-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 대다수의 광주시민들은 5.18 정치적 미화에 대해 부끄러움을 느끼고있다.
2. 5.18 유공자 명단에 끼지 못한 진짜 광주시민들은 분노하고있다.
3. 따라서...경호원 필요없었다.
[출처] 김진태의원이 광주에 가서 깨달은 점
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
비박 역적들이 주요 요직을 차지해서,
데일리안 보도도, 고성국 박사 지적으로
김진태 의원은 그 어떤 잘못된 발언도
하지 않았고, 논란의 공청회에도 참석하지
않았음에도 징계한다면, 한국당은
사라져야하는 당임을 보여준다.
진상위 정식안건에도 오른 것을 가지고
제대로 검증하고, 다수 국민이 요구하는
518명단 공개 요구는 오히려 당에서
힘을 실어줘야함에도
이를 징계하려는 비박 역적들과 비대위의
행태는 적반하장행태이다.
상을 주거나 지지를 보내야할 판에
오히려 벌을 주려하는 이들의 허튼
정치 공작이야말로 심판대상이다.
518을 부정한 것도 아니고,
당연히 진상규명차원에서 할 말을 한
김진태 의원을 징계하는 순간
한국당내 비박 역적들의 사악한
공작이 드러나는 것이고, 그 순간부터
한국당은 해채수순으로 들어가야하고
한국당 해체 운동을 대대적으로
벌여나가야한다.
[출처] 민주당은 유죄판결받은 김경수도, 논란의 손혜원도 적극 감싸는데, 한국당은 잘못없는 김진태 징계 ? 미친 기회주의 정당의 민낯 -허튼짓하면 한국당은 해체 수순
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
● 미친놈이 아닌, 지성인이라면, 그 누구라도
"북한군 침입설은 현 시점에서는 긍정도 부정도 할 수 없다. 더 조사하고 연구해 봐야 알 수 있다"
라고 해야 진짜 세계적 수준의 지성인이다.
(세계적 수준과 국가적 수준은 분명히 다름. 입만 뻥긋 열어도 단 5분만에 분별이 가능하다.)
● 위에 보듯, 탈북자 중에, 북한군 투입을 증언한 사람이 꽤 있고, 부인한 탈북자도 꽤 있다. 황장엽ㆍ김덕홍은 북한군 개입이 아니라, "북한 공작의 개입"을 증언했다.
● 광주 쪽의 "개입설 허위" 주장은 대부분 원전을 살짝 왜곡했다. 해서, 허위임을 입증 못 했다.
예를들면, CIA 나 국무부의 보고, "북한군의 움직임은 없었다"를 외삽적으로 오해석.
이때의 "북한군 움직임"은, 큰 규모의 정규군 이동을 말한다.
또한, CIA가 주석궁에서의 김일성 발언을 도청한 내용과도 상치된다: 김일성은 측근에게 군사행동을 지시했었음.
또한, 한국 국방부도 결론이, "(개입 여부를) 확인할 수 없다"였지, "북한군 개입은 없다고 결론 내린다"가 아니다.
● 6개월에 걸쳐 북한군이 여러 차례 조금씩 투입돼, 광주사태 발발 때는 600명에 달했을 가능성을 완전히 배제할 수는 없다. 이건, 북한이 붕괴할 때에서야 비로소 확정할 수 있다.
● 그외, 광주 쪽의 논리는 전부 "상식적으로 도저히 불가능" 하다는 식의 황당한 논리.
그들은 그래서 천안함 격침이 상식적으로 불가능하기에 믿지 않나 보다.
아니면, "상식적으로 불가능했던 천안함 격침"이 실제로 이뤄졌듯, "상식적으로 불가능했던" 북한군 투입을 믿어야 할 수도 있다.
● 여기서, 논리 탱크 조갑제는, 논리적으로 큰 헛점을 대단히 많이 보이고 있다. 그 이유는, 본인 자신이 그 곳에 그 때 있었기 때문인 것 같다.
하지만, 북한군 투입 여부를 알 수 있는가는 그 때 거기 있었다는 것과는 전혀 무관.
● 그래서, 북한군 투입(개입) 여부는, 아직은 결론을 내릴 수 없다. 증거 불충분한 상태.
다만, 나 개인적 생각으로는, 600명은 아닐지라도, 북한 특수부대의 개입 가능성은 꽤 있다고 보는 편이다.
물론, 그보다는 "학생"으로 위장 투입된 북한 특수요원이 활약했을 가능성을 훨씬 높게 봄. 당시 북한은 각 대학에 특수 요원을 위장투입, 아예 가짜 학생증 갖고 다니면서, 대놓고 시위를 선동ㆍ주도했었다.
언론에는 나오지 않았지만 과거, CIA가 다른 나라에 보낸 특수군이 극비리에 활약한 작전이, 나중에서야 밝혀진 사례가 많다.
[출처] "5•18 북한군 침입설"을 대하는 착하고 올바른 태도
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
북한은 일정한 양보를 얻어내고 부분적인 비핵화를 합의할 것이다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
북한의 완전한 비핵화만이 지금의 유용한 단계이다.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
작고한 맥파커가 저술한 <문화대혁명의 기원>. 현재 중국에서는 그의 책이 금서가 되었다고 한다.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[출처] 518 유공자가 보면 까물어치는 짤
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[출처] 전라도 광주 518 가짜 유공자 괴물들과 우리 많은 국민들이 힘을 합쳐 피 터지게 한번 싸워보자....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
북한의 교과서에는 김일성의 교시에 의해 5. 18이 일어났다고 분명히 기술하고 있다.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
최인석 울산법원장 “박근혜·이명박 전 대통령 불구속 재판해야”
[출처: 중앙일보] 최인석 울산법원장 “박근혜·이명박 전 대통령 불구속 재판해야”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---> 문희상이 선물로 준 만절필동은 사대주의 논란이 된 글귀이다. 그런 글을 펠로시에게 선물로 준 것은, 현재 중국과 무역전쟁을 벌이고 있는 미국의 빰을 때리는 일이다. 펠로시에게 이 사실을 알려주면 아주 화를 낼 일이다. 정말 한심스런 좌파 놈들이다.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
자유세계의 시민들이 스스로의 입을 단속하고 있다.
러시아의 화가 Ivan Aivazovsky가 그린 베니스 풍경. [1840-43]
-----------------------------
[출처] 518 유공자가 보면 까물어치는 짤
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
광주 518 이라는 민주화가
어쩌다 이렇게 괴물로 변해 온 나라가 들썩이나?
광주 518 집단은 무엇이 그렇게 숨기고 감출께 많아
대한민국 민주화를 위해 희생한 518 유공자 그 명단을 공개 못하는가?
518 유공자의 수많은 보상과 특헤로 인해 518 가짜 유공자가 넘쳐나고....
그들 가짜 유공자 괴물들은 온갖 누릴것 다 리고...그렇게 살아 가는데...
전라도를 제외한 우리 대한민국 많은 국민 모두는 베알도 없나?
어떻게 전라도 괴물 같은 가짜 유공자들이 넘쳐 나는데도 눈감고 입닫고 쳐다만 보나?
대한민국 전 국민이여!
저 괴물같은 전라도 518 가짜 유공자들이
지금 우리 국민 모두의 세금을 도둑질 하여 그렇게 살고 있다
이들 악독한 괴물 무리들을 우리 모두 힘을 합쳐 반드시 이 땅에서 몰아내자...
세금 도적질 ..온갖 특혜로 배 터지게 호의호식 하는
광주 518 가짜 유공자 저 악랄한 괴물들이 ...지금도 입에 거품 물고 우리 국민들 향해 마구 덤벼 들고 있다
이런 괴물들의 저항을 왜 우리는 그렇게 나약 하게 지켜만 봐야 하것인가? 말이다
우리 모두는 분연히 거리투쟁으로 힘을 모아 일으나자 !
전라도 광주 518 세금 도적질 괴물들이 .온갖 부정한 방법으로 특혜를 받아
지금도 어께 힘주며 거드름 피우면서 오히려 큰소리 치고 있지 않는가?
너와 나 우리 모두 반드시 힘을 합쳐 거리투쟁 그렇게 나서보자 !
반드시 그렇게 한번 싸워보자!
광주 518 유공자 명단이 공개 되면 518 광주 사태 그 진실도 확연히 들어 날 것이다
이 땅에 정의를 위해 518 유공자 공개는 너무나 당연한 것이다
우리 국민 모두 힘을 합쳐 전라도 광주 518 가짜 유공자 그들 세력과 한번 크게 맞 싸워보자....
[출처] 전라도 광주 518 가짜 유공자 괴물들과 우리 많은 국민들이 힘을 합쳐 피 터지게 한번 싸워보자....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
최인석 울산법원장 “박근혜·이명박 전 대통령 불구속 재판해야”
[출처: 중앙일보] 최인석 울산법원장 “박근혜·이명박 전 대통령 불구속 재판해야”
---> 문희상이 선물로 준 만절필동은 사대주의 논란이 된 글귀이다. 그런 글을 펠로시에게 선물로 준 것은, 현재 중국과 무역전쟁을 벌이고 있는 미국의 빰을 때리는 일이다. 펠로시에게 이 사실을 알려주면 아주 화를 낼 일이다. 정말 한심스런 좌파 놈들이다.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
수소차의 이상한(?) 단점들 / 미래예보 Season 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
자유세계의 시민들이 스스로의 입을 단속하고 있다. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
자기 검열의 시대가 도래한 것인가?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
수녀가 금욕 생활을 견디지 못하고, 자신이 죽은 것처럼 위장하고 대신 허수아비를 묻어 놓은 다음, 속세로 도망가 자신의 욕정에 따른 생활을 하다가 발각되었다는 이야기. 보카치오가 그의 데카메론에 넣었음직한 이야기이다.
----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
현대의 번영은 노동자가 아니라, 자본가, 기업가, 발명가들이 만들었다.
서구 문명은 소수의 엘리트들의 권유에 따라 자본주의를 선택했다.
경제학을 이해하지 못한 사람들은 사회의 모든 진보를 자연과학과 기술의 발달에 기인한다고 믿었다.
그들은 지난 2백여 년간의 전례 없는 기술적 진보가 경제 정책에 의해 이뤄지지 않았다고 본다. 그런 진보를 어떤 사회 체제에서도 가능하다고 생각한 것이다.
노동 생산성의 증가는 더 좋은 도구와 기계를 사용한 덕분이다.
현대 산업국가와 후진 국가를 구별 짓는 가장 큰 요인은 공급 자본의 양이다. 저축과 자본 축적으로 인해 동굴에 거주하던 원시인이 현대 산업 국가의 시민이 될 수 있었다. 그 기본원칙은 생산 수단의 사유재산권이었고, 저축에 의해 축적된 자본에 의해 기술적 진보가 이루어졌다.
현대의 번영은 자본 축적과 기업가 정신 그리고 기술적 발전에 의한 것이지만, 좌파들은 그것이 그냥 진보라는 신화적 요소에 의해 이루어졌다고 믿는다. 그들은 나아가 노동자들이 이런 경제적 번영을 만들었다고 주장하기도 한다.
Capitalism as It Is and as It Is Seen by the Common Man
Ludwig von Mises
The emergence of economics as a new branch of knowledge was one of the most portentous events in the history of mankind. In paving the way for private capitalistic enterprise it transformed within a few generations all human affairs more radically than the preceding ten thousand years had done. From the day of their birth to the day of their demise, the denizens of a capitalistic country are every minute benefited by the marvelous achievements of the capitalistic ways of thinking and acting.
The most amazing thing concerning the unprecedented change in earthly conditions brought about by capitalism is the fact that it was accomplished by a small number of authors and a hardly greater number of statesmen who had assimilated their teachings. Not only the sluggish masses but also most of the businessmen who, by their trading, made the laissez-faire principles effective failed to comprehend the essential features of their operation. Even in the heyday of liberalism only a few people had a full grasp of the functioning of the market economy. Western civilization adopted capitalism upon recommendation on the part of a small élite.
There were, in the first decades of the nineteenth century, many people who viewed their own unfamiliarity with the problems concerned as a serious shortcoming and were anxious to redress it. In the years between Waterloo and Sebastopol, no other books were more eagerly absorbed in Great Britain than treatises on economics. But the vogue soon subsided. The subject was unpalatable to the general reader.
Economics is so different from the natural sciences and technology on the one hand, and history and jurisprudence on the other hand, that it seems strange and repulsive to the beginner. Its heuristic singularity is viewed with suspicion by those whose research work is performed in laboratories or in archives and libraries. Its epistemological singularity appears nonsensical to the narrow-minded fanatics of positivism. People would like to find in an economics book knowledge that perfectly fits into their preconceived image of what economics ought to be, viz., a discipline shaped according to the logical structure of physics or of biology. They are bewildered and desist from seriously grappling with problems the analysis of which requires an unwonted mental exertion.
The result of this ignorance is that people ascribe all improvements in economic conditions to the progress of the natural sciences and technology. As they see it, there prevails in the course of human history a self-acting tendency toward progressing advancement of the experimental natural sciences and their application to the solution of technological problems. This tendency is irresistible, it is inherent in the destiny of mankind, and its operation takes effect whatever the political and economic organization of society may be. As they see it, the unprecedented technological improvements of the last two hundred years were not caused or furthered by the economic policies of the age. They were not an achievement of classical liberalism, free trade, laissez faire and capitalism. They will therefore go on under any other system of society’s economic organization.
The doctrines of Marx received approval simply because they adopted this popular interpretation of events and clothed it with a pseudophilosophical veil that made it gratifying both to Hegelian spiritualism and to crude materialism. In the scheme of Marx the “material productive forces” are a superhuman entity independent of the will and the actions of men. They go their own way that is prescribed by the inscrutable and inevitable laws of a higher power. They change mysteriously and force mankind to adjust its social organization to these changes; for the material productive forces shun one thing: to be enchained by mankind’s social organization. The essential content of history is the struggle of the material productive forces to be freed from the social bonds by which they are fettered.
Once upon a time, teaches Marx, the material productive forces were embodied in the shape of the hand mill, and then they arranged human affairs according to the pattern of feudalism. When, later, the unfathomable laws that determine the evolution of the material productive forces substituted the steam mill for the hand mill, feudalism had to give way to capitalism. Since then the material productive forces have developed further, and their present shape imperatively requires the substitution of socialism for capitalism. Those who try to check the socialist revolution are committed to a hopeless task. It is impossible to stem the tide of historical progress.
The ideas of the so-called leftist parties differ from one another in many ways. But they agree in one point. They all look upon progressing material improvement as upon a self-acting process. The American union member takes his standard of living for granted. Fate has determined that he should enjoy amenities which were denied even to the most prosperous people of earlier generations and are still denied to non-Americans. It does not occur to him that the “rugged individualism” of big business may have played some role in the emergence of what he calls the “American way of life.” In his eyes “management” represents the unfair claims of the “exploiters” who are intent upon depriving him of his birthright. There is, he thinks, in the course of historical evolution an irrepressible tendency toward a continuous increase in the “productivity” of his labor. It is obvious that the fruits of this betterment by rights belong exclusively to him. It is his merit that—in the age of capitalism—the quotient of the value of the products turned out by the processing industries divided by the number of hands employed tended toward an increase.
The truth is that the increase in what is called the productivity of labor is due to the employment of better tools and machines. A hundred workers in a modern factory produce per unit of time a multiple of what a hundred workers used to produce in the workshops of precapitalistic craftsmen. This improvement is not conditioned by higher skill, competence or application on the part of the individual worker. (It is a fact that the proficiency needed by medieval artisans towered far above that of many categories of present-day factory hands.) It is due to the employment of more efficient tools and machines which, in turn, is the effect of the accumulation and investment of more capital.
The terms capitalism, capital, and capitalists were employed by Marx and are today employed by most people—also by the official propaganda agencies of the United States government—with an opprobrious connotation. Yet these words pertinently point toward the main factor whose operation produced all the marvelous achievements of the last two hundred years: the unprecedented improvement of the average standard of living for a continually increasing population. What distinguishes modern industrial conditions in the capitalistic countries from those of the precapitalistic ages as well as from those prevailing today in the so-called underdeveloped countries is the amount of the supply of capital. No technological improvement can be put to work if the capital required has not previously been accumulated by saving.
Saving, capital accumulation, is the agency that has transformed step-by-step the awkward search for food on the part of savage cave dwellers into the modern ways of industry. The pacemakers of this evolution were the ideas that created the institutional framework within which capital accumulation was rendered safe by the principle of private ownership of the means of production. Every step forward on the way toward prosperity is the effect of saving. The most ingenious technological inventions would be practically useless if the capital goods required for their utilization had not been accumulated by saving.
The entrepreneurs employ the capital goods made available by the savers for the most economical satisfaction of the most urgent among the not-yet-satisfied wants of the consumers. Together with the technologists, intent upon perfecting the methods of processing, they play, next to the savers themselves, an active part in the course of events that is called economic progress. The rest of mankind profits from the activities of these three classes of pioneers. But whatever their own doings may be, they are only beneficiaries of changes to the emergence of which they did not contribute anything.
The characteristic feature of the market economy is the fact that it allots the greater part of the improvements brought about by the endeavors of the three progressive classes—those saving, those investing the capital goods and those elaborating new methods for the employment of capital goods—to the nonprogressive majority of people. Capital accumulation exceeding the increase in population raises, on the one hand, the marginal productivity of labor and, on the other hand, cheapens the products. The market process provides the common man with the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of other peoples’ achievements. It forces the three progressive classes to serve the nonprogressive majority in the best possible way.
Everybody is free to join the ranks of the three progressive classes of a capitalist society. These classes are not closed castes. Membership in them is not a privilege conferred on the individual by a higher authority or inherited from one’s ancestors. These classes are not clubs, and the ins have no power to keep out any newcomer. What is needed to become a capitalist, an entrepreneur or a deviser of new technological methods is brains and will power. The heir of a wealthy man enjoys a certain advantage as he starts under more favorable conditions than others. But his task in the rivalry of the market is not easier, but sometimes even more wearisome and less remunerative than that of a newcomer. He has to reorganize his inheritance in order to adjust it to the changes in market conditions. Thus, for instance, the problems that the heir of a railroad “empire” had to face were, in the last decades, certainly more knotty than those encountered by the man who started from scratch in trucking or in air transportation.
The popular philosophy of the common man misrepresents all these facts in the most lamentable way. As John Doe sees it, all those new industries that are supplying him with amenities unknown to his father came into being by some mythical agency called progress. Capital accumulation, entrepreneurship and technological ingenuity did not contribute anything to the spontaneous generation of prosperity. If any man has to be credited with what John Doe considers as the rise in the productivity of labor, then it is the man on the assembly line. Unfortunately, in this sinful world there is exploitation of man by man. Business skims the cream and leaves, as the Communist Manifesto points out, to the creator of all good things, to the manual worker, not more than “he requires for his maintenance and for the propagation of his race.” Consequently, “the modern worker, instead of rising with the progress of industry, sinks deeper and deeper. . . . He becomes a pauper, and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth.” The authors of this description of capitalistic industry are praised at universities as the greatest philosophers and benefactors of mankind and their teachings are accepted with reverential awe by the millions whose homes, besides other gadgets, are equipped with radio and television sets.
The worst exploitation, say professors, “labor” leaders and politicians, is effected by big business. They fail to realize that the characteristic mark of big business is mass production for the satisfaction of the needs of the masses. Under capitalism the workers themselves, directly or indirectly, are the main consumers of all those things that the factories are turning out.
In the early days of capitalism there was still a considerable time lag between the emergence of an innovation and its becoming accessible to the masses. About sixty years ago Gabriel Tarde was right in pointing out that an industrial innovation is the fancy of a minority before it becomes the need of everybody; what was considered first as an extravagance turns later into a customary requisite of all and sundry. This statement was still correct with regard to the popularization of the automobile. But big-scale production by big business has shortened and almost eliminated this time lag. Modern innovations can only be produced profitably according to the methods of mass production and hence become accessible to the many at the very moment of their practical inauguration. There was, for instance, in the United States no sensible period in which the enjoyment of such innovations as television, nylon stockings or canned baby food was reserved to a minority of the well-to-do. Big business tends, in fact, toward a standardization of the peoples’ ways of consumption and enjoyment.
Nobody is needy in the market economy because of the fact that some people are rich. The riches of the rich are not the cause of the poverty of anybody. The process that makes some people rich is, on the contrary, the corollary of the process that improves many peoples’ want satisfaction. The entrepreneurs, the capitalists and the technologists prosper as far as they succeed in best supplying the consumers.
Excerpted from The Anti-Capitalist Mentality
--------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기