It’s the Policy Content Supid...or

Why I Don’t Care that Trump’s Grammar is Botched and his Hair is Weird.

When people whine and complain about the current president, it’s usually in some broad general terms riddled with hyperbole or falsehood. There really isn’t anything to suggest that Donald Trump is actually “racist” and no one claimed he was until he began running for president. His secretly recorded comments on what women will let a rich celebrity do is not “sexual assault.” His administration is neither chaotic nor on the verge of collapse — in-spite of Pundits’ daily hopes masquerading as news.

It’s rare to hear a truly honest person who will acknowledge that their hatred for Trump is based upon a hatred for his policies and what they mean for the socialist vision. Donald Trump is hated among all branches of establishment media, government, and culture because he is successfully draining their “swamp.”

Does any sane person really think that enforcing America’s border security is the advent of a dark night of fascism? That reducing taxes and improving the economy is a trick to coddle the “1 %?” That wanting criminal migrants deported is an assault on legal immigration?

At this point, Trump would have to really slip up bad for someone like me to hope for a return to socialist inspired decline and politically correct micro-management of American society. While Trump’s opponents still yearn for a one party state subservient to international bureau-norms, he continues to whittle away at their century long project to rein in the free-wheeling dynamism established by the country’s founders.

This news video isn’t anything special on the surface. It’s just another brief speech by trump. A scripted speech, less than eloquent, and riddled with now predictable self-praise but, in it is the real reason many of America’s citizens are more than happy with the way things have gone since the election.

Meanwhile, the deranged clowns of old-school statism are totally blind to what’s happening around them because they’re so preoccupied with some nonsense about “Russian collusion” and “non-presidential”behavior.”

I hope their blindness continues.

“IT’S OKAY TO BE...[SANE]”... ;)

“Greed”...Imagined and Real

Capitalists admire those who create wealth. Socialists admire those who wish to steal it.

The Goal...and Inevitable Result

All forms of socialism seek to, to some degree, transform their societies and ultimately human nature. It is absolutely impossible to reach these ends without complete and total control over all aspects of society. Thus, the establishment of socialism, by it’s very nature, requires authoritarian rule and elimination of opposition.

Socialism is communism (and fascism for that matter). Socialism will, in the end, always equal constrained human vitality, prosperity, and creativity. Socialism always equals dictatorship

The Horrors of Capitalist Oppression

(Another repost...until I get more time to write)

Consistency in Clulessness Among Our Nobel Betters

previously posted

Multiculturalism and the Dance of Compulsory Affiliation

“...That’s a racist white privilege micro-aggression...”

I like my personal space to be quiet, peaceful, and elegant, with a dash of sophistication, if possible. I’m most comfortable in a room with bookshelves filled with esoteric subjects and cultural topics. I like my walls graced with fine art prints bathed in warm pin-lighting. A Bach keyboard concerto further perfects an environment suited to my tastes. I like what I like...but that’s just me.

My wife’s parent’s preferences are different than mine. They’re decent hardworking people who like loud tacky television variety shows, walls adorned with gold plastic clocks, searing neon light, and cheesy print patterns biting one’s eyes and scorching one’s soul. They’re also from a different culture than mine and that probably figures into the general incompatibilities.

My in-laws environment and the values it represents is, to me, an eruption of cortisol producing cacophony.

My response to all this is to “avoid” - to passively escape to my own space and my own values.

When appraising my situation, it occurs to me that peoples’ affinities and differences are completely natural and normal. A cactus doesn’t like to live in a rainforest and a Redwood tree would perish in a dessert. Their “likes and dislikes” are not a bias born of “hate” or mean-spiritedness - they merely “want” to live their lives as they “choose.” One’s essence is reflected in the environment or culture one choses to affiliate with or reject.

There is a tendency for humans to coalesce with those of like attributes and affinities, not because they are hateful or bigoted but because...it is their nature to do so. When one attends a large party, one can see little clusters of people, some small, some larger. What draws them together is a combination of factors from physical attraction (I dare say, based on appearances), like interests, values, and personality. I’m not one to gravitate towards a group of jocks discussing game scores. It’s not my thing but, to be sure, much in my world would be of little interest to many of them.

I remember attending public schools and later college Ed School (to become a teacher) where the focus was always forcing unlike people to nurture what they have in common with each other and “celebrate diversity.” The education industrial complex’s contrived nonsense didn’t help me to appreciate sports, plastic gold clocks, or cheap TV fare - or revolutionary movements for the cause of skin color and victimhood. I certainly wouldn’t demand that others change their character and values and suddenly appreciate Stanley Kubrick films over pop comedies. In spite of Edland’s efforts to guide my affinities, things like skin color were irrelevant to me and, in spite of what we are daily led to believe, most people could care less about such things.

In the realm of “race” and culture, I’d prefer the company of middle class black persons with interests similar to my own than rich or poor white people of very different temperaments and interests who happen to share some superficial features.

Many people — of any ethnicity — would feel some discomfort at the sight of someone approaching them who is rough, unkempt, and laden in tattoos and piercings. They’d likely be less concerned if a person — again, of any ethnicity — were to walk toward them wearing a suit and carrying a briefcase. In the end, all of our responses exhibit an element of prejudice, often born of honest perceptions.

If it’s understandable and acceptable to avoid those we have little in common with, why should we allow those in power to impose their social planning schemes upon us — to force us into the company of those who not only don’t share our values but, in many cases, despise who we are? The Obama administration had once developed the brilliant idea of deliberately housing poor people in wealthy neighborhoods. Sounds noble (to some). In fact it’s stupid. A guarantee of suspicion and conflict. Another favorite in the social-planners book of schemes is to empty the cities and disperse everyone to the countryside (Cambodia in the 70’s) or, its opposite; concentrate everyone in urban areas (the UN’s "Project 21"). Can one imagine going to a party where an omnipotent authority directed everyone to “socialize” in an environment and among those one has the least in common with?

In the past, simple immigration from varied locations could produce positive results because the new group actively sought to join a nation and its culture to some degree. Even those less enthusiastic about “losing” their cultural identity, over time, came to harmonize with a native population — immigrants subtly changed the host culture and the host culture changed the immigrants. This was an organic process and relied upon natural affinities among individuals, families, and communities.

The imposed edicts of our time to “celebrate diversity...or else” is a blending of cultures that is completely different in nature to the organic assimilations of the past. “Immigrants” shipped in to fulfill the latest fad of cultural Marxism often have no desire to blend, assimilate, or appreciate the host culture. If this was merely a passive / avoidance thing, a couple of generations would harmonize the issue to positive ends for all parties, but current newcomers are often openly hostile to the values of Western culture and occasionally note their hope that they will one day rule over their hosts. This isn’t “diversity” — it’s a war strategy and one can see it often when non-citizens tell Americans that “this country never was great” or “the flag of Sariah will one day fly over the White House.”

In the U.S. and many western countries a couple of decades ago, controversy involving race was diminishing considerably. The issue would erupt from time to time (when the media sought to exaggerate an isolated incident) but those most focused and obsessed with the issue were academics and professional unemployed “revolutionaries.”

I’ve lived in many environments across the U.S. (including the back roads of Kentucky) over the course of a few decades and during that time I may have actually heard a white person say something negative or racist about a minority less than eight times. In those instances it was some off-the-cuff remark. It was rude, tacky, and showed a high level of ignorance but it certainly wasn’t a new dawn of Jim Crow. I have no doubt that there are people out there right now who hate minorities — or “oppressive” majorities. Racists exist, to some degree,...everywhere, but far less so than pop culture would like us to think. In spite of what academics would tell us, there are people of all races who hate other races (racism). The media would have us believe that there are “white supremicists” everywhere. They’re not.

The current obsession with an imagined rampant racism in America is total nonsense. That’s why they had to invent “micro-aggressions” to compensate for a lack of real racism to whine about — crying “wolf” when an occasional hamster comes your way.

After eight years of Obama/Alinsky insurgency tactics, race issues are once more a big deal and are being utilized by the left to the usual ends, disrupt and destroy civil culture so the philosopher kings can impose their cookie-cutter gulag on everyone.

Current circumstance seems to back up the reality that people of very different interests and values who are forced together not only fail to harmonize but retreat into entrenched enclaves where they often fear and despise one another. In a natural organic progression of encounter this would either not happen or at least dissipate over time. The last thing the left wants to see is human interaction based upon the free choices of individuals. To them we are all just game pieces in their latest social experiments.

When one considers current media and academic obsessions with micro-aggressions,” “white privilege,” and “racism;” just remember;

divorced unemployed paraplegics white men dying of cancer...”have all the power.”

For this imaginary problem, the left’s solution is the usual; destroy free society as it is and replace it with...them.

My solution?...Roll your eyes, yawn, and laugh — not necessarily in that order.

Some further insight on this issue (and a rather good Youtube channel).

Signs of Shallow Times

We’ve been living in an easy time. Subsistence and creature comforts come to most with little effort. Whatever trials we experience are often fabricated of our own foolish choices.

Skepticism is easy and easy times breed skepticism. Thus the current whines and gripes directed at all things traditional, all seen through a muddy lense of relativism. Relativism and skepticism are cut of the same cloth.

In another social universe is skepticism’s opposite. The discovery and defense of truth is not easy and is not the product of easy times. So it is that times of struggle test the human spirit’s capacity for depth, refinement, and insight.

Skepticism is a child, spoiled and incapable of sound and honest judgement. Truth is an old soul, having seen the many lies tossed before us and able to judge them for the superficial nature they bare.

The superficial is skeptical, the timeless is true, and the course of existence is born of making the proper distinction between the two.

Political Correctness -- and Decency -- for Thee...but Not for Me

Will Robert De Niro be doing a video now calling Harvey Weinstien a "pig," and a "dog" and threatening to "punch [him] in the face"?

...Probably not. After all, Weinstien never threatened to reduce taxes, secure the country's borders, or, (gasp!) consider America's citizens' interests first.

The propaganda arm of leftism in America is sooo full of shit.

You'd Be Crazy to Not Agree with Me

In many comment threads of late I've often come across the cliche' accusation that my opposing view is somehow an indicator that I'm either stupid or crazy in one way or another. When it isn't me or people who hold my position on a given topic, the current president is often the target of people who feel fully qualified to judge another's mental status based on where their opinions are on the political spectrum.

It's become fairly frequent for media venues to interview psychologists who can note with confidence that Donald Trump is a raving lunatic who must be removed from office to save the world from war, plague, aberrant weather, and four demons in the sky on horseback.

The "conservatives are crazy" meme is the same nonsense every college student gets in an introductory course in psychology. Students at some point are introduced to the concept of the "authoritarian personality" and the "F" scale" ("F" for "fascist" -get it?). College professors don't tell their gullible students that the partisan clown who introduced this bogus concept was Theodor Adorno, a cultural Marxist who found anyone to the right of himself as pathological -- hardly a new strategy among the leftist caste.

In the former Soviet Union, publicly questioning the wisdom of a collectivist police state could land one in a psychiatric facility. Anyone who obviously doesn't see that a sound mind loves Big Brother is obviously in need of "help."

The left didn't get -- and still doesn't get -- "what happened" in the last election. The decision of half the voting public was a giant pushback against bureau-bullies and genuine pathological authoritarian ideologues who, if they had their way, would create a society that micro-manages every aspect of one's life. Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, et al had a better idea, and Trump was taking their side.

Every president has had their own specific idiosyncrasies that could be picked apart by the idiots in the psych profession who haven't figured out yet that none of us are completely sane, stable, or without flaw.

Yet, they can still throw words out like "narcissism" after eight years of equating the concept with "cool."

I believe the leftist industrial complex's emotional tirades against the thought of rolling back the punitive mega-state has become an "obsession."

...Is that pathological?

The Side of the Bogus Impartial

..."I don't take a side, but here's a list of why the side that favors America, limited government, and freedom are wrong."

The Moniker, "Rocket man" vs. Thermonuclear Weapons

To watch much of mainstream media, the Democrats, and the leftist industrial complex, it would appear that the greatest threat to world peace are now the words used by an American president...and, NOT the decades long threats to destroy cities in at least three countries by a ruthless communist dictator. The left misses Obama, Castro, and Hugo Chavez that much.

Beauty and the Beastly

I'm occasionally reminded that my alliance with conservatism is not without having deliberated carefully upon things that truly matter.

This documentary on Youtube is a superb testament to the value of...value.

One cannot begin to compare the things of our era that are shallow, frivoulous, and contrived with creations profound and beautiful and of genuine substance.

Roger Scruton narrates a prosaic appraisal of beauty and the human condition and how the high priests of destruction have sought to lay waste to all that truly matters.

An insightful, thought provoking, and intelligent appraisal of existence on the edge of the sacred and profane.

"Taking a Knee"...in the hopes that the rest of us will "bend over"

Professional sports figures, Hollywood, Academia, government bureaucrats, grievance organizers, even elected officials...Has anyone noticed that those who are now most disrespectful and disdainful toward the American republic are the people who have benefited the most from it? The silent majority is becoming evermore sick of the wealthy and famous lecturing the rest of us on how bad we all are for not bending over for their cause of the day. The backlash on all this nonsense is going to be sweet.

Contrasts in Charecter

I've recently allowed myself to be ensnared by one of those Youtube comments back-and-forths. 'Very annoying and ultimately a waste of time to all parties.

The topic -- one that I admit annoys the hell out of me -- was South Korean's views on who is "scarier," Kim Jong Un or...Donald Trump. I kid you not(!).

Of course, as contemporary education and media would have it, most saw Donald Trump as a greater threat. This is beyond pathetic. I know the arguments that can be made regarding the proper course of action regarding North Korea but have people become completely insane!? What does the North Korean police state have to do for some clueless fools to realize that the contrast between a totalitarian dictatorship and a dynamic free society are beyond dramatic?

What's there to consider? A Stalinist police state has imprisoned most its citizens in a cult of bare subsistence. It has successfully developed nuclear weapons and intercontinental delivery systems. It almost daily threatens someone (the U.S., South Korea, Japan, Australia) with "merciless" violence, and the civilized free world is supposed to talk some more, or worse yet, acknowledge our short-comings?

It's more than terrible but, we have almost reached the point of having to choose between the death of tens of thousands (possibly hundreds of thousands) of people or wait longer to experience the death of millions.

In comment threads on Youtube, any attempt to point out the obvious is met with the usual Jacobin scorn (the bizarre and cliche' accusations of "White Nationalism"). Like so many other issue under the Sun, I've even argued with friends who's need to demonstrate their wise credentials in post modern relativism seems to override common sense. Noting the horrors of impending war by an aggressive and brutal dictatorship is met with the usual tirades about our own misdeeds. "Sure Kim Jong Un is a dictator but...'we' owned slaves." How can anyone ever expect to preserve vibrant free societies when so many of our fellow citizens are so invested in defending the most horrid of governments and so committed to renouncing own own dynamic civilizations? You'd think some of these clowns were still jockeying for a good grade from their leftist college professor.

The Contrast

To further confirm my sense of apprehension over where this is all going, I saw the Christopher Nolan Movie, "Dunkirk." Like "Hacksaw Ridge," it was another great contemporary anti-war film. I'm not going to go into a review other than to say it was a very visceral depiction of the horrors of fellow humans thrust into nightmarish circumstances. It would be difficult for anyone to watch it and be willing to see war happen anywhere.

Where the contrast struck me was comparing the weak-willed pampered and clueless apologists for a ruthless dictatorship in North Korea with the honor and fiber of so many who endured a conflict in a another time. The "Greatest Generation" was made of something considerably more dignified and noble than the pathetic armchair philosophers of our own time.

Do we really expect the likes of North Korea, Iran, and international Islamic terror to offer peace to innocent citizens of the world? And, when they act as perceptive people know they will, can we rely on the limp cause of relativism to save us from destruction?

One can only wish that the fools who daily deride free society and defend the worst would be the only ones to suffer from the inevitable results of their stupidity. But no, they'll drag us into hell along with them.

Too bad...

"Peaceful Protests" in the Post-Obama Insurgency

I made a not so far-fetched observation in a prior post where I suggested that Antifa and other related street rabble were basically a nascent communist insurgency. This recent FOX interview more or less offers a similar conclusion but with first-hand appraisal. 'Some interesting insights from a journalist who apparently isn't in the tank for "the revolution."

The Millennial Faux Rebellion

This guy totally pins it -- excellent.

Beating a Live -- and Dangerous -- Horse

I realize that most of this blog is one big rant against the nonsense...and horrors of socialism in its various permutations but, socialism can mean a lot of things. The latest B.S. regarding the horror that keeps on giving is to note the kinder gentler version of death camps through the slow slide into "Democratic Socialism." Bernie Sanders was quite effective in the last American presidential election in sneaking this marxist con scheme through America'a wide open door. He actually had a shot at the grand prize. The next time around, a like-minded Stalinist in sheep's clothing may be given the keys to the kingdom...while Millennials stare blankly at their Facebook feeds.

Socialism is a commune with compulsory membership. In fact it's a cult, which is why it bears a resemblance to one in so many ways. In spite of how one may wish to soften its image, the manifestation is always the same. Adding "Democratic" to the word is as accurate or honest as calling the North Korean dictatorship a "Democratic People's Republic." In spite of democracy's generic use as a label for free society it in fact describes a society that is decidedly not free. It has often been accurately compared to the concept of two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. In practice, "democratic socialism" can be likened to a few powerful wolves deciding to eat sheep and...other wolves (and never becoming full).

Even when elected democratically, socialists seek to maintain their grip on power through undemocratic means ("for the people" of course). They do this easily over time by regulating away free speech, packing their legal system with like-minded stooges, and using massive sympathetic bureaucracies like the tax system and Justice department to eliminate opposition. The fact that schools, universities, entertainers, and most journalists begin to move in monopoly lockstep with it certainly diminishes its claim to be "democratic" in the generic sense. When banal modes of entertainment like comedy and pop music become venues for inculcating the party line, a society is reaching the point of no return. A system with limited state authority is considerably less corruptible. A system where state authority permeates the entire culture is corrupt by definition.

Has anyone ever heard a "democratic socialist" say, "okay, we've got a good system now that takes care of everyone. We don't need anymore offices of state to compel compliance and we don't need to move any further left to achieve a more perfect order."? You're definitely not going to hear a "democratic socialist" take a pass on the "need" to "protect" their advances through censorship, coercion, imprisonment, or mass executions. After all, such opposition is the "counter-revolutionary enemy of the people." You supposedly "have to break some eggs to make [their] omelet."

In the U.S., and many other countries, an excessive and spendthrift regulatory environment has increased dramatically over the last few decades. We've spent literally trillions of dollars on a "war on poverty" with virtually no impact (a poverty rate of about 13%). And yet, the screech is repeated that "we're not doing enough" or, reducing the budget to levels of just eight years ago will somehow result in mass death, if not the literal end of the world.

Occasionally, in keeping with the pseudo-religious nature of these virtue signaling charlatans one will hear references the teachings of Jesus but, I don't recall Jesus having proclaimed the need for further compulsory funding to the "ministry of good deeds."

Socialism in all it's forms is a massive con to pull at the heart strings of the naive and solidify the gains of bureaucrats and control freaks. To be sure, Nazi's and the Khmer Rouge are some of the more horrid examples of the belief in practice (it's always worse than one can imagine in actual practice), but most people in Venezuela today would be uninterested in the left's debate points while a small clique of wolves devour the lives of citizens who were once stupid enough to embark on the fantasy journey into paradise once more. Now, they can ponder their errors...while they search for food.

Faces of the Far Left

... a picture is worth a thousand words.

Backlash

Well, that was fast. 'Good to see that "the Revolution" is still a hard sell in the U.S., even in the post-Obama era.

Antifa...It's the Real Thing

Political developments of late are occurring at a pace that makes it difficult for anyone to truly know "what's going on."

I, like many, have noted the style and tactics of anti-Trump "protestors" over the last year. Aside from the mayhem, shouting, and occasional damage and fires, I figured it was just the usual band of random protestors. Not particularly organized or cohesive and not really holding a philosophy.

As the disparate "movements" began to gel into a predictable stance of "anti-racism, and "anti-fascism" they began to look less like contemporary leftist rabble and more like the movements we've seen in history. The group "international A.N.S.W.E.R" (a bonafide Stalinist organization sympathetic to North Korea and the Chinese Communist party) was always looming about with their pre-printed signs during any event that promised conflict.

Using a fairly solid social(ist) infrastructure of "community organizers" like Obama's radical agitators, "Acorn," along with partisan leftist student groups, and groups like A.N.S.W.E.R, the "resistance" (to Trump) grew ever more recognizable as a well organized mob with a mission. With evermore common flag-burning and Jacobin screaming about "racism" in every corner, Antifa is being revealed to be more than a mere opposition to Donald Trump. It's now becoming all too common to hear from them the usual cliche's of radical communist agitators through history, the calls for elimination of private property and the destruction and elimination of all aspects of contemporary democratic culture. God knows, if clowns like this were to ever a actually gain power, they'd be dusting off the French Revolutions calendar as well (names like "August" and "September" are oppressive).

Purges, prison camps, and killing fields are not all that uncommon to modern history. Actually they're the typical result of movements like Antifa when such movements are successful in gaining power or when "good people do nothing." All that's missing thus far is a charismatic figurehead to rally all those members of disaffected groups who really don't like America so much to begin with.

Anyone with any insight into archetypal symbolism -- or common sense -- can see that a masked group commonly dressed in black is probably not offering the best path forward for the average citizen and their families.

From the beginning of the recent crescendo of political turmoil (when was the actual beginning?) these guys looked bad but, mixed in with a few naive fellow travelers (not clad in black) they looked like some young and stupid coffee shop vagrants. Not the case now.

I believe these evil clowns are a genuine nascent authoritarian communist insurgency -- with all the trimmings. Under Obama, they no doubt would have had the blessings of the Oval Office while the "Justice" department looked the other way. Fortunately, the Justice department under the current attorney general, Jeff Sessions, is probably already monitoring these dangerous idiots. It's no secret now that they are getting substantial funding and are conducting training in revolutionary warfare throughout the country. It all sounds dramatic but this is the way it's playing out. Add the establishment institutions opposed to America as we know it (which, of course, includes the establishment media), and an organized insurgency can do some damage.

I'm not one to usually sign petitions but the following looks legitimate and I definitely support the cause

An emerging factor that favors a free society is the fact that the far left, including Antifa, have acted too quickly and are increasingly less prone to hiding their true game plan. More people are becoming "red-pilled" and can see the obvious. This isn't about support vs. opposition to racism or noble attempts to create a more inclusive society, it's about the desire among a small segment of the population to destroy all that is good so that it can be replaced by...all that is bad.

I'm hoping that this guy exemplifies an ever increasing number of people who realize that a world swayed to the dictates of leftism would not be a pretty place.

Virtue Signaling Gone Mad

Okay, we get it. Racism is bad. Racists are bad. In spite of what the media, academia, and social justice warriors tell us, most Americans are decidedly not racist and the numbers that are, are notably less so than many other countries.

"Condemn" racism -- and while you're at it, maybe thieves, rapists, and spiders. Prove you're one of the good guys. We get it. Most of Hollywood, establishment media, corporate America, and entertainment are virtuous. A few hundred other people, for whatever reason, are hate-filled, insecure, mean-spirited RACISTS.

In this whole overblown B.S. About Trump's choice of words is the implicit underlying issue; no one is supposed to question the motives or actions of Antifa (largely violent communist / anarchist groups), Black Lives Matter (a group that has now slid off into cliche boiler plate radical leftism), and other groups "on all sides" whose shit stinks every bit as much as the racist neo Nazi wannabes.

It should be noted that the Nazi groups now rallying their pathetic mob are, like the originals they seek to copy, hard core statists who believe in a powerful coercive central government -- they are not conservative, as much as Democrats and their spokespersons in the media seek to paint them as such.

Now, can we hear Obama, Hillary, and other statists "renounce" Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Write, Saul Alinsky, Castro, Chavez, and the terrorist murderers that Clinton and Obama pardoned?

High Drama and Bullshit in Weimar

Anyone familiar with the game plans of Cultural Marxists, Post-modernists, and angry vagabonds knows that current events are unfolding beyond what they could have possibly hoped for -- an entire generation of clueless ill-informed lemmings openly bringing upon themselves the most dystopian of political nightmares.

Charlottesville

We get it. Racism is bad. Racists are bad. How much of America's population is actually rooting for frustrated redneck Nazi wannabes? Not many. On the other hand, there is now a sizable number of largely unemployable public school "educated" drones ready to man the barricades in the struggle against fascism, real and imagined (I'd say, mostly imagined).

Enter, for the millionth time this year, Donald Trump -- also known as, The President of the United States. If this was a saner time, a few pundits from leftland would have whined, during one day of news, "he should have been more specific and concentrated on those white supremacists among the agitators." The following day we'd be back to wondering where the economy was going or if the international scene warranted concern.

This is not a "saner" time. It doesn't matter what Donald Trump said or didn't say, or when he said or didn't say it. The "Alt Left" (which is actually the same old stale left we've known since at least the French Revolution) has been ready to pounce for some time now. After decades of public school and university inculcation of relativism, grievance, and baseless angst, most major institutions that "inform," guide, and dictate the body politick have steered us onto the path that all dead nations eventually find themselves on.

Donald Trump has been a major public figure for decades and I know of no instance where anyone even suggested any "racism" in his character. Now all of a sudden anything he might say reveals the horrors of "white privilege" and a heart full of micro-aggressions. Of course, anyone not ordained to be amongst the noble "oppressed" is now fair game for such nonsense but Trump adds the extra troublesome feature of threatening to whittle away the mega-state and all its promise to finally rein in the lowly plebeians who have failed to give homage to the philosopher kings currently circling overhead.

Trump is not the most skilled or polished messenger but, in the end, what he usually says, though sometimes exaggerated, is pretty spot on. In Charlottesville, the usual band of "antifa" /anarchist thugs came with every bit of trouble-making energy as the neanderthal racists they claimed they were there to peacefully "resist." There were despicable forces "on all sides" (along with the usual fairly innocent followers no doubt).There is absolutely nothing careless or inaccurate about Trump's statement. More than a few insightful sources have made the analogy to Weimar Germany. We know that the militarists and Nazis in the streets of Germany at the time were some horrible people who would definitely make a -- beyond terrible -- difference in the end. If only the communist agitators in the streets at the time had ascended to power, we could then have rested comfortably knowing a new branch office for that strain of compulsory collectivism would set thing right (sarcasm intended).

And, so it is today. Clueless brigades wait to eventually choose who will drag them into the mud of chaos and demise while power hungry monsters "on both sides" set the stage for another dark chapter in human history. We know where Weimar Germany led Germany to. Where will Charlottesville take us?

Nazis, Commies, and Racists..."Oh My!"

I think he covers it best.

"One Man's Terrorist is Another Man's Freedom Fighter"

(After a white supremicist commited an act of terror) Is anyone going to say the pathetically stupid, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter?" Will there be media investigations into this guy's past to find out the "root causes" of his behavior or prod us to see what it would be like to "walk in his shoes?" Maybe a Rolling Stone cover photo of the Nazi terrorist with tosseled hair and doe eyes?

After years of having to use an abortion clinic murder from years ago as an example of the horrors of anyone right of Stalin, the left now has an event they can really milk for "the cause."

An evil Nazi authoritarian (collectivist) white supremicist critically injures several and murders one, so we all better now shut up about low taxes and limited government.

Evil is evil and stupid is stupid -- and yes, "on all sides."

The First Words are the Most Honest

Well, that did't take long.

Defending the Cause of Liberty

You read it here first...probably not. I'm sure there are others who can see the course of events in the crazy world we live in, where the left is kicking and screaming over the Trump stumbling block to their full grip on power.

I predict -- I know this isn't that dramatic of a forcast -- that shortly after war breaks out with North Korea, all the "progressives" in Europe, the American media and leftist industrial complex, and many of our own political "leaders" will blame Trump for events as they transpire. I personally think the far leftists of the North Korean police state should have been shut down long ago. Easier said than done but, it's a pretty constant horror of history that not dealing with dictatorships in their infancy virtually guarentees a more serious set of events and massively larger loss of life later.

No matter, surely anyone with a brain who sides with free and open society can see pretty clearly who the bad guy is here (oh, I forgot, in post-modern leftland, there is no bad guy...except us).

I think war with North Korea is virtually inevitable. I hope I'm imagining things and that the glass is really half full. Regardless how things play out, the left in America will literally take North Korea's side. Of course they'll do this in a round about way, "I'm not saying that North Korea is right BUT, BUT, BUT...."

Cliff's law (my name is Cliff): if a conflict exists between a free open society with a high degree of personal freedom and a leftist authoritarian entity, the left will almost always side with or show sympathy to the the leftist authoritarian institution.

The real nonsense has only begun.

Coffee Shop Suicide

The very definition of stupidity in our time can be seen in the statement, "I can see both sides" when one side is trying to enslave you, kill you, or destroy your civilization.

One of my favorite lines in Yeats's poem, "The Second Coming" is one that accurately describes our own time, "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." There can be no doubt that the worst are indeed, "full of passionate intensity" -- that's what the bad guys do (my simplistic moniker is deliberate). What's troubling to me is the historically less consistent attribute among "the best." A reasonable and respectable person with conviction is an honorable thing in my eyes. It shouldn't be difficult either to discern what is worthy of conviction. Yet, in our time, right/wrong, good/bad, decent and morally decrepit are all muddled uncertainties to the point of absurdity. To be sure, there are always things worthy of debate and not everyone who comes to different conclusions is lacking in insight or character. But, "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" is the statement of a fool, particularly when a terrorist's aim is not freedom but to impose its opposite. A wanton murderer or budding totalitarian is not just someone with another "point of view." A person wanting their family to be safe while carrying on their simple life is not simply a viewpoint open to critical analysis.

There are plenty of issues in this world that beg for philosophical inquiry and debate. But there are also issues that demand immediate resolution and less theoretical speculation -- problems sometimes just need to be solved and genuine dangers need to be eliminated. No doubt one could spend considerable time and energy pondering the grievances of terrorists and political fanatics but, in the end, the threat they pose to random victims hardly warrants sympathy and understanding, let alone the time they need to achieve their goals.

Even in mundane political life, where threats to one's well-being are perhaps less apparent, the polarity of nonsense continues. It appears that the current conflict between left and right is one of idealism with attempts to impose experiments born of philosophical speculation vs. simple attempts to deal with real issues in the most pragmatic and effective way possible.

In virtually every issue of our time, the key debate is between simple common sense and the theoretical and idealistic. The theoretical and idealistic made WWII inevitable and, in our own time, they have begun their destructive means once again. And, for what? So coffee shop poets, "artists," and assorted dreamers can claim virtue?

After decades of cultural Marxism and Post-modernist templates guiding university curriculums, the trickle down into the mundane world of education, journalism, and virtually all cultural expressions have muddled serious inquiry and action into no more than armchair discussions. While radical Islamists regularly conjure new and more pervasive methods of horror and enslavement, the chattering classes -- many who virtually run our society -- ramble on about the relative merit of contending philosophies, always top-heavy in self-chastisement. Yes, Isis wants to behead random "non-believers" but, "by the way, did you know that America had slavery?"

It's all well and good for contending sides to present their cases to each other. It's certainly reasonable that people disagree with one another. Conversations can certainly become heated over mundane matters but, is it really part of normal discourse for some in a free society to debate the cause of enemies who seek our destruction? Would anyone seriously debate the merits of a murderer's motives when he's entering your home to kill you? Or, in the same circumstance, pondering one's own sins to explain why pure evil "may have a point."

The weak-willed, suicidal impulse of so many polemics today is the natural result of a culture and system of education that has taught from primary school on that western civilization is corrupt to the core and in possession of a culture that is not worth defending or preserving. Shakespeare and Beethoven are now mere "white males" -- definitely a mark against one. Free speech a mere bourgeois creation of slaveholders from two hundred years ago.

David Ignatius recently wrote an article for the Washington Post where world issues are presented as a simple problem of some countries (and by extension, some people) just being too "selfish" - a favorite critique of leftism everywhere throughout time. For Ignatius, the overarching value system of Americans (who disagree with him) is just another "me first" attribute that conflicts with his love for an imaginary "global system." The article ties this old leftist complaint about human nature to Donald Trump -- of course -- and specifically, to the frightening concept of affording priority to our own country's interests. The concept of acknowledging our own country and its citizens "first" is certainly not a new concept or even a misguided one. It's an expression of that common sense I wrote of earlier. What's the alternative? "Other countries first?" "Dictatorships and enemies first?" Practical analysis calls this approach...stupid. The implication in leftland is not that there is an "either/or" to the equation but self-effacement results in everyone selflessly working together in peaceful bliss -- again, ...stupid.

The left's appraisal of America First is the same one they hold for any expression of self-interest. The assumption being that if one first considers self, family, and friends it must mean you wish to treat all others with cruelty and oppression. It is beyond the Jacobin mindset to consider a real world where people and nations act in self-interest while peacefully interacting and compromising with one another. In their eyes, one side is the flawed, mean, fascist consideration of one's own interest, on the other side the noble authoritarian philosopher king who wishes to see a world of self-sacrifice...to them and their "ideals" (their self-interest).

While some of today's intellectual masochism results from sincere self-loathing, much of it exhibits the standard arrogance of many intellectuals throughout history -- a genuine belief that the views they hold are superior to what they see as a simplistic desire to merely preserve one's civilization.

A conservative wants practical results; security, economic vitality, and individual freedom from the state and its schemes. A conservative is an adult with practical goals.

A "progressive" is a child, demanding that the world produce the magic toy they want anytime they scream loud enough or are able to bully someone else out of.

Social Justice Warriors, grievance whiners, and garden variety leftists are doing no one any favors. The world would be a better place if they confined their fanciful illusions to the coffee shop...where no one gets hurt.

**********************

The religion angle in this video might be a bit cheesy but I think this guy and his values run rings around any coffee shop lit major who seeks to "understand" the terrorist/"freedom fighters."

Planting an Old Flag in Newly Conquered Territory...a Follow-up to Previous Observations

The end of the American Republic is in our midst and it isn't because a rookie politician decided to enforce the country's borders or stimulate the free economy by trying to make the state less of a burden in our lives.

In past posts, I've noted a basic theory I have on current events unfolding in the United States. In summary, "progressivism" and all its permutations of statist ideology have moved steadily toward their goal of "transforming" and ultimately taking control of the United States and its citizens -- the "grand prize" in the lefts hopes to dominate the course of human existence. Some have come to similar conclusions but most observers simply see a contemporary "polarization" that can be remedied by "more dialog" or "lowering the temperature."

For over a hundred years the momentum in the U.S. has been directed to the elimination of a free constitutional republic that affords a maximum amount of freedom to autonomous citizens. Over time, the political pendulum moved back and fourth but the ultimate course, as Jefferson had expected, was for government to encroach upon the freedom of individuals. The last hundred years has brought fourth a million and one embellishments and permutations of the Marxist creed of envy and all of them have been marshaled to "progressive" end goals.

While the left and many of its associates in the establishment media chastise Republicans as racists and neo-fascists the reality is that most Republicans are no different than they've been for decades. Their core beliefs still center around concern for security and defense, disciplined fiscal management, and in many cases traditional cultural/social values. Nothing that really conjures images of jackboots. But, in the lefts fantasy world, defense is genocide, a sober budget is oppressing the poor, and not approving of the latest outlandish fad in personal lifestyle choice is a dark night fascism (okay, maybe Hitler would have opposed transgender bathrooms). Meanwhile, the progressives, imagining themselves to be a new center, have drifted off the chart.

At the core of all recent developments is not, as so many pundits would have us believe, a polarization of discourse. The right in America hasn't moved to any "pole" at all beyond wanting to maintain practical sanity in economic, social, and international affairs. The mainstream left (and America's left-center Party, the Democrats) have gone from a mere favoring of "butter" over "guns" a few decades ago, to full fledged revolutionaries bent on the complete "transformation" (destruction) of the American republic. While this might conjure an image of two sides becoming more extreme and "polarizing" the reality is far simpler. The socialist authoritarian caste has successfully seized control of a major American political party and come to steer the minds of a generation. The left's polarization is not against Republicans or conservatives, it's to America itself, its traditional ideals, and culture.

The Obama administration was a critical juncture in the subversive transition from a constitutional republic to a socialist bureau-State. Between Obama's enrichment of state authority and the actions of cultural institutions in America -- education, media, entertainment, and even business and the sciences -- the pendulum has been effectively yanked from its post. The left in all its forms simply will not allow any movement back from what they have steered the country towards. They've almost reached the finish line and they smell victory. Trump was not supposed to happen. Even Jeb Bush would have been an acceptable temporary illusional pendulum swing as the state (and, what some are now calling "the deep state") continued its consolidation of power. Those citizens who still believed in America as an exceptional land where people could extricate themselves from the tentacles of the oppressive bureau-state were not supposed to have the influence and steam left in them to win back the essential ingredients of self government. As I've noted before, THE [American] GOVERNMENT WANTS ITS COUNTRY BACK and there are plenty of fellow citizens willing to carry the torch to such victory. Some may be compassionate naive and some may be power-hungry and arrogant (some just want an excuse to smash cars and windows and burn buildings) but they all want to see the exceptional America of Enlightenment foundations to fall so that it may be replaced by the "rule of men" -- their men...and, occasionally, women. Wanting to place a hollow shell of America into a Global system is just a side scheme. The primary goal has always been to eliminate the unique values afforded American citizens by its constitution. Control freaks the world over find it unbearable that the most powerful and influential country in the world is a place where citizens can operate relatively free from...them. There are many ways to gain power. Socialisms main sentiment has always been mere theft -- seizure of power. Socialists don't produce anything (!).

Lots of country's have constitutions. Some of them even "guarantee" the same basic freedoms that Americans have. In spite of their "guarantees," some of these countries are no more than garden variety dictatorships. What has made American society work and become the catalyst that it is to prosperity and creative dynamism, is not simply a very well-thought out constitution but a fairly consistent tendency for most to actually adhere to its principles. Though the country often failed to fully live up to the standards so clearly outlined it was usually obvious when a breach of contract was occurring and men of honor sought to remedy the failing, often at great cost or sacrifice.

It is only in very recent times that the founding document itself is being called into question or people ("progressives" of course) are knowingly stretching its meaning to mean whatever they want it to mean -- again, the rule of men and women.

It was revealing to watch Democrats question Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch during confirmation hearings. Very few questions sought to judge the candidates skills and knowledge in upholding the country's founding document. Many questions ultimately sought to ensure that Gorsuch would reach decisions in line with current leftist thought regardless of how it may align with the constitution. The left only has use for a constitution that will justify the whims of their moment. The "rule of men" can change its mind in a heartbeat and certainly doesn't want some honorable and consistent standard getting in its way.

Within the scope of history, there is nothing new about what is now occurring in America. Great nations and cultures both good and evil reach an expiration period. What's ultimately tragic is that, as the end nears, a sizable part of the population still seeks the stability and success of tradition but their reward for common sense will be to suffer just the same as the socialist rabble that has sought national suicide for over a century. The only poetic justice likely to occur will be that the weasels and lemmings will probably be the first to see their living standards plummet...and, in a more extreme scenario, family members arrested.

Caveat

After having written all the preceding I have to note the very real possibility that I could be wrong. With all the venom conjured from leftland in recent years and all the success they've had in directing the thoughts of millions, there is still a good part of the population that will never bend to the collectivists siren call. Even with the globalist/socialist scheme holding so many levers of power, it is entirely possible that, in the U.S. they've taken on more than they can chew.

Backlash

It's entirely possible that progressives overplaying their card will result in a substantial backlash. This has been seen, to a degree, in recent special elections, where the left has flooded the progressive candidate with money and support and still came out losing. Between ridiculous over-hyping of Trump's supposed impeachable offenses (non-offenses) and the bizarre authoritarian uprisings on college campuses, sane people have about had it with the socialism of our time. It doesn't help that the left has failed to make the case for their fervent belief that lots of unvetted people should be let into the country and if a few of them commit violent crimes, well, that's the price you've got to pay to benefit from "diversity" -- laughable.

In the end, the century long slow creep of socialist subversion will probably pay off -- to them -- with another great civilization disposed of on the dung heap of discarded greatness or a very violent struggle will ensue between the Jacobin hoard and the traditionalists who think its preferable to live in a stable, prosperous, and dynamic society where individuals guide their own ship of state.

The Coup

Immediately after Donald Trump was elected it became a cliche' standard among the leftist rabble to proclaim that America was experiencing a "coup." "The election was stolen" supposedly. Of course, to objective and honest observers this was nonsense. The Democrat's candidate sucked and failed to hold much allure even to members of her own party. She was corrupt to the core, self-righteous, and cocky, brushing off any criticism with the usual worn out lectures about racism, sexism, and "vast right wing conspiracies." With the Republican candidate winning, the electoral college was then called into question since it didn't get the same outcome that the popular vote would have if we allowed The People's Republics of California and New York to decide our elections.

"A coup" supposedly took place by a free and open election. Ironically, a genuine coup is occurring now by the unelected power players who seek to undo the election's outcome. From the moment he was elected, establishment tentacles have sought to remove Trump from the presidency by any means necessary. To be sure, the Trump style makes their attempts easier. Crude, brash, unpredictable, and..."he tweets too much." Okay, I think everyone gets that but, anyone seeking to conjure a real, legitimate reason to remove Trump from office is going to come up short. The "Russian collusion" scam is laughable. Many in the Democrats' party had been openly sympathetic to Russia during most of the 20th century -- as long as it was communist. The same went for any of Russia's communist spawn. Now, Democrats are all-of-a-sudden concerned about national security issues. Go figure.

The left is grasping for straws but their determination is steadfast. They want Trump gone to the point of conjuring bizarre fantasies of beheading or Caesar style assassinations (the Shakespeare "interpretation" in NewYork).

I've listed before the institutions that harbor or control so much of the left-wing opposition today but they bare repeating: The establishment media, academia, public education, entertainment, "artists" (self-proclaimed and actual), the bureaucracy, and the "deep state" intelligence apparatus. All of these very powerful entrenched forces stand poised together to seek the removal of a legitimately elected president who seeks no more than the return of economic vigor to a sclerotic economy, fair dealings to Americans by other nations, the reining in of an overbearing bureaucracy that has strangled common citizens with burdensome rules and edicts and, the hottest button issue; reestablishing the country's border security to keep out those who may do our citizens harm or who don't much care for our society to begin with. These are the terrible "fascist" things that have aroused the Jacobin caste to passionate intensity.

In spite of Trumps flamboyant and brash style, I have no doubt that the left's response would be similar if Ted Cruz had won. Maybe not so much with Jeb Bush since he was just another establishment clone who would steer the country toward a globalist future. He would have talked the talk of a moderate conservative, but his walk would have been in the same direction as Hillary Clinton.

Any genuine limited-government, low regulation, conservative that put "America First" would be targeted for defeat as much as Trump is, with perhaps less bizarre embellishment (mock beheadings). Who could have ever imagined that the concept of acting first in America's interest would actually be a debatable point of contention. To be sure, if another conservative had won, the late night comedians would still be doing their obsessive one topic newscasts disguised as comedy -- as they had done with Bush 43. The intensity of their hate would perhaps be less because they would know that, in the next election, they'd easily be right back on track to ushering in a global progressive utopia to finally set the little people strait and establish the left's divine right to rule.

The big game changer in all this was Barack Obama, a virtual nobody with communist mentors and tempered revolutionary zeal. Obama normalized radicalism. Like the people who claim Swedish and Danish welfare programs are the true face of "socialism," Obama was able to feed as much power as possible into a corrupt regulatory monster in the guise of simply continuing some New Deal and Great Society programs. While socialist creep was nudged along with stealth precision, the goal was always "fundamentally transforming America."

While Hillary Clinton lacked the dignified charm of Obama, she was expected to easily put the finishing touches on the progressive agenda. After that...no going back. A million potential Democrat voters would be made citizens and the one-party state would begin its work melding a deliberately weakened America into the global "system."

All these precious expectations and along comes Trump. In spite of a gruff and unpredictable manner, he could literally end a century-long project of transforming the U.S. -- and the left knows it. The fact that agencies of state and the bureau-clones that inhabit them are on the same page as the power-brokers and cultural elites definitely makes Trump's mission difficult.

Outright assassination at this point would be hard for the "deep state" to pull off, though I'm sure the idea has been bounced around by some -- as it is regularly on social media and among members of the pampered socialist yuppie cult (suppies?).

So, now, what to do? Amazingly, they've got their "independent" investigator, who happens to be a close friend and mentor to the former F.B.I. director. To assist in the "impartial" investigation, Clintonistas and Democomm donors. This scenario couldn't even be pulled off as fiction. This is all the same cabal that let it slide when the spouse of the subject of an investigation (Hillary Clinton) met with the Attorney General. Does any sane person think that some of these same players are going to let Trump off the hook for whatever concocted "crime" they can conjure? With an "expanded investigation" they'll o doubt find something somewhere to accomplish the common goal -- rid the world of the one real obstacle to Jacobin rule.

The left's current sanctimonious tirades, threats of violence, and actual violence is still constrained by the normative power of a country's history that, in the end, wouldn't take well to attempted coups. Most Americans don't care about such things as using the latest pronouns for a limited niche lifestyle or silencing a campus speaker who believes Islamic terrorism is a legitimate concern. Ultimately, the left in America today is thinking and behaving as they have everywhere throughout history. The rabid true believers are probably no more than 20% of the public at most, but they carry along with them another 20% of the easily swayed (the audiences of late night comedy and variety shows). With that mix are probably 5% who think that progressives are merely "Democrats" who "care about the poor." All on all, half the population, either fervent or easily swayed by eight years of slick Saul Alinsky technique are now in some manner supportive of the left-wing industrial complex.

The next presidential election will be an amazing thing to watch. I have a feeling Trump will not be the Republican candidate. Pence could very well be. The Democrats and the entire spectrum of socialism will simply not allow a Republican/conservative win in spite of what the electorate chooses. The full force of leftism will be brought to bare on the outcome. The end result, either a virtually installed leftist or cities in flames over another loss. Ultimately, they will get their way.

It will be called a "revolution" but like most leftist "revolutions" in history, it will in fact be a coup d' etat -- the seizure of power by those who cannot allow freedom and happiness among fellow citizens.

Imagine a world without America.

..."the best lack all conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity."

"Down with the Man"...and, please Support, The Man

The true values of the left are becoming clearer for everyone to see. After decades of them faking the role of independent thinking rebels, a guy (Trump) has come along who is despised by all the major powerful establishment institutions in the country and the world -- journalism, education, entertainment, big corporations, silicon valley, the CIA and NSA, etc.

And, who do the pampered "rebels" side with? ...'Very revealing.

Real rebels don't love "Big Brother" and certainly don't march lockstep with everything they are told to think by the biggest power players of our time.

...sheep

"We want our government back..."

The government wants its country back

REALITY DERANGEMENT SYNDROME AND THE MIRACULOUS ENCHANTMENTS OF THE UNDERWISE

It's not really about Donald Trump...but, he is the messenger.

I once read -- I think it was among one of Eric Hoffer's brilliant observations -- that mass protests and "revolutions" don't occur when a given group is fully under the thumb of oppression. Turmoil, resistance, rebellion, and general baseless complaining, occur when a given group feels that it's demands are actually within reach. When a special interest group is on the verge of claiming a prize, it demands the prize. This sometimes occurs in instances where the "prize" is a justly deserved application of fairness, as in numerous civil rights movements. Unfortunately, this is also true in the case of ridiculous temper tantrums, like those of feminist college-educated middle class control freaks decrying the horrors of living among people who disagree with them regarding the role of the state in people's lives. Sariah law -- no problem. A guy in the White House who once bragged that his fame draws willing sex play -- Nazi Germany.

So just what is the big prize that so many pampered Jacobin brats are (were?) on the verge of getting. How is it that newly elected policies of defending American citizens against the risk of attack and reining in the growth of the punitive mega-state has brought such passionate and often violent opposition?

Too bad there isn't a Bastille around for this group to play in.

How did the sentiments of Soviet authoritarianism become a bogus and stealth "mainstream" so quickly? One need only imagine the U.S. as it was before Obama. To be sure, leftism had tipped the scales in their own direction for some time, but it was Obama who successfully normalized the leftist vision and placed it well within positions of absolute permanent power. "America First?" That's now seen as a type of fascism. Unleashing the productivity and dynamism of independent businesses, large and small? That would be selfish and "uncaring capitalist oppression." Stand up to enemies who seek to destroy us and harm our citizens? -- philistine over-simplification. Obama and a leftist industrial complex of intellectuals, "educators," entertainers, and faux journalists have dutifully imposed their dystopian vision on common citizens who simply want to be left alone and kept safe.

When appraising the new president specifically, it's clear that he's not just another establishment figure from the sleeping status quo. But, his goals are not particularly excessive either. Trump's blunt personality aside, the policies he has sought to implement are on par with those of any American president of several decades past -- including Democrats. Can anyone really believe that Harry Truman or JFK would be arguing for the "need" to import as many people as possible from areas of the world awash in violence and authoritarian beliefs? Trump, Republicans, and conservative pundits are not the radicals here. What they call for is a reintroduction of sanity into the body politik. The left, feeling the oats of a mere few decades, now wants to steam-roll its way to absolute power. Their argument isn't that they offer a better plan to consider but that everyone else must be silenced and a one-party state established to centralize punitive authority over the wayward lives of America's citizens.

Among the left, those I've interacted with have either been naive and idealistic or bitter, vengeful and authoritarian. When we see marches and protests across the country one can be sure that they are being led by the veangful and authoritarian and followed by the the former. (The Soros funding helps). There's not a lot of room for simple pragmatism when one's ultimate goal is to turn the world upside down.

So what are the appalling attributes of a Trump administration? Strong on defense. Wishes to enforce current laws regarding immigration. Wishes to promote economic growth through deregulation and lower taxation. These are the things that people are marching in the streets against? Really? This is the new dark night of fascism? What utter nonsense. To restate my thesis; the insane fever pitch of leftist rage and the successful marshaling of easily duped fellow travelers is primarily a result of the left's success up to now -- up till now, they had literally almost succeeded in taking over the United States. One last push (Hillary) would have given them the prize but, unexpectedly, along comes the heartland's choice to stop the "revolution." The ultimate "counter-revolutionary enemy of the people."

Unlike Obama, Trump is not a polished speaker. It may seem like an odd comparison, but one could accurately note that Trump sometimes communicates like Forrest Gump. In making such an observation though, one might miss the fact that Forrest Gump could see the obvious and, in a sense, was the only one who really knew what was going on. All the sophisticates of the intelligencia see Trump's statements as stupid, simplistic and childish, lacking leftland's refined self-aggrandizing and nuanced "insight." But where has the "insight" of our ruling classes gotten us? To quote Trump, "These are some really bad people..." (referring to our terrorist enemies). No one amongst the establishment would speak in such bare terms but, when you get right down to a strait-forward appraisal of our circumstance, that is probably one of the most blatantly honest and factual appraisals one could make. It takes insight and honesty over erudite sophistry to state things in such plain but accurate terms and his largely working-class followers get it.

Like so many countries around the world, the U.S. has, in recent decades, nurtured the growth of a massive self-serving bureaucracy. We can vote for different presidents and different legislators but the office of Do-What-I-Tell-You-To-Do is a lifetime position. Bureaucrats come and go but the bureaucracy is the poison barnacle of state, forever affixed to the backs of citizens dumb enough to allow its initial grip. The state's bureaucracy is always reliably for...the state. In the U.S., that makes it decidedly "progressive" (leftist authoritarian). Something like a brash billionaire president or a shift in political winds isn't about to take down the tower of enforced compliance. And, if such opposition does emerge...they're not going to go easy.

To coincide with the left's ascendancy in recent decades has been a transformation in what they are and what they really stand for. Not a real transformation. They've always been a clique' of elitist control freaks. The transformation has largely been one of their public persona. Where they once sought power by playing the role of champions for "the little guy" and working people, they now unabashedly wear their credentials as bonafide social planners who actually hold the middle class in disdain. Of course they've always despised the materialistic "bourgeoisie" but, of late, will pay the required lip-service to concern for "the middle class." The left has always been, first and foremost, a movement of striving philosopher kings convinced of their destiny to mold and shape humanity to what they have decided is best for them all.

The leftist industrial complex -- public "education" in particular -- has successfully established the myth that anything to the right of European style socialism is a degree of fascism. Of course this is nuts. Belief in smaller decentralized government, low taxation, and respect for open debate and the rule of law are not only NOT fascism but are decidedly fascism's opposite. It is in this atmosphere of perpetual left-wing propaganda, that classrooms, entertainment, advertising, and ...ordering a coffee, have come to shower the public in the ridiculous belief that that somehow half the political spectrum is literally invalid as a choice in how we choose to govern ourselves.

Another factor that intrudes upon the wish fulfillment of the Jacobin hordes is the explosive growth of alternative media. Millions of people now have access to the other side. Decades ago, ABC, CBS, NBC, and the New York Times called the shots on everything. If anyone deviated from the left's talking points they were ignored or branded insane. Now, people are on to their nonsense. The left simply can't make any headway if it is honest about what it wants. They can only lie, pretend to be relatively moderate, or paint decent constitutionalists as boogeymen of fascism. The left's organs of propaganda are imploding and along with them the entire worldview of coercion that they represent

Donald Trump is merely the messenger. Will they get the message?