A reader, Alex, just dropped a comment about the book on my blog. I understand that Eric Hoffer’s “The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements” is a splendid read.

Butler Shaffer and I were in one of those great bookstores in Stillwater, Minnesota a few months ago, and we came across an old (expensive first edition) copy of that book. $42! Butler said I _have to_ read it. I don’t know how I got by not reading that book. Butler told me the story of Hoffer being a longshoreman. Since then, I have read much online about Hoffer, his views, and his work.

He was actually quite productive, writing for Saturday Evening Post, Harper’s Magazine, and other notable publications of the time. He was called the “bare knuckle philosopher.” Here’s an interview with Hoffer from …… People magazine? When asked, “What is this country’s major problem right now?” … he answered: “Inflation. President Ford saw that, but not enough other people realize it. Inflation can destroy a society. It produced Hitler, for example.” Yes, I had a “Whip Inflation Now” badge that I wore as a kid.

I just recently ordered a real cheap copy from Amazon and I have been looking through the book, though I have not read it cover to cover just yet. One of my favorite Hoffer quotes: “A heresy can spring only from a system that is in full vigor.”

“While there are many wild cards that could light the fuse, The Trends Research Institute forecasts that if the threat of government-forced Swine Flu vaccinations is realized, it will be the fourth shot (of the second American Revolution). Tens of millions will fight for their right to remain free and unvaccinated.”

Read the whole article.

Obama said that good journalism is “critical to the health of our democracy,” but expressed concern toward growing tends in reporting — especially on political blogs, from which a groundswell of support for his campaign emerged during the presidential election.

“I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding,” he said.

Now, aside from the whole bailout scam coming down the pipe, I think there is something more important to scrutinize here. One issue is, of course, the fear the establishment has concerning the Internet and the millions of people who post freely, and with little opportunity costs, on newsgroups, discussion boards, blogs, websites, organized forums, and so on. The other notable snippet in this story is the GovernmentSpeak that has become an avocation for the current Liar-in-Chief.

For example, let me define Obama’s “mutual understanding.” This would be something akin to his health care “debate” – that is, we’d have the appearance of debate, set up so that there appears to be an overwhelming acceptance of his plans, with a few affectionate skeptics on hand to lob softball questions at the president or his proponents in Congress. The Liar-in-Chief cordially accepts the underhanded pitches thrown his way, with a warm smile and benevolent manner, and responds with a mouthful of fluffy-but-meaningless piffle that reassures the questioner and appears to solve another potential issue that may concern any anticipated objectors.

When the debate turns into vocal dissension that disrupts the one-sided sermonizing – due to passionate renegades who oppose him on the basis of the truly fundamental flaws of central planning, or even lame partisan politicking – the party in charge immediately resorts to dirty tactics charging the opposition with a politically incorrect atrocity, as so declared by the state, such as “racism.” After all, “mutual understanding” has a place in harmless dialogue where the end result is a difference of opinion, and therefore irreconcilable differences, and no harm or aggression is the outcome. However, when the terms are the individuals vs. the state (the US being the largest and most coercive governmental body in the world), with government resorting to unrestricted aggression and violence if dictates are not followed, it follows that “mutual understanding” means non-resistance on the part of the individual, or acquiescence in the schemes being cast upon him.

Can you have a “mutual understanding” with someone who vows to kill you? Can you have a “mutual understanding” with someone who aspires to kidnap your child? Neither can you have “mutual understanding” with a body of government that wants to rob your liberties, dismiss your self-ownership, and have its way with your life. Resistance to government violence – on matters of person, property, life, or livelihood – and therefore the defense of individual liberties, is the opposite of “mutual understanding.” “Mutual understanding” is sacrifice to the Gods of the collective and submission to the commands of the self-appointed deciders. Resistance is exercising one’s natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in a manner that best suits the individual without commencing aggression against other free men.

Pelosi, however, is far more than just a National Socialist. She is an ultra-wealthy, powermongering pig who uses her power, wealth, and position to obtains largesse for other powerful interests because it further enriches all parties to the transaction, while these political plunderings steal from the powerless poor and middle class, making them poorer and less capable of self-directing their lives. The corruption and influence brandished by Pelosi as a result of her power position is far more deadly, disturbing, and evil than her ideology, which is secondary to her lust for control.

On the other hand, watch Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) say that he will go against his constituents on health care (because it is in his best interest to do so, of course). MASSA: “I will vote against their opinion if I actually believe it will help them.”

Fred Solop, a Northern Arizona University political scientist, said the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona could signal the beginning of a disturbing trend.

“When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance,” Solop said. “It actually becomes quite scary for many people. It creates a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication.”

He said he’s never heard of someone bringing an assault weapon near a presidential event. “The larger the gun, the more menacing the situation,” he said.

Policies by force, or by majority tyranny, which are created, accelerated, and funded by wealthy special interests and mega-corporations with monetary interest in the policies, are called “honest communication.” If you think that the majority of the population understands the nature of government and its powers, think again. And this came from a political science academic that teaches your kids.

These people still can’t get to understanding one very simple point: we don’t want to “debate” tyranny and the level of control they shall have over us. We aren’t interested in “debates.” By ”debate,” what the media and government propagandists really mean is that we should stand up and speak a few kind words against socialized tyranny, then we all sit down and be quiet, having said our piece, and let the show go on interrupted. Debate means we get to ask softball questions, but in the end we refrain from intervening in the actual process of moving forward the government’s agenda.

Katie, by the way, is a multi-millionaire who need not worry about being put out to pasture under the cold, methodical, rationing hands of centrally-planned health care. She’ll get her plastic surgeries before you will get your hip replacement or torn rotator cuff fixed. Thanks to Travis for the link.