PROMETHEAN ANTAGONIST

Don't vote for the Republicans…vote against the Democrats.

The midterm elections are less than a month away and the media and their opinion polls are telling us that the Republicans are about to have their power wrested from them by America's new party of socialist statism (the neo-Comm. Democrat Party). Some say it would serve their right. Even many conservatives are disappointed, to say the least, in the Republican Party. Libertarians – many who opposed the action in Iraq – are equally dissatisfied with a party that has historically been more free market than their redistribute the wealth collectivist opposition. In some ways I'd have to agree with many of these points of concern. The Republican Party has hardly lived up to prior values espoused. Many in the Republican Party can still talk the talk (the Reagan / Goldwater legacy) but definitely can't walk the walk.

Republicans, including their party's head – the current president – have spent recklessly, are hardly a party of small decentralized government, and they seem to care little that a massive portion of the country is actively being overtaken by illegal immigrants whose contributions are little in comparison to their demand for "rights" they are clearly not entitled to as illegals. (This issue has nothing to do with legal immigrants who have always, ultimately, contributed to America's progress).

The Republicans, as a party (there are rare exceptions within the party of course), are indeed due to be tossed out of office. A couple of decades ago this would have meant a few years of a more "liberal" public policy. 'Definitely not the case this time. The Democrats have been heisted by a dominant wing of socialist fanatics. They are now the party of George Soros, Michael Moore, Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Maxine Waters, et al. Some of the Democrats' most prominent figureheads are 9/11 conspiracy theorists and admirers of Fidel Castro (hardly -- John F. -- "Kennedy Democrats"). It is not completely fanciful to say that they want America to lose in Iraq if not the general confrontation with Islamo-fascism itself. To many of these socialists, America is a bad country, its citizens undeserving of the prosperity they themselves have produced and ripe for reigning in by a bureaucratic authority that impels allegiance to "the common good" (their favorite meaningless euphemism of late).

Be assured, a Republican victory in the coming election would mean virtually nothing in the way of change or rolling back the authority of centralized intrusive government. But, be equally assured that the Democrats gaining control would be a new era of Euro-style socialism and anti-free market dogma made into law, with accompanying lower levels of prosperity and individual freedom, not to mention prostrating the country before the forces of Islamic terrorism and states run by ideologies of radical authoritarianism.

The national security issue is a problem that shouldn't be taken lightly. For all their clownishness, there is no question that the Republican Party has a clearer view of how to confront an axis of evil (firstly, by acknowledging that there is indeed such a thing). We – the civilized world as a whole – are at war again with a totalitarian mindset. Islamo-fascism and its allies in various strains of radical socialism are determined to bring down the American "hegemon" that has sought to spread the concept of open, free, constitutional society. Hugo Chavez (and assorted Latin American friends), North Korea, Iran, and Al Queda (to name a few) are clear and vocal about their desire to finish off the fortunate historical circumstance of a society that is both free and powerful. The rabble of fascist / socialist sentiment has active facilitators in media, "education," and entertainment, and in one of America's prominent political parties – the Democrats.

Anyone with genuine libertarian views regarding the values of diverse open society and freedom will not look favorably upon the Republican Party, but the other choice is definitely far worse; appeasement with dictators, active pursuit of a more intrusive bureaucratic monolith, and war against the values of individualism and free commerce.

The mainstream media will continue to paint a dire image of the Republicans' chances of retaining power in congress and to hype insignificant "scandals" like the Foley e-mails to pages comedy (a similar "scandal" by Democrats would be spun as an issue of "persecuting" a gay congressman). Of late, a clear scandal involving Harry Reid's financial transactions has been all but swept under the rug by the mainstream media.

The media's response to a potentially looming switch in power between parties is the opposite of what they had done when it was the Republicans who stood to unseat a 40 year long Democrat majority congress. It was then that the media concocted the idea of the "angry white male" voter. In the current instance, a supposedly insightful public rebels against corrupt Republican legislators, in the mid 90's it was the public itself that was depicted as flawed, choosing to end Democrat power merely (supposedly) because passionate voters were "angry," "white," and "male."

Current opinion polls may not be entirely accurate (the same polls constantly saw a serious challenge from John Kerry in the last presidential election). The media is actively facilitating the cause of the Democrat party (as it always has) in the hopes of at least discouraging Republican voters from bothering to vote.

A Democrat victory would ensure that congressional committees would be headed by some very left wing fools and idealistic control freaks. The majority leader of the House of Representatives would be Nancy Pelosi ("rhymes with witch") – a millionaire socialist (not a new concept). It's no secret that one of the first lines of business in a Democrat dominated legislature would be to clog the apparatus of government with a frivolous attempt to impeach George Bush, Vice President Cheney, and of course to remove the left's much hated secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. These critics are the very people who also earlier uttered the same words of concern regarding Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction as the Bush administration did. They voted to hold the Hussein regime accountable to numerous U.N. resolutions, and twice voted to not remove forces from Iraq! These are the same people who call interception of suspected terrorist communications, "spying on Americans" and daily show greater concern for the terrorists of Guantanamo Bay than the citizens of America.

However one may view George Bush, the constructed reputation he's been given by intellectuals, media snobs, and elitists socialists in education and entertainment is hardly an accurate appraisal of the guy who clearly acknowledges who our enemies are and how they must be confronted.

The economy is doing very well, though one would never know it from press accounts. The war with fundamentalist fascist Islam is being fought with at least awareness that they're the enemy.

If you want higher taxes, punitive laws against the production of new, cheaper, and more efficient products, and active appeasement and sympathy for totalitarian ideologies, by all means vote for Democrats, they'll definitely give you all that and then some.

If you realize at this important juncture in history that you must support the "lesser of two evils," then hold your breath and vote for the Republican candidates, at least then you'll be demonstrating a resistance to an elite clique of social planners who already dominate too much of our society and our lives – leftland's "philosophers, "aritistes," and academics who seek to once more build a new world, with them in charge, all a far cry from the more banal and infinitely less harmful epitaph, "pro-business."

It's the nature of Robin Hood that he never robs himself.

Expressing "outrage" regarding the circumstance of the poor is quite easy. Demanding that others continually pay for the poor (or be punished for not being poor themselves) is equally easy to do.

Finding a leftist who actually directs their own energy, time, and money to help anyone is rare – finding one who's genuine efforts match their dogmatic demands on others; nearly nonexistent.

Nowhere today is the concept of "be nice to your enemy" more bizarrely displayed than in the limp and pampered realm of Euro-Socialist Land. Not all Europeans of course have bought into this self-destructive P.C. nonsense but the one's that have, as in America, pull a lot of strings in media and education.

Amir Taheri has an excellent overview of "pre-emptive obedience" at FrontPageMag.com.

"...In most European countries, an official black of list of books has emerged, containing works deemed to be "hurtful to Muslim sentiments". The list includes the names not only of such major European authors as Voltaire and Thomas Carlyle but also of Muslim writers whose work has been translated into European languages. For example, the novel Haji Agha by Sadeq Hedayat, translated into French and published in the 1940s, is no longer available. The novel Four Pains by Cyrus Farzaneh has also disappeared from French bookshops and libraries along with The Master by Darvish...."

Taheri's essay reminded me that; if one word were to overwhelmingly encompass the positive attributes of the American people, the word would be, "disobedience."

Europe's obedience of late is going to land it into one giant Burka if they don't soon come to their senses and realize they are under siege again from totalitarianism.

The threats continue. As the U.S. keeps insisting it has no plans to invade North Korea (a statement that I'm gonna say has appeared pretty realistic over the last fifty years or so), the mere threat of more sanctions has been enough to elicit further threats of war to both the U.S. and Japan, with hints of attack against their pathetically naïve "brothers" to the south (many younger people in South Korea actually believe the U.S. is their greatest enemy – score another point for public "education" and left wing news media). If the North Korean "socialist experiment" (one of many dismal failures) is so grand why is it in constant need of subsidies from everyone else? Sanctions should mean nothing to a country that is successful and "has a superior system."

I realize that North Korea is the an embodiment of the left wing world view manifest to it's most maximum state of lunacy, but in more mundane terms, it's soooo typical – they've destroyed any possibility of producing an effective economy (i.e. they've outlawed capitalism – human nature) and, like their friends in Cuba, they're now destitute and poverty stricken and their only response can be; "give us money! Give us food! Give us stuff! Do what we demand, NOW, or we'll threaten war!" It's kind of difficult to argue the relativists' positions when one side is so overwhelmingly juvenile and aggressive yet, the international clown parade of leftist fog dwellers continues to pound out the view that the U.S. is equally, or more, at fault for things as they now stand. Any aggressive statement or action by North Korea is portrayed as just another example of how the United States or its current president have offended its "dear" absolute dictator.

So, just how long are we going to have to play along with this kind of nonsense? The North Koreans have, or are actively refining their capacity to produce, a devastating weapon, and the milquetoast-left can only whine about the need to talk more. Will such fools ever get a clue?

China and Russia, though in the end coming around to a sober stance, were initially against the use of effective sanctions against their totalitarian pal. Sympathy to a ruthless dictator to be expected from two countries both worthy of sanctions themselves. Anyone with decent capacity to appraise the character of North Korea and its "leader" could see the risk posed to any country in proximity to their weapons. As history shows again and again, Communists have a great capacity to turn on each other with more passion than that directed against their capitalist targets of venom.

I personally think the capitalist world should pull the plug on any assistance of any kind to countries who have declared war upon free open society. If you hate the free market than wallow in your own socialist excrement as North Korea and Cuba have been doing since their "revolutions." This should be done on a micro scale as well as there are plenty of entertainers, journalists, and academics living well off the capitalist gland while they continually seek to undermine the very source of their power and wealth.

As with the Islamo-fascist regime in Iran, the civilized world now has to deal with institutions and ideologies that will potentially devastate populations in the hundreds of thousands if not millions, and for what? The glorious success of imposing ruthless one-party police states – and perhaps getting rid of all those pesky Starbucks franchises.

At the same time we have clowns like Ted Turner uttering their usual nonsense about their struggle to decide which side they're gonna be on in the issues of the day – Islamo-fascism and the "Dear Leader" or prosperous multi-value free society. 'Hard choice to make indeed.

Regarding North Korea, remember, it's all Bush's fault. He called them part of an axis of evil, when they're obviously not?

Socialism sucks. Radical Socialism; beyond words.

What's it gonna take for some to see the writing on the wall?

I don't suppose there's any law that says I have to only write about political and cultural issues on this site. In any event, I'm too busy to deal with the usual blog rant. I'm just posting here what I have on my Promethean Visions site -- a list of recommended classical music tunes that I had recently sent to a friend.

The following is definitely not an exhaustive list of excellent music. The pieces listed are just a quick overview of works I have personally found quite satisfying. I could easily add many more and have probably forgotten a few that are better than some of those listed.

note: some of the more obscure composers (i.e. Stenhammar, Berwald etc.) can be found on the Naxos label -- a recording company that has recorded some excellent music that was difficult to find in earlier days.

********************************


Baroque :

Bach – Concerto for two keyboards in C minor (harpsichord or piano versions both sound good even though there were no pianos when Bach wrote the piece). The best recording I know of this piece can be found on the soundtrack to Stanley Kubrick's aesthetically pristine film; "Barry Lyndon" (the other music on the soundtrack is good also, particularly a piano trio by Schubert).

Bach – Cantata # 21. Only the one directed by Karl Richter – Deutsche Gramophone Archive label -- is worthy, in my opinion. Other recordings, in the interest of sounding authentic to the time the piece was written, lack the drive of Richter's interpretation.

Bach -- Magnificat (again, I think that Karl Richter conducting is best)

Classical:

Franz Berwald – All four of his Symphonies (wrote in the Romanic Period, but in the Classical style). This guy is grossly underrated! Because he continued to write in the Classical style, he was no doubt seen as not being "innovative" and had been less appreciated for the beauty and form of his compositions then his works actually merit.

Beethoven – His grandiose works are well known and definitely masterpieces of Romantic profundity but Symphony # 8 is a gem of absolute perfection -- a rather "retro" piece in the style of his teacher, Haydn.

Romantic:

Brahms -- A German Requiem.

Wagner – The overtures to, Die Meistersinger, Tannhauser, and Parsifal

Anton Bruckner – Symphonies # 4 – 6 – 8 – 9. Symphonies number five and seven have some rather majestic moments as well. These are very difficult pieces that require several listening but are absolutely awesome once you "get" them. Bruckner will probably always be an acquired taste.

Nationalist:

Sibelius – Violin Concerto, and Symphony # 5 (the finale is superb).

Stenhammar – Symphony # 2. Way underrated! This is a first class masterpiece of technical and aesthetic brilliance.

Glazunov – Symphony # 2 and virtually all of his other works. His many suites are akin to small symphonies in beauty and perfection. It should be noted that he was Shostakovich's teacher.

Modern:

Stravinsky – The Firebird and The Rite of Spring (of course).

Vaughn Williams – Symphony # 5

William Walton – Symphony # 1 (the introduction is among the most spectacular in the symphonic literature).

Ravel – Piano concerto in G (especially note the nostalgic melancholy beauty of the middle movement).

Hindemith – Symphony in E-flat.

Shostakovich – Symphonies # 4 – 5 – 7 – and 11 (the finale to the 7th is magnificent). The 4th is extremely modern, abstract, and difficult, and it wasn't performed till decades after it was written because communist governments will lock you away for writing music they don't like - it wasn't accessible to "the people" (typical of what we know of "political correctness" – i.e. leftwing political extremism).

Copeland – Symphony # 3.

Howard Hanson – Symphony # 3 (A beautiful work of neo-Romanticism).

Gorecki – Symphony # 3 can easily be listed as among the most beautiful pieces of music ever written (in my opinion). His other two symphonies are completely different and aren't very impressive. His Keyboard concerto is quite interesting.

Sakamoto – Almost all this guy's film score music is fabulous particularly the themes written for the film, "The Last Emperor." -- best to find a compilation of his music.

Ligeti – "Atmospheres" and "Requiem" (both can be found on the soundtrack to the film, "2001: A Space Odyssey"). Don't be fooled into initially thinking these pieces are just gimmicks with ambient sound. They have all the structural integrity of a Beethoven symphony and are brilliant in using washes of Harmony rather than traditional melodic lines. The flux between harmony and dissonance in these works is fascinating.

John Corigliano – Symphony # 1. On first hearing, don't be deceived into thinking this is just noise – it's actually a beautiful masterpiece skillfully structured and awash in complex harmonies. Also, the film score to, "The Red Violin" by this same composer is a quite beautiful (and accompanies a movie of equal beauty and drama).

Minimalism :

Phillip Glass – Film Scores to, "Koyannisquatsi" and "The Fog of War."

Steve Reich – The Four Sections and Music for large ensemble. Hypnotic minimalism that's never mechanical (as some may think of minimalism in general). Repetition in these pieces is a mere illusion, as they both grow in an organic way akin to fractal patterns in nature.

Others have certainly made note of the following but it bears repeating:

Have you noticed that the "talking points" of Al Zawahiri, Bin Laden, Castro, Hugo Chavez, and Kim Jong Il et al. regarding George Bush, and America in general, are virtually identical to those of the Democratic Party leadership and garden variety leftists throughout the world?

Mere Coincidence? I think not.

It should be further noted that such "perspectives" involving America specifically were certainly afloat long before the current Iraq conflict, 9/11, or even the fall of the Berlin Wall. The left and its new friend in fervent authoritarian Islam consistently oppose the values of individual freedom for their more favored glories of an omnipotent state. To the left, the spread of democratic free society is "Hitler" and any style of authoritarian government is preferable to one where George Bush merely finishes out his term or another Starbucks franchise opens its doors.

The good news – to people like me at least – is that by focusing virtually all of their passions and excess against a simple guy from Texas, "progressives" will be completely without a platform when Bush is gone in two years. A dumb move on their part to be sure but they never really had a valid point to make in the first place. While a President's program of pre-emption or civil conflict in a middle-eastern country may be a worthy topic of debate it hardly merits the venom that our latest batch of Jacobins has been able to muster.

Again, when your talking points sound more like those of an Islamic Fascist terrorist or Communist dictators don't be surprised when you crash and burn in the public forum of ideas. In the grand scheme of things, the much awaited resurgence of the Democratic Party may turn out to be somewhat disappointing. They're neither the party of "the little guy" (George Soros and Michael Moore?) or a party of sane debate directed in America's interests. They may score points with Kofi Annan and a few authoritarian kings of sound-bite, but they turned the little guy off long ago.