When the apparatus of the state must be protected from the citizens ... what then?
My life has involved an ongoing battle against resentment: I stepped away from the rank and status games that surround conventional success, partly from principle [my Zen precepts included 1) do not make a livelihood from selling the wines of delusion, and 2) do not abet what makes the untrue appear true] but mostly from self-preservation; I felt those games would leave me spineless, feckless, cynical and pessimistic, sophistic and jaded. The peers I see enjoying their material success are, to a greater or lesser degree, spineless, feckless, cynical and pessimistic, sophistic and jaded. And that makes me very angry with them. And I need to ride that ... but I can't say, "Thanks" because they are, most sadly, bereft of the foundations for solidarity.
I am not totally without sympathy for those whose view of liberal democracy are consonant with such as Fukuyama, but I do wish they were not such wingeing whiners.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhereThe Second Coming -- W. B. Yeats
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all convictions, [not universally!] while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
EU Summit Marred by Riots
also from SkyNews: Iraq's Plan for the Future - "Iraqis have drawn up a 13-point plan to rebuild their country following the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime." This, so far as I can tell, is a flat out lie. There was agreement to re-convene the meeting (which, let's face is, is a step) but the 13-point plan? Most had no idea who drew it up, and "Jay" Garner's staff would not confirm its provenance.
Given the concern for democratic governance, matters such as authorship are salient, yes? What do we call those who perpetuate distortions and un-truths?