William Thien

Archive for June 2011

I recently heard a female news woman proclaim on a Fox News affiliate during a debate about the need for law enforcement in a community that single females “need protection.” It was a surprising revelation to hear from a liberated woman. I consider any woman working in the capacity of a news person to be liberated, by the way, as say compared to fifty years ago, when they were uncommon.

And yes, there are women capable of everything to which a man is, often more so, aside from sexual function of course. But they are not the norm, far from it. Yet, for some reason, we have adopted an elaborate series of lies, generally perpetuated now by Federal Law and the media, that creates an unusual arrangement between the sexes in many places today. This eludes to the point in my essay, Is There a Natural Order Amongst The Sexes?.

Something then occurred to me after hearing the news woman’s proclamation that single females need protection. This is just an observation as there is no scientific evidence supporting my observation. The feminist movement is also expensive to a community in that single women “supposedly” require more protection than married women. Therefor, the demand for police services. or protection, is or must be higher the more single women there are in a community. That fact may even be more obvious in those parts of our society where the women are single and also mothers. Are more police required in such communities? Of course they are.

The thing about police is that they are expensive to maintain, probably THE most expensive personnel at the municipal level as they require by law all sorts of training, they are outfitted with extensive amounts of expensive equipment which they carry or that is located in their vehicles, and their vehicles are enormously expensive. The police also require large amounts of support personnel. The procedures they use to solve crimes are also often very expensive.

Police are the most invasive extension of a bureaucracy and when crime is down, they begin writing traffic tickets and generally making themselves difficult, one might say, without deference or disrespect to the office itself. So not only are police expensive in terms of tax dollars, they drive up the cost of our daily existence, they work to increase municipal revenue at our expense through traffic and parking enforcement, for example, you name it. We all like the protection a police presence affords us. But the result of feminism, the increase in society of single women, is quite possibly creating a lopsided society where excessive police personnel are required. That has to be expensive.

Furthermore, it is believed that police often vote in order to perpetuate their jobs in ways which may not all be mutually beneficial to the citizenry. Add to that the fact that the police and municipal protective services form large voting blocks to which if politicians do not pander, they can often forget about getting elected. So not only are police expensive to maintain on the tax rolls, they can be difficult socially as they may vote in large numbers contrary to the needs, or desires, of the population. And who can blame the police for that last one? Everyone needs a job. It’s human nature. But isn’t that what many laws are written to do, address human nature? I once thought that police should not be allowed to vote in legislative elections that effect law since they enforce the law. It suggests a conflict of interest. But police are people, too.

Getting back to the matter of feminism and taxes, therefore, the greater need for police services as a result of feminism could very well be costing the taxpayer substantially.

That is, by the way, just an observation. I fully expect repercussions. You can rarely say such things publicly and not expect repercussions. But someone has to say them. Married men are afraid to do so. Divorce tantrums have all too often been the remedy for an unhappy wife put in her place during a family disagreement. The political system can’t afford to say what I say here, and they don’t have the intestinal fortitude, either. I’m not running for office, so…

But isn’t it feminism that tells us men and women don’t need to get married, that women are equal to men, in every way? Yes, that is exactly the feminist platform. And it is false. Men and women are not equal. They are different, some might say completely different. And equal and different are not synonymous, equal and different do not mean the “same” thing.

Perhaps men and women should be treated equally. But the lie of feminism, that men and women are equal, is most likely an expensive lie for the tax payer to perpetuate.

Copyright 2011 William Thien

WARNING! Abstractions follow.

One of the themes you will see running through this blog are observations about “the collective.”

Recently, one of the observations I’ve had about the collective is that the collective is a coward. Now I’m not talking about “collective bargaining” by unions or class action law suits, I think you know that, I hope you do.

The collective is a coward because with all its great numbers, with its great social, economic, and political strength, it fears more than anything the individual, particularly the individual trying to assert his or her own, not collective, his or her own individuality, his or her own way of life, particularly without effecting anyone else. The collective can’t stand for that. The collective can’t stand for that because it undermines the collective’s position that only the collective knows how things should be done, only the collective knows how to run the government, and only the collective knows how you should live your life. Any variation on collective themes of existence and you can expect repercussions. Why, if the collective is the foremost authority on “everything?”

Because. Because the collective is a coward and it can’t accept deviation from the path of “the collective.” Because then you will know that the path of the collective isn’t the only true path out there. Then you will know that you have free will. And the collective is more than anything afraid of you finding out that you have free will.

The collective is afraid. The great, all-powerful collective is afraid, afraid of the individual. Or is it that the collective is a coward, a coward because the many fear the one.

Copyright 2011 William Thien

Yes, it’s true. I write poetry and have been accused of being the “consummate poet-warrior.”

Check out some of my poems by visiting The Dublin Quarterly in Ireland.

You can read another one of my poems titled The Laws of War at the Anti-Landmine Pageant.

I am against landmines because more often than not they are not removed after a war and more often than not it is children that are victims of landmines, often years after a war, setting them off while playing.

Copyright William Thien 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011.

I don’t like to say things like this because I like to watch the news and very much enjoy reading the newspaper. Though, lately I am of the belief that the media may need to be removed from the election process and that their behavior must be regulated regarding elections in America.

Multiple attempts have been made to control campaign financing and various forms of political input, McCain-Feingold the most notable of them, with the intent to clean up the election process, but the media always seems to undermine any attempt by the elected and the public to successfully clean up the various processes of democracy. The problem persists and in fact many believe was worse during the last major election as I describe in the essay titled Campaign Finance Reform: A Plague of Democracy https://williamthien.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/campaign-finance-reform-a-plague-of-democracy/

This is most likely due to the fact that campaign season is one of the most lucrative ad revenue seasons for all types of the media, and the media lobby Congress and the courts to insure campaign finance dollars keep flowing their way, all along knowing the process is questionable. You know this as political pundits gather at all hours on the television during campaign season rubbing their hands together, a gleaming, maniacal look in their eyes, gesturing as if they can smell blood. Unfortunately, history indicates it is probably the blood of The American People.

Furthermore, the media have been known to begin accumulating files on people they believe may run for office years in advance of any such public indications. One media outlet in my television market even advertises a featured reporter attaching GPS tracking devices to people’s cars. The media are not the government, they are more often than not private corporations with a profit motive as their primary incentive. Not that the government should even be involved in such behavior, but such behavior is not free speech, it is militaristic, predatory behavior and it undermines the tranquility of the country.

And it raises the question, is the accumulation of information using such methods really free speech at all? Or is it something else entirely?

The behavior of the media lately has also become so tabloidian that you have to wonder what is going on. Is it really ratings they seek or are they on some sort of mission? And who is behind the mission? What are their names? What do they look like? Do they prescribe to a particular religious persuasion? Who polices the media? The media police the media. Sounds like a good position to be in.

The end result is we often do not find the most suitable candidates available during the voting process as the media has already filtered them out, probably due to an agenda the media have or have been paid to have, filtered them out through a thorough process of reporting often close to liable and more often than not some form of character assassination. It is illegal to shoot a man in America. But there are no laws preventing the assassination of his character. Many of the candidates, being human, have perhaps committed some minor indiscretion or been involved in some sort of difficult circumstance, yet they may be the best choice for the public at the voting booth. But the media for some reason has harped about them for months or been at their campaign trail cloaked in the Constitutional “right to free speech” when we all know more often than not the media are simply influence peddlers, with many media outlets lacking any real integrity.

The important thing though is that by the time it comes to vote, it is as if many of the most favorable candidates have been “knocked off” through a series of elaborate character assassinations committed by what could be called “media hitmen” with particular focus upon what are often the most decent men and women to run for office. We know this because all too often what candidate wins the election represents nothing the electorate could hope for or need. Since that happens over and over again, it indicates there is actually something structurally unfair about the election process. But what is it? Is the media the beast under the bed in American Politics? Is it as if the media were deliberately undermining the election process in The United States to perpetuate a state of discord and uncertainty in order to increase their ratings, as people then look by default to the media for answers concerning the declining state of the country? This indicates strictly a profit motive and not one of free speech, which further indicates to me that the media must needs be removed to a certain extent from the election process.

The problem is that such action is a slippery slope. Once you start controlling speech for one organization or individual in America will there be encroachment upon the rights of other, less damaging speech? And when it starts, when will it stop?

One thing is certain, you can not say anything you want everywhere in America. You can’t shout “fire” in a crowded theater or “bomb” on an airplane. But perhaps the media needs to be removed from the voting booth.

Leave a comment if you dare.

Copyright © William Thien 2011

Don’t forget to sign up to receive email updates and get the latest. It’s easy. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and enter your email address.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Find by month

Find by date

June 2011
Follow William Thien on WordPress.com
%d bloggers like this: