Little Foot-Stampers and Fist-Shakers

Our Little Gang of Nannies

Nanny Speak or Mob Rule was our comment (below) on the Gang of Eight that got the Times-Standard to publish their vocal animus in the July 22, 2011, My Word. In today's My Word: "Authors failed to do their homework on Atkins" Sue Brandenburg takes exception to their assault on Councilwoman Linda Atkins and other pious and self-righteous statements. To quote:

“The firing of Police Chief Garr Nielsen was the last straw for a large group of people who have endured the incompetency and arrogance coming from some of the city management and some of the past and current city council members.”

She then proceeds to explain what she means by, “incompetency and arrogance.” Also, for those that have the stomach to keep up on the Debt Debate going on with President Obama and the Republican, you can get a real good idea what she's talking about. What soon becomes apparent, along with the “incompetency and arrogance,” is the deceptive swindle that's in play backed up by lies and false accusations. Each side is trying to force or coerce the other side. No one is negotiating in good faith. The irony is, that is exactly how the United States and in particular Barack Obama deals with other peoples and countries of the World. Now it is exactly how he is treating his so-called Republican adversaries and is, in fact, being treated in return.

Looking at the primary letters of which were published here, here and here as My Word articles you'll readily see a couple of common themes: ideologues enforcing their personal beliefs as logic facts. Two, never taking personal responsibility for anything they say or do – And conflating their personal opinions with who and what they believe or think they are as a person. In other words they take EVERYTHING personally. More importantly and one of the reasons the Editors of the Times-Standard had responsibility to NOT publish these peoples' letters is that they use every means to viciously brand or label those that don't believe or agree with their right to judge, in this particular case Councilwoman Linda Atkins, as mental, delusional or not sane. Their actions, stated beliefs justifying their actions when compared to paranoia identifies these people exactly for what they are and what their intent is - BULLIES AND BULLING.

To better understand the connection you need to read the interview with: Norway’s Johan Galtung, Peace & Conflict Pioneer, on How to Stop Extremism that Fueled Shooting - Johan Galtung is a man who’s spent half a century pursuing nonviolent conflict resolution. This comment really caught my attention as our goal here at the Joe Blow Report is to stimulate thinking:

I don’t use the word "terrorist." That’s an American vocabulary, which has found much too much usage. It’s a sign saying, "Stop thinking. He’s just simply bad and evil." 

Galtung's granddaughter, who came to the island on the same boat as Breivik and survived, asks: "How can we prevent movements like the movement Breivik participated in?"

Let me give one answer immediately. Challenge these people on the extreme right in debate. Get them out in public space, in the open. Challenge them. Let me only say one thing. If you want to challenge them, you should have been well prepared. These people are well prepared. Don’t underestimate them—point one. *** And I can only say, having done it, it’s very, very easy. But you have to understand them. That doesn’t mean you have to accept them, but you have to go your portion of the way.

Even more noteworthy was listening to what that guy in Norway, Anders Behring Breivik, said motivated him, what his Christian beliefs are and who he attacked and why. The Guardian Newspaper has a relevant article today on this very subject: Anders Behring Breivik: the truth in delusion - “The case of Anders Breivik in Norway reminds us that the relationship between madness and responsibility is complex”

“Paranoia has three classical components. The paranoiac has located a fault or malignancy in the world, he has named it, and has a message to deliver about it. For Breivik, the conviction is that Europe is rotten, that the name of this rottenness is Islam and that it is his mission to expose and excise it. 

Whereas many schizophrenic subjects experience an invasion inside their body, the paranoiac situates it outside: there is some badness out there in the world. Where for the schizophrenic the other is often too close, intruding into their body; for the paranoiac, self and other are rigidly separated: the other is outside. And hence the paranoiac subject is always innocent: it's the other's fault. 

Paranoia here should be differentiated from paranoid. Anyone can be paranoid, but paranoia as such implies a rigid system of beliefs with explanatory power, according the subject a fixed place in the world: for Breivik, that of the "perfect knight" battling Islam. The other common misunderstanding of paranoia is to assume it always involves persecution. In fact, many paranoiacs locate the malignancy not in a person but in some aspect of the world: a disease; environmental problems; danger to children.” **** 

“The paranoiac's delusion here can be false but it can equally be absolutely true.” ****
“The madness lies not in the content of the beliefs here but in the person's relation to the belief. If certainty about the belief replaces doubt, we are in the realm of psychosis.” **** 

“This nuances the old-fashioned idea that the subject is only responsible for a crime if he "knew the difference between right and wrong", since the central feature of paranoia is precisely that the person does know the difference. That, indeed, is why they are psychotic: they harbour not doubt but utter conviction that what they are doing is the right thing.” [Emphasis added]

When the newspaper publishes these people's letters they are enabling them and facilitating their paranoid delusions. All that does is "grease" the way for the "Anders Behring Breiviks" in Humboldt County.
[Source]

--Joe

Nanny Speak or Mob Rule

Again we witness conservative ideologue believers using the Times-Standard to promote their demagogue and vitriol to divide and alienate the people of Humboldt County while their hypocrisy and duplicity is as repulsive as a pile of cat shit on your kitchen table. “Progress or protest? We need to work together to move forward” is classic in how these wannabe Elitist say one thing and do another. The whole My Word article by Mike Jones, Jeff Leonard, Virginia Bass, Polly Endert, Mary Beth Wolford, Connie Miller, Cherie Arkley and Nancy Flemming is nothing more that a cheap political attack on “progressive” thinking people, in particular Councilwoman Linda Atkins disguised as some Nanny Elite Dictate telling everyone what to believe, what to think and how to act. They seem to think that just because they were elected to the City Council one time or another they are all some sort of authority as God's gift to the rest of us poor, lowly, ignorant rabble, in particular the apparent lone progressive on that Council. Talk about sheep among wolves!

They, the undersigned, say at the outset of their attack: “Politics is all about compromise and working together.” They then define what they mean by “compromise and working together.” When you are all alone and don't control anything, keep your mouth shut, do what you're told, go sit in the corner and put that damned dunce hat on so everyone can see who and what you really are – stupid and ineffective.

Keep in mind, these people are not just talking to and about Councilwoman Linda Atkins, they are telling everyone else that doesn't think or believe as they do and support them and their current representatives, as a minority without standing, to SHUT UP and GO AWAY – preferably to hell.

When you read their complete statement you will find that they leave absolutely no doubt or equivocation on how they “work together.” Just like any gang of thug bullies, they threaten and intimidate by simple innuendo and mob-rule intent. The "tough cop" way works, in time, everyone knows what the bully wants and expects without a word, agree or not, everyone falls in line and justifies the bullies right to exist and make them non-human, second class citizens.  Example: They say, “Instead of working together and moving forward, we seem to have one out-of-touch city councilmember protesting and challenging most things the current city council tries to accomplish to improve our community. That's not a good place to be for Ms. Atkins if she wants be part of a progressive city council.” Who is this "we" these people speak for? If not you, then are you "out-of-touch" too? Building on the continual drumbeat that there is something wrong with her, that she's conflicted only exposes their own paranoia. How can she claim to be a “progressive” when she's is obviously NOT lining up with the REAL progressives? Poor pathetic Linda Atkins. All alone in the corner.

Example number two: their abject hypocrisy – in their defining these people as a “progressive city council.” Saying it doesn't make it so. Compromise and betrayal of one's principles is certainly NOT the high standard anyone should aspire to, unless and except from those that are without principles, decency or any moral integrity. My father used to always say: “People that live in glass houses should never throw stones.” Since they're all in the business of telling everyone else, specially those that don't agree or believe as they do and in particular, the total failure Linda Atkins, as compared to them and their class of political compatriots, that's good advice. Probably on a par to "get out of town, but don't go to Fortuna."

The only benefit to come from all of this, as I see it, is that the voters get what they want. Not always what they expected, but justified just the same. The problem is the continued effort to justify their failure to vote in decent, honest and magnanimous people to represent their best interests. (Probably because they can't find any self-respecting person.) Regardless, just because you vote for people that would have you believe they are an American Elite will not make you an Elite too. It makes you a dunce the same as them.

By the way, this quote about Nannys defines our Gang of Eight to a "T":

In Nanny's world she doesn't speak English, she uses a mangled mix of bullshit "management speak" and political/socialist double speak when communicating.
Why?
Simple:
1 She is stupid.
2 She doesn't want people to understand what she is talking about, so she tries to be clever.
3 Her arguments wouldn't stand up to rigorous intellectual scrutiny if they were presented in English.

As a final observation, I'd say Ms. Atikins must be doing something right since she's got all of these people running scared. If they weren't scared none of them would of ever shown themselves in the light of day. When the full consequences of their past actions, twelve years and more, come to bear upon everyone, and they are held accountable for their actions - well, let's just say they may wish to be somewhere else at that time.

Just so the reader knows, I read and reread their statement as I wrote these observations. There are statements and issues they made that I didn't followup on since I wanted to address the tone and true purpose of their personal invective and demagoguery; causing divisions, alienation and war. Including the Times-Standard's part in promoting this class agenda.
[Source]

UPDATE:
Here's a link to another, shall we say “nameless blog” that has some interesting comments, mostly supporting Linda Atkins and denouncing the Gang of Eight's assault on the liberal, progressive way.

--Joe