PROMETHEAN ANTAGONIST

The Revolution

For those who haven’t noticed, -- and it would be difficult not to – there’s a revolution taking place now, but it’s different from what some have defined as, “revolutionary.”

Every few decades or so, self-described “revolutionaries” seek to re-impose the level of government authority that America’s founding fathers shook off over 200 years ago. There are, however, other revolutionaries with more honest semantic appraisal of their goals.

Today’s revolution is different. In the past, self-deluded “rebels” marched, ranted, and whined; opposing, “Wars, racism, and greed (selectively).” Assisting them in their crusade, they had the support of a good portion of academia, the intellectual “community,” entertainers, the media, and even the public schools. Whether one read an 8th grade history book or watched the nightly news, one could often find suggestions and hints that an evil capitalist system had erected an American tyranny of selfish oppression. Whether addressing civil rights, feminism, the environment, or “peace,” the ultimate obstacle to the flourishing of goodness was, in their eyes, …individual freedom!

A left of center worldview still dominates most of the international media, entertainment, public school bureaucracy, et al. The world over, a generation of young people have been raised convinced they are somehow free-thinking “rebels” because they agree with what they’ve been told by their teachers, Michael Moore, and “mainstream” news sources. Many are now convinced that a highly regulated bureau state is the solution to perceived flaws in human nature and that any country or person that thinks otherwise is “fascist” (this, often from the very nations who invented both Fascism and Communism). The cheap imitation rebel sees any open system of products and values as the enemy of utopia.

The real revolution currently taking place can be seen in a renewed appreciation for the values established by America’s founders. Such values acknowledge, first and foremost, the right of the individual to live freely from arbitrary coercion and submission to state authority.

In the past, media had deliberately dramatized the modern failings of free society (i.e exaggerated claims of “poverty”) rather than the realities of successful achievement among new immigrants rising to America’s middle class through their own effort.

Today, true diversity of opinion has emerged; a just countervailing force to the authoritarian’s contrived diversity through compulsion. This is a radical change from former decades when domineering and self-righteous ideologies had gained significant influence over public opinion and policy. In cable news options, books, and Internet sites, the silent majority has again risen to fairly claim their just position in the marketplace of ideas.

When I briefly taught high school social studies, I was amazed (disgusted) that so many school texts and so many teachers preached the idea that the government has “given us rights,” or “allowed us to have rights." The founders would have cringed to hear such nonsense. Their assumption was that humans are literally born with natural rights and that government's prime purpose is to maintain the security of those rights. The citizen allows the state to exist – we give it the right to exist -- not the other way around!

The reasoned establishment of self-government and the existence of free expression and choice is still the only value system that can truly be called “revolutionary.” The “revolution” squealed from the left is no revolution at all – not even close. It is a desire to merely return to the political state of most of human history; subservience to centralized authority. One must remember that revolution ultimately means change, The goals of the left have nothing to do with change.

The founders of America’s constitutional system knew that factions in contending thought would spontaneously emerge when one aggressive ideal sought to impose itself. So it is that today, over 200 years after America’s birth, the real revolution for individual liberty has reasserted itself. The true rebels of today’s revolution are not calling for a more powerful state or “wise” leaders to compel obedience to philosophical fads; they are merely asking to be left alone. The Left hates to leave people alone. Today’s “Progressive” ultimately demands that we embody the same banal trait sought by caricatures of some cheesy corporate enterprise – that we be “a team player.” (The Amway of political philosophy)?

Many countries and cultures maintain a sort of archetypal consistency over time. The America of a couple centuries ago, described so well by de Tocqueville, is essentially the same in “personality” as the America of today. The pioneers, cowboys, and inventors of the last few centuries still represent the basic social design that has always colored America’s character. Waves of immigrants haven’t changed this essential fact in the slightest; in fact they have helped to perpetuate it. There’s a kind of wisdom in-the-rough that the diverse and independent citizens of America have that will always make them far more revolutionary than any European coffee shop "thinker." America, of course, has its share of salon philosophers, and Europe still has a few genuine renegades, but the real revolutionaries of the world are still the simple folks. Pompous mouthpieces of "revolutionary" banter never have been revolutionary in spirit. Anyone can say, “I want a strong central government to tell everyone how to live,” but this is hardly revolutionary or even vaguely novel. Of course, the Left never outright states their case so honestly. They've had to erect a constantly morphing capitalist boogeyman to rally against. To them, all human problems come down to something called "greed" and all solutions come down to "eliminating" it. They start with laws and regulations and they often end with blatant threat and coercion. The Left's pervasive blueprint of revolution has always been the violent and reckless model established by The French Revolution, c. 1789. The guillotine is their symbol of revolution. Robespierre was the hero of their mission. In America's revolution, we had no Robespiere, no changing of the calendar, and no theft of church property -- no turning the world upside down.

Real revolution doesn’t need to steal from anyone or impose new rules. It doesn’t need to march and scream, it merely recognizes that we are born free, and insists that we remain so.

*****************************************
Mona Charen notes the media elite’s continued absurdity in appraising current "misunderstandings" with Fascist Islamic Jihad:

“The response of the editorial board of The New York Times reveals why Western civilization is imperiled. “Urgent efforts are needed to better manage the cultural tensions perilously close to the surface of Dutch public life," intoned the Times. "The problem is not Muslim immigration, but a failure to plan for a smoother transition to a more diverse society. One very real danger is that the public trauma over the van Gogh murder may lead to a clamor for anti-Muslim policies that could victimize thousands of innocent refugees and immigrants."

“Right. The problem is not a murderous, totalitarian religious ideology bent on domination of any society with which it comes into contact (just ask the Sudanese Christians, the Israeli Jews or the Hindu Indians), rather it is the Western world's lack of "diversity."…

The N.Y. times often sounds like a college Ed. School professor – totally clueless.

*****************************************
Che Guevara has continued to hold sway over the ideals of the brat class. The Authoritarian Left has milked that famous photo of the useless demogogue to the point where some people actually think he stood for something beyond his own reckless will to power. Here's some reasons to not like Che.

Top Ten (actually 14) Reasons To Not Like Che:

14. Administered summary trials and executions.

13. Always looked stoned.

12. Didn't hold a steady job.

11. Oliver Stone is a "friend of a friend."

10. Always acted like he was cool or something.

9. Promoted peace by wearing army fatigues.

8. In an ancient forgotten tongue his name means, "That dumb guy in the funny hat."

7. Real men don't write diaries -- on a motorcycle or otherwise.

6. Typical pampered socialist spoiled brat.

5. Colonel Sander's image on a t-shirt makes one more approachable.

4. Hair style looks cool on faded t-shirt but in real life was simply unwashed.

3. Admired by vapid, rich Hollywood Communists.

2. His best pal, Fidel, keeps winning elections by not allowing other candidates, and...

The #1 reason to not like Che is......(lets get to the point):

He was ruthless egomaniac socialist demagogue!

*********************************
The pre-election arrogance of the left continues.

A guy I was talking to recently shook his head in disbelief while uttering, "I can't believe you voted for Bush! How could you vote for Bush!" (A related string of insults followed). He was clearly enraged, like most leftists when confronted with the reality that there really are views out there that differ from their own. What struck me about the tone and nature of the tirade, was the blatant rudeness of such an outburst. I wasn't even sure how he knew I had voted for Bush -- I hadn't brought the issue up.

While certainly having been a participant in many heated political arguments, I've never began a spontaneous assault on anyone's voting choices. Niether I nor anyone I know on the right would tell someone, "I can't believe you voted for Labor (or a Democrat), what were you thinking, how could you possibly vote for a person who...?"

This self-righteous and condescending manner is one of the Left's most un-endearing traits; arrogance, intolerance, and aggressive insistence that their personal ideals are the standard upon which we must all submit.

"A philosophy of peace and understanding"...my ass!