The Communist Teachings At Lakota: Superintendent Mantia Protects Teacher Wages

The scouting report at Lakota regarding all things campaign related is that I am a narcissist that thrives in the spotlight and the way to win this next election is to diffuse me without engagement—so not to play into my strengths. Lakota as a progressive institution find it appalling that any individual would see themselves as “bigger “than their socially centered school. On the other hand, my scouting report on Lakota is that they are the narcissists as a collective organization who believes they are the center of the community, and that they are acting on behalf of what’s good. The reality is that they are a cancerous leech that uses children to drive unionized government workers into inflated wages and have tied themselves over time to real estate values as a back-up to their child extortion racket. As a progressive organization they were set up years ago to fulfill the communist infiltration of America after McCarthy overplayed his hand—and the insurgents were emboldened by the public support of their cause which followed. Communism sought to infiltrate the public school system through the teacher unions and advance progressive goals, and there was never a finer example of this trait than the article by Superintendent Mantia in this week’s Today’s Pulse.

To know how ridiculously misleading and parasitic the Lakota school system intends to make itself upon the community which is its host it is important to read the quarter page public awareness column that the community newspaper gives to Lakota’s Superintendent each week. This latest week, as much as their campaign strategy has been designed to diffuse my “narcissism” Mantia acknowledges that she is reading here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom frequently, because she addressed several of my recent points made upon these pages. Her topic this week was a proposal to reduce fees in extracurricular activities so to increase student participation. But first she felt she needed to set the record straight on the value of teachers who volunteer their time—“for a small fee of course”—to provide students with extracurricular activities. She said, “Many, though not all of our extra-curriculars are guided by our teachers. They earn a small amount of extra money for doing it, but the vast majority put in far more hours than they’re required to, because they love what they’re doing and know how much it means to kids. Per-hour our coaches and advisors could make far more money working at any fast food restaurant.” The most dangerous part of that statement is that Mantia is a quarter million dollar member of Lakota’s management team and they are preparing to engage the labor union in 2014 contract negotiations. Mantia clearly is on the side of the teachers and the union based on just the statement she provided above—so anyone hoping that Lakota will put up a good fight against the union can wake up. Mantia is a former teacher, and she is on the business side of teachers. The management at Lakota is bought and paid for by the labor union and they are just “narcissistic” enough to believe that the residents of Lakota are stupid enough to supplement their scam with higher taxes.

Mantia goes on to say, “The two qualities we see young people develop so often in extra-curricular activities are leadership and teamwork. They also learn the value of sacrifice and hard work, and often, other life lessons. They may have to accept that they may not always be the star. Sometimes they will have other roles to fill.” She goes on for several more paragraphs with the same kind of progressive drivel for the next quarter page in the newspaper in that same fashion neglecting to report that the causes for the high fees imposed upon students and their families in the first place are due to her mismanagement. She chose to raise sports fees to punish parents for voting down Lakota’s previous three levies, and not ask the teachers and other Lakota employees to take a 5% pay cut which was proposed by No Lakota Levy after the levy defeats. Instead she advised the rest of Lakota’s management to raise sports fees to protect the teachers who work under her from unnecessary public scrutiny over their average salaries of 63K per year. She chose protecting the highly paid public employees over the community health then, and now to appear as though she were doing the community a favor ahead of the fourth levy attempt, she is floating the idea of being “compassionate” so that she can earn votes for a levy allowing her to throw that money gained straight at her upcoming union contract—which she already blew the negotiations by revealing her pro-teacher position—which for those who know her was a foregone conclusion. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FINANCIAL FACTS ABOUT THE UPCOMING LEVY.

Mantia had the audacity to state that her teachers would make more money working at a fast food restaurant then they would be paid to stick around a few extra hours a day to teach kids during extra-curricular activities. For those who aren’t so good at math, with an average salary of 63K per year, the teachers average approximately $30 dollars an hour, so teachers can make a lot of extra cash off their “extra-curricular sacrifices.” But what’s worse in Mantia’s comments are the things she values from these experiences which come straight out of the progressive playbook, sacrifice, team-work and other “shared values.”

The statements about communist penetration of our public schools have been underway for many years, so long that it is doubtful that Mantia has the intellectual history to grapple with the issues. She and her teachers are paid well to not pay attention to the “big picture” only to teach it. She was raised into the system and knows of nothing else. The attack against America was subtle, and occurred before her time. She believes she is sticking up for her employees with her comments and support of another tax increase against the community. But she is the one who’s narcissistic, and wrong. My father-in-law was visiting over the weekend and told me the story of how on Friday he was called into a school district where he lives in Kentucky as a substitute—a very affluent district that is the home of many thoroughbred owners. The demographics there are very similar to Lakota. He was called in to teach as he has been a teacher for public schools for several decades, and now in his later years does it only as a substitute. He holds several degrees, one of them a Master’s in geology. He reported his anger to me upon seeing two of the topics given by an advanced English teacher to their class written on the chalk board, one on the merits of Marxism, the other on the merits of feminism. Students had to pick one of those two topics to write about. It wasn’t hidden with subtle dialogue the way that Lakota hides their progressive educations, because there isn’t a narcissistic Rich Hoffman in my father-in-law’s school district to call them out, so they recklessly placed their agenda up on the chalk board for all to see. He was aghast at what his very affluent public school was teaching children and his obvious question—why wasn’t there a third topic about capitalism to choose from? The answer was that public schools are not about American traditional values, they are about collapsing economies and advancing fairness for all—at the expense of productivity. They are about higher taxes through schools as a way to redistribute income from one sector of the economy to another and they advance their agenda recklessly through the narcissism of the parents who support a large centralized institution that is simply a parasite upon the community. Those parents believe that in exchange for their support of people like Superintendent Mantia, and the 63K per year teachers at Lakota, that their child will escape a life of mediocrity and become successful adults. But what those parents discover too late is that the taxes raised are intended to be spent on teaching their children the merits of sacrifice—of sharing their wealth for the benefit of others. What their children are learning, which was confirmed in the comments of Superintendent Mantia in the Sunday, September 15, 2013 edition of Today’s Pulse of Butler County, is that kids are learning to work hard for the sacrifice of others so that collective society can advance fulfilling the aims of communists many years ago. These school officials will mislead, manipulate, and stoop to any low to advance the progressive platform.

The fight of our day is not in Syria, Russia, or even the Middle East, it is in our public schools where saboteurs are using our money stolen from property taxes to convert our children into socialists through an advanced communist plot hatched before Superintendent Mantia was even born. She is paid to advance that plot and look not too closely at their intentions—which is driven by government for the service of government with the ultimate example of narcissism provided anywhere. And it is our task to put an end to their scheme. There is no hiding it now; they are out in the open with their intentions. All that is required now is to admit that such sinister plots are at play and they intend to feed off the innocent minds of our children for a social goal that is not in their best interest. As Mantia said in her article, sometimes kids need to “learn the value of sacrifice and hard work, and often, other life lessons. They may have to accept that they may not always be the star. Sometimes they will have other roles to fill.” Those roles under communism are to work hard for the benefit of the greater good, a greater good that is determined by mother government for the benefit of itself and the employees who make it grow.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

A Morning In Liberty Township: Celebrating a backyard fantasy land of creativity and life yet to live

I usually wake up at 5 AM every morning to begin my day, and I am often alone with the early morning noises that accompany a sunrise. I never tire of mornings. There is something optimistic about every one of them that I find endlessly enduring. Every start of a new day is a hope for something that was better than the day before. However, over the weekend I awoke to find my wife still up, not yet having gone to bed, baking and preparing for a mammoth day of celebration that occurred at my oldest daughter’s home—a celebration of my youngest daughter’s first born son paying tribute to his first birthday. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW THE DAY HE WAS BORN. My daughters created for our first grandson a complete conversion of their Liberty Twp home into a story book themed party inviting both sides of the family to a mythological exercise that will lay the path for static patterns lasting a lifetime. For the many birthdays that follow, my grandson will have this first one to launch him onto a lifelong quest of adventure, curiosity, and creativity.

In our family creativity is extremely important. I raised my girls on the idea of creative enterprise even when the world no longer values such things because the benefits extend well into more remote aspects of individual lives. As little girls my wife and I would allow them to convert the entire house into the concepts of their creative thoughts. My girls had access to the entire basement to create anything they wished any time they desired. If their creative enterprises took them into the late hours, we let them do it without restriction. This followed a tradition my mom started with me, allowing me to do much the same, only on a smaller scale. The belief was that the mind being active had value on a young person and that value would translate over into other aspects of their lives. It was certainly true for me. I did so much of it that many adults were deeply concerned when I arrived into my teenage years showing no desire for pop rock music, girls, or fashion of any kind. I didn’t care about school, or the people I knew there because I was more content to live within the world of my own making, than in sharing my space with others. The creativity that I had as a young person was the first foundation I had into self-reliance. When some of those adults decided that I needed to grown up, and took away all that creativity, I gave them a string of violent years in protest which really never went away.

For my children I never restricted them in manners of creativity. Over many years I have known many very affluent families in Indian Hill, Northern Kentucky, and other similar places where their wealth afforded them the luxury of eccentricities. I have known entertainment types on both American coasts who make their livings off creativity, and host grand extravaganzas at great expense for their children and grandchildren. But all such events and people fell short of what my daughters did for my grandson, for reasons that defy conventional logic. As adults, and for the first time in their lives my wife and two children all shared equally in creative input as each are extremely gifted at different crafting skills, which was why my wife had baked, and cooked for a straight 30 hours without going to bed or resting. She even forgot to eat all day Friday in preparation for our grandson’s birthday. Her mind was in rapture with creative enterprise as the cake, and various other extravagant deserts she prepared had her mind working on overdrive.

My daughters meanwhile where busy at work transferring their Liberty Township home into a storybook setting of a living mythological significance. Most everything cooked was done by either my wife or daughters, and every decoration was made or built by an immediate family member meaning my children or one of their husbands. Nothing was store bought directly. Everything was made by hand only for the event of my grandson’s first birthday. There was no financial reward at the end of the endeavor, not a single bit of it was done with a fiscal concern. The entire effort was performed for the solitary reason of launching the young fellow into a life filled with creativity unhindered by convention.

When I was a kid, my mother was a room mother at school hoping that it would engage me more in my classes which I found grotesquely boring. I hated every moment of school, starting as early as kindergarten. My teachers noticed my obvious athletic ability early on, but more than even that, they found I was very artistically inclined. My art projects were always the features hanging up in class for all to see as my teachers hoped to use me to show what a good job they were doing, and hoped to inspire other students to do the same—which none of them could of course. The reason is that I learned my creativity at home, from my mother who would do multiple craft projects all the time. As a room mother for our holiday parties, she would do elaborate gifts to give all the kids in my class. She did this until I was in the fourth grade and every kid wanted her for a mother. Many of them acted like the little craft gifts she brought to school to give them were the best things they had ever received in their lives. For some, it was. Even some of those young kids who would grow up and become wealthy, driving Ferraris and indulging in the rewards of fiscal surplus never forgot the wonderful things that Mrs. Hoffman did for them during their grade school holiday parties. The reason is that many of their parents were just beginning to accept the progressive dual income role that is now the standard today and they had no parents at home who did nice things for them—because the parents were too busy.

I made a point with my own children to make sure they at least had what I had—hopefully more. I made it so that my wife was always home, and my children had unlimited creativity to indulge in to build their brains. My children when they were little came home from school, and went straight into the basement where they built entire cities out of wood, cardboard, and putty. This went on until they were essentially graduated from high school. My wife extended the tradition my mom had started and provided for my children–an unlimited creative environment. My wife, a creative bastion herself makes blankets, clothing, cakes, and exotic foods and is a limitless resource of creativity that mixes style and fashion perfectly. When she was a teenage girl she was a model for the John Casablanca School of Modeling and had parents who had wonderfully high tastes. She was set to become a fashion model in New York—until she met me. That sense of style helped shape my kids from the raw creativity that I had, into a careful balance of fashion that my wife brought to the table. The result has been the best of the two worlds. The culmination of that experience was seen at the magnificent party my children put on for my grandson—and extended family.

The intention was not to impress anybody, not me, not the family, not their neighbors—nobody. My children simply wanted to participate in the act of creation with the opportunity to provide for my grandson a life that holds all possibilities that the mind might possibly generate. Many might think that the little boy will never remember the events—that such an extravaganza was a waste of time. But they fail to understand that even though the brain does not consciously remember, it unconsciously writes information upon itself forming the static patterns of an individual’s life. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW STATIC PATTERNS. This is why it is so important to put good things into a brain even during sleep so that good things come out of the mind.

Driving home the other day on my motorcycle a very expensive Harley Davidson pulled up alongside me with its radio blaring. Normally motorcycle riders wave to one another, but this guy didn’t want to look at me. He was a middle aged guy, bald, fat around the middle, and he had a mustache typical of cops and firefighters. Sure enough by the stickers on the back of his motorcycle he displayed several showing that he belonged to a firefighter’s union. He seemed to recognized me because of my heavily anti-union stance, especially among cops, firefighters, and teachers. He was playing classic rock on his Harley radio very loud and truly thought he was cool. I looked at him directly laughing hoping to engage him, but he refused to look my way. He was an example of garbage in, garbage out. Young people in their 20’s can put garbage into their minds and hide the results from the rest of the world because they are only a few years away from their childhoods—from the constant positive messages aimed at kids through toy commercials, and popular entertainment. But after abusing themselves from 18 to 30 with careless sex, terrible music, and chemical intoxicants such as marijuana and alcohol the effects begin to show by age 31 to 40. By the time those individuals are 40 to 60 they look like beat up sacks of garbage that have been drug behind a truck for twenty years. Their cell structures rebel against years of abuse and their small minds cannot give any other command to their bodies but to look like chaotic messes. They are often fat, smelly, and look sickly. This rider was a victim of many years of bad decisions and his music was an attempt to carry him back to the beginning of his life, to his morning years. In his mind he hoped that a young 20-year-old girl who is at her own beginning might find him appealing. But the young girls only see a ruined old man—fat, ugly, hairy in all the wrong places, and a follower of other such men because he’s so proud of his “union brotherhood.” The girls laugh and snicker sending photo texts to their girlfriends making fun of the Harley rider as they pull up next to the guy at stop lights.

The reason my daughters put on such an elaborate party for my grandson was to give him the start of a life that carries him far away from the fate of people like the Harley rider. It was to launch him into a lifelong quest of creativity that will take him further than any of us have been able to go thus far. The extravagance was not to impress, but to repeal a society that does not value such things—which is why society is struggling with so many personal issues. The party was intended to write upon the young boy’s static patterns a brain activity that carries him to new heights not yet known, for a life that has possibilities only experienced through boundless creativity.

I am proud of them and all their work. They did what they did not for a single ounce of social gratitude, but for the unsaid mysteries that feed the human mind of a young child. Birthdays are a celebration of life and in our family; life is meant to be lived not squandered. It would be a failure if my grandson grew up and became like the unionized Harley rider, middle aged and still stuck mentally at the age of 15, and still looking for girls the same age. The work my family did was to insure against that tragic scenario, to guarantee that our grandson will grow up to reach for the stars instead of another bottle of Jack Daniels and become just another adult porn addict. My wife stayed up all day and night cooking and baking to make sure that her grandson can begin the second year of his life with the knowledge that life can be whatever you make it to be. Learning to make life good starts by developing creativity at an early age. Creativity can be applied not just toward career goals but in every aspect of life from the time that a person wakes up in the morning until they journey off to sleep each night.

I love mornings because like my grandson’s life, they hold infinite possibilities for creative use toward goals only a human being can conger up. I never tire of their infinite possibilities as the sun gradually grows brighter throughout the day. I am proud of the party not only for my grandson’s life, but for the rest of my family, who contributed, from my mom who went against the grain when the rest of the world was going to their jobs to be the mom every kid in school wanted. I gave that to my fashion model wife who gave even more of that creativity to my own kids. While at Disney World over this past summer, my children hatched this birthday party by looking at the way Downtown Disney was decorated and decided to elaborate further into their own backyard for my grandson’s first birthday. I am proud to have watched the creative arc occur over many decades culminating at this wonderful event, dedicated to a life lived, not squandered to faceless decay. As my reference to the Harley rider shows distain, it is because in the morning of his life, he chose to waste it, and the cost of his waste is evident now, no matter how shiny the motorcycle, or loud the radio. For my grandson, the first steps into his life will more than guarantee that his life will not be wasted as the day of his life lengthens and gets warmer, and busier muddled with complexity. The intention of the party was so that when he arrives at bed at the end of the day he can rest his head knowing that he lived his day fully, and utilized every measure of what is offered to the mind that thinks creatively.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

What Is Meant by Having “Thin Skin”: Stealing value from those who have it

It has always come up, and for whatever reason lately, has come up more often than usual, the notion of having a “thin skin.” The insinuation is that one should develop a “thick skin” and yield to insults of whatever kind for the purpose of collective opinion. Most of the world functions on this premise; however I disagree with it vehemently. I take name calling as a challenge to combat, otherwise it wouldn’t be attempted—for that is the real meaning behind the action. Yet our modern American interpretation of name calling and subtle slander is to assimilate the individual into group oriented behavior—to do as the drill sergeant does and drive out individual ego from a task and replace it with group assimilation. When the term “thin skin” is used, most of the time it is because the accuser wishes to impose upon another the destruction of individual ego so that they yield to collective enterprise.

When the issue of bullying is addressed in public schools, this is almost always the root cause. Schools do not know what to do about bullying because they are institutions of compliance, and require the destruction of individual ego. They generate bullying behavior by their very nature of existence. So they hope to curb the most violent forms of bullying with rules which never work, because the desire of institutionalism craves more the compliance of ego destruction than the compliance of rules to serve the whims of individuals. So as along as public schools exist in their current form, bullying will always occur. There is nothing a teacher, an administrator, or a parent can do about the issue.

In the military, bullying is used heavily during basic training. Personal insults are flung at individuals to strip them of their ego. The military mind molder then replaces the stripped away ego with compliance to greater causes associated with sacrifice to the group. Colleges do the same in their hazing rituals for the similar reasons. This is why such large portions of functioning adults have duality issues in their lives—why so many of them feel individually unsatisfied, ethically, sexually, intellectually when they are alone and are driven like moths to fire at social circles of group assimilation in order to find personal comfort, which never fully comes. They drink, get drunk, pop anti-depression medicine, or indulge themselves in some type of television prime time fiction, or fantasy sports selection to compensate their personal loss. The human craving of such activity comes from the destruction of their individual egos—and usually at the young age of grade school.

The entire human race past the age of 15 years of age expects group yielding to some degree or another. It has been pounded into our minds from a young age and the results are terribly obvious. Personal depression is driven by the need to align the values of individual ego with the social imposition of group assimilation. The desire to fulfill the empty goals of any group whether it be in a business enterprise where the underlings structure their lives around sucking up to their boss for the needs of the company rather than the drives of their individuality. The boss should not be surprised when they discover that a parade of incompetents work for their company. The boss hired individuals to fulfill certain tasks, yet those employees have built their lives around group pecking order, becoming obsessed with who is where on an organizational chart, believing falsely that the title one holds provides the merit of value for a job done—and those titles are given out by the boss—so sucking up might provide such merit. Both parties miss what they are looking for in the relationship, the boss loses because they end up hiring incompetent staff members who bring nothing to an enterprise but bobble heads who nod in agreement not because they agree with the boss, but because they want the titles the boss is entitled to provide to those deemed worthy. Because the boss often thinks the same way, they often give such titles to those who are most prone to assimilation to their organization—and failure ensues.

When I was young as is still the case, I did not accept this assimilation. In sports I sabotaged my own career because I would not allow myself to be assimilated into the group. I refused the snippy comments and personal insults from my coaches thinking they were making me better with violence earning me the nickname of “animal.” The older I got, the worse it got until coaches stopped trying to involve me. They wanted my athletic ability but I was just too much of a pain for the “team” they were trying to build. In class, I didn’t accept it from teachers. One example was an English teacher who was late every morning for home room class. This went on for months. The entire class had to stand outside waiting for the teacher to arrive. I felt as an individual that this was wrong, because it disrespected the individual rights of the other kids, and it made me very angry. So one morning when this teacher arrived to class—late, they discovered that the lock to their classroom door was packed shut with chewing gum, so that a key would not unlock the door. My message to the teacher was that if they wanted to ensure they could unlock their door in the morning, they better arrive early to protect it from sabotage. It took half a day to get a locksmith to open the door, which I had packed with gum in full view of everyone. Of course some of the students told the authorities on me as they were seeking favoritism from the teacher in a similar way that businessman kisses ass to work their way up the institutional ladder. They want the authority figure to grant the titles not based on individual effort, but by degree of personal sacrifice to the organization as a whole. I got into a lot of trouble, but it didn’t stop the behavior. I went on with a group of friends to set off fireworks in the halls under student’s feet within the very next week, and had frequent fights with other students. I sought to sabotage authority any way possible. It wasn’t that I went out looking for trouble, but was simply protecting my individuality against group assimilation.

As an adult I am very happy, and healthy. I’m in my middle years now, I take no medicine for depression, heart disease, or any other physical aliment. And while many my age seem to rely on Viagra to maintain their bedroom stamina, I couldn’t imagine having such a stupid problem—and don’t need it. I don’t drink, I don’t over eat, I don’t lose sleep at night over social issues, I could care less what my neighbors are doing so long as they don’t bother me. And I could sit for entire weekends totally alone and not get enough “me” time. I love myself, and I am happy I do. The result is that I have much love to give my family because the value of “love” is generated by my ego—which is uniquely preserved. Part of the preservation is in not tolerating attempts to assimilate my behavior to the whims of group compliance.

When it is said that such people have “thin skin” this is what the accusers hate, they wish to see a person who will yield their individuality to group goals instead of an individual pulling the group toward their goals. When it is wondered by the masses what the invisible qualities of leadership are, the root is in the ability of individuals to get groups to follow them. But leaders are not provided in this fashion by titles given by a boss. Leaders have intact egos that can bend the will of broken intellects to their desires by sheer force—the force is in unifying conquered souls toward a goal the individual leader desires. Really good leaders can do the same with individuals as well, and I am of this latter category. Because of my background that is often dripped with blood I learned how to achieve leadership without destroying the individuality of the participants. The spilt blood was worth the value, because the skill is unique in modern America, and it serves me well. That value wasn’t given to me by anybody; it is something I gave myself by not allowing my ego to be stripped away by group assimilators at any point in my life.

The same rules hold today. I don’t worry what people say behind my back, but if they engage me directly, they will get a fight—100% of the time. It is a personal policy that I have for my life to protect it against the forces of group assimilation which I have determined is one of the most corrosive forces in the known universe. At times when I have found myself at Walgreens to get a passport picture, or just to pick up some small grocery item I continue to be amazed at the long lines of people seeking doctor prescriptions for ailments that are mostly psychological. Most of the morbidly obese, the headache prone, the depression driven, the faulty heart conditions of those seeking Walgreen prescriptions, and even the blue pill popping men who desire to keep a four-hour erection for 5 minutes of bedroom engagement with their wives are driven to their multiple forms of insanity because of their stripped away egos which they yielded to group compliance imposed upon them by name calling. Of course my attitude has put me before many court judges who threatened years in jail if I did not become more compliant, but I always presented to them the perilous dilemma, which I covered in my novel Tail of the Dragon. I was always basically a good person, with moral authority on my side. The cost of putting my non compliant behavior into a locked up area is greater for them than against me, so they have elected not to do it. In times when blood has been spilt and bodies were broken, it was cheaper for the statist system to yield to the individual, because the refusal to yield in a locked up environment means death and liability for the captors—and knowing that they were looking at a pure example of goodness, they elected not to impose that cost on themselves. Thus, the benefit of being an individual in a socially broken world full of followers who are lost if they don’t have a leader in their lives to issue out merit for unearned action. Name calling is the first step into removing ego from individuals for the benefit of group assimilation. The loss of ego destroys individuals and robs the gifts that personalities have to give to their families, their friends, their companies, but worst of all, themselves. Such victims die a slow death beginning in their grade school years once they start yielding to authority instead of fighting to preserve themselves.

So I have a strict policy against assault, I don’t allow it, verbally, or physically. It is not my duty to learn to take it for some mythical “greater good,” yielding to the needs of institutionalism. The by-product is that I have unique gifts to offer, and those who know me best, understand how much it enriches their lives—and institutions. But the benefits cannot be understood without the context of leadership and what makes someone a “natural leader” and what makes others just kiss-ass administrators as worthless as toilet paper—the tragedy of our current society is in their lack of ability to know the difference because they are functioning from the wrong motivations in their lives given to them by faulty educations at an early age. It is for these reasons that I have a zero tolerance policy for personal insult, and why many refer to my behavior has being “thin skinned” as if it were my social duty to allow impositions from inferiors to loot my value to bolster their own deflated egos with the value of my personal worth. The term, “thin skin” is just another name calling attempt to do for the egos what Viagra does for their genitals, and that is something I won’t allow—and never will.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

What Fast Food Workers and Teachers Have in Common: Rich Hoffman and Matt Clark talk about it on WAAM Radio

Matt Clark had me on his WAAM radio show in Ann Arbor, Michigan to discuss the inflated wages fast-food workers have been demanding as unions are attempting to infect the food service industry with communist oriented mediocrity. During our conversation we covered some of my personal stories and feelings about how value has been robbed from all fields of endeavor due to the subtle influence of communism through labor unions, and how that has lowered the performance level of productivity in America. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW MY THOUGHTS ON THIS MATTER IN GREATER DETAIL. As our discussion evolved we discussed public school teachers and how they are like the ridiculous fast-food worker in thinking they are worth a lot more money than they really are just because of their collective-bargaining agreements. Watch and listen to the interview for yourself:

What has been robbed from the fast food industry, the teaching profession, and every endeavor where unions’ public and private have taken root is the value of value. Value has been stolen from the American worker through these collective bargaining agreements, the belief that just because the ignorant masses believe something, that they can assert a value to it. Obviously, they can not. When people like Matt and I show outrage at the behavior, it is because we see that it is value for an endeavor that has been lost in the process of teaching, building cars, or simply making hamburgers as mediocre workers inspired to achieve a “living wage” through collective enterprise no longer reach for the stars, dream of becoming more than they are, or constantly invent new and better ways of doing things because they are complacent.

American industry was the best in the world because it offered the prospect of profit, even at the lowest level job—as effort and value drove the market. Through the typical progressive, through the unions, the government workers, and all forms of collectivism from the private union steward to the college fraternity, it is the concept of “fitting in” to a group that is destroying American ingenuity, and thus, destroying the American worker. All participants in such processes understand the concept of collectivism and they sense there is something wrong with it, yet they continue to keep their mouths shut because they know they must do so to reap the benefits of group affiliation. Groups do not like individuals who speak out, because there is comfort in silence, and under the communist like methods of the labor unions, there is pay through collective bargaining.

That mentality is attempting to migrate into the fast-food industry out of sheer desperation. Like a cancerous leech, labor unions have destroyed American manufacturing, all government unions, and a good portion of the food distribution network. They need fresh blood to keep their influence migrating off the used carcasses of their members, so they are targeting restaurants. The cost is a loss of value from the industry that is there to some degree in individual pockets where exceptional workers can still make a difference in some fast food stores, and rise to the top to eventually run some of those establishments. But the threat of a labor union moving in to build a nation of more complacent workers happy to make $15 an hour for doing a job that is only valued under $10 is a threat not only to cheap and easy food, but the value of capitalism that is implanted in every free-standing restaurant in America.

Once workers become unionized they are forever tainted by the effects of collectivism, and are more or less ruined for life. The union employee is a typical individual that has been cannibalized for the greater good, and yielded all their hopes and dreams to the value of the worst of their group affiliation. Unions are anti-America, anti-capitalism, and anti-productive. They are no good for anybody. But worse than anything they are looters of value as they not only rob individuals of their merit, but steal value from every task they are affiliated with. And for that reason, they are agents of destruction upon a wasteland that was once known as the most productive country on the planet—now consumed with the parasite named “collective-bargaining.”

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

The Overworked Lakota Teacher: New levy talking points from the regime of public union monopolies

If it was ever wondered what the cost of public education monopolies are, read the following comment from an apparent Lakota teacher who came unglued the other day on the Channel 9 website for a story they did about the upcoming levy attempt. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. The teacher’s comments are shown below. Before I dismantle this teacher’s claims to pain and suffering, read it for yourself. The short of the issue is that this teacher can make the claims of hardship because they are working for a monopoly—they have no competition to judge against. So they can claim any little thing as an unwarranted pain, because the unionized workforce of the teaching profession backed by the federal government is operating as an anti-trust. Their demands, and pay rates are dictated by price-fixing, and their expectations are ridiculously high because of it. Now read what a teacher from Lakota thinks is a hard day as they answer to a commenter named “Joe Jobs.”

Let me be succinct in case you can only hold one or two thoughts in your head at any one time. First, those “unions” are made up of teachers; teachers who spend their every day in the classroom with their students and then do the grueling “union” job after hours in many cases. Teachers choose their profession because they are dedicated to helping children be successful people and citizens of their communities. See, it benefits us all when our children succeed in life. Joe, take a “sick day” this week and visit any Lakota school. Sign in and tell the secretary you want to volunteer in a classroom for the day. Don’t forget to pack a small lunch; you won’t be going out and you won’t have much time to eat that lunch anyway. Better be sure to go to the bathroom before the students arrive, because once they do, your only “break” of the day will be after the students go home. Please dive right in; help that teacher manage classes filled with students who arrive with a myriad of abilities and challenges. Some don’t speak English yet. Others are living through family wars, losses of parents or jobs, some are latchkey and arrive at school before the sun is up and most people are not even dressed for work. Be sure you help the students understand how to edit their writing to make it clear. Then help the students understand the challenging new math curriculum that the state and the new “common core” dictates they must understand and succeed with. You’ll have to write for the student whose muscular disease no longer allows her to hold a pencil. You’ll need to always be aware of the time so that students get to the nurse for their insulin checks and their medications. The counselor will need to see some who desperately need his/her help. Several in your class will need to leave at their appointed time to go to the resource room where they’ll continue to work with their specialist who tailors their work to meet the individual needs of each of those students who struggle. Don’t forget to challenge those kids who fly through their work and crave more! Follow the students as they travel their day to each of their classes without their favorite subjects: art, music, and PE. They’ll get a lunch and small recess; you won’t. During your half hour lunch, I hope you can eat with one hand while you answer parent emails with the other, tutor that child that comes in needing help with their math facts, and of course, you’ll have a meeting 4 out of 5 days. When everyone is exhausted, and you finally send your students home, get your butt outside because you have carpool duty. See, Lakota lost most of their busing, so you’ll stand outside every afternoon while hundreds of cars line up to retrieve their children. Pay attention; make sure the right kid gets into their car quickly. The kids will be too busy talking with their friends to be paying attention, so you’ll have to. Finally, at 4:30, go to the bathroom, finally, and drag your butt into your car. Did you remember all those papers that must be assessed before the kids arrive tomorrow? Take them home. Forget watching TV or going out for a run or walk, you have work to do. This is your 60+ hour a week job, that you love, by the way, for 40+ weeks of the year. With an advanced degree and 20 years of experience, what is your salary? Seriously? Think again, JoeJobs. Support our children and their education. Teachers have been doing just that every day.less

I see no problem with arriving at work at 7:30 in the morning and not taking a break until 5 PM. The teacher however does get a bit of a breather between class periods all through the day, so no matter how grueling this teacher attempts to portray their day; it is an obvious neurotic exaggeration. A ten-hour work day is a piece of cake, and I have offered Lakota schools to take this teacher’s challenge and teach not just one of their classes, but four of them at the same time. I made such a challenge to Lakota East’s Spark Magazine where Dean Hume is the head of that endeavor. Of course they didn’t take me up on the offer, and our relationship is so deteriorated now that it is off the table. But the gist is they know at Lakota that their claims of hardship are overblown in a big way, and their collective bargaining agreement expecting over $60K a year on average is too high. Way too high—by about 10K per year.

Much of what the teacher complained about is driven by failures in progressive education, where teachers have attempted to take the place of traditional parents, infusing themselves to the lives of all children in intrusive ways. They have desired to push traditional parents out-of-the-way and raise children into a statist education making students always dependent on others. This has made the teacher’s job harder as parents have yielded to this intrusion seeking a taxpayer-funded babysitter while they build their careers for their own pursuits. The teacher at Lakota made themselves advocates of a progressive education, and they are dealing with the results of a classroom full of dependents. The failure is in the style of education. If the teacher’s job is harder, it is because the progressive education children are receiving has made it so. The task of putting a band-aid on the failure by throwing money at education through permanent tax increases is a stupid idea.

If there were competitive options, that teacher would be happy to have the problems they are complaining about now. The only reason they feel obliged to complain in this case is because there is no competition to their profession other than a few remote private schools, or the occasional home-schooled family. Therefore, the severity of the workday expressed by this teacher is measured against the unrealistic expectations of employment created by a government monopoly at Lakota. Only in such monopolies could employees behave as badly as some of those teachers at Lakota who have been involved in sex scandals, and gotten away with the crime, and still make the claims of hardship similar to what was made in the above statements. The reason is that they are anti-trust employees justifying their impositions on the communities that employ them with parades of complaints that are driven by their own incompetency.

For further proof of this mentality, here is a letter to me from a pro tax supporter I received just the other day.

Rich,

I disagree with your goal of $45K average salaries for teachers. But the public will ultimately decide that. If that goal is reached, it will be up to the teachers to work at a $45K pace and not the pace they are currently working.. Your comment that “teachers at Lakota are making too much money for doing too little” is the point of the levy results. Why would anyone devote so much time toward a job which the community deems as being not worth it? Why isn’t 8 hours of hard work each day enough time toward their jobs?

Mr. George says that the public wants to work with the teachers, but the union won’t let them. Who does he think the union is? It is that 2nd grade teacher that comes in to school 3 weeks early to set up her classroom and prepare for the year. The union is the 5th grade teacher who postpones her bathroom break so her students are under constant supervision.. The union is the AP teacher who teachers college level material using a high school schedule with high school materials and support. When parents go to open house and conferences, that is when they should voice their displeasure with the union because that is who they are directly talking to.

Once again I call on the labor force of the schools to determine the next round of cuts if the levy fails and those cuts should be in the time devoted to the job at hand. Make gone the 50-60 hours work weeks. The public, by voting no, is saying they can’t afford to type of service.

William Schmidt

Isn’t it amazing how similar those comments are to each other? It is the new union talking points for the elections of 2013.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

Egalitarianism: Parasites seeking asylum from their own ineptness

Chances are dear reader you fall on the latter half of this upcoming statement as opposed to the former, that often there are those who are on the cutting edge, who fearlessly face down the impossible with a mentality that is obscure to all others, and there are those who wish to sit down with such people and share in the wealth of fiscal opportunity they have created with sheer uniqueness. People who believe in consensus building and shared ideas are those trained in the false ways of egalitarianism. Most every education system in the world teaches this forged method of human achievement because it masks a grim reality—that it is the very few who have the courage to face down the unknown, the perilous opportunities of uncharted waters, but the many wish to take credit for the voyage once safety is realized and strategy is achieved.

I have sat through many dozens of human endeavor where I solitarily cut through the dangers of a task only to have a parade of parasites join me at the finish line wanting to pop corks and celebrate in a victory with the chant of “teamwork.” I laugh inwardly at such people knowing that at any moment I could repeat the task over and over again forever—but they could not, and they know it. They hope that I don’t know it, or that nobody else discovers it, but they do—and it terrifies them. So they promote the social activity that was taught to them during their educations—egalitarianism.

Egalitarianism (from French égal, meaning “equal”)—or, rarely, equalitarianism^[1][2]—is a trend of thought that favors equality for particular categories of, or for all, living entities. Egalitarian doctrines maintain that all humans are equal in fundamental worth or social status, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.^[3] The Cultural theory of risk holds egalitarianism as defined by (1) a negative attitude towards rules and principles, and (2) a positive attitude towards group decision-making, with fatalism termed as its opposite.^[4] According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the term has two distinct definitions in modern English.^[5] It is defined either as a political doctrine that all people should be treated as equals and have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights^[6] or as a social philosophy advocating the removal of economic inequalities among people or the decentralisation of power. Some sources define egalitarianism as the point of view that equality reflects the natural state of humanity.^[7][8][9]

At a cultural level, egalitarian theories have developed in sophistication and acceptance during the past two hundred years. Among the notable broadly egalitarian philosophies aresocialism, communism, anarchism, libertarianism, left-libertarianism, social liberalism and progressivism,^{[dubious – discuss]} all of which propound economic, political, and legal egalitarianism. Several egalitarian ideas enjoy wide support among intellectuals and in the general populations of many countries. Whether any of these ideas have been significantly implemented in practice, however, remains a controversial question.

One argument is that liberalism provides democracy with the experience of civic reformism. Without it, democracy loses any tie—─argumentative or practical—─to a coherent design of public policy endeavoring to provide the resources for the realization of democratic citizenship. For instance, some argue that modern representative democracy is a realization of political egalitarianism, while in reality, most political power still resides in the hands of a ruling class, rather than in the hands of the people.^[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarianism

Egalitarianism allows a room full of businessmen to believe that they deserve a seat at the table when it is only one or two at the table who gave them all something to talk about. Without the initiative of the self-motivated, nothing happens. In politics, board meetings and town hall gatherings allow democracy to claim the rewards of the very few who created the options discussed such as whether or not a new store could be built into a community, or how to spend the tax money taken from property owners. The money and business opportunities were created by the very few, but is spent and consumed by the many who wish to see themselves as equal contributors to the process through egalitarianism. But they are not equal, they are simply parasites—they depend on the actions of others to sustain themselves.

In the case of today’s egalitarian trend, for over two hundred years Europe’s altruist, collectivist intellectuals claimed to be the voice of the people—the champions of the downtrodden, the disinherited masses. They advocated unlimited majority rule—rule by consensus. But their error was that they failed to pay heed to those who created their opportunities. Without those types—the creators–the “champions of the people” would have nothing to discuss or distribute to the masses. Capitalism and its moral—metaphysical bases had to be destroyed by the egalitarians so that the evidence of this parasitic enterprise indulged in by the could be realized. The concept of justice had to be destroyed so that value judgments could not be distributed to those who were ripped off—the creators of virtually everything—the forward thinking individualist whose mind and effort molded the world from their sheer imaginations.

In the end, it was Payton Manning who won the game for Denver and the loss of Ray Lewis sealed it for Baltimore. Everyone else playing the game were egalitarians. The Broncos “team” simply rode the coattails of Payton Manning. Without him, they would only be “average.”

Every time I encounter these egalitarians it sickens me to my very core. I offset my disgust by withdrawing from them for long periods of time, and I always return to the act of creation not for them, but for me. I create because I enjoy it. But the process of the egalitarians never ceases to disgust me in the way that maggots on a rotting corpse might sicken the stomach. Egalitarians are simply vile to the creative process, and they bring nothing to the table. Consensus building exercises do not work, it has never worked, and it will never work under any conditions. There are always only two types, there are people with ideas, then there are people who seek to loot portions of other people’s ideas to fill voids in their own lives. Value is not created through equalitarianism. It is simply another form of wealth redistribution, the value of those who create given to those who do not by democracy.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

Why Some Republicans and Democrats Want War in Syria: Protecting the United Nations with American money

Many pundits and social commentators seem baffled as to why some Republicans share with Democrats a desire for war in Syria while others share in common a desire to stay out of such an action. It is mysterious to them that a supposed anti-war, pro peace politician like Barack Obama would support a war effort of any kind, while political “extremists” such as Sarah Palin does not. The reason is not because one political party represents elephants while the other represents donkeys, but because they are both social progressives as the others are not, or are trying to distance themselves from such political parasites.

Progressives believe in global unity, and individual sacrifice for the greater good as defined by them. They wish to think of the world as a giant global village and they are the chieftains. If some terrible thing happens in Syria, then it is the job of the “international community” to do something about it once the United Nations is made aware of an evil. In the case of Syria the crimes against the Syrian people has been known for a long time, but it was only once the United Nations inspectors supposedly saw footage, and were granted into the country to inspect conditions for themselves that progressive politicians decided that the time for action was now, rather than at any other point in time, past or future.

Progressives are not attempting to do justice to the poor people killed under a tyrannical regime. They are simply attempting to preserve the authority of The United Nations as a world police force. The war drums in Syria by otherwise antiwar politicians are the obvious result of these progressive types. If it was ever wondered what politicians are progressive and which actually hold the type of beliefs established under their respective political parties it has never been more obvious, or hypocritical as to whom are progressives than those who support the Syrian War.

Progressives are vile, despicable people who are destructive intellectual collectivists. What they are fighting for is not justice in Syria for the benefit of free people. They simply fight to preserve the reputation of the United Nations. In the context of the global community, it is the United States that is known as the official police force in that global community—and other countries who have elected to stay out of Syrian engagement wish to see the police do their job on behalf of the United Nations, while maintaining their own disengagement from conflict due simply to the financial cost.

It is not such a mystery once this basic fact is known, who is what and why they believe the things they do. Progressives want war because it further advances their desire for global rule under a gigantic social village where the values of The United States are erased so that the values of lower quality countries can be elevated. Eventually all progressives hope the values of all people will be equal under the leadership of the village chieftains, the progressives. Under those terms, things are not so mysterious. Progressives are not for American preservation, they are about advancement of United Nations influence, and the war in Syria allowing them to achieve two of their goals, to destroy the reputation of America as an independent sovereign nation, and strengthen the influence of The United Nations as a global police force. But the war is not about preserving American independence, or fighting for freedom across the world. That is the distinct and sorrowful difference. The supporters of the Syrian War are united in their goal of progressive politics and that makes them dangerous to every American who supports the Constitution of The United States of America. Progressives desire to use the resources of America to destroy it while moving all the countries of the world toward a global village ruled by a Constitution not yet written, by a society of people the progressives hope to mold from their own cloth. It is not the Founding Fathers of America that these people hope to emulate. They hope to become their own type of “Founding Father” in a society not yet known built on political views of the dangerous progressive, and their wholesale desire to destroy individuality at all cost.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

Vote Justin Binik-Thomas for Deer Park School Board: The right person for the right reasons

For those who need to be reminded, Justin Binik-Thomas is an author, one of the founders of the Cincinnati Tea Party, and was at the heart of the IRS scandal personally targeted because of his conservative beliefs. He is also a fan of my novel Tail of the Dragon and is a recent conqueror of that treacherous road in the mountains of the North Carolina/Tennessee, which is evident by the picture on his web site: http://www.binikthomas.com. He is a frequent guest on Greta Van Susteren’s Fox News broadcast and does several radio spots a year with my friends Matt Clark and Doc Thompson. He is also a personal friend of mine. So it gives me great pleasure to announce that Justin is running for the Deer Park School Board.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Committee to Elect Binik-Thomas Contact

Justin Binik-Thomas
Candidate for Deer Park School Board

candidate@binikthomas.com

(513) 402-2727

Binik-Thomas Responds to Deer Park School Levy Request

Deer Park, OH, September 4, 2013– The budget shortfall remains one of the largest district concerns. I have had the opportunity to review the coffee session materials and the five-year budget with senior district leadership. I have come to the conclusion that the levy is premature.

As a taxpayer, I expect budget lines that do not impact services or people should be reduced or removed prior to a request for new funds. The five-year budget includes quite a few areas where this has not yet occurred. Among these are a postal meter, awards, and a line labeled “other.”

The coffee session materials provided attendees with a false choice of ‘tax me a bit more now’ or ‘tax me a lot more later.’ Predictably, the attendees selected the lower tax number. District mailers tout this “choice.”

The proposed levy will tax us forever in order to plug a potential four-year gap.

Next Steps

Regardless of the outcome of this levy, we need to engage in long-term revenue planning to ensure we can cover unfunded mandates, educational needs, and emergencies without continually asking for taxpayer bailouts or levies.

We have two success stories in town to use as a model: my alma maters, Walnut Hills High School and the University of Cincinnati. Each has provided ways to grow funding, using many under-$20 donors, to achieve their goals.

We can further mitigate this risk by limiting our dependence on taxpayer (federal) funds.

About Justin Binik-Thomas

http://www.binikthomas.com

Justin is married to Casey and the proud father of two preschool children (aged 1 and 3). He is a nine-year resident of Deer Park and graduate of Indiana Wesleyan University (MS) and the University of Cincinnati (AA, BS). In addition to working as a contract manager in the medical research industry, he specializes in media relations as owner/consultant of Conservative Media Group.

In his free time, he volunteers as a chaplain at his synagogue and leads the Sunshine Committee. Justin has taught at religious school (grades 2, 3, and 7), currently teaches a social media course annually at a local university, and is responsible for training new employees at both businesses.

Even though I personally think public education is a complete waste of time, and am not the politician type as I don’t play well with others, I admire when local people who are very passionate about reform get involved in politics. I would say to Justin that he is wasting his time with the Deer Park School Board; however, he wouldn’t be if all the school board members were like him. It is entirely possible that public education would not be such a wreck as it is today if people like Justin were school board members in every district in America.

Unfortunately most school board members are big spenders who are in love with the government statist version of public education—filled with progressive politics and antagonistic toward American tradition. That’s why they often run and win while conservatives build businesses, make money and throw money at progressives like a fisherman trying to escape blood thirsty piranhas by pouring blood in the water to take them off the scent. Justin Binik-Thomas is not one of those types. He is a star in his own right, an accomplished person who could care less whether or not he has a powerful nameplate on his desk in charge of millions of dollars. If voters of Deer Park had to pick anyone in a ballot box during their entire lifetimes, it is unlikely they would run across a candidate as pure as Justin Binik-Thomas who simply wants to do the right thing for the right reasons at the absolute right time.

Vote for Justin Binik-Thomas for Deer Park School Board! overmanwarrior-team

CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON JUSTIN.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

The Final ‘Lone Ranger Box’ Office Numbers: Western values upheld through Disney’s ‘Star Wars’

The worldwide total box office take for Disney’s The Lone Ranger was $239,131,00 which is respectable. It was hardly the box office flop that the entertainment industry has attempted to project it to be. I felt that The Lone Ranger deserved a bit of defense because it was a hack of a good movie. I heavily promoted it, I loved the film, and I am sure that when it hits the home theater market, it will do excessively well. Disney spent the enormous sum of $215 million on the production of the modern western plus many tens of millions on advertising hoping the picture would bring in a billion dollars as a summertime blockbuster. But the money wasn’t there. By the time the summer box office market hit the Fourth of July, movie goers had already spent their money on superhero pictures like Iron Man 3 and Man of Steel. Money was still spent on children’s films like Monster’s U and Disney’s Planes, but for the most part, movie audiences had run out of money leaving many studio films to fail at the box office. But when it came to The Lone Ranger, there was a hatred from the entertainment community that caused them to even turn against Johnny Depp, which I found fascinating, and I know exactly why. A good portion of the why is seen in a totally unrelated Blaze Television piece that Glenn Beck did about his experiences on a real western ranch. The entertainment community in Hollywood’s Wilshire Blvd and Broadway in New York has grown to despise the “flyover states” and Glenn Beck is part of that New York culture which is where he made his fame and fortune. But wisely, he has moved away in search for truth and discovered the America that the rest of us already know about, and he is touched by the results.

The Lone Ranger as a Disney film was about these good ol’ fashioned attributes of self-reliance and rugged individualism. The movie will be looked back upon as a success as it will become a fan favorite in the years to come once it gets away from the entertainment machine that is rooted in progressive political causes. The Lone Ranger was in fact too good for the modern film community. They did not want it to do well because they didn’t want to have to compete against it with future remakes and copy-cat attempts by other studios. Modern progressives do not want to revisit the era of the American western. They do not want western values to exist in American culture for many of the reasons Glenn Beck uttered in his short video clip above.

The movie business is changing dramatically, and industry insiders know it will not be to their advantage. They resent Disney as a family film studio and the amount of money they generate. Disney thankfully holds the rights to Marvel Comics, Pixar, their own slate of family programming and now the massive franchise of Star Wars which I’m going to state emphatically is set to change the world with “western values.” Star Wars is a modern western. George Lucas made Star Wars in the spirit of the old Saturday morning serials that made The Lone Ranger so popular and there is little that the world can do at this point to stop the explosion of Star Wars that is about to burst upon the world. Movie studios attempting fixed progressive social messages can see that Disney is positioned to get the “family friendly” message out to the flyover states for the next 20 years while they collapse under the weight of competition.

That competition is driven by union labor. The cost to make movies is too high because labor demands are too ridiculously over-rated and most studios cannot make films that will garner over $500 million in worldwide market sales which is what it takes to cover modern production costs. So many studios will drown within the next decade because they will have to produce more comedies, more chick flicks, and more small pictures that are not so effects driven, because during the summer of 2013, many of them took a bath that they drowned in. The impact of 2013 won’t be seen until 2015. In that year, Disney will become the most dominant film studio in entertainment as the rest of the entertainment establishment reels. Other studios will have to file for bankruptcy. They will not be able to compete.

Disney has their own internal marketing machine, their own amusement park revenue, and they own ABC, ESPN and many other media outlets, so they can afford to have the rest of the industry turn their back on them, which they did when The Lone Ranger was released. Critics went after the film more for the power that Disney had, than because the film was bad. The industry wanted to see Disney fail because they know what’s coming, and they resent the filmmaker Jerry Bruckheimer openly naming himself a conservative while he was promoting The Lone Ranger. That is where the real hatred for The Lone Ranger filmmakers and the film itself stemmed from. Disney is not making movies for the Los Angeles and New York markets, but for the other 48 states that are the “flyovers.”

When Star Wars hits the release phase, Lucasfilm under the protection of Disney is going to produce the most intense schedule of family programming ever seen in the motion picture, and television industry. I have read just about every Star Wars novel, and I can report that there is so much wealth in that story line that literature has never seen anything like it. When that material becomes television shows, cartoons on the Disney Channel, more novels, more movies, more video games, entertainment will be changed forever. And Star Wars is not a progressive production—it is traditional in the way that The Lone Ranger was a western set in the desert during a historical past; Star Wars is a western set in the distant past in deep space.

When it is wondered what the Huffington Post and Glenn Beck have in common, it is Star Wars. The Huffington Post covers every move of the Star Wars production with keen interest and if anybody has read any books by Glenn Beck Star Wars references are common, especially in his novel The Overton Window. When Star Wars hits theaters in the winter of 2015 after Avengers Two dominates the summer box office the world will change in entertainment. A new bar will be set, and many studios will collapse under the pressure. They know this instinctively and they took out their frustration on The Lone Ranger.

In the end, The Lone Ranger will get the last laugh. It will not be a financial loss for the Disney studio as it will easily cover its marketing budget with home sales on Blu Ray. But more than that, The Lone Ranger is one of the many influences of Star Wars. The values of The Lone Ranger are the values of Jaina Solo who will be the star of the next Star Wars film. She will go down in history as the strongest female protagonist in any movie at any point in time, and Disney will be the studio that can take credit for it. Disney will not need the New York and Los Angeles media in their court. They will have the “fly over states” and a very hungry international market that is poised to consume the intensely “western” values of Star Wars which will eclipse everything else produced by all other studios. In the end, The Lone Ranger produced by the Disney Company will ride off into the sunset knowing the part it played in the creation. Critics attacked The Lone Ranger not because it was a bad movie, but because of the values it articulated. But even their parade of insults did not prevent the film from doing respectable business. For Disney however, the best is yet to come, and for those who were afraid of The Lone Ranger, wait till the impact of the new generation of Star Wars hits a youth that is so hungry for heroes that they can think of little else. The emotional void left by our modern progressive society will fill quickly with values that were born in the American western.

And no group of progressives, Fabian socialists, or open communists will be able to stop it this time……………………………………….

The western is back. But this time the horse will be replaced by space ships, the gun and the whip by the lightsaber of Jaina Solo.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

‘A Theory of Justice,’ by John Rawls: Destroying America through the legal system

A major escalation of degeneracy by the modern statist regimes using meritocracy to propel mediocrity into every modern profession is a fairly recent trend inspired by the 1972 book A Theory of Justice, by John Rawls who was a professor of philosophy at Harvard University. Rawls argued in that popular statist book that a new theory of social justice demands that humans counteract the injustice of nature by instituting a corrupt and unthinkable concept upon mankind, equality at the expense of quality. Rawls believed that nature should be rebelled against depriving those favored by nature of the right to rewards they produce, and grant to the incompetent a right to the effortless enjoyment of the rewards they could not produce or imagine on their own. In other words John Rawls believed that justice should be redistributed into society to alter nature itself bringing different standards of justice based on social need, not individual desire. Under this thinking if a dirt bag raped a woman, or broke into a home and stole all the money of the occupants, the scales of justice would be altered for the man if he was a member of the poor, or minority because nature did not give him the proper tools to be equal to those he robbed, or raped. Under Rawls theory, the individual crimes are secondary to the greater good of social equality, so under his “Theory of Justice” the criminal is a useful tool of fighting against nature the tendency to make some people better than others.

A Theory of Justice is a work of political philosophy and ethics by John Rawls. It was originally published in 1972 and revised in both 1975 (for the translated editions) and 1999. In A Theory of Justice, Rawls attempts to solve the problem of distributive justice (the socially just distribution of goods in a society) by utilising a variant of the familiar device of the social contract. The resultant theory is known as “Justice as Fairness“, from which Rawls derives his two principles of justice: the liberty principle and the difference principle.

In A Theory of Justice, Rawls argues for a principled reconciliation of liberty and equality. Central to this effort is an account of the circumstances of justice, inspired by David Hume, and a fair choice situation for parties facing such circumstances, similar to some ofImmanuel Kant‘s views. Principles of justice are sought to guide the conduct of the parties. These parties are recognized to face moderate scarcity, and they are neither naturally altruistic nor purely egoistic. They have ends which they seek to advance, but prefer to advance them through cooperation with others on mutually acceptable terms. Rawls offers a model of a fair choice situation (the original position with its veil of ignorance) within which parties would hypothetically choose mutually acceptable principles of justice. Under such constraints, Rawls believes that parties would find his favoured principles of justice to be especially attractive, winning out over varied alternatives, including utilitarian and right-libertarian accounts.

Rawls belongs to the social contract tradition. However, Rawls’ social contract takes a different view from that of previous thinkers. Specifically, Rawls develops what he claims are principles of justice through the use of an artificial device he calls the Original position in which everyone decides principles of justice from behind a veil of ignorance. This “veil” is one that essentially blinds people to all facts about themselves so they cannot tailor principles to their advantage.

“no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status, nor does anyone know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength, and the like. I shall even assume that the parties do not know their conceptions of the good or their special psychological propensities. The principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance.”

According to Rawls, ignorance of these details about oneself will lead to principles that are fair to all. If an individual does not know how he will end up in his own conceived society, he is likely not going to privilege any one class of people, but rather develop a scheme of justice that treats all fairly. In particular, Rawls claims that those in the Original Position would all adopt a max -min strategy which would maximize the prospects of the least well-off.

They are the principles that rational and free persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamentals of the terms of their association [Rawls, p 11]

Rawls claims that the parties in the original position would adopt two such principles, which would then govern the assignment of rights and duties and regulate the distribution of social and economic advantages across society. The difference principle permits inequalities in the distribution of goods only if those inequalities benefit the worst-off members of society. Rawls believes that this principle would be a rational choice for the representatives in the original position for the following reason: Each member of society has an equal claim on their society’s goods. Natural attributes should not affect this claim, so the basic right of any individual, before further considerations are taken into account, must be to an equal share in material wealth. What, then, could justify unequal distribution? Rawls argues that inequality is acceptable only if it is to the advantage of those who are worst-off.

The agreement that stems from the original position is both hypothetical and ahistorical. It is hypothetical in the sense that the principles to be derived are what the parties would, under certain legitimating conditions, agree to, not what they have agreed to. Rawls seeks to use an argument that the principles of justice are what would be agreed upon if people were in the hypothetical situation of the original position and that those principles have moral weight as a result of that. It is ahistorical in the sense that it is not supposed that the agreement has ever been, or indeed could ever have been, derived in the real world outside of carefully limited experimental exercises.

“

First: each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others.^[1]

”

The basic liberties of citizens are, the political liberty to vote and run for office, freedom of speech and assembly, liberty of conscience, freedom of personal property and freedom from arbitrary arrest. However, he says:

liberties not on the list, for example, the right to own certain kinds of property (e.g. means of production) and freedom of contract as understood by the doctrine of laissez-faire are not basic; and so they are not protected by the priority of the first principle.^[2]

The first principle may not be violated, even for the sake of the second principle, above an unspecified but low-level of economic development. However, because various basic liberties may conflict, it may be necessary to trade them off against each other for the sake of obtaining the largest possible system of rights. There is thus some uncertainty as to exactly what is mandated by the principle, and it is possible that a plurality of sets of liberties satisfy its requirements.

Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that (Rawls, 1971, p.302; revised edition, p. 47):

(a) they are to be of the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society, consistent with the just savings principle (the difference principle).

(b) offices and positions must be open to everyone under conditions of fair equality of opportunity

Rawls’ claim in (a) is that departures from equality of a list of what he calls primary goods—”things which a rational man wants whatever else he wants” [Rawls, 1971, pg. 92]—are justified only to the extent that they improve the lot of those who are worst-off under that distribution in comparison with the previous, equal, distribution. His position is at least in some sense egalitarian, with a provision that equality is not to be achieved by worsening the position of the least advantaged.^{[clarification needed]} An important consequence here, however, is that inequalities can actually be just on Rawls’ view, as long as they are to the benefit of the least well off. His argument for this position rests heavily on the claim that morally arbitrary factors (for example, the family one is born into) shouldn’t determine one’s life chances or opportunities. Rawls is also keying on an intuition that a person does not morally deserve their inborn talents; thus that one is not entitled to all the benefits they could possibly receive from them; hence, at least one of the criteria which could provide an alternative to equality in assessing the justice of distributions is eliminated.

The stipulation in (b) is lexically prior to that in (a). Fair equality of opportunity requires not merely that offices and positions are distributed on the basis of merit, but that all have reasonable opportunity to acquire the skills on the basis of which merit is assessed. It may be thought that this stipulation, and even the first principle of justice, may require greater equality than the difference principle, because large social and economic inequalities, even when they are to the advantage of the worst-off, will tend seriously to undermine the value of the political liberties and any measures towards fair equality of opportunity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Theory_of_Justice

When it is wondered why there doesn’t seem to be any justice in the world of modern America, and why the court system seems to be failing, look to A Theory of Justice by John Rawls. Under the accepted terms of Rawls’ work, if a member of society daily injects themselves with heroin, pimps out stolen women into prostitution to pay for his drug habit, runs a theft ring and is a general menace to society, the social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are to be of the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society, consistent with the just savings principle. Meaning, all the good people of society who have made quality decisions in their life, worked hard, treated others with fairness are to pour some of their hard work into the degenerate so that social justice can look favorably upon the entire human race regardless of individual value. Isn’t it clear now why studying philosophy should be more important in your daily life dear reader?

Every courtroom in America with miles of case-law supporting them created by too many money-grubbing, parasitic lawyers have taken the work of John Rawls and made it mainstream thinking. It is why criminals believe they have rights to the merit of the good, and why they are not motivated to change their behavior because John Rawls new theories of justice instruct them that nature has given them an unfair advantage in life, and it is up to the intelligentsia of meritocracy to determine winners and losers in society arrogantly suppressing nature behind the rule of the academic class.

Until A Theory of Justice is rejected by the American population and the case-law built upon its failed philosophy is scrubbed completely, justice will be elusive in modern society. Criminals will continue to believe that they are “owed” something by somebody, and innocent victims will continue to search for justice among judges who sit upon their ivory towers and defend Rawls because through the meritocracy of the Harvard University elite, there is a power they dare not challenge. It is largely because of Rawls that the Second Amendment is being eroded away, that the NDAA Act was voted upon, that the TSA, the NSA, and every other government organization works against the vast amount of American population with violations against their personal liberty. Because under A Theory of Justice the rights of individual citizens is secondary to the rights of the under-privileged, the lazy, and the corrupt because nature selected them to be less, and it is the obligation of mankind to help them become better by giving them a free pass to continued behavior of a social menace. Sometimes it only takes a few generations to wreck a civilization and in the case of American justice it only took a few years from 1972 to destroy the logic of our legal system. The blame rests on the shoulders of John Rawls and his Harvard University meritocracy agenda driven psychosis of reshaping the world against the desires of nature to create a world molded by the morally bankrupt in a perpetual draining of wealth not just monetarily, but ethically till there is nothing left but a distant memory of a once great culture. America was a land built by rules yet was destroyed by A Theory of Justice, written in 1972, a college professor functioning from a failed philosophy that was never corrected in time to save civilization.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!

	Anonymous on THE SYSTEM WAS NEVER DESIGNED…
	Anonymous on THE SYSTEM WAS NEVER DESIGNED…
	Rich Hoffman on Paradise Lost, Pickle Rick, Jo…
	Anonymous on Paradise Lost, Pickle Rick, Jo…
	Anonymous on Why Christianity Survived as a…
	Anonymous on Christianity as a Weapon of Wa…
	Anonymous on Christianity as a Weapon of Wa…
	Anonymous on Is God an Idiot: I don’t…
	Anonymous on Christianity as a Scaling Move…
	Rich Hoffman on The Jonathan Edwards Study Bib…

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: