This post is to explore some of the inner workings of the Left, and to offer solutions to negate their pernicious influence.
So a typical Leftist apparatchik represents himself to be a truth teller and sober commentator, but actually he's simply doing his duty in service to The Narrative. Therefore, the Leftist's purpose is not to inform, explain, or clarify. He's not intending to impart information or understanding. These things are not offered to contribute to the debate. No, he simply bolsters The Narrative.
And Leftists aren't even very good at it. One would think that simply spouting random sentences pulled from various leftist websites (which is what most of them do) would be relatively easy. And regurgitating a couple of leftist factoids shouldn't be much of a challenge. Make superficial correlations of otherwise unrelated events is not a terribly taxing activity. Misstating history is not particularly difficult.
Mountain Man's Law is a descriptor we have created that contextualizes certain aspects of The Narrative. Leftists routinely accuse their political opponents of misdeeds, crimes, or planning to cut a program or hurt a certain group. Invariably those accusations correspond to what Leftists themselves are actually doing right at that moment. So Mountain Man's Law states that everything a Leftist tells us about what the political opposition is doing or will do, whether it is conservatives, Libertarians, Republicans, or Christians, is something the Left is actually doing and in many cases have been doing for decades.
Ironically, the Leftists rarely live their lives in a way that is consistent with their philosophy. Usually leftists are among the richest, greediest, and most racist people in the room, spouting talking points about equity, social justice, and environmentalism while simultaneously hiding their wealth, keeping their low paid all-white staffs, and showing no concern for their large carbon footprints. They make noises about the horrible things their opponents are doing while they do the very same things themselves.
The Narrative always facilitates The Agenda. The reader should keep this in mind at all times.
More accurately, "...socialism had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for a post-capitalist system based on some form of social ownership of the means of production."
Social Democracy: "Social democracy is a political ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy, and a policy regime involving welfare state provisions, collective bargaining arrangements, regulation of the economy in the general interest, redistribution of income and wealth, and a commitment to representative democracy."
Democratic Socialism "...rejects the social democratic view of reform through state intervention within capitalism, seeing capitalism as inherently incompatible with the democratic values of freedom, equality and solidarity. Democratic socialists believe that the issues inherent to capitalism can only be solved by transitioning from capitalism to socialism, by superseding private property with some form of social ownership."
Thus you will note that the distinctions are really pretty subtle. Yet we know that subtlety is not a characteristic of the Left or big government systems. We can rightly conclude that any trumpeted differences are largely affectations or diversions, in order for the Left to pursue The Agenda.
If that doesn't yield the desired results, then social disorder is employed, like protests, boycotts, sit-ins, attacking dissent, personal assault, and hyperbolic language. Basically, any technique, any avenue, any tactic is permissible for the sake of The Agenda. So really, democracy be damned. Civility, discourse, reason, debate and logic are alternately embraced (as a bludgeon) or abandoned as the situation dictates. What matters is The Agenda, to be reached by any means available.
The reason democracy is nothing more than a convenience to a Leftist is because there is no way to ensure that the desired system will be what actually ends up manifesting. Democracy doesn't get to decide if America becomes a Socialist Democracy or Democratically Socialist, let alone full-blown, raw Socialism. That is for those in power to decide. The Left can claim they want Social Democracy, for example, and end up with either one of the others very easily.
How to Install Socialism
Bernie Sanders garnered quite a bit of support for president leading up to the 2016 elections, and it at first seemed puzzling that a self-described "social Democrat" or "Democratic Socialist" would have that much support. He actually makes specific claim to "Democratic Socialism." However, his position page reads like a Democrat campaign, so it wouldn't be wrong to suggest that there is not a whole lot of difference between Democrats and social Democrats.
Thankfully, Bernie's appeal is still a minority position. It could be that he is not the young, vibrant, articulate figurehead they need in order to put a handsome face on the ugliness of Socialism. But he is really the only thing they have right now. There is no other national figure who identifies as Socialist.
Nevertheless, he is part of the conversation people are having. People are seriously considering the seemingly innocuous initiatives he has proposed. And with a willing media, anyone who suggests that his ideas are flawed or dangerous is shouted down and mocked.
So the stage is being set. Though Bernie failed, the next Socialist has a better chance.
What is the real answer?
In the history of this nation we find the real answer. For over two hundred years America was and is the envy of the world. The highest standard of living, the most innovative, and the most generous, nation in the history of the planet. What went wrong? Well, we started believing Leftists.
These are things we must recapture in order to regain the hope, the optimism, the can-do attitude our grandfathers had:
One other thing. The only hope for our nation, and the only hope for people in general, is the mercy of God as shown through his Son, Jesus Christ. We need a spiritual awakening, a revival, a turning from our wickedness and apathy. Ultimately, every answer to every problem is found in Christ.
The Narrative
One can be sure that if a Leftist is going to explain something, what he tells you will not be accurate, will not clarify, and will not be intended to impart information. This is because Leftists are only interested in furthering The Narrative, that is, the daily talking points and bumper sticker slogans promulgated by Central Command. The Narrative is circulated throughout the media landscape every day, and writers, commentators, and news operations dutifully regurgitate it. They march in lock-step with other leftist agitprop generators to supply the day's bumper sticker slogans.
These talking points are designed as a barrage to overcome the intellect. They are relentlessly piled one on top of another, and repeated every day no matter how much one attempts to refute them. But Leftists ignore any attempt to counter, pretending that today is a new day as if nothing previously happened.
So a typical Leftist apparatchik represents himself to be a truth teller and sober commentator, but actually he's simply doing his duty in service to The Narrative. Therefore, the Leftist's purpose is not to inform, explain, or clarify. He's not intending to impart information or understanding. These things are not offered to contribute to the debate. No, he simply bolsters The Narrative.
And Leftists aren't even very good at it. One would think that simply spouting random sentences pulled from various leftist websites (which is what most of them do) would be relatively easy. And regurgitating a couple of leftist factoids shouldn't be much of a challenge. Make superficial correlations of otherwise unrelated events is not a terribly taxing activity. Misstating history is not particularly difficult.
They don't actually have to be good at it because they're rarely challenged. News anchors and "journalists" simply nod their heads and move on. And, as mentioned, since every day is a new day, there is no need to answer yesterday's refutations or even be consistent from day to day. What was said yesterday is irrelevant, so a Leftist is free to oppose today what he favored yesterday. He is also at liberty to oppose something that political opponents favor while simultaneously favoring the same thing if another Leftist favors it.
Mountain Man's Law
Mountain Man's Law is a descriptor we have created that contextualizes certain aspects of The Narrative. Leftists routinely accuse their political opponents of misdeeds, crimes, or planning to cut a program or hurt a certain group. Invariably those accusations correspond to what Leftists themselves are actually doing right at that moment. So Mountain Man's Law states that everything a Leftist tells us about what the political opposition is doing or will do, whether it is conservatives, Libertarians, Republicans, or Christians, is something the Left is actually doing and in many cases have been doing for decades.
Ironically, the Leftists rarely live their lives in a way that is consistent with their philosophy. Usually leftists are among the richest, greediest, and most racist people in the room, spouting talking points about equity, social justice, and environmentalism while simultaneously hiding their wealth, keeping their low paid all-white staffs, and showing no concern for their large carbon footprints. They make noises about the horrible things their opponents are doing while they do the very same things themselves.
One reason is, intellectual honesty is not valued among the Left. There is no such thing as a double standard when it comes to what Leftists do or say. Leftists by definition cannot be hypocrites. Leftists will never call another Leftist to account unless that Leftist has become too much of a political liability.
A Leftist is insulated from most every consequence if he simply keeps to The Narrative.
"The System"
A primary technique of The Narrative is to characterize The System as unjust, unequal, greedy, unfair, and biased. The System is the institutions, values, and structures that constitute the American culture. Leftists hate the American culture and work very hard to substitute their own values at every opportunity. This is why the Left loves to talk about "systemic racism." The phrase is an attempt to indict The System so as to give reason to replace it. The System, more so than individual people, is racist. This justifies its dismantling. It cannot be fixed, only replaced.
However, "systemic racism" is a fiction. A system is not a sentient entity so it cannot be racist. A system is an purposeful, organized structure that expresses a human desire for order. That expression can be legitimate, moral, and useful, or it can be oppressive and destructive.
Structures cannot continue to exist apart from intentional maintenance. A system will not continue to exist without systemizers. Systemic racism is not possible without racists. It is impossible for a system to persist without those who would nurture it. Therefore, a system cannot inflict harm absent those persons who would use it or allow it to inflict harm.
Who might those persons be? As we survey the places across the nation where racism seems to be a significant problem, all of these places are controlled by the political Left. Minneapolis, Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Seattle are all current racism hotspots, and all of them have been governed by the Left for decades.
If those Leftist who are in control of The System have not changed it they must be in agreement with its results. Our conclusion would be that the current occupants of these power positions within The System are racist, either actively or passively. They are ok with the chaos and destruction that comes.
Or perhaps, they want the chaos and destruction.
Indeed, if The System needs to be dismantled, blaming the chaos and destruction on it will facilitate that. This means that they use racism an excuse. Despite the fact that our country has made great strides to wipe out the residual effects of racism, the Left wants to hold it responsible for all the ills of the world. Which means if America is responsible, it is evil. If it is evil, it must be replaced. The System - racist, unfair, and hurtful to the worker, minorities, women, gays, and transgenders - must be dismantled.
Which means none of these issues are actually important to the Left. Oh, of course, some Leftists might actually believe The Narrative, but the the only reason these issues are continually kept afloat is their utility to The Narrative.
Note this carefully. The Left doesn't really care about racism, inequity, the worker, gays and transgenders, women, minorities, a living wage, the environment, free speech, or democracy. They don't have any intention of doing anything about these and every other issue de jour. All of these are part of The Narrative, and only useful to the degree they advance the leftist dream, which we have deemed "The Agenda."
The Agenda
There is one purpose to The Narrative, to facilitate The Agenda. The Agenda is the dismantling of The System. This is the key thing to remember whenever a Leftist makes a claim or accuses an adversary. It's always about The Agenda.
The Agenda is the reason why it seems like the Left hates America. They are convinced that America cannot be fixed. Moreover, they are convinced that there is a better system, for which the Left ceaselessly labors.
That system is Marxism. Socialism is their ideal system. Leftist rhetoric is steeped in revolution. The evil rich stealing from the worker, The System exploits minorities, the unfairness of some doing better than others - all this is revolutionary talk. The Left is convinced that revolution is the only solution for The System.
Flavors of /Marxism/Socialism
It has puzzled us for a long time why people want a socialist system in America. We think that it boils down to greed and envy. The Left is trying to convince people that they don't have a big enough piece of the pie. They want people to believe that they are being stolen from. The rich got their money by exploiting the poor. The worker doesn't get the fruit of his labor. Unequal outcomes is obvious evidence.
The Left typically tries to make a distinction between historic Socialism and its attendant atrocities and another flavor of Socialism with the "Democratic" modifier. It's not Socialism, you see, it's Democratic Socialism. Apparently there is a substantial difference. Or maybe it's a Social Democracy they want.
In any case, the Left wants you to think they support something different, and it isn't a threat to you or your way of life. Because "democratic."
So, let's define some terms:
Socialism: "Socialism is a social and economic system characterized by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system. 'Social ownership' may refer to public ownership, cooperative ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these."
More accurately, "...socialism had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for a post-capitalist system based on some form of social ownership of the means of production."
Social Democracy: "Social democracy is a political ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy, and a policy regime involving welfare state provisions, collective bargaining arrangements, regulation of the economy in the general interest, redistribution of income and wealth, and a commitment to representative democracy."
Democratic Socialism "...rejects the social democratic view of reform through state intervention within capitalism, seeing capitalism as inherently incompatible with the democratic values of freedom, equality and solidarity. Democratic socialists believe that the issues inherent to capitalism can only be solved by transitioning from capitalism to socialism, by superseding private property with some form of social ownership."
All three claim to value "democracy." All three want to either eliminate or curtail capitalism. All three want to have central control of the economy and society.
Thus you will note that the distinctions are really pretty subtle. Yet we know that subtlety is not a characteristic of the Left or big government systems. We can rightly conclude that any trumpeted differences are largely affectations or diversions, in order for the Left to pursue The Agenda.
The appeal to democracy is hollow. In actual fact, democracy is simply a means to an end. The Left wants the majority to vote their way to Socialism. Democracy is continually trumpeted by the Left, but it's merely a buzz word that gets abandoned at the drop of a hat. Because if Democracy doesn't go their way (for example, the definition of marriage), they move on to the courts. If the courts don't go their way (for example, Citizens United), they embrace executive decree.
If that doesn't yield the desired results, then social disorder is employed, like protests, boycotts, sit-ins, attacking dissent, personal assault, and hyperbolic language. Basically, any technique, any avenue, any tactic is permissible for the sake of The Agenda. So really, democracy be damned. Civility, discourse, reason, debate and logic are alternately embraced (as a bludgeon) or abandoned as the situation dictates. What matters is The Agenda, to be reached by any means available.
The reason democracy is nothing more than a convenience to a Leftist is because there is no way to ensure that the desired system will be what actually ends up manifesting. Democracy doesn't get to decide if America becomes a Socialist Democracy or Democratically Socialist, let alone full-blown, raw Socialism. That is for those in power to decide. The Left can claim they want Social Democracy, for example, and end up with either one of the others very easily.
And, because government is vested with so much power, the journey to tyranny is short indeed. Why is this? Because there is no way to restrain a government that already can do anything it wants. Democracy, equality, and free college, the carrots offered by Leftists, only exist at the pleasure of those who hold the reins. You may like and trust Joe Politician now, but Fred Dictator might come along and wreak havoc. Or even, Joe Politician might simply change his approach. And who's gonna stop him?
How to Install Socialism
Socialism has traditionally been installed via violent revolution, but that doesn't appeal to today's Left. Or actually, it isn't something they are willing to publicly advocate. That wouldn't palatable among those they want to convince, especially in gun-loving America. So, in an attempt to distance themselves from the atrocity-ridden socialism of history, socialists will mock and shout down anyone who attempts to connect them to the inevitable result of having a socialistic society.
Thus they pretend that Democratic Socialism, for example, is an entirely different thing, benign and noble. In fact, that's the emphasis. Or smokescreen. This is why they dangle women's rights, economic equality, free healthcare, no unemployment, and no eeevil CEO as incentives. It's time you got yours, and they are going to see to it you do.
Thus they pretend that Democratic Socialism, for example, is an entirely different thing, benign and noble. In fact, that's the emphasis. Or smokescreen. This is why they dangle women's rights, economic equality, free healthcare, no unemployment, and no eeevil CEO as incentives. It's time you got yours, and they are going to see to it you do.
But revolution is always the goal. Finding bloody revolution unpalatable, at least at present, their revolution is incremental. Little by little, over the course of years and decades, their ideas have been insinuated into society via agitprop, government initiatives, the media, and infiltration. They join clubs like the girl scouts, they obtain professorships, they go to journalism schools, they become pastors, they form coalitions and charities and think tanks and lobbying groups, all for the express purpose of remaking society's institutions for their own uses. Or dismantling them.
This process of remaking charities, church denominations, and businesses into entities that serve The Agenda has been called "convergence." Convergence is the work of transforming an entity until it is no longer willing (or able) to perform its primary function. A good example of this is Bud Lite. It's primary function is to sell as much beer as possible, but due to convergence it is more important now for Anheiser Bush to cater to the Left and implement their goals than it is to perform their primary function. Such a thing can only happen if their corporate structure has been infiltrated and compromised.
This has been going on a long time over great swaths of society. Thus we have seen our culture and institutions slowly transformed into a socialist-friendly environment. As the country devolves, we see the beginnings of authoritarianism and tyranny. where language is policed, behavior is regulated, dissent is stifled, and people of faith are driven indoors. People have been fired for supporting the wrong cause. People have lost their businesses because they were on the wrong side of an issue. It is now enough for Leftists to simply declare something offensive, and that is sufficient to send something down the memory hole or even, to get people prosecuted and thrown in prison.
So, the socialists have been alarmingly effective in moving society toward their vision. We are no longer a nation that values liberty and self-determination. We are no longer a self-governed people. We no longer live in a land of limited government and unlimited opportunity. We are descending into slavery, a slavery of approved ideas and disapproved ideologies where not toeing the line is punishable by ostracism and economic sanction (or worse).
But for some reason, the Left has not succeeded in taking it all over.
Why Haven't they Succeeded?
The Left has been frustrated that they can't get socialism fully installed into society.
One reason is our poverty rate is too low. One reason is Socialism requires a large number of poor, oppressed, and marginalized people who can be manipulated into thinking the reason this is is because of The System.
The best way to obtain more discontented poor is to create envy, dissatisfaction, and calamity. And this is what we have had. Unrest, financial turmoil, war, and hatred. We're not suggesting that this has all been caused by socialists, but it certainly has been taken advantage of as an opportunity. Socialists are gunning for the tipping point in the ranks of the poor and even the middle class.
That's why there is the constant clamoring for a living wage, free government programs, more taxes on the rich to solve the income inequality problem, and all the other hysterical hand-wringing. And, that's the reason for the bailouts, the prolonged economic downturn, and the seemingly insane financial practices of government. This all contributes to the swelling ranks of the poor, dependent on government for their all of their daily needs.
More poor and discontented people are needed to effect revolution, including the middle class. Socialists are trying to sow the seeds of discontent, which is a necessary component for motivating the proletariat to rise up against the bourgeois. But rather than creating opportunity, economic growth, education, Leftists offer discontent, envy, and greed. On purpose.
But there are just not enough disaffected, discontented people. Yet.
Bernie Sanders, a Test Case
One reason is our poverty rate is too low. One reason is Socialism requires a large number of poor, oppressed, and marginalized people who can be manipulated into thinking the reason this is is because of The System.
The best way to obtain more discontented poor is to create envy, dissatisfaction, and calamity. And this is what we have had. Unrest, financial turmoil, war, and hatred. We're not suggesting that this has all been caused by socialists, but it certainly has been taken advantage of as an opportunity. Socialists are gunning for the tipping point in the ranks of the poor and even the middle class.
That's why there is the constant clamoring for a living wage, free government programs, more taxes on the rich to solve the income inequality problem, and all the other hysterical hand-wringing. And, that's the reason for the bailouts, the prolonged economic downturn, and the seemingly insane financial practices of government. This all contributes to the swelling ranks of the poor, dependent on government for their all of their daily needs.
More poor and discontented people are needed to effect revolution, including the middle class. Socialists are trying to sow the seeds of discontent, which is a necessary component for motivating the proletariat to rise up against the bourgeois. But rather than creating opportunity, economic growth, education, Leftists offer discontent, envy, and greed. On purpose.
But there are just not enough disaffected, discontented people. Yet.
Bernie Sanders, a Test Case
Bernie Sanders garnered quite a bit of support for president leading up to the 2016 elections, and it at first seemed puzzling that a self-described "social Democrat" or "Democratic Socialist" would have that much support. He actually makes specific claim to "Democratic Socialism." However, his position page reads like a Democrat campaign, so it wouldn't be wrong to suggest that there is not a whole lot of difference between Democrats and social Democrats.
Thankfully, Bernie's appeal is still a minority position. It could be that he is not the young, vibrant, articulate figurehead they need in order to put a handsome face on the ugliness of Socialism. But he is really the only thing they have right now. There is no other national figure who identifies as Socialist.
Nevertheless, he is part of the conversation people are having. People are seriously considering the seemingly innocuous initiatives he has proposed. And with a willing media, anyone who suggests that his ideas are flawed or dangerous is shouted down and mocked.
So the stage is being set. Though Bernie failed, the next Socialist has a better chance.
What is the real answer?
In the history of this nation we find the real answer. For over two hundred years America was and is the envy of the world. The highest standard of living, the most innovative, and the most generous, nation in the history of the planet. What went wrong? Well, we started believing Leftists.
These are things we must recapture in order to regain the hope, the optimism, the can-do attitude our grandfathers had:
- Take the gloves off - Leftists must be vehemently opposed, countered, and removed from office and other positions of power and influence.
- Morality - The abandonment of traditional morality found in our Christian heritage almost perfectly correlates to our decline
- Self-determination - The State does not know best. We are not its wards. We do not serve it, it serves us.
- Return government to its constitutional boundaries - A lawless government is one to be feared.
- Value the traditional family - The basic unit of society, its destruction is an invitation to crime, divorce, chaos, and abandonment of virtue.
- Resist tyranny - People have gotten so accustomed to corruption, oppression, and overreaching government that they don't even pay attention any more.
One other thing. The only hope for our nation, and the only hope for people in general, is the mercy of God as shown through his Son, Jesus Christ. We need a spiritual awakening, a revival, a turning from our wickedness and apathy. Ultimately, every answer to every problem is found in Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment