Answering for American Exceptionalism: After the victim of a mixed economy lashed out

I received from my radio friend Matt Clark a note from a listener of his who took exception to our recent broadcast about American Exceptionalism.  The guy was very upset about my response to comments he made after our broadcast featuring the goodness that Walt Disney brought to American society.  CLICK HERE to review.  The comment he left me was well over 1000 words long so I felt an involved response to his statements was warranted as he showed himself to be a very confused person.  There are aspects of his thinking that are quite good, but other aspects that are deeply flawed.  However, he is like so many modern-day conservatives/libertarians who have found themselves formulated around machine politics for their entire lives and has the taint of the modern mixed economy all over their thoughts—so dealing with them is a mess if such an attempt is even desired.  But because he addressed me directly and was very critical, apparently discussing me at great length on an XM radio show, I will take great pleasure in dismantling his thought process appropriately.    When his comments were first sent to me, I was out-of-town competing in the bullwhip events shown below, so it took a bit of time to catch up with all my email and comments from the previous weekend.  Below are his comments with my reply in italics as response.

‘’American Exceptionalism tends to set off tempers from the type of people who have been taught their entire lives that America should follow the trends of the rest of the World and not proudly proclaim the wonderful attributes that have come out of the freest country in the world-such as capitalism, human rights, individual freedom, and quality of life that is unmatched anywhere.’’ Did Rich or El Rushbo write this? Funny I was a Rush baby, some of us grow up and actually learn history, economics, free-markets, and real Conservative, ex. Russel Kirk, TS Elliot, Edmund Burke, and M.E. Bradford (who was originally appointed by Reagan for national endowment position, but sidelined by Bill Krystol for neocon Bill Bennett (Lincoln lover)).

The listener’s name is Ben Cowan and he is attempting to display that he has the superior argument by stating he has grown up and away from the way of thinking of Rush Limbaugh.  People who use such arguments with a direct attack like that try to gain supremacy through insult instead of the quality of their statement.  Cowan then proceeds to establish that he has a vast knowledge of history to draw upon as if I do not.  He has obviously not read the more than 2 million words here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom, so if he starts now he may be qualified to make such statements in about 6 months.  But until then he is functioning from ignorance.  I enjoy the work of T.S. Elliot particularly “The Wasteland.”  The point of his statement is to say that Cowan has evolved intellectually into thinking beyond Rush Limbaugh which is supposed to qualify everything that follows as fact, and everything he says about me as inferior to his arguments.  This is a trick Cowan learned from the progressive intellectuals which he reveals further in the next section. 

Notice how weak Rich’s arguments are that he portrays anyone who gets frustrated with Decepticons aka neocons using the term American Exceptionalism as someone who supports Obama or his ideology. As to Rich’s Bill Maher clip, I actually agree with some of Bill’s sediments in this clip. This is probably the only time that I have agreed with Bill Maher, but our solutions and reasons are much different. Did you notice how I separated the two complaint/Solutions without emotionally driven comments like Rich uses?

Prof. Kevin Gutzman liked this part of the main article ‘’Under the American Constitution, slavery was abolished- a move happened nowhere else in the world.’’ If the point is that slavery wasn’t abolished under the US Constitution outside the US, well duh. Slavery was abolished in Haiti, Cuba, Brazil, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Barbados, Bahamas, Suriname, Guyana, Trinidad, and Nevis. –Response by Prof. Kevin Gutzman (Author of Who Killed the Constitution).

Cowan attacks my arguments as weak without identifying the argument which is an anti-concept trick that was perfected by the political strategist Saul Alinsky.  It is used, copied and heavily studied by radical groups to this day.  People like Cowan pick up the behavior through observation and interacting with people who use the method.  The premise of his attack is that my statement about Obama and his ideology is weak because it points to American Exceptionalism as strong, and that such a broad brush is not appropriate under the terms Cowan established in his anti-concept.  By my definition of American Exceptionalism I am stating the concept “America is good.”  The reason this angers people like Cowan, who believes that he is an evolved conservative to some degree, or just defining himself as some degree of libertarian, is that he has accepted that the concept of American Exceptionalism is a myth at some point in his past and he is defending his foundation beliefs from the concept of goodness.  He then uses Bill Maher as validation to support his theory in the same fashion that he uses Kevin Gutzman as a crutch the way most academics use quotes and references to support collectively their own thoughts and beliefs.  The implication of their need for reference crutches is their insecurity to their own thoughts.  They attempt to build a public consensus by pointing at others and what they say as if to justify their own thoughts.  The truth about slavery is that The Society for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage was the first American abolition society. It was founded April 14, 1775, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania by Anthony Benezet and others, and held four meetings.^[1] Seventeen of the 24 men who attended initial meetings of the Society were Quakers, or members of the Religious Society of Friends. Thomas Paine was also among the Society’s founders.  It was reorganized in 1784^[2] as the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage,^[3] (better known as the Pennsylvania Abolition Society) and was incorporated in 1789.  At some point after 1785, Benjamin Franklin was elected as the organization’s president. The society asked him to bring the matter of slavery to the Constitutional Convention of 1787. He petitioned the U.S Congress in 1790 to ban slavery.^[4]

During this time there were similar movements happening all over the world as many were questioning the practice.  But the big driver in changing the culture of slavery was The United States in their fight for independence.  Once that revolution was won other countries looked at their own situations and made adjustments.  Smaller countries like Haiti, Cuba, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Barbados, Bahamas and so on were able to abolish their slaves more quickly than larger countries with more bureaucracy.  My example of American Excepetionalism is that if America had failed in their revolution then other countries would have stepped back from such a task.  It took America to lead by example.  Cowan would then point out that many of those movements took place at the turn of the 1700s into the early 1800s.  Yet they were using America as their example as many of the discussions taking place in the colonies from those Philadelphia meetings were exported all over the world through commerce.  When America defeated the British, many countries became more embolden in their pursuit of individual freedom and passed anti slavery mandates.  Sadly, many of those same countries Cowan mentions would submit to socialism just a few years later falling back into social slavery of a different type. 

Capitalism is great and the best system in which people can move up and down mobile in a free society. Capitalism predates the Union of States and American Exceptionalism. Did it occur to Rich that Britain lead the 1st industrial Revolution, followed by Meiji Restoration in Japan, and the 2nd industrial revolution was led by the United States.

Yes, it did occur to me, yet Britain failed in their economy falling to socialism as they allowed Keynesian economics to ruin their capitalism, and Japan of course could not leave their feudal social functions once they submitted themselves to an emperor.  To this very day many large countries make the mistake of attempting to emulate Japan for their manufacturing standards believing them to be of higher quality than American standards.  The failure in this thinking is that the Japanese place themselves before their individuality in nearly every case.  Their programs of lean manufacturing work well as their people do not question the methods.  Their service to their country and business come before their own desires.  American strength in manufacturing has always come from their ability to think outside-the-box as individuals, not blind compliance to a greater good such as country, company, or even community.  America adopted foreign lean manufacturing methods as a direct assault against the American labor unions which infected manufacturing from the Red Decade with communist philosophy.  It was the only way that companies could force the unions to not destroy their businesses with non-productive effort.  Because the unions put a lock on productive output, American companies were forced to use foreign collectivist methods perfected abroad to keep the unions from destroying their companies that were legally allowed to organize against industry for the collective gain of the many.  Even with these severe handicaps most new ideas still come out of The United States.  Most literature, films, music, art and technical innovation are generated by free people with the prospect of profit blowing wind into their sails.  Even with all the best lean manufacturing techniques produced for collective motivation of work forces, creativity is what makes American Excptionalism.  Creativity is what is missing from all other countries that have stepped away from capitalism, and to this day seek alliances with others to disguise the fact that they are nations of suppressed thought praying to their religions for inspiration.  In America, innovation is invented because the mind is free—that is the backbone of American Excepetionalism.

 

‘’Americans have been taught by their gov’t that the United States gained everything it achieved by consuming too many resources and stepping on the rights of others across the world.’’ -This is what would be taught at a progressive college, that so called conservatives send their kids to and help support and perpetuate. Many fake conservative send their kids to progressive colleges so Johnny and Suzie can watch people run into other people on Saturday afternoon and ‘’what’s the score of the game mindless thinking.’’ Again, Rich is using the absurd progressive logic to lump real Conservatives like myself into, to push ‘’American Exceptionalism’’, which is the progressive rights term invented by a Frenchmen, and used to spread democracy by force to any country whether they want it or not.

Not sure that I disagree with Cowan here.  He uses my name in a way that implicates that my statement is wrong, but then he agrees with it, because I had just said the same thing.  Americans have been taught such things as I stated and most colleges are infected with progressive thought.  If Cowan doesn’t believe such a thing I’m not sure what planet he’s living on. 

I enjoyed Rich’s definition of a neocon! How terrible of the social freedom of the people in the 60’s. Was Steve Jobs one of those people?? A neocon or decepticon is someone who left the Democrat Party to join the Republican Party in which they brought their FDR progressive foreign policy with them. They also brought the mentality that morals should be controlled through the Fed gov’t. They were Nationalist that the great founders feared, and why some didn’t sign the Constitution fearing the Union would end up like as it is now.

Steve Jobs had a good idea and left his indoctrination education to invent his own way.  He used capitalism to bring a great product to market, so not all people who smoked dope, and listened to the garbage music of the 60s was a diabolical hippie menace.  I would say that George Lucas was cast of the same mold as Jobs, and I’m sure that George loved the 60’s although he was more of a loner than his friend Francis was at their first studio set up in San Francisco where hippie mania was rampant.  Somewhere in that drug induced haze Star Wars was born which I love.  But these guys are rare examples that managed to rise to the top even as statism was increasing to put shackles on the mind of mankind by suppressing capitalism.  The second part of Cowan’s statement I agree with for the most part, even though it’s pretty general.  The real situation is more complicated, but Cowan is learning so I’ll give him a gold star on his paper for at least thinking. 

The founding fathers wanted to be immortalized for their writings and their accomplishments ‘’Fame of our Fathers’’, they however were very humble; they had humility which Rich doesn’t seem to grasp! Jefferson studied Scottish philosopher David Hume, Switzerland’s decentralized country, the Indians free trade, and the ancient Greeks who prior to Alexander the Great were successful for centuries with their small [r]epublics in which Math, Science, Art, Philosophy, architecture, and sport was mastered in small [r]epublics of people. Jefferson wasn’t arrogant as to say he created our ‘’written gov’t’’ on his own without researching other countries and philosophers. Rich’s progressive right term “American Exceptionalism’’, he points to ‘’American Experience’’ of 1776, which I noted to Matt Clark in my response.

‘’The benefits of capitalism and the American Experience produced a unique type of person that had only been contemplated by philosopher fantasies prior to the declaration.’’ Again the arrogance of Rich’s comments, Madison and Jefferson both used Adam Smith’s a Scottish Philosopher book ‘’Wealth of Nations’’ as a guide to preventing a National Bank and advocating the market to work!

As to Cowan’s point, there is nothing “progressive” about my term other than such an identification about American Exceptionalism is needed to defend what’s good about The United States against the progressives.  Other than that, Cowan is indulging himself in wishful thinking to believe that I adhere to something because of some progressive invention that has not been carefully considered from all angles.  In this paragraph the real weakness of Cowan begins to emerge, his real gripe with me.  As a victim of a mixed economy he believes certain things.  As a flawed human being who probably has events from his past that he regrets, he chooses to maintain a view of the world that supports notions that flaws make humans, “human.”  Many people wish to believe such things because it would be hard for them to get up every morning and put on their shoes.  But I am very aware of the origins of Jefferson’s belief and studies of Scottish Common Sense, which I have written about elsewhere, CLICK FOR REVIEW. I have said on many occasions that the work of John Locke was inspired by the pirate Henry Morgan, which then also showed the colonies how to shake off a nation the way that Morgan took on Spain nearly single-handedly with their presence in the Caribbean.  But the fact remains that these elements came together not in Scotland, England, Spain, or France where they were talked about.  It was only in America where the dialogue was able to move away from dinner tables, congregations, and card games to become part of the governing philosophy of a country on the rise. 

Now to deal with the “arrogance” portion of this debate–being humble is a taught theory by statist oriented groups, be it religion or government to force compliance of the masses to the desires of institutionalism.  Grace in victory and humbleness are often confused to be the same thing by people like Cowan, but they are not.  It is often perceived that confidence is “arrogant” by those who lack it which is to say that such a declaration is just another anti-concept.  By calling me arrogant Cowan hopes to dismiss everything I have said and place himself in high esteem with a reader who identifies their internal value with humbleness, which is sheer nonsense.  The concept of serving God with humbleness may be what the majority of human beings believe, but that belief was created during the Dark Ages of Europe and should be confined to the corners of one’s own home.  Humility and “duty” to something greater than oneself is a statist concept that was created by the churches of Europe to maintain political control over their flocks.  Under the rules of engagement for people like Cowan he is quick to associate humility with arrogance so that he doesn’t have to deal with the root cause of the word.  It is the tendency toward humility that Eric Holder continues to lie directly to the American people, it allows Barack Obama to lie about the impact of the scandals he’s at the center of, it allows scum bags like Anthony Wiener to lie, lie, and lie again to anybody and everyone about his sexual lust for other women making his wife look like a buffoon who will forgive anything just so she can be married to someone in a powerful public office—like her mentor Hillary Clinton.  These predators all have in common a desire to use the humility of civilization to hide their true intentions.  Humility is not a good human trait, kindness is, intelligence is, even compassion, but not humility.  Yielding to ones faults, which humility implies, is a sin against the individual soul of every human being and people everywhere will continue to live in bondage to social parasites so long as they believe in the kinds of things that Ben Cowan believes, that humility has value, and equals arrogance.  More on this in a bit because it’s not the only time Cowan uses the term.  But as far as how to behave when you win, the following videos are from the bullwhip competitions that I was at when Ben started this little fuss through Matt.  Notice my behavior when I win.  I expect the same from every American.  You don’t rub people’s face in it, but you don’t cower away from it either.  When you have something to be proud of, be proud of it.  

‘’Life in virtually every facet is better in America because of the philosophy of personal independence that is much larger than the ‘’American Experience.’’ This is so obnoxious, that is the American Experience, limited gov’t. The founders referred to their states as countries, they didn’t speak in homogenized tongue like Rich! The South traded throughout the world (off the backs of slaves) and the Northern States were protectionalist!

This is the kind of thing that caused Cowan to start this dialogue off with an anti-concept attack instead of fact based thought.  He does not understand the American Experience in spite of all his supposed education and conservative thought.  He doesn’t understand it as a graduate of Rush Limbaugh thought so he finds my statement, “obnoxious.”  He lacks perspective to see the world through common sense instead of memorized standards which is why he surrendered his statement to some implications of racism and isolationism—both agreed upon violations of universal understanding.  The American Experience is being born in a free country with no hooks into the soul of the child.  Many believe that the World Bank owns us all, but at least philosophically, in The United States there is at least the assumption of personal freedom that is held in high regard.  In America one does not have to social climb to be successful.  That is a European trait.  One does not have to marry someone else to become powerful.  That is a European, and Asian trait.  One does not have to become a member of the political class to gain wealth.  That is a European trait.  In America one can be just about anything they want to be and they can be it anytime they want to.  Just as a byproduct of American culture, which is a direct result of the American Experience, look just at Comic Con in San Diego.  America is dedicated to the products of the mind, and no place else in the world is there anything like Comic Con.  There are other countries that attempt to host such events such as the recent Star Wars Celebration in Germany, but the products displayed there are not developed in other countries, it is in the United States that they were created.  Or consider the British Invasion of music that came out of England during the 60’s, a period that Cowan seems to enjoy.  They came to America to be superstars as England had too small of a stage to gain such fame.  That is the American Experience.  Cowan because of his very weak position again took a page out of the progressive notebook of anti-concepts and attempted to use racism and isolationism to gain control of victory in the debate without having any facts to cover his emotional lack of understanding about the American Experience. 

Walt Disney should be honored as a great entrepreneur that used determination, creativity, and thrift which is missing in today’s culture. People don’t know what thrift is, these days!

Rudolf Diesel a German inventor invented the diesel engine, which we use very much in the Union today. I could see German’s going around saying this is German Exceptionalism. I have never heard German’s speak in that tongue, but I detest our countrymen arrogantly beating their chest say we are the Awesomest of the Awesome! People don’t like pompous people, they are attracted by humility, what you don’t have Rich.

This is where I get really angry, and why I took a few days to cool off before answering Cowan directly.  Let me start on a positive, which I agree with Cowan on the thrift issue.  I would like to see a return to that type of mental exercise.  And the German’s would have every right to proclaim German Exceptionalism.  It was they who produced some of the finest engineering feats in the world during the 20^th century and even as members of the European Union, they manage to be so productive that the rest of their European neighbors continually want to borrow their money.  German BMW and Mercedes automobiles are fabulously engineered earning them the right to beat on their chest about that particular field.  But here is where people like Ben Cowan are deeply flawed human beings bringing in the front door the tyrants of our modern age because they fail to project the proper mentality to combat attacks from villains who prey on humility. 

When making a point that most of society will reject people who do not display humility he is right, but wrong.  Being “liked,” being “popular,” or having people think you’re “awesome,” is the furthest thing from my mind.  I don’t have humility because I don’t want it Cowan.  I do not conceal from hangers in my closet skeletons of shame, I do not fear violence by my attackers, or need to be liked in any fashion.  I do have people who like me, who share my values, but I have no desire to be liked by people who do not share my values, which is very few.  If I had such a thought I wouldn’t say half the things that needed to be said in this day and age.  Even people who read here every day get angry with the things I say.  But it doesn’t change my stance and it never will.  When you start caring what people think of you, you are finished in the philosophy business.  When you desire to be loved, you are prone to be corrupt, to be bought, to allow enemies to gain emotional leverage over you.  People should like you because they share your values or respect you, not because you pander to their own weaknesses.  It is that process that has turned our entire society into a nation of fools led by idiots, and I would guess that many of them think just like Cowan. 

Cowan believes he stands on high moral ground backed by historical fact, but all he stands upon is a pile of his own metaphorical feces created by years of such thinking.  It is because of this weakness in him personally that he attempts to skirt around the edges pretending to be a sophisticated conservative that is beyond refute.  But in reality he is a child of the mixed economy that has bought into some of the statism that is rampant in American culture, much of it culminating in the 1960s a period Cowan appears to enjoy. 

At this point of reading this Cowan probably believes that all this sounds tough, but would I say the same things in public–well, the answer is yes.  Just last weekend I was in a very public show and anybody who wished to take exception with me could have—but they didn’t.  I interact with people every day, and they have learned that I hold back a lot on these pages and when pushed I certainly respond without compromising my beliefs in person.  CLICK HERE to see a speech I did critical of public schools where the school board members and their treasure showed up to “intimidate” me into not speaking.  They knew very well who I was, what I have done, and wanted to meet me in person.  I gave my speech in a respectful way, but I didn’t hold back, and I never do.  The point is not to be liked, it is to make people think, and many don’t like to think, so I know beforehand that they will be angry.  So what!  

A defeated person uses an emphasis on humility, weakness, or accusations of pompousness to justify their lackluster existences.  It is easy to be an armchair philosopher, a casual listener of a radio broadcast, and a Facebook junkie that comments on things other people do.  It is quite something else to be the leading edge of an ice breaker, to crash through all opposition knowing that the pain will never ever go away so long as there is ice to smash through.  To the broken ice, the ice breaker is a villain, a un-compassionate destroyer, an uncompromising force of sheer will and something to be feared.  To me the value is in the ice breaker who can smash through the progressive ice even if people like Ben Cowan have built cities upon the ice believing that the surface was sturdy underneath.  They believe such things until they see the ice breaker coming and to cover their fear of seeing for the first time the waters under the ice, they attempt to direct the ice breaker somewhere else so that it doesn’t violate the cities of thought they have built upon progressive corruption.  That is the motive behind their diatribes of humility, arrogance, and pompousness.  Notice in the events shown in these clips that I was competing in as Cowan sent me his half-baked diatribes, that I don’t rub anything in when I win events.  But I don’t show modesty either.  If you are good, you are good and should not be ashamed of it.  People like Cowan mistake pride, confidence, and determination for evil vices created in the courts of Europe for the determined strategy of controlling the masses to limited thinking and self imprisonment by social shackles.

Instead of comparing us to China, India, Spain, and Russia, how about you compare us to Switzerland, Estonia, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Chile. We are the 10th freest country in the world now! Using the left/right paradigm gets old. It is now Nationalism vs. Federalism, Limited gov’t vs. Central planning. Obviously you want the Fed Gov’t to plan social cultural norms. Steve Jobs was a capitalist; he listened to the Grateful Dead and was an advocate of LSD. I don’t own any apple products, but luckily he was never jailed for 20 years with your authoritarian leaning positions. How many jobs did Steve Jobs create Rich?

I didn’t try and put Matt on the defensive. ‘’American Exceptionalism’’ comes off as arrogant to the average person and turns them away from limited decentralized gov’t that the good founders embraced! It also gives the average person the mentality that we need to export our awesomeness to other nations, which is the opposite of the founders. ‘’American Exceptionalism, is a term that Hitler would have embraced if he were American, getting people to believe in the good of the state. He detested divided gov’t and decentralization. He wanted to instill Nationalism in the German people, and he commended Lincoln in his book Mein Kampf for Nationalizing the US and trampling the states. No critical thinking allowed in their worlds, similar to Rich’s.

And here is why I find Cowan such a repulsive parasite that is more dangerous than the average progressive, because at least those threats are easy to identify.  Cowan sells himself as a logical conservative, but since his value system was threatened by my statements he has retreated to comparing me to Adolf Hitler!  Cowan, America needs to export its awesomeness to other nations!  You bet your ass!  I’ll say it again.  “AMERICA NEEDS TO EXPORT ITS AWESOMNESS TO OTHER NATIONS!” Other countries would be much, much, MUCH better off if they adopted American ideals of independence, economic freedom, and creative enterprise.

 I have no tolerance for drug use, but where do I advocate authoritarian drug laws!  SHOW ME ONE PLACE UPON THESE 2 MILLION WORDS!  ONE PLACE!  You can’t!  And if Cowan did any research into what I write about, he would know that I’m all about critical thinking and trying to get people to embrace such a concept—but because Cowan was too lazy to check before opening his mouth, or putting something in writing, he compared me to Adolph Hitler’s Mein Kampf hoping that introducing yet another anti-concept would force me into some sort of retreat from the name calling.  Well dude, it doesn’t work.  CLICK HERE FOR AN EXAMPLE.  

As for celebrating in sports, I don’t watch those main stream sports! I play sports that are gentlemen’s games, where you can call a penalty on yourself because the people who play have virtue! Humility and lack of explaining in a story of how the Union came about and how the founders studied other countries to help craft written documents such as the ‘’Declaration of Independence’’, ‘’Articles of Confederation’’, and ‘’The Constitution’’ is what is missing today. Broad rhetoric and arrogant phrases ‘’American Exceptionalism’’ detour people from discovering our founding generation’s great works!

Just as the definition of Welfare 250 years ago, ‘’it was a deliverance from evil’’, which now means gov’t assistance. The American Experience is the correct term in which to use! I have served my country and I am a small business owner and it makes me upset when people use terms that confuse people into thinking the person is bragging about America or is trying to invade another country and impose its Exceptionalism on them! So let’s teach kids limited gov’t and to promote trade with countries we don’t see eye to eye with. Encourage kids to read about the great risk takers and inventors of our country and the rest of the world!

Finally what Ben Cowan is really about; he considers himself a gentleman, something of a Victorian gentleman at that.  Well, dude, it was considered against the “gentleman code” to attack during bad weather or other adverse conditions, but George Washington attacked the Hessians at Trenton anyway against every kind of “gentlemanly” code of conduct there was, early in the morning, right after a holiday, and during bad weather.  Then again at the fall of Yorktown, Cornwallis attempted to send his surrendered sword by Deputy General Charles O’Hara to give to General Rochambeau.  When Rochambeau rejected the offer O’Hara had to give the sword to Benjamin Lincoln because Washington refused to allow Cornwallis to avoid acknowledging the American General as his superior in combat.  Cornwallis was a gentleman.  Washington was gracious in victory, but demanded respect—which is a lesson we should all be embracing!  I can only imagine what kind of “gentlemanly games” Cowan is talking about, Croquet, basket weaving, coin collecting?  I hang around knife throwers, gun marksman, and bullwhip artists.  CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW.  The “gentleman code” is just another anti-concept.  There is a difference between being respectful of other people, and then pawing off inaction, indecision, and just plain being a pussy to behaving like a “gentleman.”  Cowan, you be a gentleman all you want.  I’ll take the win, I’ll take the American Excepetionalism, and I’ll take the freedom that comes with it.  You keep the European terminology and keep calling me arrogant.  It lets me know I’m doing the right things.

 

A friend of Ben’s wrote me here and spoke on his behalf not to take him wrongly, so I deeply considered everything Cowan had said.  I think Cowan believes he’s doing and saying all the right things, but is clearly mixed up as to what definitions apply to what, and what to believe or not to.  I don’t fault people for ignorance so long as they are trying to get someplace positive.  But when they come across as experts—especially experts about my intentions, and compare me to Adolph Hitler, Rush Limbaugh, and even racists, there are traces of progressive society that come through in the guy that are direct results of his upbringing and skeletons he has in his own closet that keep him from being the kind of man he wishes he was, and I will not carry his emotional burden for him with anti-concept use.  LEARN MORE ABOUT ANTI-CONEPTS BY CLICKING HERE.  This struggle is clearly present in his comments to me, which he hopes to hide through insults, which for me is simply unacceptable.  I’ll take his friend at his word and believe that Cowan is not a bad person, just a person similar to me in thinking about some things, but dreadfully lacking in others.  But being not quite a complete person does not provide an excuse for name calling and wearing the mask of patriotism while being underneath something else entirely.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!