By Chris Rossini
Hillary Clinton, ever the campaign blusterer, is trying to weave the word "love" into her marketing.
Here are a few recent tweets:
“Let America ‘be that great strong land of love.’ That is more than poetry…that’s a prayer.” —Hillary quoting Langston Hughes
"Let’s keep going together.
followed by some visuals:
For those who have no interest in being bamboozled by political propaganda, I'll break the news to you: Government has absolutely nothing to do with love.
Government is violent force.
Those who occupy government (or "gain power") use violent force against real human beings (other than themselves and their friends). Every election is a battle over who will wield the violent force. Naturally, no one wants to be on the receiving end, so money and bribes flow in every conceivable direction. Everyone seeks to control the violence so that it could be unleashed against others, rather than it being unleashed against themselves.
There is no "love" when it comes to government.
Now, does that mean that government is constantly using violence against people? Not necessarily, though there is no shortage of its actual use.
Oftentimes, only the threat of using violence is sufficient enough. For example, we pay taxes because we don't want the government to throw us into a cage. Given a free choice, who knows how many people would actually pay taxes? Probably very few. That's why the threat of violence is always there.
When government institutes a military draft, it literally kidnaps children away from their parents so that they can go across the world to use violence against total strangers.
That's not "love" no matter how neocons try to spin it.
When government fights wars (something the U.S. government is very used to) it commits mass murder on a scale that no other organized group on Earth can ever compare to. No other institution on the planet has piled up more skulls than government.
Hillary has already taken part (not in battle of course) in numerous disgusting wars. There's no "love" to be seen anywhere.
If Hillary is really interested in "love," may she have the courage to resign from all positions of power, and enter voluntary life.
Then Hillary can express true love like a real human being. If she wants to help person (A) she would have to do so without first robbing person (B). Only then would she be making a real and genuine contribution to civilized life.
Robbing (B) in order to help (A) is not "love".....it's a crime!
Of course, were Hillary to choose a genuine path of love, all of the Goldman Sachs money would have to come to an end. No one will lobby Hillary for acts of love. People lobby power, so that they can use government violence to their advantage.
Love has nothing to do with government.