties, with 2 parties significantly larger than other. Usually coalition of 2 parties gives majority.

Political system with low political corruption and free speech

- prevention of impact of large or strong interest groups on political parties and politician: very strict rules on lobbyistic activities ( in short I would cirminalize most of lobbyistic activties that are now legal in US, so as to bring it to EU standards),

- cap on the amount individual person can grant to political party, up to equivalent of 1,000 US dollars,

- ban on any donations not made by individuals,

- significant part of party financing (about 50%) through government grants on the basis of last elections (but all parties, even the smallest one, the one that have not made it to the parliament are given money proportionally to the votes),

- caps on the amount of money parties can spent on election campaigns (people not money should govern in democracy),

- easy access to ballot at national level ( it is better to have 15 parties that people can choose from than 2 like in US. Only Republican and Democratic Parties are represented in all 50 states in federal elections to US Congress),

- free access to major media for 4-10 major parties during election campaign).

-This is utopian: At least 1-2 National TV stations and 1-2 national newspapers that are totally unbiased and independent:

a. all news are fact checked, presented in unbiased way. If any issue or news is contentious all opinions and options are presented from left to right,

b. No commercials, long-term financing ( at least for 5 years in advance) through government grants, 

c. Hiring real journalists on the basis of merit for fixed long-term years contracts so as to ensure their independence.

Edited June 22, 2020 by Marcin2
typo

[Hotone + 412]

4 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

But, that aside, you're still not revealing your personal political ideology?

We are not so ideological in this part of the world.  I would say pragmatism.  Democracy is not so important - our votes doesn't do much.  Liberal democracy - meh.  Values are important - social justice, religion or spirituality, no to corruption.  

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

10 hours ago, Yoshiro Kamamura said:

The other problem is income disparity. At the beginning of 20th century, a director of a factory had income that equaled ten times of the income of a common worker. Today? ten thousand, even hundred thousand times. It can only be descried as pure insanity.

What your type fails to mention is how much 30k a year is compared to the lower class earnings at the start of the 20th century. Sure, the top guys earn much more, but you're completely ignoring the fact that the lower class is undeniably richer than ever before. 

[Zhong Lu + 845]

Anti-ideological.  I don't like anyone who has double standards but pretends otherwise. 

Edited June 21, 2020 by Zhong Lu

[SUZNV + 1,197]

Even each person have a ideological, it is call individualism, respect other ideological but apply your ideological rules on yourself first before expect from others. 

I agree with @Marcin2about the organization donation. 

Here the differences IMHO,

Too many parties will not work with too many states with big diversities and big populations. Consequence of many parties will have more permanent standoff and nothing to be done. In the reverse, applying much breaking the standoff mechanism will go back to flavor big parties and come back to the loop. People have freedom to choose to switch to smaller parties are good enough.

Minorities in the US did have all of the civil rights and  that is good enough. Let the market and productivity decides individual value, no skin color should be mentioned at all and that is  the best for minorities. There is no freedom of speech with political correctness that make people afraid of speaking their own mind. If you feel your communities holding you back, try to improve your community first, either neighborhoods or ethnics communities.

Nationalism are needed to make people appreciate what they have now and make sacrifice of their country and not taking things for granted. If a country is productivity enough for competition, no trade tariff will be needed unless the trade partner protect their own markets first. Use nationalism to ensure individualism. No country in the world can be successful without nationalism. You not only want to build a paradise with equal chances and freedom and no race issues, but also you want to maintain it and pass it to the next generation. Everyone can be perfectly nice to each others but will not be able to defense themselves. You need moderate greed to improve your knowledge and productivity, to conquer yourself and moderate nationalism to hold people together otherwise will be scattered by oversea influences (not their fault as they have freedom to try). 

If you were a good person and wish no harm to your citizens, you would not wish to harm to other countries ' citizen unless they invaded you first. 

Chop up all the media corporations into small and should even be local  non-profit organization. If we stop the lobbying systems from organizations, we should stop the media got donate from organizations as well other wise the lobbying simply  from one to another. If you have the medias bad talking about each other and government, then you have the freedom of speech. The media should simply report the events not feeding thoughts. 

If we can cut the organizations form interfering the policies either by lobbying for politician or news, then we can have freedom to manage the most important objectives or meaning of our lives: family, money, knowledge, spirit/religion, security, freedom etc. Money always seek for powers to ensure investments and put barrier to competition. 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2020 by SUZNV

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

Independent if one likes to label a mindset...very strong belief in fundamentals, Originally a Democrat evolved to republican and finalized as a independent. 

Graduated with a degree of political science from the Sears school of politics..keeps the agenda very elegant shall i say.

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

27 minutes ago, SUZNV said:

Chop up all the media corporations into small and should even be local  non-profit organization. If we stop the lobbying systems from organizations, we should stop the media got donate from organizations as well other wise the lobbying simply  from one to another. If you have the medias bad talking about each other and government, then you have the freedom of speech. The media should simply report the events not feeding thoughts. 

If we can cut the organizations form interfering the policies either by lobbying for politician or news, then we can have freedom to manage the most important objectives or meaning of our lives: family, money, knowledge, spirit/religion, security, freedom etc. Money always seek for powers to ensure investments and put barrier to competition. 

Absolutely agree (with the rest of your comment as well).  This is an area that I think Singapore CAN BE held up as a shining example.  They do a pretty good job of holding their media to reporting facts, if not skewed by the government's overriding "good of the society" slant, which I think is positive in the long run. 

And, as far as I know, Singapore does not allow these lobbyists to invade the political process, opting more for a bidding type system where companies or concerns must prove themselves and their product offerings, and openly present themselves for scrutiny.  Alas, this is easy in a city state with only a couple of million occupants and may not be possible in larger countries.  Having said that, the U.S. used to be like that at one time in my life, and our population was about 190 million then.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

My political ideology was best summarized by Robert Heinlein in the original and correct Star Ship Troopers, not the ridiculous movie of the same name, which was so execrable the family sued and won without contest. 

In Heinlein's vision, you're not a citizen until you've served your country, period. I forget the minimum term but I think 2 years. If you're not a citizen you're merely a resident, and you have no say. The problem with democracy today is people with no skin in the game, who haven't sacrificed, merely vote their personal, selfish interests, and follow "politicians" who pander to those purient interests.

When the US was founded in its current form, only land owners could vote. While that seems bad to the myriad liberals here, the value of such a system was that every land owner had their own skin in the game. Voting did not become what it is today, with three wolves and one lamb, "voting" on what to eat for dinner. The Demoncrats know they've only got to tweak the amygdala of their constituents, never mind the intellect. There's a damn good reason the top 20 cities with the worst rioting and looting are heavily democrat. Their race to the bottom will only ensure that the rest of the country gets to enjoy their particular flavor of ineptitude. Like a roach motel, once in never out, once they've got power, they never relinquish it, voters be dammed. Yes there is rampant fraud, but like a tree falling in the forest, as long as they can eliminate any chance of an investigation, no crime was committed

[El Nikko + 2,145]

Is this a politcal idiology?

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

11 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

But, that aside, you're still not revealing your personal political ideology?

My personal political ideology is based on the Constitution of the United States as written by the Founding Fathers along with the Bill of RIghts and other amendments. At present I see that all being degraded by a Supreme Court that has chosen to read whatever they want into it and ignore it when that is the easiest way to go. Their decisions do not change my ideology however. 

I also see the Constitution being degraded by individual states who do not chose to follow federal immigration law, The Second Amendment, etc. This is my PERSONAL ideology. Everyone should have one. It would be a good idea to look at the Democratic Party Platform, The Republican Party Platform, and the Green Party Platform. 

https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2016_DNC_Platform.pdf

https://www.gop.com/the-2016-republican-party-platform/

https://www.gp.org/

Please watch for changes coming in 2020 prior to the election.

Edited June 21, 2020 by ronwagn
addition

[El Nikko + 2,145]

1 hour ago, ronwagn said:

My personal political ideology is based on the Constitution of the United States as written by the Founding Fathers along with the Bill of RIghts and other amendments. At present I see that all being degraded by a Supreme Court that has chosen to read whatever they want into it and ignore it when that is the easiest way to go. Their decisions do not change my ideology however. 

I also see the Constitution being degraded by individual states who do not chose to follow federal immigration law, The Second Amendment, etc. This is my PERSONAL ideology. Everyone should have one. It would be a good idea to look at the Democratic Party Platform, The Republican Party Platform, and the Green Party Platform. 

https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2016_DNC_Platform.pdf

https://www.gop.com/the-2016-republican-party-platform/

https://www.gp.org/

Please watch for changes coming in 2020 prior to the election.

What chance you do give that, that mentality will prevail in the US (or in the west in general) in coming years?

All I can see is a steady push towards left wing politics and no push back from so called conservatives who cede ground at every turn.

If the demographics continue to change then the values will as well, it might not be the most important issue but it's going to affect political results and I find it amazing that still no one notices this.

 

Edited June 21, 2020 by El Nikko

[ronwagn + 6,290]

5 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

My political ideology was best summarized by Robert Heinlein in the original and correct Star Ship Troopers, not the ridiculous movie of the same name, which was so execrable the family sued and won without contest. 

In Heinlein's vision, you're not a citizen until you've served your country, period. I forget the minimum term but I think 2 years. If you're not a citizen you're merely a resident, and you have no say. The problem with democracy today is people with no skin in the game, who haven't sacrificed, merely vote their personal, selfish interests, and follow "politicians" who pander to those purient interests.

When the US was founded in its current form, only land owners could vote. While that seems bad to the myriad liberals here, the value of such a system was that every land owner had their own skin in the game. Voting did not become what it is today, with three wolves and one lamb, "voting" on what to eat for dinner. The Demoncrats know they've only got to tweak the amygdala of their constituents, never mind the intellect. There's a damn good reason the top 20 cities with the worst rioting and looting are heavily democrat. Their race to the bottom will only ensure that the rest of the country gets to enjoy their particular flavor of ineptitude. Like a roach motel, once in never out, once they've got power, they never relinquish it, voters be dammed. Yes there is rampant fraud, but like a tree falling in the forest, as long as they can eliminate any chance of an investigation, no crime was committed

Sadly, the same thing has happened in states as Demoncrats leave the Blue States in droves and turn states like Colorado and New Mexico from Red to Blue. If the voters don't wake up we will be living in a anarcho-socialist hell hole. China will be the global hegemon as the Demoncrats make all sorts of weak deals with them. Then, we will possibly end up in a nuclear war with China because they go too far.  

Edited June 21, 2020 by ronwagn

[ronwagn + 6,290]

35 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

What chance you do give that, that mentality will prevail in the US (or in the west in general) in coming years?

All I can see is a steady push towards left wing politics and no push back from so called conservatives who cede ground at every turn.

If the demographics continue to change then the values will as well, it might not be the most important issue but it's going to affect political results and I find it amazing that still no one notices this.

 

You and I see the same thing coming. Many of us will fight it until our dying day, but only God can save us from communism and he is watching to decide what future we deserve. 

Edited June 21, 2020 by ronwagn
addition

[El Nikko + 2,145]

13 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

You and I see the same thing coming. Many of us will fight it until our dying day, but only God can save us from communism and he is watching to decide what future we deserve. 

We're living in very strange times, that's for sure.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

23 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Simple question.  Requires a bit of reflection for most, not for some.  Not asking for the ideology of your country in particular, although you may wish to champion yours if you believe it superior.

Mine is rather simple (I actually first read it in a book by John Grisham, The Pelican Brief, and, being American, it seemed to align quite well with my personal feeling on the subject.  The beginning of that book, in a way that may be 10-20 years past, sort of sums up the American version of Freedom of Speech, in all its glory.).

Government over business, the individual over government, the environment over everything. And the Indians, give them whatever they want.

Grisham, John. The Pelican Brief (p. 2). Random House Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. 

(Excerpt)

HE SEEMED INCAPABLE of creating such chaos, but much of what he saw below could be blamed on him. And that was fine. He was ninety-one, paralyzed, strapped in a wheelchair, and hooked to oxygen. His second stroke seven years ago had almost finished him off, but Abraham Rosenberg was still alive and even with tubes in his nose his legal stick was bigger than the other eight. He was the only legend remaining on the Court, and the fact that he was still breathing irritated most of the mob below. He sat in a small wheelchair in an office on the main floor of the Supreme Court Building. His feet touched the edge of the window, and he strained forward as the noise increased.

He hated cops, but the sight of them standing in thick, neat lines was somewhat comforting. They stood straight and held ground as the mob of at least fifty thousand screamed for blood. “Biggest crowd ever!” Rosenberg yelled at the window. He was almost deaf. Jason Kline, his senior law clerk, stood behind him. It was the first Monday in October, the opening day of the new term, and this had become a traditional celebration of the First Amendment. A glorious celebration. Rosenberg was thrilled. To him, freedom of speech meant freedom to riot. “Are the Indians out there?” he asked loudly. Jason Kline leaned closer to his right ear. “Yes!” “With war paint?” “Yes! In full battle dress.” “Are they dancing?” “Yes!” The Indians, the blacks, whites, browns, women, gays, tree lovers, Christians, abortion activists, Aryans, Nazis, atheists, hunters, animal lovers, white supremacists, black supremacists, tax protestors, loggers, farmers—it was a massive sea of protest. And the riot police gripped their black sticks.

“The Indians should love me!” “I’m sure they do.” Kline nodded and smiled at the frail little man with clenched fists. His ideology was simple: government over business, the individual over government, the environment over everything. And the Indians, give them whatever they want. The heckling, praying, singing, chanting, and screaming grew louder, and the riot police inched closer together. The crowd was larger and rowdier than in recent years. Things were more tense. Violence had become common. Abortion clinics had been bombed. Doctors had been attacked and beaten. One was killed in Pensacola, gagged and bound into the fetal position and burned with acid. Street fights were weekly events. Churches and priests had been abused by militant gays. White supremacists operated from a dozen known, shadowy, paramilitary organizations, and had become bolder in their attacks on blacks, Hispanics, and Asians. Hatred was now America’s favorite pastime.

Grisham, John. The Pelican Brief (pp. 2-3). Random House Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. 

It doesn't sound much like the movie with Denzel Washington and Julia Roberts. Should I read the book? I loved the movie. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

I'll just put this here.