America, Land of the Free, Home of the Fucking Hypocrites
Feel free to stalk our every post with the f*cking c*nts RSS feed, subscribe to f-ckingc-nts.com by email, follow our new posts and random comments on Twitter, or become a fan on facebook. Go on. You know you want to! All the cool kids are doing it ...
The whole "America hating" thing seems to be going over really well … people either love it, or want me to leave the country. So, when a reader suggested a rant on the US's unique brand of blind militant hypocrisy, how could I say no? (No, I don't think there's anything here that hasn't been said or noticed before, but so long as I have a little clutch of love-it-or-leave-it types milling around, I can't possibly miss the opportunity to goad them.)
Most of these points center around the first amendment of the US Constitution, so let's just review that real quick, shall we?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
So, in practice, this little bit of text breaks down into a few basic principles:
- Separation of Church and State … that's the first part. No laws concerning religion, or restricting your right to practice whatever religion you choose. There are a few common-sense caveats there: Your religious practices can't infringe on anyone else's rights or break laws regarding animal cruelty, so no human sacrifice, forced marriages, or goat fucking, 'kay?
- Free Speech and Press … I can criticize my government and society and damn near anything else, and other people's opinions about it, and I can broadcast those thoughts via "the press" (which has, in modern times, been understood to include broadcast media and the internet). The caveats to this bit are libel and slander (libel is written, slander is spoken). Basically, you can't lie about someone in such a way as to damage their reputation … unless you're engaging in satire (which is how cartoonists and columnists get away with half the shit they do). Public figures enjoy a great deal less protection under libel and slander laws.
- Freedom of Protest and Lobbying … Indeed, lobbyists exists thanks to the first amendment. We can go to our state capitals or Washington DC and ask our government to do things for us. We can circulate petitions. We can peaceably stand around holding signs and shouting slogans. Even the neo-nazi racist fuckwits. However, we can't stand in front of the White House with pitchforks and torches, threatening to cremate the First Family.
So yeah, Huckabee's whole idea about rewriting the Constitution to encapsulate Biblical law? Totally illegal. Unconsti-fucking-tutional. The idea of a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman? Ah yes, the bible says gays are sinners so they shouldn't get married … also unconstitutional. Using taxpayer money to post the Ten Commandments in government buildings? Ditto. Are we getting the drift here?
People tell me our boys in Iraq are dying for my right to say whatever I want — not sure how that works, since neither Saddam nor the insurgents have the ability to amend the Constitution, but there you go — and yet these are often the same people telling me I should leave the country if I actually say any of it. Oh yes. Freedom of speech and expression, as long as it doesn't involve anything offensive to the redneck-patriot contingent. Because if you dare say anything they don't like, they want you exiled.
See, here's the thing … I'm actually exercising my rights, and you are telling me to leave the very country that gives me those rights? I doubt you even appreciate the concept of irony … Tell you what, you want to live in a country where nobody speaks out against the government? Move to fucking North Korea, dipshit. If you love someone, and they're fucking up their life with drugs or alcohol or an abusive relationship, you step in and say something to them. You don't just walk away because things are bad. As far as I'm concerned, religion may be the opiate of the masses, but it's like fucking crack cocaine to the US government … and the military-industrial complex? There's your abusive spouse (if you don't give us more money, YOU'RE GOING TO DIE). Maybe you're the kind of person who ditches your loved ones when times get tough. Or maybe you're the person holding your falling-down drunk spouse upright at the company Christmas party, telling everyone they're just a "social" drinker?
And as for all you people who hold up the pledge of allegiance as "proof" our country is a Christian nation (nevermind that pesky first amendment), try looking into the history of the pledge before you open your mouths. The whole "under God" bit was added in the 50s, during the height of the Cold War against those nasty godless communists.
[The] original Pledge read as follows: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' He considered placing the word, 'equality,' in his Pledge, but knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans. [ * 'to' added in October, 1892. ]
[...] In 1923 and 1924 the National Flag Conference, under the leadership of the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, changed the Pledge's words, 'my Flag,' to 'the Flag of the United States of America.' Bellamy disliked this change, but his protest was ignored.
In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.
Bellamy's granddaughter said he also would have resented this second change. He had been pressured into leaving his church in 1891 because of his socialist sermons. In his retirement in Florida, he stopped attending church because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there. The Pledge of Allegiance - A Short History
Of course, US constitutional hypocrisy isn't limited to just one amendment … the right to privacy, courtesy of the 4th Amendment, has been variously insulted by state laws banning the possession and/or sale of sex toys, laws banning anal and oral sex (also known as sodomy laws), and current hysterical polemics about gay marriage. Seriously people, if your personal life isn't your own private business, what in the fuck is?! Republicans claim to support smaller, less intrusive government, and yet who brought us the Patriot Act and requested private phone records from telecom companies (And yes, many Democrats voted in favor of the Patriot Act, and its renewal … which is why they're turncoat sleazeballs. But they didn't start it, and they're not the "small government" party)? Which party mobilizes voters with anti-gay-marriage amendments?
(Yes, yes. Now you're going to bring up the Second Amendment, and how the left wing is always trying to restrict firearms … but the difference is that they're not claiming to support unfettered firearms ownership out one side of their mouths, while passing anti-gun legislation out the other.)
It's not like all of these objectionable things couldn't be considered legitimate political positions, I suppose … but for fuck's sake, start a new party for it, because it's got nothing to do with the foundational principles of the Republicans (much as I love my country on the basis of its founding constitutional principles, I actually have great respect for the original principles of the Republican party … even when I disagree with them). You can call yourselves the Anti-Constitutional Totalitarian Bible-Thumpers party … it may not be catchy, but at least it's honest.
I just started reading your blog, and needless to say, its incredibly satisfying. Keep up the good work!
1st March 2008 at 7:07 pm | permalink |the thing is, it may be Unconsti-fucking-tutional now, but if an amendment is added to the constitution then it IS the constitution. that is the fucking scary part.
love the site btw….you fucking cunt ;)
1st March 2008 at 7:37 pm | permalink |That bit about being in war with Iraq to protect our rights is particularly annoying for me (the fact that the concept exists, not that you called it out). My siser and her husband were both commissioned (sp?) over in Baghdad and they came back a little jaded. It would appear that many of our soldiers joined up with the army after 9-11 and wanted to protect our country, but were stuck over fighting a war even after later evidence would disprove/dissavow the connection between Iraq and the 9-11 attack.
My sister joined up specifically after the 9-11 attacks, but why was she in Iraq not less than 3 months ago? Bah!
1st March 2008 at 8:44 pm | permalink |You are my fucking hero. :D
1st March 2008 at 9:23 pm | permalink |ok, i guess once i start commenting on something, it's hard to take a break. anyhow…
i actually went to an elementary school where we said the pre-g-d pledge. i was confused when i changed schools and it was different. and so many people base the un-constitutional union of church and state on that bit of recently ammended pledge.
so i particularly appreciate the history. the rest of this is common knowledge - yes even current war not being a deffence of our rights (i figgure it's not a hard thing to understand if one were to take their head out of their ass for a moment)- but the pledge, that's one bit of information that doesn't get spread around enough.
1st March 2008 at 10:08 pm | permalink |p.s.
1st March 2008 at 10:12 pm | permalink |my grandmother has been a staunch republican since she cast her first vote. she HATES the current administration. says they're the antithesis of what her party is all about. and i can't immagine she's the only one.
@sparrows
Was it a long time after it was added to the pledge before schools started using it?
If, as the article references, it was added in 1954, then there was still another 30 years before I would have been born.
1st March 2008 at 11:00 pm | permalink |Your country scares me. Every abuse of government you mention seems so bloody obvious - if I can see it from my vantage point (I'm British, living in Kuwait) why the hell can't Americans?
And if they _can_ see how they are being screwed over, why the hell don't they do something about it? If they simply can't be arsed to do anything about it then they deserve nothing less than the government they have.
SC
1st March 2008 at 11:15 pm | permalink |If I could so much as draw a stick figure, I would lay out a political comic on the republicans' shtick about 'small government.'
What that's degraded to today, is NO gun laws, NO government social program funding, and FREEDOM of religion (So long as it's Christianity), but only whilst it includes freedom FROM respecting any other religion. (The pagan baby-eaters!)
They'll sell their rights in a heartbeat if it'll make their monkey in the white house look good, but hey, they're against most of those rights getting banned anyhow.
1st March 2008 at 11:39 pm | permalink |i'm only in my 20's. it was a private school. to the best of my knowledge, the current version was consistently used in public schools very soon afeter the change.
2nd March 2008 at 1:19 am | permalink |i'm not sure why we said that version, but in retrospect it might have been because of the liberal-leaning politics of the school and parents; they really had a thing for the separation of church and state. a lesson that i've embraced wholeheartedly.
I've always wondered about the 'under God' part, but never took the time to look it up or ask someone who might know, thanks for filling me in.
So alpha, who would you want in office next term if you had your first choice (including people that have dropped out if you want)?
2nd March 2008 at 1:48 am | permalink |My problem with the pledge of allegiance, besides the part about under God, is really the section about liberty and justice for all. Ok, that may be have been what the author wanted but we all know that is not what we have, unless of course you are white and have a penis. As soon as we have liberty and justice for all, perhaps I will consider saying the pledge again (without the reference to God, whoever she maybe.)
2nd March 2008 at 5:50 am | permalink |As always, excellent missive.
For you posting comments: If you want a more in-depth analysis of religion and the separation of church and state, pick up a copy of "The Godless Constitution," by Kramnick and Moore.
I wonder what happened to the copy I sent to alphabitch for free distribution? ;-)
2nd March 2008 at 8:50 am | permalink |I grew up in the military and this whole argument about soldiers overseas fighting and dying so you can say this and that is pure b.s. Those soldiers overseas right now are firmly against the republicans they used to hold so dear until they stabbed the soldiers in the back. The soldiers want to come home and be with their family and friends, they really don't care about this phony war on terror any longer. I know this because I have friends who are military who have friends who are military and so on and so forth. The overwhelming message except for a few marginilized individuals is 'bring our boys and girls home!' Not 'Bush is a great president and I would follow him anywhere.'
2nd March 2008 at 10:22 am | permalink |The North Korea analogy is a good one because if you really take these people aside and take apart their personal beliefs there is more in common with Stalin and Mao or Kim Il Sung than there ever was throughout the entire history of this country with a true american patriot. Dissent is the fabric this country was built on and thrives on. Anyone who has forgotten or never known that doesn't deserve to call themselves an american. Free speech is paramount, if you cannot support that, then consider yourself 'A Good Communist'. They even use the phraseology of communism in refering to one of their most revered: 'The Great Communicator'. Using the language of Mao to refer to Reagan. I cannot feel that was not deliberate. To me those who identify as right wing will never be anything other than totalitarian, fascist worshipping nazis and that label sticks far better and more firmly than any label they could make against persons who wish to 'engage in a dialog'. Instead their response is 'Shut up Shut up Shut up'. Hypocrites. They will be remembered by history as such.
Two comments:
1) "the Anti-Constitutional Totalitarian Bible-Thumpers party" - I love it!
2) There's a deeper issue here: it's not just that the constitutional rights are being eroded, but that they are an illusion. The various rights conflict with each other and themselves (http://thewaronbullshit.com/2007/08/17/rights01/). It may be that a rights-based social system is impossible in principle.
2nd March 2008 at 12:45 pm | permalink |Now that we are quickly approaching the second "great republican depression" isn't it time to punish these bastards with impeachment at the very least…
2nd March 2008 at 2:02 pm | permalink |@Matt: Thanks! :-)
@IB: "… if an amendment is added to the constitution then it IS the constitution. that is the fucking scary part." Yes, that is indeed the fucking scary part. I don't think the fundie/loony camp is strong enough yet to push something like that through, but so help me, if they ever do I WILL leave the country.
@Autodidact: "That bit about being in war with Iraq to protect our rights is particularly annoying for me …" Yeah, I feel bad for all the people who signed up for the military thinking they were going to get to do something about the 9/11 attacks, and end up conned into Iraq instead. Funny, the people who usually throw that line around ar sitting on their asses stateside, nice and safe and sound.
@deletedsoul: lol … thanks. ;-)
@sparrows: "p.s. my grandmother has been a staunch republican since she cast her first vote. she HATES the current administration." No, I can't imagine she's even close to the only one. (and glad to see you didn't disappear! ;-)
@Copley: "If they simply can't be arsed to do anything about it then they deserve nothing less than the government they have." While I agree in principle, it pains me that those of us who do try to do something about it get stuck with their just desserts too. hehe
@Adam Seale: "If I could so much as draw a stick figure, I would lay out a political comic on the republicans' shtick about 'small government.'" Aww, c'mon! Even my Dad can draw stick figures … and if he can, anyone can!
@deeesseee: "who would you want in office next term if you had your first choice (including people that have dropped out if you want)?" Including people who've left the race? Kucinich was my favorite. Not a chance in hell, but I really like that guy.
@Vickie: "As soon as we have liberty and justice for all, perhaps I will consider saying the pledge again" You might be waiting an awfully long time. ;-) FWIW, I stopped saying it in elementary school … been a while for me too.
@Becca: "I wonder what happened to the copy I sent to alphabitch for free distribution? ;-)" Never got organized with the person who said they wanted it … did Jack ever get a copy? I'll track him down and send it to him if not.
@mk1gti: With the exception of "Good Communists" (since Communism as a philosophy doesn't say anything about restricting free speech), I agree wholeheartedly.
@Kavan Wolfe: So, I went looking for the follow-up to your post there … what do you propose instead of a rights-based system?
@J.O.J.: "isn't it time to punish these bastards with impeachment at the very least…" YES!!!
2nd March 2008 at 5:27 pm | permalink |Fuck impeachment, they should be tried in court and then executed for their crimes.
2nd March 2008 at 8:59 pm | permalink |One time your President Regean was asked, while he was the Governator of California, about motorcycle helmet laws. He responded that it was simply a matter of choice if a person wanted to wear one. He was asked about decriminalizing Marijuana, and responded that he would never because pot can destroy the brain! What a wacky country you have!
3rd March 2008 at 12:38 pm | permalink |Love it. Couldn't have summed it up better myself. Keep up the good work.
3rd March 2008 at 1:08 pm | permalink |Even as a small child, I hated pledging allegiance to the flag. I always thought, "It's a piece of material. Why am I pledging allegiance to it." It's a stupid, stupid ritual.
btw - you seem to have a lot of fun with this blog. I really enjoy it. I usually read it right after I check Shakespeare's Sister.
3rd March 2008 at 3:31 pm | permalink |@davidgx: And then there is that … heh
@pedro: Seriously? That's fantastic! It's like they don't even THINK before they open their mouths! hahaha
@ben: Thanks. :-)
@akshelby: That's pretty much what I thought. Then I got old enough to realize my government was doing a lot of stupid shit, and I didn't really want to be pledging allegiance to their political endeavors. heh
And thanks, I do have a lot of fun with it. :-)
3rd March 2008 at 3:59 pm | permalink |Isn’t the real problem with the world the very fact that we divide the planet into countries in the first place? Therefore we divide ourselves into "us" and "them", meaning "we" are always better than "them".
3rd March 2008 at 7:44 pm | permalink |"We" have the right god, "they" don't. "We" have the best philosophical and social system, the rest of them are ignorant assholes. So we fight endlessly protecting our believes and our systems and they do the same, and the whole world is talking about peace at the same time, it’s fucking insane!
if it were legal id ask you to marry me
3rd March 2008 at 7:47 pm | permalink |@alphabitch
I'm still working on an alternative to a rights-based ethical system, but it still has too many inconsistencies for public consumption. Right now it's primarily responsibility-based with a small number of very basic rights, including freedom of thought and the right to a name. If you construct the responsibilities properly, some freedoms, like freedom of speech are emergent, but others, such as freedom of religion are impossible.
3rd March 2008 at 7:58 pm | permalink |@bill_norwegian: I think the problem stems from the fact that humans evolved in small tribal communities, and have a limited capacity for identifying themselves emotionally with a worldwide-scale "tribe" … hence the feeling of necessity around countries, ethnic nationalities, religious communities, etc. But yes, basically, what you said. ;-)
@hoodiemonster: lol … thanks.
@kavan wolf: Well glad to hear you're still working on it. :-) Do drop by with a link when it's done, would you?
3rd March 2008 at 9:20 pm | permalink |While you did not actually say this directly, your comment about the military-industrial complex — "if you don't give us more money, YOU'RE GOING TO DIE" — brings to mind a common falacious argument against the military: No other countries are threatening us, so why do we need it? (Or why can't we make it much smaller, at least?)
In case any of your readers are in the group that thinks this way, I'd like them to consider two other versions of the statement:
1. Our city has virtually no crime, but a very large police force. Shouldn't we cut it back by at least 50% to save money on unecessary cops and cop stuff?
2. We haven't had a fire in our city in many, many years. Why do we need so many fire trucks and full time firemen? Can't we cut it back to a couple trucks and volunteers?
One could go on, as this "logic" is becoming more pervasive all the time. The point is that the police and firemen (and the military) act as deterrents. Shrinking them shrinks their deterrent level (as it were), making it easier for counter forces to consider, plan, and implement their events.
So, keeping money flowing into both the research and operational arms of the military makes sense — unless one wants our nation to become part of a hostile nation that does maintain their military. And not all of the money spent is "wasted" — Think about the National Guard helping out after disasters, the Army Corps of Engineers, and even Google Earth if money hadn't been invested in the space program and in 'spy' satellites.
Sure, some of the money is wasted, but our government is too large to avoid that. It can hardly take a dollar out of its wallet without dropping a few others along the way. But to think that the military is exclusively to blame for that is just foolish. There's too much waste everywhere in government spending to blame any one part.
OK, that's enough. Time for my fellow readers to open all gun ports and shoot my comment to smithereens…
4th March 2008 at 5:08 am | permalink |Don't execute them, send them to Iraq to do community service.
Delicious site. Thanks and bravo.
http://web.mac.com/mattybee/www.mataharifilms.com/Welcome_Stop_Press.html
4th March 2008 at 2:12 pm | permalink |@nurbles: I don't think we should have NO military budget … but I think our current military budget is absurdly bloated. I don't see any reason our federal budget should allocate approximately 50% of federal spending to the military. I've written a more detailed explanation of my views on the military budget elsewhere on the site. :-)
@matt burton: That's a fucking great idea. :-D
4th March 2008 at 3:30 pm | permalink |@Alpha,
I agree with your reply to Nurbles. If preventative spending in defense were a pre-requsite for maintaining a small army then other non-utilitarian countries would have bloated budgets in respects to defense spending as well. (I mentioned before that Britain's defense budget is less than their educational budget).
@Nurbles,
4th March 2008 at 9:10 pm | permalink |Our spending in the space program is very small compared to our defense spending, I'd rather see money go that direction than defense spending. At least we recieved (according to tradition) velcro and tang out of that deal. You mentioned a theoretical city with (virtually) no crime and a large police force. Perhaps lowering the police force by 50% would allow an influx of crime into the city, but a lowering of 25% might not. Any side of an argument can be augmented with outrageous theoretical change (50% would be high enough to cause significant administrative overhead in a police department from skill juggling and resource placement). With the huge budget being thrown at defense, it is hard to belive that they could not stretch the existing money farther through more discretionary (sp?) spending.
Not a convert exactly…an admirer.
6th March 2008 at 2:26 pm | permalink |What does it take to get a smiley face … I could use one?
12th March 2008 at 2:12 am | permalink |@joj: Aww. :-)
12th March 2008 at 3:52 pm | permalink |Everything you write is 100% correct. Will you marry me?
17th March 2008 at 1:25 pm | permalink |@thomas b: Y'know, I'm going to have to go through my comments and emails, and tally up the number of marriage proposals this site has prompted … I think I'll keep a running total in the sidebar somewhere. lol
17th March 2008 at 2:01 pm | permalink |Heard from the sandbox in kindergarten:
20th March 2008 at 5:45 am | permalink |“My father is stronger than yours!” – “But I can run faster than you!” -“Yeah? Well, I can whistle through my nose!” -“Ok… But my god can beat your god with a BIG hammer!” -Well, buuhuu, I’m from the mightiest country in the world, Americaaa!” -“Buhuhu, you’re naughty, I’m gonna tell the UN… Uhuuuu…then they’re gonna kick you’re ass! uhuuu…”