Canuck57 wrote:
Howard Brazee wrote:

People have been better off where change continues without hitting
bottom. But those advocating hitting bottom do so because they
don't like forward change - they want to go back to a past that never
was.

On what do you base this rather broadly stated assertion? I am sure
you are correct in some cases, but equally sure that it is not so in all
cases, perhaps even a large majority. As for "past that never was" -
some yes, most no. There have been better days in the USA. Returning
to living in a manner that accords with the principles of individual
liberty is not, as you would seem to imply, wrong-headed and
implausible. It is eminently doable, but people have got to get their
heads straightened out. That last bit, I contend, is the real kicker -
the single most important and by far difficult element in all of this
and one whose successful realization I am not optimistic for. But if
heads began popping out of anuses by the millions, there could be
fundamental change here in a very short while. But we are a mishmash of
conflicting opinions with near-terminal case of poisoning by
social-liberalism, amongst other thought maladies. If we are to survive
as a nation to be even worth crapping on, we most assuredly have our
work cut out for ourselves.

Trouble is, so very few have the diciple or IQ to anticipate. Take
Pearl Harbor, they should have been on alert and not golfing. Most
people are denialists, a major flaw in our species which allows our easy
manipualtion toward nafarious ends.

Hitting bottom is necessary for the masses to wake up and smell the
coffee that liberalism and corruption are the problem, not the solution.

I tend to agree with this. On the whole, people don't learn until they
get their asses beaten badly enough. Even then...