Standing up for What is Right

Joe di Genova and Tom Fitton are genuine patriots in the mold of America’s founders. I particularly like di Genova’s style which confronts what’s going on with brutal honesty.

While some who defend the president use a strident tone that often undermines their case (in the end just sounding like one side of a debatable argument — e.g. Sean Hannity, Alex Jones), these guys cut strait to the truth.

Appeals to justice, the rule of law, and the foundations of America’s constitutional republic win hands down over a group of corrupt scheming autocrats dedicated to nothing but destruction and imposed obedience.

Aside from FOX news, you’re not going to hear much from these dedicated citizens in establishment venues.

The Monster in the Mirror

A rarely acknowledged recurring truth of history:

When a group is oppressed or in a position of diminished status and seeks equality it will, in the end, seek dominance. Upon achieving dominance it will often act as oppressive toward other groups as they themselves had experienced prior to attaining ascendency.

Non-Divisive Divisivness

“Donald Trump’s legacy of Divisiveness...”

Really?

Repeat a lie enough and people will believe it. Establish a general theme repeatedly, and that too will be digested as having merit.

After nonstop depictions of Trump as a “divisive, corrupt, racist, authoritarian” devil, a segment of the public with weak critical insight have bought the image hook line and sinker. After all, that is what “they” are saying. Of course, “they” are merely the propaganda arms of the leftist industrial complex — everyone from college professors to late night comedy hosts. If they told you daily that elephants fly, a good portion of the public would accept it as a fact of science.

So now, complete fabrications of character regarding the president have become gospel among mobs of statist thugs, assorted proto-communists, and run-of-the-mill drones lacking the intellectual insight required to form conclusions based on reality.

So it is that Donald Trump is a “racist” even though, after three years of thorough investigation, no one can come up with any evidence of him “using the N-word.” Partisan clowns like low-grade actor Tom Arnold or a very bitter and scheming former assistant to the President, Omarosa, claim they have their smoking gun but have yet to even reveal an empty squirt gun. One of my favorite repeated fantasies is that Trump is “homophobic” in spite of a long history of friendship with gay personalities, appointing a — very qualified — gay man to the ambassador post in Germany, active support from tech icon, Peter Thiel, and even old video footage of he and Rudolph Guilliani in drag. The truth regarding Donald Trump’s “____phobia” is that he simply doesn’t care. (I can personally relate to this stance). He neither loves nor hates any specific PC protected group. That, in itself, is enough to get one branded “___phobic” these days. It is part of the Jacobin gospel that one must enthusiastically crusade for a given interest or one is automatically....”____phobic.” I think Donald Trump could care less about Muslims, gays, or Hispanics. Putting a temporary ban on people coming to the U.S. from SOME Muslim countries — which have unstable terror-aligned governments — hardly equals, ....”hates Muslims.” Pursuing racially-neutral policies (e.g. negotiating more labor-friendly trade deals) that improve the employment status and lives of specific racial groups produces a good practical end yet fails to impress leftists favoring words over results. If one fails to raise a rainbow flag or enthusiastically celebrate an obscure personality or holiday honoring a victim group du jour, one simply must be, “full of hate.”

Then, there is the “divisiveness.” What the hell does that even mean? Obama spent eight years stoking flames in every incident that held racial implication. Trump’s only statements regarding African-Americans have been to brag of his improvement of their lives and to express sympathy for the one’s he knows who’s loved ones died at the hands of illegal migrants (a sympathy not shown by anyone on the left or the Democrats’ party).

It turns out that “divisiveness” in regard to Trump merely means that he tweets back sarcastic responses to those who unfairly malign him and seek to thwart his active attempts to fix the many problems that have gone unaddressed by establishment institutions for decades.

Meanwhile, in a stunning example of projection, the left hammers away at any crack in American society, creating crevasses everywhere, between genders, races, religions, economic classes, and personal orientations. With the fall of Marxist economics, cultural Marxism has sought to splinter society into a thousand-and-one groups of “oppressed peoples.” With a final goal of creating a powerful punitive mega-state, the last thing the left will permit is a stable prosperous society where people’s personal interests and concerns override the ideological bandwagon.

None of this is to say that any president is not fair game for critical analysis or that Donald Trump doesn’t have attributes worthy of negative appraisal but...some fairness and honesty please.

Claims of “racism,” “[every group] phobia,” and divisiveness have all just become another cliche’ method of attack upon anyone who dares stray from the left’s march into chaos and eventual bondage...

Meanwhile; low unemployment among all groups, improved national security, and a genuine desire to repair the damage of decades brought by those whose only real concern is dictating the personal lives of others.

The Marvel of Common Sense

People are often amazed at the prophetic skill some people have when, in fact, a common sense awareness of human nature and creative capacity could come to the same conclusions just as easily. An accurate appraisal of the human condition and its development arises not from being a genius but by simply not being blind.

Chaos in the Tinderbox

Jordan Peterson references Taoism when he speaks of the significance of chaos and order as the polarities that drive existence. Pronounced degrees of chaos or order are necessary at times but, either side in excess inevitably elicits its opposite. So it is that anarchy is a foundation of totalitarianism and rigid structures breed resentment and the eventual demise of imposed overlords.

(Some) American voters of late have sided with chaos. The current executive branch has tried to maintain the barricades of some degree of order. Not excessive, if one recognizes that nurturing a healthy economy, maintaining national security, and respect for traditional guiding principles of governance are reasonable and stabilizing values.

Chaos is the hallmark of all socialist grievance. To disrupt, subvert, and chisel aways at the organizing principles of a healthy society is the means to establish absolute order over a citizenry. Free peoples feed an organic growth of dynamism and change within a recurring natural order that bridges the gap between creation and destruction.

In the mundane politics of our time, American Democrats have scored a significant foothold on power. They were able to do so because their underlying beliefs have been nurtured and disseminated by all aspects of culture. In any society, most people do not hold an active interest in politics and if they do, most do not arrive at their opinions after reasoned inquiry. They form a caricature view of hope and the villains who would deprive them of that hope. To many Democrats — and I dare note, many younger voters — a world of peace, equality, and progress is within our reach but something ominous stands in the way, mean selfish racist and greedy “fascists” who hate babies and small birds. This caricature has existed for at least decades in American politics and it has always been promoted to some degree by media giants and statist-sympathetic institutions. For those with short memories, the “racist” and “fascist” label was liberally (no pun intended) applied to Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and even Mr. Boys Scout, Mitt Romney.

The general consensus is probably accurate, that the Democrat majority in the House of Representatives will devote considerable attention to inflicting as much harm as possible on the president. After all, he’s guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors” — the resurrection of the American economy, massive availability of jobs for all demographic groups, a sound and secure foreign policy that recognizes prime consideration of our own country “first.” Then there’s all that other horrible stuff like calling immigrants “animals” (something he never said), or proclaiming himself a “white nationalist,” also never said but widely reported on mainstream media platforms. Then there is, of course, the “divisive rhetoric” — defending himself from unfair and dishonest attack through the horrid act of name-calling. Calling fake news, “fake news” is now grounds for impeachment.

In the end, the degree of venom and violent vitriol directed at Trump will remain one of modern history’s greatest puzzles. Suffice it to say that “Trump derangement syndrome” has less to do with Trump and more to do with derangement. How realistic is it to scream, berate, and break windows because....the president wants to enforce current laws that allow immigrating people to enter through legal channels?

The very fact that so many candidates in the last election (some of them winners) are hardcore leftists should be troubling. The young viewers of Colbert and Trevor Noah et al. actually think such candidates represent an imaginary Scandinavian “socialism” (neglecting to acknowledge that Sweden and Denmark are capitalist countries). Welfare programs are not “socialism” per se. Bitter hatred for a free market economy and its high level if individual freedom is the socialism touted by the likes of Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez - both steeped in the “teachings” of Marx and fond sympathies for the dictatorships in Cuba and Venezuela.

As far as the election goes, there were some positive points in it for those of us who favor the constitutional system established by the country’s founders. Of course, the Senate remains in the hands of those who will inevitably approve federal Justices. Also, the president cannot be removed from office on the mere whim of House Democrats. Trump, more than most, knows how to make lemonade when lemons are dumped in his lap. The Jacobin spectacle that the Democrats’ house will soon embark upon will reveal the absurdity of ever having voted such fools into positions of power. When Democrats pursue what they really want (when they’re not running for office) they look like total idiots. That, and a few more high profile reports (only on FOX NEWS) of rape, murder, and drunk driving accidents by people in the country illegally, should remind most citizens that there are saner approaches to “immigration.”

If Trump’s party had a clean sweep win, there would be massive upheaval and rioting in the streets by those who don’t like free elections and the choices of fellow citizens (conservatives, you will note, don’t do that). With the Democomms having won the house, there will still be massive upheaval and rioting by the left’s mobs of Soros-fueled chaos.

Atifa and other fifth-column rabble will continue their violent support for chaos and their mission will be aided by a branch of government now heavily weighted with sympathy and support. Maxine Waters and CNN are not going to be renouncing such groups as communist agitators. In the end, the left wing of the Democrats’ party (now the dominant voice) and thugs like Antifa are on the same page. They both want chaos and the collapse of “the old order” — a two-century old constitutional republic — in the belief that they will then be able to establish a new order...under themselves of course.

Andrew Breibart famously noted that politics is downstream from culture. As long as America’s culture remains in the hands of statist fools, elections will continue on the slow (but quickening) path toward punitive statism. The orchestrated mobs in the street will be in kindred sympathy with the buffoons in committee chambers, and the tinderbox of governance will burn on an altar of chaos.

The struggle to Merely be Left Alone

(...is it really too much to ask?)

For those so refined, the prime struggle of existence is between those who wish to be left alone with knowledge, peace, and beauty,...and those who wish to deprive them of these simple things.

Another ”Bombshell Tipping Point”

Pinned it!

Perfectly.

“Making America Great,” Kills

Several explosive devices have been sent to some high profile Democrats, among them former president Obama and the resentful hag, crooked Hillary Clinton.

This is the time where everyone puts on their public outrage costume (just in time for Halloween!). The Democrats (the “targets” for the most part, if one includes George Soros as a Democrat) can now use a legitimate cause of victimhood to talk more about their...victimhood.

I’m not going to make light of what is obviously a very serious circumstance. No one should be happy about any aggressive or violent action against any side of the spectrum. But....I’m not going to hang my head in mock shame for despising the same people that some violent nut case hates. George Soros is still an evil manipulative control freak and enemy of “open society” (ironically). The fact that he was targeted by a deranged Unibomber copy-cat doesn’t magically make his views and actions noble. Non-the-less, for weeks now we will be hearing, non-stop about the horrors of conservative philosophy with the obligatory fake news parade attacking President Trump for “creating a climate of”...whatever.

Certainly someone has noticed the timing of this and the “caravan” of “immigrants” headed toward the American border. More than a few pundits will weave their prose now to the effect that, because explosives were sent to Democrats, we should let 14,000 (the current estimate) unvetted random poor people into the U.S. and sympathetically vote for Democrats in the coming election.

The civil war continues and its pace and intensity builds. Republicans being shot at on a baseball field caught the news cycle for a few days — often being spun as the fault of the actual victims. Current events are certainly more noteworthy but will spawn an entirely different narrative. Every time Republicans seek a tax cut or the deregulation of a worthless parasitic bureau, we will be reminded that such actions are out of the question because...the other side of the issues are victims that once had explosives sent to them. The Democomms couldn’t have received a better news-cycle gift.

Meanwhile Donald Trump, pushing back and responding to dishonest media and promoting and defending the conservative position on the issues of the day, will face an even more strident crusade to destroy him, this time trying to justify it based on the actions of a single villain.

Democrats can now go back to squelching free speech, harassing people in restaurants, beating up people who have the nerve to wear hats proclaiming their desire to make America great again, and general screaming, destroying, and lashing out every time they don’t get their way.

Republicans and the current president will have to continue being forced to justify their politically controversial stance of merely wanting to be left alone.

No Longer Liberal Democrats

Is there anyone that can seriously say that there is a person with conservative values that the left will accept as legitimate opposition? ...Of course not.

The left’s position is now beyond obvious. No one holding views different from their own must be permitted a voice or position in public office. They will accept nothing less than a coup d’ etat.

They currently don’t even have the unrestrained authority they have been seeking yet they are openly threatening to impeach, imprison, and in some cases, commit violence against anyone who fails to adequately support the socialist “revolution” to enslave free peoples. Leftism is always oppressive, punitive, and authoritarian.

If Trump were to be replaced tomorrow by the most docile black woman who held conservative views, she’d be harassed to no end. If Brett Kavanaugh was not sworn in as a new Supreme Court Justice, there is no one else who would be acceptable who did not state emphatically that they would override the constitution to command “progressive” dictates.

These are the same people we’ve seen throughout history who round up political enemies, imprison, and execute. All they need is enough power. They thought they were almost there.

The best case scenario for America at this point is one where sane and sober liberals break off to form a party of ...liberals — people of the center-left who favor more social spending and more passive attitudes toward military spending, etc. (typical “liberal” positions). Liberals don’t hate America. Liberals don’t seek radical disruption and chaos. Liberals don’t seek to undermine the safety and success of fellow citizens for a global collectivist order. “Progressive” leftists actively support all of the above. If rational reasonably patriotic liberals from past decades were to break away from the insanity within the current Democrat party, conservatives and liberals could resume a civil discussion regarding their conflicting views on government. If that were to occur, the Jacobin rabble of the “Progressive”/communist left would fade and have to return to their turbulent psyches and their cave of angst and resentment....

...’better for all of us.

The Left

In all it — typical — splendor.

...Vote

Never Leaving School

I’ve often wondered why so many “educators” (public school teachers) tend to be left-wing in their political affiliations, often very left-wing. It struck me as a I watched an elementary classroom today that, like most classrooms, had very little of what could be called freedom in such an environment. That in itself isn’t so much a problem. Obviously, to manage a group of kids who would by their own devices be random and chaotic, requires some degree of organization and standardization.

The thing that makes teachers often so comfortable with this scheme in the wider world is an inability to see their child students as being quite different from those who operate in the adult world.

In essence, many teachers view fellow adults / citizens as children and see the world around them as akin to a classroom where obedient drones obey the drab dictates of rules and authority.

People have different perceptions of life in the classroom. Personally, I hated school. It was the ultimate bureau-environment. Like many people I’ve met, most of what I’ve learned in life has taken place after breaking free from the government’s stockades of compliant inculcation.

Next time you view a public classroom, imagine it as a model for society itself, a socialist dictatorship — where you can’t leave at the end of the day.

...’just a thought.

Just the Facts

People can love or hate Donald Trump. People can be communists, anarchists, racists, or collectors of exotic office supplies. In spite of the continued icing piled on America’s contemporary political cake, the facts are simple and air tight.

Donald Trump ran for president under the rules and guidelines of presidential elections (an electoral college system). The rules and standards were accepted by both candidates.

Donald Trump won the election.

A significant number of people and groups opposed his election. These people and groups were from powerful and influential media organizations, universities, the entertainment and high tech industries, government institutions, an entrenched class of powerful professional statist elites, and common citizens who agree with the ideals of those mentioned.

During the election, the previously noted cabal used a variety of legal and illegal methods to thwart Donald Trump’s success. None of these people have been legally punished yet.

Again, he won the election.

The same statist cabal then sought to undermine the duly elected president and sought his removal from office.

The same group, along with millions of sympathizers who believe in the Obama style of government — big, powerful, punitive, and subservient to global institutions — continue to use all means possible to undo an American presidency chosen by a free and open election system.

In spite of the bitter hatred and accusations of some, the duly elected president has been remarkably successful and has produced positive results both economically and diplomatically, (in addition to numerous specific issues like veterans reform, restrictions on lobbying, prison reform, and reduction of pharmaceutical prices). His policies and actions have been exactly what he ran on during the election - the platform he won on.

A just course of action should now be: further investigation and prosecution of anyone breaking the law to conspire the removal of the duly elected president. The left has had plenty of time and resources to pursue their bogus and contrived claim of wrong-doing on the president’s part and the more they dig the more we find that it is the “resistance” that has conspired, colluded, and broke laws to overthrow the duly elected government.

Those who hate Trump and/or his policies should wait til the next election and accept the results.

Rambling about tweets or gruff manners is irrelevant. Complaining about the government losing some of its power over people’s lives is irrelevant (especially when your side lost the election).

Very simple...deal with it.

Obey!

The entire philosophy and worldview of America’s Democrat party can be summed up as: “Obey!” “You will do what we tell you to do. If you don’t obey, we will be unrelenting in our attempts to smear, punish, or harm you.”

WOW!

This, if you haven’t seen it yet, starts out pretty tame but becomes pretty dramatic.

China + Communism

...Pure evil.

Put on a happy compliant face and obey.

(I’m sure America’s “progressives” are jealous that they didn’t think of this first).

Project Veritas

Peeling back the poison onion.

‘Can’t say it enough; the real rebels, ...the real “resistance,” is decidedly NOT the nest of pampered leftist parasites that dominate the apparatus of state.

SOCIALISM...

...Enough said.

Legitimacy

In America’s past, the legitimate president and government was simple to discern. They were the one’s elected by the country’s citizens according to a set of established and agreed upon rules. A Democrat certainly wouldn’t object to election results where they won the electoral vote though not gaining a majority of popular votes. The electoral college system allows non-coastal / non-urban American’s to actually have a say in elections (too bad that isn’t the case with media and culture). The electoral college issue is just one of the many concepts that current progressives cite when claiming that the current president is somehow illegitimate. The new “progressive” / Democrat view of legitimacy has now morphed into a simple formula — if you disagree, you are not legitimate.

This bizarre formula has resulted in a non-stop call for impeaching a president who has done nothing wrong. Of course the complaints will continue — “Russia,” “racism,” “mentally unfit,” the whole litany of straw-grasping attempts to overturn a thus far rather successful presidency.

Republicans still largely hold the view that their opposition simply has a different opinion. They disagree with that opinion strongly but they recognize the Democrats as their — legitimate — traditional opposition. The Democrats, on the other hand, having become extremely radicalized of late, genuinely believe that their opposition is illegitimate. In their mind Republicans have become extremists because they continue to hold the same basic views on government that they have held for at least decades — smaller less centralized government, lower taxes, and concern for the country’s security. They are now described as “racists” and “fascists,” and are in league with foreign powers (Russia) to block the righteous path laid out by Obama and other deep state schemers.

When viewing the typical Democrat response to any Republican policy, one might ask the Democrats, “what exactly is an acceptable — legitimate — opposing viewpoint?” For decades now, the Democrats and their enablers in establishment media, have basically anointed themselves as the arbitrators of what is permissible on the other side of the aisle. In a primary election, John McCain (a “maverick”) was acceptable...until the election against Obama, during which he became “Hitler.” The same held true for Mitt Romney. Moderate to liberal republicans are allowed to run but no one even a centimeter on the right of the spectrum is permitted to actually win.

In accepting a Supreme Court nominee, there are no qualifications that are good enough for Democrats. Adherence to the letter and the spirit of America’s constitution is seen as disqualifying. Overriding the constitution for the sake of the progressive “revolution” is the only value worthy of acceptance. Everyone simply must obey.

Twitter last week, temporarily, deemed the phrase, “illegal alien” (an actual legal term) to be “hate speech” and grounds for temporarily shutting down an account. If they were honest, they would have simply said, “we at Twitter believe in open borders and the words used to promote that stance. If you disagree, we will stop you” — everyone must obey.

My beliefs are pretty fervent. I like America’s unique constitutional republic. I believe in limited government. I would love to shut my opposition down but, if I actually supported that, I would be an asshole, and a bit more authoritarian than I’d like to be. The left, and their powerful institutions in establishment everything, don’t seem to mind being authoritarian and, they certainly don’t mind being assholes.

After all, they are the only legitimate voice. You can only disagree if....you agree. Now, bow down before us, lowly plebeian.

Now You Know Why the Establishment, Deep State, and Tech-Socialists Want to Shut Down Breitbart and FOX News

Tucker Carlson is a very big thorn in the side of the leftist industrial complex .

The “Unhinged Unstable Unpredictable Crazy Man” in the White House and...

...the methods vs results quandary.

This week we have two big anti-Trump screeds in the news. Hardly a novel thing. An “insider” among Trump’s senior staff and famed “Watergate journalist” Bob Woodward have penned more of...the same. There are only so many ways one can say they hate Trump but the “resistance” (drones of obedient statism) keeps plugging away.

What exactly has Trump done wrong?;

Apparently he’s rude, unpredictable, and unorthodox — go figure. Who would have known.

Among recent attempts to smear the renegade president, Woodward’s book carries a little more weight because...(?) He’s supposedly a “respected” journalist. But that’s like saying, a “respected lawyer” — is there such a thing? True, unlike the Omarosa pulp fiction book recently published, Woodward’s tome is no doubt more polished and at least feigns some believability.

As advertised, Woodward’s script sounds like it may be a good book. But it also sounds basically like all the other establishment books about the Trump White House. Some of the gossip in it may even be true (though highly embellished) but there is clearly something notably lacking; Is it really possible for a guy to create a successful business empire, become president of the United States and, in a span of less than two years, accomplish virtual miracles while all along doing nothing right? Really? We’re supposed to believe that?

For those with longer memories, this plays like a repeat of Ronald Reagan’s media coverage. A thriving economy and stabilized international system equals failure while, in a case like Obama’s or Jimmy Carter’s, a sclerotic economy, international chaos, self-deprecation, and defeat are a gift from the wisest and most noble. And, don’t forget, the presidents previously mentioned...had good manners — they knew when to use the salad fork.

We’ve had presidents who are touted as models of stability, decency, and intelligence and, what did we get?

The real choice people should be considering is; do they want a level-headed predictable professional “statesman” who continues the subservient march toward surrender to global aurhoritarian bureau-elites and economic demise or, an outsider who these very elites continually describe as unhinged but in a matter of two years dramatically increases the economic vitality of the country, the strength of its foreign policy, and the honoring of the country’s constitution in a limited government where citizens are secure and prosperous? The coastal elites will continue to favor decorum over action and bureau-constraints over freedom.

Among the pervasive critiques of Trump’s shortcomings are the constant suggestions that he is literally crazy, and therefore fair game for removal from office.

Every time a conservative, or anyone who isn’t decidedly left wing, achieves a position of power we are told they are crazy in one way or another. Unpredictability and temper are noted as sure signs of literal insanity, which would of course mean that we are all insane. In keeping with leftland’s critique of everything, the former Soviet Union famously sent people to mental institutions for the insane act of questioning the need to live in a dictatorship. Marx’s spawn in the present-day west are no different. Don’t follow their drummer and you’re obviously dangerous or insane., or at least “full of hate” and need to be silenced. The sane people, in their eyes, are the ones who kill off over 100,000 people in the march toward “socialism.”

When a public figure, particularly a president, is not behaving or following the globalist game plan, the suggestion always comes up of the need for a psychological evaluation as prerequisite to high office — a very dumb idea.

You might as well just install a team of psychologists in leadership positions (very bad idea) and be done with the messy act of freely choosing a candidate.

As an aside, I remember reading (the famous behavioral psychologist) B.F. Skinner’s popular book, “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” and concluding that his type wouldn’t be very helpful in producing a free and open society.

The mere fact that a person actively desires to be president sets their psychology apart from “normal” people. Presidents like Lincoln would have surely failed any contemporary critique of mental condition (he was widely known to be severely depressed and at times even suicidal). The fates of history cough up some weird characters to lead us from time to time. Sometimes it is to our detriment and often it virtually saves civilization (Churchill). I heard a great quote recently in this regard (I think it was FOX’s witty Greg Guttfeld); “To people who are boring, interesting people are always seen to be crazy.”

Interesting, dynamic, and unpredictable is often the very mix required to drag stale times into a more hopeful future. Boring, compliant, and ineffective is no way to run a country. It’s not even ideal for casual friendship. If the terrorist acts of 9/11 hadn’t occurred, George Bush would have joined his father and Gerald Ford in the hall of semi-fame boredom. Obama no doubt gets high marks for being “normal” and “stable” but the trade off of an economy in stasis and constitution being whittled away for the establishment of Soviet-lite didn’t really provide the public with much to go on. One could almost accurately generalize that the presidents most admired for their adherence to social norms or shining intellect are the most useless to a country’s citizens (Jimmy Carter was a star in this regard).

Of course Trump is a “narcissist” (‘pretty obvious to all) though I’m not sure how that qualifies as a “high crime” or “misdemeanor” or even a detrimental hallmark of insanity. Obama was a narcisist too and although equally obvious many would refuse to acknowledge that. After all, he was the god-man sent to us to....??? Obama was also raised a Muslim and later a communist — big points scored for those noble positions no doubt.

In Trump’s case, (and, Reagan’s and Bush’s, and even John McCain’s), the Hitler comparisons always come up. Obviously, to the left, anyone who doesn’t want a communist revolution must be “Hitler.” If one was to look for psychological comparisons between Hitler and Trump, they would come up short when appraising attitudes within their respective families. By all accounts, Trump was raised in a loving family with a pretty stable childhood. He speaks very fondly of his deceased parents and his children do the same in their support for him — hardly the life of a crazed dictator.

In the end, regardless of how many more books or phony expose’s are touted by the interbred media as “bombshells,” the issues regarding America’s forty-fifth president will remain the same; some people hate him because he stopped the “progressive” march toward socialism in America, and some will love him for...stopping the “progressive” march toward socialism on America.

You would think by now that the left and other establishment deep-state lovers of centralized government authority would realize that Trump’s armor goes beyond Reagan’s famous “teflon.” As it turns out, people care about actions and results over manner and procedure and no amount of hyperbole, distortion, or fabrication is going to sway them from seeing the obvious. Writings like Woodward’s and the “anonymous” White House turncoat don’t hurt Trump in the slightest.

If you like Woodward’s new book and the many other writings just like it, in all likelihood you would have prefered that Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush was president. Now — who’s the real “crazy idiot?”

“Democratic” sophistry

Putting the word “Democratic” in front the word “socialism” is like placing a row of flower pots in front of a barbed wire fence.

It should be a surprise to no one that Democrats are more and more acknowledging their nascent affiliation with socialism. They are America’s de facto socialist party. They’re still in the position of having to actually convince people of the worthiness of their philosophy so, for now, it has become necessary to tack on the “democratic” qualifier.

The word “democratic” possesses some subtle and perhaps confusing meanings. I would maintain that there are actually three common meanings to the word. It’s used most often in a very general and generic sense to denote a state of freedom. There are dictatorships, authoritarian regimes, and “democracies.” It’s fine to use the word this way if all parties are on the same page with this definition. The more specific meaning is what the word actually means from its original Greek, “rule by the people.” Of course, this second meaning, that a society be ruled by everyone, reflects an impossibility given that contending interests exist within any group. “Rule by the people” usually defaults to the concept of majority rule. majority rule is often best described by it’s definition as “two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner” or the less symbolic, “fifty-one percent of citizens deciding to kill the other 49 percent.”

The third meaning is how “democracy” actually plays out the concept of a “general will,” directing the course of events through a powerful state that mysteriously interprets all citizen’s common interests. So it is that so many ruthless dictatorships are fully comfortable in using the word in the belief that they act as a positive good for all.

In the public schools and academia it has become popular to describe America as a “participatory democracy” thus sneaking in that last definition to replace America’s constitutional republic (very different from a “participatory democracy”).

With Bernie Sanders candidacy and a few newer “democratic socialists” gaining the spotlight, the phrase has sought to put a kinder and gentler face on what always has been mere statism— centralized rule by a group, individual, or bureaucracy. We are supposed to now think that those ideologues who idolize Marx and Trotsky are really just trying to offer a few extra social services in the image of Sweden or Denmark. Scandinavian welfare states and massive social expenditure certainly share a leftist affinity but I have yet to meet anyone praising socialism who ultimately does not wish to see capitalism and private property eliminated and opposition to a “revolutionary” objective censored and crushed.

Democratic can mean “free,” “majority rule.” or rule “by the peoples’ “general will.” In the end, semantics mean nothing when a specific personality and vision continues to cloud the pages of history with predictable rage and desire to control.

Contemporary politicos can tack the word “democratic” on to their identity all they want. In the end, they’re socialists. Putting them in power will not mean living in Denmark. It will mean living n Venezuela. Good luck with that.

Tucker Carlson just keeps getting better and better.

Swamp Creatures

I realize that it’s pretty easy to simply post a link to someone else’s insights but FOX’s Steve Hilton is a first rate journalist in the old tradition where a viewer comes away from their reporting knowing a lot more about a given subject than other sources are willing to investigate.

Other networks won’t go near this kind of information, mostly because they are partisan hacks with pathetic ideological agendas but also because they’re too stupid, lazy, and insincere to actually seek the truth and share it with their audience.

This is some incredibly important biographical information regarding two top players in the quest to nullify an American Presidential election.

I really hope that, in the end, all of these deep state clowns get exactly what they deserve. Informing the public as to who they really are is a good start to that just conclusion.

Pathological Leftism

The Totalitarians in Freakout Mode

Here we go again. It’s not as if the state of current events hasn’t occurred before. The government wants its country back. The movement to enslave everyone to everyone else (their precious “society”) contains a simple cast of characters:

1. The garden variety power seekers: People with money, power and influence who want to keep it that way.

2. The intellectual ideologues: Academics, pundits, and mundane “thinkers” and social planners who know what’s best for everyone else.

3. The “revolutionaries:” Everyone from so-called “democratic” socialists to hard-core street thugs (e.g. “Antifa).

4. The blatantly clueless: stupid mobs of ill-educated idealists who want to be seen as being among the “good” people.” Informed by late-night comedy, wealthy entertainers and musicians, and pawns of public education.

These categories in the movement to facilitate the growth and centralization of government authority over everyone’s life represent degrees in character from the well-meaning to the brutally dangerous and pathological.

In spite of the variations in political dogmatism, they share a common suspicion or hatred for anyone who sees them self as an autonomous agent seeking happiness and personal fulfillment.

Their obsession with “fascism” stems from the fact that they all represent a strain of fascism to one degree or another. They favor a controlled world where the centrifugal forces of diverse opinion and lifestyle are not able to escape the watchful eye, camera, or bureau-edict of predictability and regimentation.

The power seekers These clowns are a relatively harmless bunch. They’ve always been with us. A person can be anywhere on the political spectrum and enjoy the largesse of affiliation with a sympathetic state. They really don’t care what you think so long as you let them continue to amass personal power and wealth. An individual can get by in life with these schemers as mere background noise. They suck, to be sure, but they’re probably the least harmful in the grand scheme of things. Where they do pose a threat is, in their quest to increase their personal power they often lend support to a more pathological category of people. These are the people that Lenin said would sell the rope they would later be hung with. Jeff Bezos is possibly a person in this category. Traditional Republicans and “Never Trumpers” like Jeb Bush are as well.

The intellectual ideologues: While this group typically has less wealth to utilize in their mission, they harbor an equal desire for power — perhaps more so. These are the people described in Eric Hoffer’s brilliant book, “The Ordeal of Change” as “the scribes.” The servants to the business class who came to resent that, with their great intellect and mastery of ideas, were not themselves the ones running the show. These people can be academics, public school teachers, media pundits, or virtually anyone else who harbors an inflated view of their knowledge and awareness thus affording them the right to rule. These fools support anyone who wishes to tear down the status quo and are among the first to be executed after they’ve helped to burst the dam, allowing their more pathological spawn to rein supreme. Among example of this niche in the authoritarian hierarchy can be found virtually anyone in the humanities or social sciences today (most of which are on the far left).

The Revolutionaries: These are the most immediately dangerous among the authoritarian rabble (though the intellectuals, after achieving power, can do incredible damage). These people are just full-on ID anger. They are truly “full of hate” and often hold signs labeling others as such. Often self-described as “anarchists” they only support anarchy as an initial means of tearing down “the system.” In the end they are all some form of fascism/communism — punitive state authority. They are naturally violent and it should be a surprise to no one that if they achieve power, mass-torture and execution is their favored method of establishing their authority. Antifa — obviously.

The blatantly clueless: These people can be well-meaning, relatively non-aligned, and easily swayed, but their numbers are huge and they are easily brought under the umbrella of more sinister elements in movements to eliminate the advance of peaceful liberal democracy. They are typically not well-informed or educated on matters of politics, history, or mass-psychology. They are generally not objects of oppression or misfortune, and seem to think all the world’s problems could be alleviated if we would just “cooperate” and perhaps give one of the other groups mentioned here the chance to fix things. These people are putty in the hands of contemporary media and entertainment. You can hear them applaud on “The View” or any late night comedy show. You can see them sign petitions on college campuses, and you can watch them nod in agreement when anyone labels Donald Trump the embodiment of evil. As voters, these people hold the keys to the gates of hell...and they don’t believe in “walls.” They really believe that America is the only country to have ever had slavery, that if we be nice to dictators, they’ll be nice to us. If we shut down the American economy, the climate will arrive at a correct temperature and stay there — and, the polar ice caps on Mars will stop receding. It is a genuine pity but, these are the people in whose hands the future of modern free society rests.

Of course, all of these categories I’ve described can and do overlap to varying degrees. In some ways, Barack Obama possessed attributes of all these categories. Hillary Clinton, definitely the first two (a power seeker and intellectual ideologue). The “deep state” is certainly a major player in all of this, but like their favored candidate, Hillary Clinton, it fits neatly into the schemes of power seekers and intellectual ideologues.

Each one of these groups has been on the ascendancy over the past several decades, at least since the social turmoil of the late 60’s and arguably going back to Wilson progressivism and the post WWI era.

All of these groups, in their own way, have directed the course of modern history toward greater and greater distance from America’s founding documents and further down that nasty road to subservience to the state and its minions.

Who would have guessed that a goofy poorly spoken real estate developer would pose such a great threat to the plans of the overclass?

For all the cunning charm and spy-craft that the statists have mustered, Donald Trump is giving them a run for their money. He, almost single-handedly, is stopping “the revolution” in its tracks and they don’t know what to do about it. Everyone knows what they’d like to do but that wouldn’t be so easy to pull off, even for them.

They’re freaking out and all they can count on now are the blatantly clueless ...but that, unfortunately, is a lot of people.

DITTO

Fake News Triumphant

You know that disinformation has been successful when (“democratic”) socialists are described as “anti-establishment.”

A belief system that strives to further centralize power and increase authority over citizens lives through a massive expensive punitive bureaucracy is “anti-establishment [?]”

“...ignorance is strength.”

Astrology and Psychoanalysis

My second attempt at self-publishing. Truth be told, this ebook is just a reworked blog post from my astrology blog but it was fun embellishing it and incorporating my own cover art and design.

Eventually I hope to write longer works, fiction, and maybe even address political issues 😱.

May the planets align well for you.

By the way. For what it’s worth, Donald Trump is “a Gemini” with Moon in Sagittarius and the planet Uranus prominent in his birth chart. What does that mean? Among other things, a very changeable, adaptable, and flexible personality - decidedly not “authoritarian.” The prominence of Uranus suggests an independent ground-breaking revolutionary personality.

“The Stars” do not favor the left’s delusions. In that sense, they denote the same conclusions as objective reality.

Heading for the Precipice

Warnings and speculation about a civil war in America are no longer curious prognostications. We’ve arrived. Virtually everyday, America’s — now socialist — Democrat party (they certainly can ‘t be called “Democratic”) concocts bizarre new claims and demands. After two years of finding zero evidence of “collusion” between the president and the Russian government, Trump met with the Russian president and a whole new elixir of paranoia emerges from leftland. The latest, utterly insane idea is a congressman’s demand that Trump’s translator testify before congress as to what our supposed “treasonous” president said to his supposed boss from Russia.

American Presidents actually do meet the leaders of Russia during the course of their tenure of office. What’s different this time is that an imaginary narrative exists that says Trump is a spy working for Russia. This of course flies in the face of every actual policy action by the Trump administration. What’s funny is that we are being told this crock of nonsense by people in media and government who have a long record of sympathy for America’s enemies.

The Obama CIA Director — a “former” communist (!) — is making his usual groundless claims of treason. A new socialist /Democrat candidate in New York is calling for Airports, immigration offices, and ports of entry to be “occupied.” An American member of congress and a few media clowns have actually more than suggested that the “shadow government” or military take over the government — a coup d' etat. These bizarre reactions to the deep state and Democrats’ recent legitimate losses are classic leftism. THIS IS WHAT THEY DO - always.

Can any objective observer not be aware of how such a mentality functions when it achieves power? Mass censorship, arrests, and eventually executions. As far-fetched as it sounds, there are many in the democrat party who would be comfortable literally seizing power and establishing tribunals for the execution of their opponents. Anyone who doesn’t believe that hasn’t been listening to the left’s talking points and isn’t aware of how these things play out in history.

With the active assistance of the establishment media, the deep state bureau parasites, and the tech industry (e.g. Google, Facecook, YouTube, et al.), the forces of totalitarian social planning are feeling lucky. They will make their move. How bold and how successful they will be can only be guessed at.

The absolutely surreal part in all of this is the catalyst, Donald Trump. There is absolutely nothing particularly extreme or unusual about any of his actions to date. Half the political spectrum believes in strong national borders, low taxes, and less regulation, etc. No doubt, the left would have pulled this nonsense if Barry Goldwater had won in 1964 but they wouldn’t have gotten very far with it back then. In an earlier time we hadn’t fostered a generation of pampered fools raised on social media and late night comedy.

For the millionth time; this is happening now because the left had almost achieved the full control they’ve been striving for and now their project is being unraveled before their eyes. It is because they are now losing when they were so close to winning.

This is what a Jacobin temper-tantrum looks like. ‘Not pretty... and it’s going to get uglier, real fast.

Facts...and “Idiots”

This guy says it all. I love it when the word “revolution” is used with it’s actual meaning and context. Donald Trump is the closest thing to a real revolution that we’ve had in a long time. “Resistence” isn’t revolution and another warmed-over socialist bureau-coup d’etat is the the farthest thing from it.

Really?...Really!?

Leftism is the gift that just keeps on giving.

“The End of the World”...again

“We’re looking at the destruction of the constitution” says Kamala Harris — socialist (Democrat) senator from California.

This is a classic debate point from the left every time a Republican president nominates a Supreme Court justice. Like everything the hyperbolic vein-bulging left comes up with, it’s utter nonsense. (Remember, “ripping babies from their mother’s arms and putting them in cages” ....like Hitler, of course).

A Supreme Court justice’s role is to reconcile laws to the specific instructions of the constitution and the spirit that gave birth to the document. The specifics are obvious and concise. The spirit is also obvious as there are numerous documents from the period that make clear what the American government is to be. Specific reference and details to specific issues (like abortion, for example *) need not be listed. This may be the case in a 500 page bureau-authoritarian monstrosity like the EU’s “constitution.” The prime overarching attribute of America’s constitution is that American government is to be LIMITED, power is to be diffused, and the citizenry is to be largely “self-governing” ...a very unique and successful way for a people to live.

While leftists will often point to constitutional rights when it serves a specific argument, their sympathies are decidedly anti-constitution. They are not just opposed to “conservative” (originalist) court justices. They are opposed to the constitution itself. Just as progressives see America as a deeply flawed country, they see it’s founding documents as the irrelevant outdated self-interested rambling of mere “dead white male slave-holders.”

It should be no surprise that a progressive (now, virtually indistinguishable from a communist) should see a Supreme Court Justice’s role as one of imposing ideological standards on the nation that have no relationship to the founding documents. The Supreme Court to them is just another command center in which to subvert a society of free people and reintroduce the world-historical standard of tyranny.

People, and the left specifically, will often frame the arguments regarding a nominee as being part of the conservative / liberal polarity, but this is not what is actually at issue.

“Originalists” like former justice Scalia believe — as they should — that their role is one of applying the constitution and its original intent to the issues of the day. The constitution is the reference that determines legal decisions. In itself, that is NOT a “conservative” position. In fact, if done honestly, it is incredibly neutral — as it should be. What disturbs leftists’ sentiments is the fact that an originalist interpretation of the constitution more often than not defaults to what is currently seen as “conservatism.” As in the culture as a whole, the court has so successfully been skewed to a leftist method of operation, that anything stable and “original” is seen as “conservative.” In some court cases, members of the court have cited “international law.” International law is completely irrelevant to America and its constitution, not least because America is — thankfully — not governed by “international” law. (Most institutions and ideals deemed “international” are typically far left in in their makeup and goals).

It is now seen as “conservative” to want the country’s border to be secure....Really? That position was considered mainstream and moderate a mere few years ago. Positions seem to become conservative after the left has successfully attempted to mainstream their radical position.

The left has never held America or America’s constitution with any real respect. To them, the constitution is an obstacle to their desire to reintroduce the “rule of men” over impartial laws.

The prime goal of “progressives,” socialists, communists, et al has always been “socialist revolution” and absolute rule over their fellow citizens’ lives and thoughts. America’s constitution is the citizenry’s greatest defense against tyranny and tyranny’s contemporary advocates.

Another appointment of a strict constructionist to America’s Supreme Court is not the “end of the world,” or the “destruction of the constitution.” It’s the maintenance of a sane world and return to genuine constitutional authority.

* (The complexity of the abortion issue stems largely from how one views a fetus at its stages of development. If one sees it as a human life, than abortion would accurately be seen as murder and one would reasonably hope that people would be strongly opposed to murder. If one does not believe a fetus to be a human life, one could reasonably argue for “a woman’s right to choose.” Constitutionally, this is the kind of issue that should most likely be addressed by individual states).

For What it’s Worth

This is my feeble first attempt at publishing on Amazon/Kindle. I make no pretense as to the quality but, if you’re interested in art history, please have a look.

Who would have guessed that a "narrow-minded, ill-informed, mouth-breathing conservative" would have an interest in nineteenth-century Landscape painting...or maybe the left’s self-righteous pseudo-intellectual arrogance is ill-founded.

That’s Racist!...

...and, it may rain tomorrow.

There’s a lot of “racism” in the news recently...this week, this month, this year. In fact it’s so pervasive (we are told) that talking about it has taken on the same significance as a weather forecast. Any weight that may have previously been given to the word “racist” is now gone. Overuse, misuse, and...stupid use, has made the word, ...useless.

Starbucks shut down thousands of its stores to school their staff in the wondrous world of self-reflection on unconscious racist thought crimes. A famous actress/comedian had her popular sitcom ended because she made a racist comment toward a person that doesn’t even resemble any specific ethnic group but does kind of resemble the animal she was compared to — race being irrelevant (though the intention may have been racist). I always thought that Valerie Jarrett bared a resemblance to Yoda in Star Wars (who — like Jarret — doesn’t even look vaguely African American).

Being rude, ill-mannered, or ignorant is certainly a bad thing but I’m not sure that it’s up there with inflicting physical harm or depriving one of equal opportunity.

If someone directs cruelty, aggression, or deprivation of opportunities to a person for being a member of a specific group, punish accordingly. Even if it’s not for being a member of a specific group. Cruelty is always a bad thing, ...isn’t it? If someone is course and uncouth and makes insulting remarks about someone else on account of their ethnicity or social status, deride them as pathetic and ill-mannered people or question their intelligence. But...

Many of us hold negative views of specific groups based on a generalized appraisal of how that group seems to behave compared to other groups. There are very few among us that are not guilty of that, most of all the leftist hypocrites who obsess upon such things.

There’s a joke that goes like this:

In heaven the police are British. The chefs Italian. The mechanics are German. The lovers are French. and it's all organised by the Swiss.

In hell, the police are German. The chefs are British. The mechanics are French. The lovers are Swiss. and it's all organised by the Italians.

Of course this is light prejudice...because it involves Europeans - fair game to the P.C. Police.

I’ve heard similar “jokes” to the effect that, “Why are blacks so money hungry and Jews so lazy?” — groups and statements that are off limits. The question is almost funny because the appraisals are the opposite of what discrimination typically sees or says. Everyone “gets it” right away. The intents are surly exaggerations but even softening such statements (“Jewish people have become skilled in business over time due to a variety of factors in their history.” / “Blacks have a more casual and relaxed approach to their efforts.”) doesn’t change the fact that group stereotypes exist because there is often an underlying truth to the observation. This puts individuals in a bad situation since they are pigeonholed into expectations that may or may not be true of them specifically. The issue ultimately boils down to the unfortunate philosophical point that we are individuals and part of larger social constructs — a conundrum.

In the end, one can justly note that not everyone in a given group fits the group stereotype but it doesn’t change the fact that there are characteristic images built up over time regarding group qualities. Pretending that the stereotype is groundless fools no one.

Valerie Jarrett, in responding to Roseanne Barr’s recent “racist” tweet, noted the injustice of those who hold their purse more tightly or walk to avoid encounter with a person from a certain ethnic group (she meant blacks). It’s actually a stupid statement. First of all, there are a variety of other factors that will determine a person’s behavior. Most middle class white people walking down a street will likely choose to avoid a white guy in grubby clothes, multiple piercings, and tattoos while being indifferent to a well-groomed black businessman. Most black people would no doubt have the same “prejudice” in such a case.

How bad is racism today — after the voting public elected an African-American to the presidency twice? Ironically, it could be legitimately argued that the noted former president was instrumental in fanning the flames of racial conflict that, prior to his administration, had simmered considerably.

Because real, notable, aggressive racism has declined from daily life so much, it has become necessary for the usual neo-Marxist opportunists to invent grievance over more subtle forms of “racism.” “Micro-aggressions,” “white privilege,” and “cultural appropriation” are the latest fads in the Jacobin’s tradecraft. Utter nonsense, and like so much in the “racism” game, no one outside of Marxist university enclaves is buying it, particularly in view of the fact that so much concern over “racism” is just another strategy d’ jour for political posturing.

A few decades ago there was a best selling book with the title, “All I really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten.” The basic gist of the book is that the simple lessons learned in Kindergarten regarding being a decent responsible person are all one really needs to lead a responsible and decent life. ‘Maybe a tad bit simplistic but the points made are good ones.

Treating people badly is the wrong course of action for anyone who really hopes to be happy and successful. People — all people — have their views on others. Some of those views are narrow-minded, mean-spirited, or overly generalized. Oh well...

Screaming about real or imagined slights daily gets old really fast, especially when the rants continually come from a self-anointed group (college professors, journalists, and professional grievance hustlers) perpetually seeking to speak for others. Maybe it’s racist to think that...and maybe it’ll rain tomorrow but, who cares.

The Demise of Scholarly Inquiry and Insight

To narrow the focus of existence, I suggest to young people that the the goal of all strivings should be knowledge and beauty. That, of course, encompasses a lot of potential subject matter but I think it also encapsulates everything of substance and value. All the other worthy goals of existence (“be nice to others,” “work hard and honestly,” etc.) are offshoots to some degree of attempts to immerse one’s self in knowledge and beauty.

In my home, I have a “study.” I’m not wealthy by any means but I like having a room with fine art prints on the walls, book cases stocked well with books on the humanities and social sciences, and the air buoyantly graced with the thoughts of Bach or Beethoven. It’s just a personal choice in atmosphere but I hope it effectively conjures a course to knowledge and beauty.

An ambience like that of my “study” is a target of derision in the modern academy. It conjures images of “whiteness” and “western imperialism” to the feeble mind that is unable to see anything beyond strident political rhetoric in all of existence.

I contemplated this after seeing a cartoon recently that depicts the sad state of affairs in “scholarship” today. The gist of the cartoon is beyond accurate, only omitting the fact that the dumbing down and indoctrination occurs as early as elementary school. A youth needn’t attend a modern college to be filled with the stale drumbeat of neo-Marxist passion/envy.

These same issues come to my attention when I hear Jordan Peterson discuss a wide variety of issues from politics, to psychology, art, and mythology. He has become noteworthy among a youthful mass audience precisely because it is so refreshing to simply hear a smart person talk about smart things minus the patronizing gloss of politically correct dust and agitation. Old-fashioned scholarship and inquiry is a firm bedrock for a soul in ascent. What is passed off as “academic” today is a mere decent into chaos. The uglier they can make that path of decay, the more satisfied the Jacobin scowl becomes.

It’s no coincidence that “revolutionaries” across the ages immediately begin destroying the vestiges of a culture’s highest expressions of beauty and philosophical thought. Burning books is not just the pastime of Nazis. Any political worldview that hates life immediately feels the need to destroy it wherever it can.

There may be a self-indulgent quality to those who relish immersion in the higher learning of earlier times but somewhere along their journey, contemporary students will realize they’ve been conned by sleeping wizards and their potential to live a full life has been stolen from them by the charlatans of politically correct sophistry.

When a new generation looks behind the curtain and rejects the wizard’s bogus charade, they can once again know the joy of a peaceful walk on the path to knowledge and beauty.

More Fascism...

When will the nightmare ever end? ‘Good thing that the deep state and the Democrat’s Mueller slueths are working to put a stop to things like this.

Actually, this is what happens when a public official addresses practical issues in practical ways...as opposed to trying to impose ideological “transformation” upon a society.

The worthless socialist, Obama, did virtually nothing of practical value for his country. In fact he implemented policies that restricted freedom, growth, and practical success.

Like Reagan before him, Trump is demonstrating the value of applyng practical principles to problems instead of the continually flawed attempt to simply feed power to bureaucrats and philosopher kings.

...but, don’t forget,......Russia, Russia, Russia. And sleeping with a porn star ten years ago.

Free to be a Team Player...

or not.

There have been studies that address the issue of how societies orient themselves in relation to their affiliations and group identity vs. individuality and independence. Needless to say, The research seems to back up what everyone intuitively knows, “the east” — Asia — tends to have a more collectivist orientation. In the west, there is a more individualistic one. Not really rocket science. There are certainly times and places were either orientation would be beneficial to circumstance. Surviving off of a labor intensive crop like rice or being subject to a variety of natural disasters may indeed favor a strong “we’re in this together” mentality. At times, the West has had its circumstance too that required more solidarity than autonomy.

“No man is an island” often becomes a one-line argument as to why no one should dare think themselves a free-agent. Of course no one has argued that we should be left as isolated islands. In the lefts’s polemic war-chest is the cliche’ description of those who favor individuality, independence, the West, and capitalism. They are seen as caricatures of non-cooperation, indifference, selfishness, and even cruelty. This is B.S. and most sane people know it. One can be cooperative, friendly, kind, charitable, and altruistic while defending the right to act of one’s free will and to strive for the lifestyle and values one chooses. The Left’s argument really isn’t about “cooperation with others,” it’s about cooperation with a powerful punitive apparatus of state with the assumption that said state will be benevolent and guide society in a collective / cooperative endeavor. It never seems to occur to a leftist idealist that the benevolent socialist hierarchy often eats its own and once given unbridled power, will enforce some policies you won’t like.

In all my years of debating political principles I can say with certainty that the one thing that will rile the anger of a leftist more than anything is the proclamation that I wish to be free to choose my own path and allegiances. It is then that the attacks begin like clockwork. I will be accused of “selfishly” using public roads, built by the glorious state out of compassionate concern for the long-suffering roadless citizens. I’ll be chastised for renouncing my “fair share” of taxation, forcing other groveling peasants to pay more (of course, in the real world the groveling peasant pays nothing and may not even be a citizen but will unselfishly be drawing blood from the society assembled in their honor).

Like many who take interest in politics and world affairs, I often — stupidly — pull myself into the back and fourths of the comment section of YouTube or news websites. It gets pretty ridiculous at times and I just throw in the towel. Occasionally a person will comment who is fairly reasonable and knows a fair amount of history and holds opposite views from my own. Like me, their belief is an antecedent condition, born more of personality than revelation. I’ve always been “right-wing.” I’ve always had a gut disgust for ideologies that, in the end, want no more than to compel others to live in accordance with their dictates. I’ve experienced those who lay claim to my property because I have something they don’t and therefore feel justified in taking it. My property is a reflection of my values and choices as much as it is a reflection of my wealth (disclaimer - I’ve never had much “wealth”). Facts and information about poverty rates or health is not going to convince me that I should relinquish my freedom to a corrupt and inefficient mega-state. (By fortunate coincidence, the facts don’t back such propositions well anyway). I assume that the intelligent and informed person who passionately argues their case for collectivism has probably held those views long before they came across any facts that may have backed such a stance. The polarities on the political spectrum will always be with us no matter how actively one hopes for the eventual triumph of their “side.”

Alongside debates one may have with intelligent opponents in thought, one often confronts a member of the mob out there that will potentially do us all in. These are the clowns that repeat the cliche’s of the Marxist death cult. The violence, death, and tyranny of socialism “wasn’t real socialism” (I can’t believe people still say this). “The gulags and mass-murdered never happened. They were all capitalist propaganda forced on children in public schools.” (I was a public school teacher and I can assure that this was/is not the case - quite the contrary). And, of course, there’s the stupid debate point of equating public road building and schools to “socialism.” ...really?

Sometimes a debate just isn’t worth having. When someone starts to drone on the perpetual mantras about slavery in America’s history and the wealth generated by capitalism having been mere theft, I just roll my eyes up, yawn, and move on. There are only so many times one can have that debate before realizing there are better way to be spending one’s time.

The conflict in opinion is irreconcilable between those who favor the establishment of a powerful state and those who believe people should be free to affiliate as they chose — and have the option to be left alone to the degree they choose.

In defense of my position, I’d note that “leave me alone” is a passive stance, it’s not an active call to harm others. “Love and obey Big Brother” and “the people” ...we know where that goes.

Fascism

When will this “dark night of fascism” ever end?

Striving for Greatness / Striving for Shit

I received this little moral lesson in an email. No doubt such lessons are well-meaning. They don’t qualify as “rants” but I felt compelled to respond to it with a rant because this mentality is now pervasive and never questioned. Fundamentalist Religious followers and Marxists alike love “messages” like this, tugging on their frayed heartstrings and leaving their minds in perpetual sleep.

Truth be told, I hate little moral lectures like this. The average uncritical clown sees little videos like this and they think the message is somehow profound and insightful when, in fact, it’s full of shit. “Speaking kindly,” and “Lov[ing] generously” is great but completely unrelated to the lifestyle one strives for. If all a person needs is a house, why get a nice one? If all you want is to create art, why strive to create the very best, especially if no one wants or expects the very best anyway?

There is nothing wrong with wanting a nicer cup for your coffee or,... a better job, or more refined or dignified life. While it does induce stress, the stress is a biologically built in factor that motivates progress and, in some cases, greatness. A race for more garbage is certainly not a worthy standard but striving for the best has some merits.

In this video, it’s kind of ironic that the goal is stress reduction and the demonstration is through downing...caffeine (genius).

If I were to do a video like this I would show everyone scrambling for the shittiest cup, or the leader commanding them to take a shitty cup so as not to be “selfish.” But, ask yourself, what’s so nobel or wise about a collective race to the bottom, or even a race to mediocrity?

The real moral of this story is that some people and some nations and cultures will strive for the best, some others will simply not care, and others, to prove some abstract moral point, will demand that everyone “equally” subsist on scraps. Some will be motivated by refined taste and standards and some will have no taste or standards. Some people’s value of greatness is ...to not be great. Some people’s value of greatness is to seek greatness in all that they do.

I’m now going to have a cup of coffee...not in a convenience store paper cup but in that really nice cup I bought at an arts and crafts show. The one made by a really creative and great craftsman. But that’s just me.

The Loss of Sanity in Public Life

What the hell is going on?...really.

Donald Trump is the current president. Presidents are temporary. Presidents are usually controversial to some degree. People often disagree with presidents. Some people hate specific presidents.

In the history of choosing sides between allegiance to or disdain for a president, nothing comes close to the nonsense occurring now in America.

The establishment institutions of America, public and private, are horrified daily that the current president wants to enforce the laws passed by congress protecting the country’s borders — seriously (!)

Everyone from late night comedians to college students are up-in-arms over the horror of an American president actually expressing his primary concern for the interests of his country’s citizens over those of foreign countries (that are often directly opposed to American citizens’ interests and well-being).

Major blocks of people and organizations openly recoil in disgust that the American economy has quickly and dramatically rebounded and that unemployment has been dramatically reduced among all demographic groups.

Talking heads...and the talking headless, daily express utter contempt for an American president taking a strong and resolute stand against dictators and countries that have expressed a desire to kill possibly millions of our country’s citizens.

Aside from a few Jacobin bureau-weasels, most leaders who have met the current president get along well-with him and express respect for his strait-forward manner.

The current president has successfully promoted legislation cutting taxes, dramatically reducing superfluous and burdensome regulation, and putting an end to the government/lobbyists revolving door.

Everything this president has done, as with all presidents, is open to reasonable inquiry and debate but mundane accomplishments that any society would usually look favorably upon are now somehow seen as the expression of pure evil.

Really..what the hell is going on?

I’ve stated my theory on this blog many times. The leftwing world view that seeks to eventually put the entire planet under the control of unelected social planning elites has been very successful up to now. They were ready to reach the finish-line and then...

...Fox News, internet bloggers, a new breed of young libertarian hipsters, and...Donald Trump.

The current political turmoil was never about “Russian collusion,” “racism,” or “fascism.” It isn’t even about Donald Trump. It’s about an elite clique of authoritarian control freaks who are mad that they’re finally meeting an effective resistance — real resistance. Supporting them is an army of clueless drones who have been processed through the socialist mills of public schools, academia, and mass entertainment.

Every sane person is well aware of the numerous breaches to constitutional legality on the part of Hillary Clinton, the deep sate intelligence community, and Obama / establishment partisans at the FBI. In a more sane time, all of these players would be looking at jail time, Mueller and his merry band of partisans hacks would be under investigation themselves and...the President? He’d be praised for a revitalized economy and an active program of putting America first.

Not everyone is completely blind to the obvious. There is a pretty even split between those who appraise current affairs sanely and those who merely mimic what they’ve heard from establishment journalism and “entertainment.”

The Jacobins are not going to politely relinquish the goals of their century-long project to subdue the American citizenry and those of us who value freedom, autonomy, and sane thought are not going to simply hand our souls over to a ruthless ruling class of statist philosopher kings.

Someone is going to be sorry...This is not going to end pretty.

Land of the Free

...home of the contemporary desire to whittle away freedom.

It’s been common for prominent conservative voices over the decades to note that America is “The Land of the Free.” The left seldom notes this because they don’t consider America free, and won’t consider it free until every citizen has had the last drop of autonomy rung from them. I once argued with a leftist who said that, “your need to be free imposes on my freedom.” ...Ahh, okay.

Europeans and others around the world no doubt wonder why an American feels justified uttering praise for freedom in American as a manifestation of ”American exceptionalism.” Certainly Canada is free (so long as you don’t express dislike for Jihad or that you use conventional pronouns when addressing others). Australia is free (so long as you turn in any powerful weapons you may hold to defend your family).

Lots of countries around the globe are “free” — on paper — by a variety of standards. North Korea and China enshrine freedom of religion and freedom of the press in their constitutions. I haven’t read the several hundred pages of the EU constitution but I’m pretty sure it guarantees basic freedoms as long as one adheres to the state specs on vegetables and citizens restrict their criticisms of religion to Christianity only.

To be sure, America’s constitution — on [parchment] — promises a host of conventional freedoms.

When Americans (typically, more conservative Americans) speak of their country as an exceptional “land of the free,” whether they know it or not, they are not talking about the promises on a document. While the codified freedoms in America are written, what makes America free (thus far) is not written. What makes America free is an understanding beyond words and that stems from a long unique — exceptional — cultural tradition.

Of course everyone knows that the United States has often “not lived up to the freedoms” written or understood and expected — slavery probably being the most egregious example (notice that was outlawed after a long and brutal struggle). This is so self-evident that I usually shrug off the observation with a yawn and two eye-rolls when I hear it. What’s your point?

“You only think you’re free” - the classic line uttered by someone who would like it to be less so. The Post-modern / Neo-Marxist ideologue will constantly remind us that our flaws or failure to live up to our written freedoms fully is ample excuse to deprive us of all of them.

An example of where freedom on paper and freedom in life diverge is Japan...and, many other countries. Japan is a free country. You can criticize the government, hold personal religious beliefs of your choice, and seek and express a variety of opinions but...many Japanese citizens must belong to their local community organization and eventually they will be called upon to be treasurer, conveyor of messages, or the leader of this “organization.” The person called upon is called a “volunteer.” A “volunteer” can’t say, “no” thus creating the Orwellian concept of a compulsory volunteer. I once had a student, a single mother who worked full time, who was appointed the role of volunteer in her community organization. In addition to working full time and performing all the households chores of a mother, she had to spend several hours a week in her role as “volunteer.” It was “her turn” and apparently her fellow citizens saw no need to make an exception for her circumstance. Apparently “compassion” doesn’t count when we’re dealing with obligations to the collective. I had another student close to retirement age who quit is job early because he didn’t have time to both work and take on the burdensome role of “volunteer.” Students often seemed shocked when I told them that neighborhoods in America somehow survive and function without allegiance to a compulsory community organization. In fact, Japanese neighborhoods got by okay when these unnecessary organizations were banned under General MacArthur. They were only reinstituted after the American post-war occupation (because some narrow-minded control freaks thought it would be a good idea...in my opinion).

Japanese citizens, for the most part, are wonderful people and basically pretty “free” but there are a million and one expectations in daily behavior that go unquestioned. There is an old Japanese saying that “the nail that sticks out is hammered down.” I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel like being “hammered down” and I wouldn’t feel very free if one was doing so.

In our neighborhood, we have to write our name on our bag of recyclable plastic. This is so the garbage “volunteer” can gauge the quality of disposal - everything must be done a certain way. This occurs daily in many common interactions. The Japanese constitution guarantees freedom of religion but not...freedom to pursue happiness. There are expectations, and in the struggle between the individual and the collective, obedience to the system, “the man,” or whatever you want to call it, trumps all. The classic collectivist appraisal; the pursuit of happiness is “selfish.” Therefore, everyone must become a slave to everyone else — the equal distribution of conformity and unhappiness.

In America, you can pretty much walk down the street with a purple chicken on your head. You may be mocked, laughed at, or just looked at with disdain or puzzlement but, in the end, no one cares. It’s none of their business. There is no clause in America’s constitution regarding the color of chicken permitted on one’s head (maybe the EU constitution has a section on that - ?).

To be sure, there is a wide spectrum among the nation states of the world as to what freedoms are permitted or, more importantly, accepted as natural rights.

From its founding, American society and culture has been one where the renegade or loner has had a wide degree of autonomy. Of course, the autonomous individual can choose to join any number of groups or affiliate with anyone of their choosing. Some brilliant men eloquently codified this autonomy in a very short and simple document, America’s constitution. But, in the end, the document itself is not what affords freedom to America’s citizens, it is the exceptional circumstance of a culture that has evolved over time to the goal of freeing the citizen from the expectations and dictates of their fellow citizens. Given the choice to volunteer, many Americans will (and do). Some will not...because they are free to choose what allegiances they will devote themselves to.

In America’s long history of freedom there have always been those who despised the idea of freedom for fellow citizens. If they had their way, they’d regulate your every breath. The clowns of autocratic control are on the march now more than ever. To implement their planned world, they know that the line of attack is most successful in the nooks and crannies of daily existence, the words we use, the thoughts we have, the food we eat. Their first step is to micro-manage the little things. When they’ve successfully beaten the culture into obedience, the stuff on paper — freedom of religion, speech, etc. — is a minor detail to be dealt with easily.

Being the land of the free means having freedom of speech, religion, and press, etc. It also means not having to “volunteer” if your schedule and free choices are different than what your “community” demands.

Freedom means never having to say your sorry, even if you choose to wear a purple chicken on your head.

As an aside, when America stops being the home of the brave, it will cease to be the land of the free. That time is quickly approaching.

The Song Remains the Same

The anti-Trump hysteria that is literally everywhere is like a popular song. It may be a catchy song. Some of the performers may be talented. The lyrics may be moving...but it's just a pop song on the radio, and it's getting boring. Even people who like it should be sick of it by now. (It never was a very good song anyway).

Geben Sie Mir eine Demagoge

I may just be paranoid or just computer inept but, this is the second time that it appeared that I could not paste a link from Youtube. I eventually had to use this roundabout method. Please copy and paste this address if you haven’t seen this yet.

This ( https://www.libertyheadlines.com/youtube-puts-warning-satirical-video-david-hogg/) would be funny if it weren’t so damn accurate. This kid has the madness of a Hitler or Robespierre in his eyes. God forbid if most media outlets were to choose another more sincere and sober-minded victim of the recent school shooting. If anyone can’t see a self-absorbed proto-tyrant in the making, they’re blind to the hsitory and psychology of tyranny. Thank god his fifteen minutes of fame will go no further than the idol worshipers of the Democrats’ party.

Reposting an Old Essay

Some concepts are eternally relevant.

Dichotomy Classics -- Addressing Differences In The Worldviews Of The Right And Left.

Long Live The "Single Agent Fallacy"

The socialist worldview has a way of morphing itself to changing times. While it may appear to change, its underlying values and obsessions remain the same - imposing a "planned" society, "redistributing" wealth and power to the state, and honoring some collective abstractions above and beyond the actual individuals who occupy the real world.

Collectivism, and the very stance of viewing humans in context to group affinities, is one of those major concepts that define Leftism. It is equally true that Classical Liberals -- "the right" -- are polarized to this stance. A basic tenet of the Right-Wing worldview is individuality and autonomous freedom.

Of course, some will immediately drag dishonest, "conventional wisdom" into the argument; "weren't Hitler and Mussolini Right-Wing?" - Actually, no, they weren't (although common semantics has come to define them as such). Although it has been a successful ploy of The Left to paint some factions of collectivism (i.e. Nazism and Fascism) as "Right-Wing," as a means to distance their own philosophy from some of its more heinous expressions, Nazism and Fascism have absolutely nothing in common with free market classical liberal thought. Of course, everything from conventional wisdom to the common dictionary has bought into the lie. For those naïve in their knowledge of totalitarian institutions, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were not decentralized states which honored the rights of the individual in life and commerce. The socialist's supposed hatred for Fascism is little different than their hatred for other factions within the collectivist ideal. The Stalinists hate the Trotskyites, the Maoists hate the "capitalist roaders" (other socialists who will allow some degree of private commerce to later steal from). Because the very essence of socialist thought is imposition of a "plan" or scheme, they will always be violently opposed to anyone who supports an alternate "plan." The Classical Liberal will always be the main target of such vitriol because, by its very nature, it is opposed to externally imposed plans of any kind.

While a thousand initially just causes, from civil rights to environmental issues, can be used to rally the flock to the standard socialist game plan, their ultimate goal has always been collectivism and imposed government authority.

Some members of the intellectual "community" have also become quite skilled in adapting fads and philosophies to these ends. An entire chain of "thinkers" from Plato to Rousseau, Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre, Derrida et.al., have continued the mental gymnastic stunt of twisting radical skepticism and relativism to the usual socialist ends. Their "skepticism" is, however, highly suspect, as they are inevitably choosy regarding what it is they are skeptical about.

The Left's con-game for justifying an "ordered" society reached a high point in America's colleges in the last few decades under the broad headings of "Postmodernism" and "Deconstructionism," their main point being, that our system of existence, commerce, and very individuality, were all mere "constructs" erected by the powers that be (the capitalist bogeyman -- as usual).

The autonomous individual, so praised by Classical Liberals (The Right), was labeled in the postmodern mind labyrinths as, "The Single Agent Fallacy" (another masterstroke of Orwellian word play). In essence, these philosophers were trying to say that individuality is an illusion. We're supposed to see such intellectual guile as another great flourish of insight by the elites of Left-land.

While it is true that, "No man is an island," it's certainly reasonable that some of us may actually desire a high degree of autonomy. In heated discussion, libertarians often encounter people who are shocked that an individualist's perspective does not "view us all as part of a fast web of interconnectedness." The truth is, Classical Liberals, like most individuals, are aware of the claim's validity to a degree (cheesy descriptions aside). "The right" (again, I emphasize, Classical Liberals), knows that people function in any number of complex group affiliations. Where they differ from The Left is, they do not believe such group affinities deny one's essentially individual nature and capacity to choose, apart from group coercion.

"… We are alienated…We are materialistic"…etc. One must remember that when a leftist says "we" he or she means you. The shallow attempt to include themselves in such deprecation is no more than mock humility and hardly represents the epitome of propaganda skill.

The Post-Mod philosopher's slight of hand is to acknowledge some people's love of individual liberty but then write it off as an illusion motivated by "selfishness" or delusion. It's no coincidence that, in the Soviet gulag, a person's belief in liberty and individuality were seen as symptoms of mental illness; "Since you have no genuine free will to begin with, you might as well do what we well-meaning socialist tell you to do[!]...if you don't, you're obviously insane." The conservativism as pathology "argument" continues to be used by leftists today.

Since the Post Modern school of philosophy (Which is ultimately just another neo-Marxism) feels justified in equating our sense of individuality with a mere fantasy, can we not question the Left's preoccupation with its dream world of collective abstractions? When an individual commits a crime against another, the Left (and all its permutations) will tell us that responsibility lies with "society," "the [free-market] system," or "Euro-centric linear patriarchal thinking." It seems to be literally beyond their comprehension that genuine individuals exist at all. (An exception is made, of course, when dealing with such persons as George Bush who is seen as individually evil of course). Perhaps it could be said that the Left generally favors larger social units. They will always support the interests of the "community" over the family, the centralized state over the local region, and finally, "humanity" or "the Earth" over an individual nation. It's no wonder that those on the left hate authority and simultaneously love authority (if it is their philosophically kindred brethren imposing it). A Leftist is often rabidly anti -authoritarian on the surface. Ultimately, it's not so much that they're against individuality per se as they are against other's claims to individual freedom. Is it any wonder that such lines of thinking are opposed to anything incorporating the word, "private;" private enterprise, private ownership, private property, private sector, privatization… The very thought of having private lives is anathema to those who would collectivize every aspect of the human spirit.

On a true polarity to collectivist thought lies Classical Liberal conservatism; a belief in limited decentralized government and the primacy of the individual to act and trade according to his or her self-interests. The prime tenant of Leftism is the insistence that individual free expression be controlled and molded to what the Leftist sees as a higher cause -- "the people, the race, one's 'class,' society, the poor..."

When we deal with these basic philosophical stances we are no longer in the realm of debate backed by "proof." We are all indeed enmeshed in a complex web of chosen and un-chosen group affinities and possess an awareness and ability to think and act as individuals. How much people choose to live in accordance with the dictates of their own conscience vs. how much they feel themselves to be mere cogs in group allegiance is, to a considerable degree, a subjectively chosen stance. While a slave can't "prove" that he or she should be left alone, the state and its supporters can't "prove" that you should sacrifice your own values to a conjured collective abstraction either. (i.e. "The People").

The "single agent" is neither a "fallacy" nor a "construct" fabricated by a "capitalist class of oppressors." It's the basic package that we humans come in. The fact that we may choose to be, or find ourselves, among others as families, communities, clubs, or "classes" hardly justifies that we be compelled to live out an intellectual's favorite plan for marching in their parade, ...to the beat of their discordant and oppressive drums.

Random Thoughts...and Thoughtlessness

This is still basically a random exercise/hobby so general laziness intrudes occasionally.

For now I offer...this:

For now,...then. For then,...now. For nothing,...everything. For this, these, those, and more. For the rich and for the poor. As long as nonsense prevails we will know that it is all for the sake of laughter.

And this:

Nothing says, “help the poor” quite like “re-education” and mass executions.

The Rabbit Hole

Excuse my weak abilities in dealing with internet concepts, like this blog. I can’t seem to get links to my other sites to show up at the top of the page in a mobile format. Anyway, for anyone who likes the Arts, Education Theory, astrology, or other such things, please be further enchanted, bewildered, or annoyed:

OTHER PROMETHEAN STUFF

• Promethean Allegory
• Beijing Travel Essay
• Promethean Observer
• Promethean Visions
• The American College Ed School Experience
• Promethean Allegories
• Book Reviews

Striving for a Dopamine Rush while Rome Burns

Like a lot of people today on the right of the political spectrum, I often waver between the libertarian and conservative side of issues (they’re not completely the same). In the past I really didn’t care much about issues like abortion, trans rights, or drug use. I basically still don’t. I must confess however that the more the woke left pushes its agendas on the public and the more leftist-controlled power structures like google unjustly manipulate access to information, the more I find myself digging my heels in with the cultural right. It is of course a common tendency among most — a psychological principle — to hold one’s ground more strongly when the opposing views argument becomes a mere command to obey.

The firmest positions from the political right that I hold relate to the value of keeping government authority limited and power diffused. My greatest fear for the future is that statism will triumph and every citizen of the world will become a mere cog in a global bureaucratic wheel that constrains human creative expression and codifies stasis. For the whole world to be like North Korea would be hell on Earth but for the world to be an embodiment of Maxine Water’s vision would be a close second (her authoritarian idealism would likely lead to a North Korea-type scenario anyway).

Beyond the political tug of war currently occurring in the west is something possibly even more dubious. Andrew Breitbart famously said that “politics is downstream from culture” — an insightful observation that recognized the role that culture plays in manipulating political thought. The right can pen articles and essays, speak at colleges (though that is easier said than done), and create blogs and Youtube videos. But, no matter how convincing one may be, impact will be limited so long as Hollywood, the music industry, education, and establishment news sources are dominated by the cultural Marxist menu of grievance.

Cultural Marxists’ belief, along with “progressives’,” has been the guiding force behind the West’s ever leftward momentum during the last half a century or so. Suffice it to say that Cultural Marxism is a philosophical belief system that sees the final advance of socialism most easily obtained through a direct attack on the daily cultural milieu we live within. A cultural Marxist will not bore their audience with lectures on “class struggle” or “dialectical materialism.” Instead, they may organize a march for a concocted crisis of oppression against a victim du jour (and their contrived gripe will be covered by the likes of CNN to their favor).

So we now find ourselves daily bombarded with whining concerns for the plight of the transgendered LGBQxyz...”community,” as if anyone really cares about their victimization or adoration. Some people have jobs and bills to pay. 

A half century ago, mention of alternative lifestyles would elicit a snicker and eye roll. To be sure, reaction would not be marked by “acceptance” but it wouldn’t be marked by “hate” either (and it rarely is today). The Cultural Marxist goal is to import as much rot and chaos to the body politick as possible and then paint all aspects of society as corrupt and in need of total upheaval for not accepting every possible choice of lifestyle and for simultaneously being decadent for having done so. Then, they can insert the socialist “guardians” they fostered upon millions in the last century. One must remember that a socialist of any stripe ultimately seeks to control others. The means by which it gains that control is irrelevant so long as the goal is reached.

More than a few people have noted our own time’s similarity to Weimar Germany, a cesspool of decadence and cultural decay. As a libertarian, I don’t care if someone is using drugs and I don’t like the idea of a threat of punishment if one chooses to. On the flip side I don’t think that dealers on street corners and addict parents are a good thing either. I don’t care if others think they are a different gender than their biology indicates. Where the march into Gomorrah becomes problematical is when “choice of lifestyle” becomes a strategy to disrupt societal stability. The famous Christmas movie, “It’s a Wonderful Life” well depicts the negative course of civilization when it has lost any sense of moral bearing. The Romans — and history — could see the results of a civilization where the prime goal is indulgence and gratification at the expense of all that is innocent, pure, and dignified. Freud had hit the nail on the head when he noted that humans’ simple prime impulses were to seek pleasure and avoid pain. One could also note that an excess indulgence in pleasure often results in pain; physical, emotional, and societal.

I’ve never been into religion at all and have always been annoyed by those who think I am in need of “[their] truth.” That said, I’m not so sure that the quiet family who goes to church on the weekend, prays before meals and vows relative adherence to standards of morality is such a bad thing when compared to “revolutionaries” dedicated to the overthrow of common goodness. The Jacobin alternative to stable living can be seen as even worse when one considers what occurs once they’re in power. There isn’t a single “revolutionary” movement that, upon destruction of their host body, doesn’t become puritanism on steroids. The Taliban outlawed music, the Soviets sought to eliminate any art form that veered away from “Soviet Realism,” and North Korea today is hardly a great place to go clubbing on the weekends (unless one is a high-level member of the “workers’ party”).

In a liberal republic, the traditionalist perspective (conservatism) is largely motivated by the expectation and hope that free choice will choose what is best for one’s self and others, but the lure of pleasure can blur the lines between good living and “fun” living. There are plenty of artists and Hollywood directors that will gladly romanticize a world of wanton decadence over one constrained by reason and moderation. The Hollywood left would have us believe the average family home is (or should be) like the one in the film, American beauty...or that it’s okay if it becomes so. In truth, humans have problems and purity is hard to come by but when everyone is on the Dionysian bandwagon, madness becomes a collective standard — never a good thing.

Hypocrisy is okay, within reason. Most people want a sane world with some constraint on the tendency of humans to do stupid things, or at least do things to unnecessary excess. And most people, at some time or other, want an extra cookie, bong hit, or glimpse of a naked body.

It may be that sane people will just have to accept that the course of all civilizations eventually takes them down a road to self-destruction and we can only hope that our own lifetime doesn’t occur in such a period.

Maybe it’s okay that Donald Trump is a serial philanderer who also supports patriotism and Christian traditionalists. The “hypocrites” may actually be the best among us, drunk on Saturday night and praying in church the next day. Better than living a “clean life” in honor of an overbearing state or slouching toward Gomorrah only to find one’s self waking the next day in a the gulag.