Archive

Posts Tagged ‘freedom’

Irreconcilable Differences

February 13, 2011 Leave a comment

Standing in line waiting for my morning oatmeal at the cafe beneath my midtown office, I noticed something astounding a couple of weeks ago. There was a woman standing in line reading Glenn Beck’s The Overton Window. I sought to make eye contact with her, if for no other reason than to give a thumbs up to this anomaly of a lady. Regardless of your views on Mr. Beck, seeing someone…anyone in Manhattan with a potentially conservative view is a site to be treasured. However, when the woman saw me looking down at her book, she quickly closed it, put it in her purse and turned away, startled that I knew she was one of the silent majority.

This is the climate in which we coastal conservative infiltrators live on a day-to-day basis. We have to be careful with the books we read in the cafe, the topics we bring up at the cocktail party and the jokes we crack at the office. The fear stems from the intolerance of liberals, who are incapable of functioning in a world consisting of anyone but those who think. speak and act the same as them. And frankly, I do not know how much longer I can be tolerant of such intolerance.

Perhaps it is my jaded view having lived in New York and New Jersey my whole life, but I have started to come to the conclusion that our mindsets are so antithetical that we are simply unable to co-exist in any meaningful way.

For liberals believe that we are our brother’s keeper — that by the power of decree some people should be able to reach into the pockets of others to provide for themselves. Liberals believe that certain people in society should be able to make decisions for others for their own good. Liberals believe that wealth created in the private sector is a mere byproduct of greed and graft. Liberals believe that all religions and visions of morality are equal. Liberals see every issue in terms of egalitarianism, race and class.

I find such a world view abhorrent.  It pits some people against others by design. It is based on envy, arrogance and the imposition of force. It robs man of his individualism, his humanity and his soul.

Barack Obama represents this worldview in its most extreme form, albeit buttoned up and with a soothing smoker’s voice to hide its revolutionary nature in relation to this country’s bedrock principles. It leads to supporting terrorists in the Muslim Brotherhood taking over Egypt; it leads to giving the nuclear secrets of our allies to the Russian thug government; it leads to the crushing of our economy, and the demonization of its most crucial constituents.

Given that the natural end to the socialist society is one of mass poverty, constant threat of attack and overall demoralization, without any notion of morality or justice, (but rather with their perversion), I find it quite difficult to not hold this personally against all of the useful idiots — friends and foes alike who support this kind of world.

How in good faith can we love our neighbors who seek to plunder us, knowingly or unknowingly threatening our safety and whose policies are going to make the lives of our children far more crass? How can we feel sympathy or compassion for someone who supports Islam in word or deed when its whole history has been marked with bloodshed, debauchery and hatred — and its adherents continue their conquest today. How can we support people that wish to suppress our speech and our G-d-given rights?

Politics is supposed to be a separate sphere from our personal lives. But increasingly, the politics of the left encroaches on every aspect of our personage. This is what happens in a collectivist society, where so many of our countrymen have been duped into parroting, believing in and legislating based on effectively Marxist principles. Increasingly, I wonder what is to become of the irreconcilable differences between us and them. I can no longer give their hatred and contempt for us my sanction.

The Naivete of the American Public and Barack Obama

August 24, 2010 1 comment

Suddenly the American public is shocked.  Perhaps there is no economic recovery.  Perhaps the One really does favor Islam.

Democrats and Republicans shake their heads and wonder, how could our President pursue such divisive and unpopular policies?  What is the rationale for this President’s decisions?  Is he incompetent?  Is he naive?

The answer is none of the above.

I have said before and I will say again, Barack Obama does not share the values of Americans.  His vision is completely anathema to an America based on individualism, private property rights and Judeo-Christian morality.

When one argues that Barack Obama is merely mistaken in his economic program, they completely discount the notion that he knows exactly what he is doing and that he has been 100% successful in achieving his policies and their intended ends, means and ends that any objective viewer would realize were insane.  After all, an economy is nothing more than the collection of mutually beneficial voluntary exchanges of labor and the fruits of labor.  Anything that impedes one’s labor, or the trading of its fruits is necessarily bad for the economy.  Hence, almost everything a government does to try to stimulate an economy, impeding the natural spontaneous harmony of such a system necessarily postpones any recovery.

We were in major trouble with unsustainable public and private debt prior to this President, coupled with a completely insolvent financial system, a destined to fail monetary system and numerous stagnant businesses sucking up economic resources.  A real financial restructuring would have taken significant time, and even the most “fiscally conservative” President and Congress would not have been able to move enough roadblocks out of the way to make this recovery painless or quick.  I question whether or not anything could change the direction of the economy in the long run, save for a collapse that would force us to let the free market work and liquidate the welfare state.  But this President ensures that there will not even be a chance for recovery for many many years, regardless of who the next President is.

And it is all by design.

If you are Barack Obama, your plans are working perfectly.  You are driving the economy into the ground, fueling turmoil in the Middle East, weakening our nuclear defenses and supporting the enemies of civilization, and you are lining the pockets of your constituency and pushing us towards such great crises that a society already addicted to government may be forced to its knees wrongfully begging for an even greater paternal one.  If you doubt my argument that the American people are still not awake enough to cause any meaningful change, consider that for all the talk of a backlash against this government, if you look at the Republicans that will take over Congress, almost none of them them would truly be willing to do the things necessary to make our government solvent, break the chains off of our private sector and defend us against our enemies and their abetters, starting with calling them by name, not a tactic like terrorism.

This brings us to Barack Obama’s stance on the Ground Zero mosque.  Months ago I argued that Islam is not a religion in the traditional sense.  I argued that as Islam is a theo-political system, it should not deserve the same Constitutional protections as other religions with a strictly spiritual component.  In effect, to support Islam in this country would be to support a political system incompatible with ours, and intolerant of our pluralistic Judeo-Christian society.  To support Islamic institutions would be to weaken America’s freedom, not strengthen it.  And this is because Islam and America cannot coexist because America is a threat to the Ummah; us infidels would have to be converted by the sword or forced to live as second-class citizens under Islamic law, like Spaniards once did in Cordoba.  Hence the Cordoba Initiative.

Yet Barack Obama consistently sides with Muslims; makes it a point to bow down to Muslims at every turn and has since the start of his Presidency and throughout his public life.  He also studied in the madrass as a child, has had the backing of major players in the Muslim community during his academic and political career and attended Reverend Wright’s church which parrots the same narrative as Imams worldwide.  His true colors showed when he made the Ground Zero mosque a national issue by supporting it.  Howard Dean has gone on record as questioning what Barack Obama could have been thinking politically.  Of course he found it to be a political disaster, lest he should care about its destructiveness on principle.

Barack Obama had to know the firestorm he would create, but he did not care.  He could not help himself when it came to something he truly believed in, jumping to say something unpopular to the American people but instinctive for him.  Just like he did not care about creating fertile soil for economic growth, just like he does not care in my opinion about defending American lives as reflected by his policies.  And when he speaks and says inflammatory things that make political pundits shake their heads in wonder, it is because he is showing who he is, and where his passions lie.  This President is a principled politician, but he supports principles that are crushing the American people.  He is a third world man who gives a second rate speech and believes in the First Amendment as a suicide pact.

This is the most destructive President since FDR, and that it is intentionally so makes it all the more demoralizing.  Until more people realize this, we won’t even have a fighting chance.  We are going to be poorer, weaker and less likely to ever rekindle the flame of freedom in this nation, and I fear that our differences with our political opposition will prove irreconcilable.

Dispelling Moral Relativism, Multiculturalism and by Extension All Leftism

July 9, 2010 Leave a comment

Liberals, progressives, socialists, statists, communists — all enemies of civilization argue all issues on the basis of moral relativism, one odious derivation of which is multiculturalism.  There are many arguments for why such principles are wrong.  But perhaps the most obvious problem with moral relativism and its counterparts is that from which moral relativism springs: the idea that there is no objective truth.

If there is no objective truth as the Sophists argue, then how can the statement that there is no objective truth be true?  If nothing is true, then how can the assumption be made that it is true that there is no such thing that is truly inherently good or inherently bad, or that it is true that there is no culture that is truly better than any other culture?  To argue in favor of moral relativism or multiculturalism requires a belief that there is objective truth; this is a conundrum that Leftists cannot argue away.

Since all Leftism stems from a fallacious premise, all of its aspects must be fallacious.  If only anyone would think it through, perhaps we could right this ship.