Search This Blog

De Omnibus Dubitandum - Lux Veritas

Showing posts with label Leftism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leftism. Show all posts

Thursday, July 2, 2026

It's Long Overdue for Jews to Take the Right Trail

By Rich Kozlovich 

Tikkun Olam is a foundational Jewish philosophy that is all about “fixing the world”:

"......that calls on humanity to partner with the Divine to heal, fix, and improve a broken world. It has evolved from an ancient mystical and legal idea into a contemporary guiding principle for social justice, environmentalism, and community action."

But one has to wonder how can a people, especially a people who are arguably smartest people in the world, possibly believe that concept resides in the Democrat party, or any leftist movement for that matter? 

Leftists, especially the far-left crowd, are philosophically and actively antisemites.  They are now and have always been antisemites. That’s history, and that history is incontestable. Yet America’s Jews have consistently been the most reliable voters for the Democrat party. Why? Because Jews suffer from heuristic preconceptualism, and not just in America, 

So, lets define this.  

  • Heuristic - "A mental shortcut or "rule of thumb" used to make quick decisions, solve problems, or form judgments when time or information is limited. While these methods trade precision for speed, they offer a "good enough" solution that saves vital mental energy in everyday situations......While heuristics enable highly efficient, automatic thinking, they can sometimes lead to systematic errors, cognitive biases, or faulty assumptions if over-relied upon."
  • Preconceptualism - Drawing conclusions without doing any research, and then refuse to hear anything that contradicts those conclusions, ergo, since you never hear anything that refutes the conclusion, the conclusion must be right.

They clearly refuse to see, read or hear anything that refutes their views, irrespective of history, facts or reality.    Will this change?  I think to a degree, but when you look at what happened on October 7th 2023 in Israel and the direction the leftist Israelis have taken ever since, I have to doubt the numbers will change dramatically. 

It’s the Two Trails Story, and they keep taking the wrong trail.  As Daniel Greenfield notes:

The attacks were launched less than a month after the new Israeli government was sworn in. The Netanyahu government has pledged to reform the leftist judiciary which enables terrorism......

A generation of Israelis has grown up in a state of siege because the terrorists waging war on the country enjoy extensive foreign support from Iran, the EU, and the State Department in the United States, as well as domestic support from the Israeli Left, which uses its official and activist arms to undermine the fight against terrorism in every possible way...........

The Left was able to legitimize the PLO and give it control of sizable parts of Israel by crippling previous efforts by conservative governments to defeat the terrorists and expel them from Israel...........

What is going on in Israel is not just warfare, but a culture war between the democratic majority and an entrenched leftist elite that will use any means to protect its power and privilege............

The positions taken by these leftists are insane and clearly represent an existential threat to Israel, and yet they continue down that destructive trail.   Leftists are certifiable lunatics, irrespective of geography, religion, race, or ethnicity.

 

Monday, April 7, 2025

What Does It Mean To Be a Leftist?

By Rich Kozlovich

Many years ago I was watching a television show dealing with how seriously peer pressure impacts children.  In this case teenage children. They demonstrated a study using a classroom as the lab for this experiment in human nature. Two sentences appeared on the blackboard, sentence “A” and sentence “B”. The class was asked, “Which sentence was the longest?” I don’t actually remember which sentence was the longest, but for this commentary let’s say that sentence “B” was actually the longest. This test was structured in such a way that only a small number of the kids in each group was "unaware" as to what was going on and could vote which- ever way they saw fit. All the rest were in on it and their job was to vote for sentence “A” as being the longest when in reality it was the shortest. 

Now the question! How many of the control students voted along with the crowd for sentence “A” as being the longest, ignoring the obvious truth that sentence “B” was in reality longer? It appears that 93% of the test students chose to go along with the crowd rather that have the courage and integrity to stand up for the evidence of their own eyes. Going along to get along!

Although a recent study actually put the number at 95%, studies have a way of proving what the creator of the study wants proven. Therefore there is no way of knowing if 93% is a truly reliable number. Does it matter? Would it matter if the numbers were 90% or 80% or even less? Probably not, because science should be proving things that we can easily see going on around us and our own experiences in life show that the pressure on youngsters to go along is tremendous and most youngsters succumb to that pressure in greater or lesser degrees.

What is the point of all of this? The desire of young people to fit in is well known, but this isn’t really the issue. The real issue is this. How serious is this problem as we age? Quite frankly, I don’t think it changes all that much except on little issues. Adults have the courage to stand up for issues that don’t amount to much. I used to work with someone who was always the first to stand up and be counted. Always the first to criticize over any tiny issue that really didn’t matter much and would have had little impact on anything, especially his job. How did he respond when a serious issue arose between the company and the employees? Such as a change in how we were to be compensated? This was one of those issues where standing up and being counted could possibly cost you your job. The silence was deafening.

Adults, like children, also have convenient memories. Some years later at a social gathering this came up in discussion and his recollection was, “if you remember, I was the only one to speak out on this issue”.   Since he was generally regarded as being outspoken no one questioned it, at least until someone actually pointed out what was actually said and happened at that meeting, and all of a sudden memories became clear again because it was pointed out that after the boss temporarily walked out of the room his comment to the only one speaking up was “why don’t you shut up, I just hope this is all that they take away”.

It would appear that whenever issues become complex or challenging you get the same result with adults as you get with children. Why? Just because issues that appear to be a small matter to adults doesn't mean that these issues aren’t “big” to children. They don’t have the same concerns as adults. Being accepted by their peers is extremely important to children, especially teenage children. To their perspective, it has the same level of importance as major issues do to adults.

It is a matter of perception and once we realize this it is easy to realize why so many adults make so many decisions to go along with programs and issues that are clearly detrimental to their own interests. We use the term “peer pressure”, but in reality it isn’t a peer pressure problem. It is a herding problem. The innate desire to go along to get along. The need to be part of the herd.  I find it to more like the Stockholm Syndrome. 

The size of the issue is a matter of perspective and fear of rejection, fear of being ridiculed, fear of job loss and fear of isolation cause people to go along to get along. Coupling these fears with a lack of knowledge and proper understanding of important issues absolutely assures the 93% rule. Is 93% the actual percentage for adult decision-making? Once again, I have no idea, but the rule certainly applies as a principle because the actual percentage is immaterial when that percentage is still very large.

Global Warming is one of those issues, and here are six questions that everyone needs to ask.

  1. Is it possible that no one sees the obviousness of promoting this insanity?   
  2. Is it possible that no one sees that the fruitage of the environmental movement has been the unnecessary death of millions along with wretched living conditions and sickness for millions more?  
  3. Is it possible that no one sees the devastation that has ensued in the third world as a result of promulgating environmentalist programs?  
  4. Is it possible that no one sees that most of what the environmental movement has promoted has been based on fear mongering and lies?  At the very least lies of omission?  
  5. Is it possible that no one sees that the Administrative State is not a neutral, willingly making decisions that have been disastrous to mankind without any scientific basis whatsoever? One could even say fraudulent science!  
  6. Does no one see that these policies are detrimental to humanity?

Either we are making uninformed decisions or we are guilty of the 93% rule. Going along to get along! The appeasement mentality of Neville Chamberlain was in reality the 93% rule. 

For entirely too long we've been required to stand up for things which are unproven or unprovable. To support things that are not true, while refuting or rejecting those things which are true, those things that work, those things that allow for the continuation of advanced societies.   We've been forced to believe in the fairy tales of people like the Mother of Junk Science, Rachel Carson and her acolytes, and call it science.” The only thing left is to hallow that which is unholy!

That's what it means to be a leftist.  

Monday, September 30, 2024

The American Left’s Tribal Collectivism Has No Future

Daniel Greenfield @ Sultan Knish Blog 


The great paradox of the American Left is that it aspires to collectivism, but can only get it through tribalism. Every Democrat presidential primary is a frantic effort by collectivist candidates to amass enough tribal support from different identity politics groups to secure the collectivist nomination.

Senator Bernie Sanders, the great socialist hope of collectivism, tried to rope in Latinos and black Democrats, succeeded with the former, failed with the latter, and lost South Carolina. And everything.

When lefties switched from class warfare to identity politics, they became hopelessly mired in tribalism. Their old animating principle of an egalitarian society has long since given way to a tribal society in which certain groups will have more power than others because equality can only come about through massive doses of inequality. But even that is considered hopelessly old-fashioned liberalism. The new wave of identity politics doesn’t even justify its demands for special treatment by promising that one day we’ll all be equal. The tribal premise of inherent inequality is the essence of intersectionality.

Collectivists and constitutionalists believe in equality. Tribals believe in inherent inequality.

Collectivism promised to put an end to inequality by remedying the unfairness of a society in which unequal opportunities led to unequal outcomes. In the United States, collectivism attacked the country’s founding principle of constitutionalism, a legal framework which protected individual aspiration, by claiming that social inequality made aspiration impossible without government social controls.

The political strategies of the American Left made collectivism into a bad bargain with tribalism. Even before the modern multiracial coalitions, the Democrats drew power from 19th century urban coalitions of immigrant groups, feeding their rivalries and suspicions to hold on to power in New York and Boston. The Draft Riots of the Civil War were the country’s earliest massive race riots, perpetrated by the Democrat Party’s urban political machines which wanted to bring down President Lincoln by mobilizing immigrant groups to riot against social inequality, while, among other things, burning black orphanages.

Leftist groups pushing for more radical collectivist solutions sought out immigrants, then racial and finally sexual minorities to build their coalitions around. The general class of social solutions gave way to the particularist demands of coalition members leading to a Democrat Party defined by tribal groups that have adopted each other’s most extreme positions even if they are unappetizing to the country.

The Democrats struggle with a message that is both collectivist and tribal, promising equality to all and special treatment to some, collectivist socialist solutions to health care and employment, and tribal allotments for political appointments and benefit programs, as equality and inequality go to war.

But the cultural tensions of combining collectivism and tribalism run deeper than the policy tensions.

Tribalism is defined by the superiority of the tribe to rival tribes. Its honor and shame code demands that other tribes be regularly humiliated to assert its superiority and gain ‘mana’ for its members.

Identity politics is a set of political rituals that acts out these tribal imperatives on college campuses, in urban governments, and in the marketplace of ideas. The civil rights movement long ago degraded into tribal posturing of this sort. Its successor movements play out the assertions of persecution and superiority, humiliating tribal enemies, beginning with white men, and ending with anyone who isn’t a member of the group, and portraying these tawdry tribal rituals as civil rights empowerment.

Tribalism is amoral and actively hostile to principles. Its virtues are tribal and its heroes are those whose posturing humiliates the enemy. Its essential identity dehumanizes outsiders. It cannot think in terms of abstract ideas, it rejects any moral code that supersedes tribalism, and its intellectual life consists of rationalizing the contradictions between tribal behavior, and external moral codes and principles.

Politics is inherently tribal. Collectivists insist that life be based around political activism and their morality inevitably becomes warped around tribalism even in the absence of actual tribes. When collectivist politics, as in America, revolves around tribal coalitions, then tribalism rules everything.

The arguments for collectivism are based around abstractions, ideas, and ideals. These are the very things that tribalism cannot tolerate. As collectivists become tribal, they abandon objectivity and embrace subjectivity. The truth becomes ‘my truth’. Lived experience supersedes expert planning. Every objective idea, from mathematics to the structure of reality, comes under attack by tribalists.

Tribal subjectivism evaluates every idea based on the tribe it came from. A tribal argument is that Newton’s Third Law of Motion is the work of a dead white man. Diversity is just a tribal contention that personal perspectives define ideas and that therefore perspectives matter more than ideas. There is no reality, just a series of subjective impressions filtered through race, gender, and sexual orientation.

The tribal reality is personal and subjective. The science that demands a vast universe governed by unbreakable laws appears cold and alien to a tribal. Tribals don’t believe in science, but in magic. They just call their science, magic, and their magicians, scientists and experts, but their science is not based on reason, but on will, ideology is the incantation that its magicians recite to bring it forth.

Collectivism begins with science, but ends with magic. That is why it always fails. Its experts become false prophets who, like Lysenko, tell the rulers that reality comports with their ideology. Tribalism dispenses with an objective reality, transforming science into the magical reality of the subjective. The end result is even worse than Lysenkoism, but is colorful, apocalyptic, and invariably diverse.

Lysenkoism’s calculated irrationality had nothing on the apocalyptic panoply of global warming.

Collectivism wants a world full of identical factories. Tribalism wants to get back to nature. Collectivist science wants to actually accomplish things. Tribal science seeks the undoing of industrial civilization. The destruction of civilization is the goal that the great movement of global warming is openly aimed at.

The great collectivist vision of governments getting bigger and of a massive infrastructure running everyone’s lives is doomed by the tribal impulse to dominate and destroy those institutions.

Collectivists embrace tribalism to advance their goals, but tribalism destroys collectivism. It does this on the micro scale, as many white liberals who ran afoul of identity politics in urban areas found out, but also on the macro scale, as every dysfunctional institution from major cities to the EU and the UN show.

The European Union is falling to mass tribal migrations and nationalist backlashes. The United Nations stopped functioning as anything except a corrupt clearinghouse once it fell to third world tribalism.

The Democrats who embraced tribalism for the sake of collectivism might profit from these examples.

Constitutionalism was a compromise between the extremes of tribalism and collectivism that neither denied the need for individual and group identities, nor the importance of institutions and ideas defined by reason and the rule of law. Collectivism sought to usurp constitutionalism only to fall into tribalism. Every ideological attack on constitutionalism ends in a descent into the swamps of tawdry tribalism.

The Left’s attack on the Constitution has been destroying the great bargain that made America possible.

Identity politics and big government don’t mix. The unstable compound only holds together as long as there is a common enemy who can serve as a threat to the greed that unites its corrupt factions. When that enemy, Republicans, the primordial white male, ceases to be a factor, then it all falls apart.

The American Left’s old collectivist dream is dead. Its current platform of industrial decimation and identity politics lead not to a world government, but to a fractured landscape of warring tribes.

Collectivism has fallen into tribalism every time it’s been tried. This time will be no different.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.

Friday, June 28, 2024

Every Leftist Cause Begins as Humanitarianism and Ends as Terrorism

“Liberty, equality, fraternity, or death; – the last, much the easiest to bestow, O Guillotine! —A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens

By Daniel Greenfield @ Sultan Knish Blog

 

Every leftist cause is founded on empathy.

The quintessential leftist, no matter how much blood eventually spatters his hands, starts off by caring a great deal about other people. His heart bleeds for the oppressed, the workers and the peasants, for racial and sexual minorities, and for all the oppressed peoples of the world.

The ideological fashions may change but the story is always told the same way.

Somewhere there is an oppressed group to be liberated. And he, she or they is the one to fight for their liberation. Along the way that exquisite sensitivity which may lead an upper class Ivy Leaguer to learn all about the customs and suffering of black transgender men in Detroit or Hamas terrorists in Gaza congeals into an equal insensitivity for the suffering of his targets.

And then people die. Sometimes it’s those he considers the oppressed or the oppressors. Usually both. The humanitarians become terrorists and their revolutions lead to tyranny.

The opposite of tyranny isn’t revolution just as the opposite of empathy isn’t a lack of caring. They are both circles. Revolutions make tyrannies and empathy leads to cruelty. While there is a small subset of humanity that genuinely lacks empathy, most of the ideological bloodshed of the last century and this one was committed by men and women who cared far too much.

Those who care too much will eventually care enough to kill.

That is the argument that has been made in defense of every murderous leftist cause and is currently being made for Hamas. If you really care about the suffering in Gaza, you too would set yourself on fire or burn Israeli families alive in their homes. If you really care, you won’t care.

Genuine humanitarians can exhaust themselves caring too much. But those are the types of people who stay up nights helping others. Some of this type can be recruited into leftist movements, but the average leftist is a deeply insincere humanitarian who cares about others only as a vehicle for developing an identity and asserting it on a public stage.

Leftists genuinely do care a lot. They care about rising oceans, polar bears, women in hijabs, men in dresses, drug dealers in the ghetto and eco-terrorists in prison, racist highways and dead terrorists, and if you think of something that they don’t care about yet, they will soon.

As long as it fits the larger agenda of asserting their will over society from a moral high ground.

That is why they also don’t care about the horrifying death toll among young black men from crime, how many Muslims are being killed by Muslim governments or the state of the gay rights movement in Marxist dictatorships. If the state of oppression does not conform to the narrative of external social oppression to be overthrown by a liberation movement it is useless to the political movement and to the individual ego of the aspiring freedom fighter.

To a genuine humanitarian, the oppressed are an end, but to a leftist they are a means. A leftist cares a great deal about a coal miner until he votes for Trump or a black man until he runs as a Republican. Or until, even through no fault of his own, like the coal miners and steelworkers for whom leftists once bled, he is replaced by a new pathway to the ultimate revolution.

It is not truly the workers and peasants, the transgenders and the terrorists, whom the leftist cares about. They humanize, articulate and personalize the revolutionary mandate whose purpose is not to save, but to destroy everything about a world that doesn’t care as much.

The more the leftist cares, the worse the atrocities he can justify with his boundless caring.

That the caring rarely leads to anything useful is the entire point. Empathy for the leftist is a narrative point. Really fixing anything robs him of his motivation. That is why the standard leftist position is that black people are as oppressed today as they were under segregation. If they were to admit that black people were equal and free, what would they do with their time?

Successful leftist movements seize power. They fix nothing and repair nothing because caring is a means for the individual ego and the collective one. Every leftist is a heroic freedom fighter who wants to be the king. He pretends he wants to save the world when he’s out to rule it.

Leftist violence is not the outcry of the oppressed, but the mandate of the oppressors.

That is why every leftist cause begins as humanitarianism and ends in terrorism. Humanitarianism and terrorism don’t contradict each other, they complement one another. There could be no terrorism without humanitarianism. Terrorism is not an accidental sidetrack, but the next phase of a three step process that then ends with tyranny or defeat.

When a leftist starts caring about something, it will, given enough time, end in mass murder.

It’s not because he can’t feel your pain, it’s because he’s too busy feeling someone else’s pain so he doesn’t feel yours when he comes after you. Much as the best way to drown out a signal is with noise, the best way to drown out empathy is with lots more empathy.

The leftist cares about so many people and things that he can’t feel anything when it comes to his real targets. Human suffering has become so much noise that he picks and chooses which strands to isolate and listen to based on ideological grounds. Leftist empathy doesn’t sensitize, it desensitizes by design. Given a large enough palette, the leftist can vandalize art, bomb events and assault people because he’s trying to save millions, billions and the entire planet.

But the only one he’s really trying to save is himself from his own boring mediocrity.

The upper class leftist revolutionary, unable to accomplish anything of worth or become anyone of note, sets out to subjugate the world. His empathy for people whom he has never met instantly makes him a wiser and deeper person. And before you know it, he’s cheering Hamas.

And it’s all because he cares so much.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.

Wednesday, June 12, 2024

Let's Not Offend Anyone!

Who makes up the rules for secular religions?

By John Droz, Jr.  Jun 11, 2024 @ Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues

Recently I was discussing  strategies for educating the public regarding scientific realities concerning a technical matter (e.g., climate, energy, medical), and an ally said: 

“We need to be careful not to offend anyone!”.

OMG!

Let’s unpack that concern and assess its legitimacy.

To begin with, the Left has created a broad collection of new standards (like social justice). If we listen closely, we will see that their communications are now infused with value assessments (e.g., Democrats calling a border wall “immoral”).

This has bled into areas of Science — which should be based on facts, not subjective values. For example, leading Climate Change advocate, Dr. Michael Mann, stated that he is “fighting on the right side of a battle between good and evil.”

In the same vein, carefully consider this official statement from the Dean of Duke’s prestigious Nicholas School of the Environment, on receiving that appointment:

“At a time when we’re so deeply divided as a society, and issues seem to grow more contentious daily, we can no longer treat environmental issues as solely scientific or technical problems. We have to wade into the complex value choices that are at the heart of policy decisions. Science will always be a central and essential input into the decision-making process, but policy decisions require choices. And choices reflect values.”

What is going on here?

Basically. this is part of a larger campaign, where our traditional Judeo-Christian standards (an integral part of America’s foundation) are being attacked, undermined, discarded, and replaced.

They argue that traditional religions are archaic, corrupted, and inappropriate for today’s “enlightened” world.  (The trend of this thinking is clear.)

Note: They employ similar arguments against traditional Science!

However, as Carl Jung (the founder of analytical psychology) insightfully observed: "You can take away a man's gods — but only to give him others in return.” (Ironically this was in one of his greatest books, , where a key message was: “the future depends on our ability to resist society's mass movements.”)

Essentially what is transpiring is that the Left is following Jung’s insight by substituting a secular religion for traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs.

The core belief of this new religion is environmentalism. It doesn’t take much reflection to see that environmentalism has literally evolved into a religion (e.g., see here, here, here, and here).

Okay, So What?

Well, the first so what is that we need to appreciate that this is an important element in the campaign to promote world governance (vs individual countries that we have now). The idea is that if we all have the same world belief system, then there will be little resistance to the concept of a world government.

But there are a multitude of unanswered questions about this new global secular religion, like:

  1. -Exactly who is it that determines what the acceptable “values” are?
  2. -Specifically where are these fundamental “values” published?
  3. -Who has the judicial authority to ascertain whether we are properly adhering to these said “values”?
  4. -Who has the power to punish the miscreants who do not properly adhere to these said “values”?

OMG. The implications of these matters are literally unfathomable.   

Just to make sure that they have covered all the bases, the Left is promoting an alternative to secular religions: relativism. This gives them new power, as a true relativist can do anything and doesn't have to respect the views of anyone.”

This brief overview brings us back to the initial question: is it rational to set up criteria that we engage with the Left, and do not offend any of them?

Since they are making up “standards” — usually self-serving, and often on the fly — there is no possible way of not offending them. Of course, that is one of their objectives — so they then can play the victim…

The answer is to do Critical Thinking — and then speak the Truth. If it offends someone, that’s their problem.

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.orgdiscusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.infocovers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.infomultiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2024 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time - but why would you?

Leave a comment

Share

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about once a week). 

 Pledge your support for Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues

 

Thursday, May 16, 2024

Will the circle be (un)broken?

Beating the unbeatable FDR Democrat coalition

Many readers will recognize the title of this piece as being from an old gospel tune, written way back in 1907. The lyrics were reworked a few decades later, but the basic idea remains: A bereaved person wonders if he will meet his departed loved one when he himself leaves this mortal coil. Here’s a nice rendition of the song.

The circle under consideration in this article is a collection of disparate groups that have enabled the stranglehold maintained on much of this country by the Democrat party. I’m certainly no fan of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945), but give credit where it’s due. He broke the power of Tammany Hall, and he created the “collection” I speak of.

FDR’s Democrat power grouping included the poor of all races; essentially every conceivable minority group; union members; a large percentage of Catholics; nearly all Jews; a significant number of farmers; anti-Establishment types of all description; white Southerners; and those who hated Prohibition.

As to Prohibition, it should be noted that the Republicans were the dominant political party from the end of the Civil War to the beginning of the Depression, and saw fit to wrap themselves in the supposed “morality” of the temperance movement. Few Left-wing historians (and that’s most of them) are willing to admit that Republican Herbert Hoover, who ran against FDR in 1932, proposed a far more socialist agenda than did Roosevelt.

Unfortunately for Hoover, he was perceived as the captain of the Titanic, and that, coupled with his relatively lukewarm support of Prohibition, did him in. With his loss came the Democrat steamroller.

So how fares FDR’s collection currently? Today’s poor are of course far more affluent than in the 1930s, and since they are already the beneficiaries of scores of entitlement programs, are less interested in politics than their 1930s predecessors.

The minority groups—many of whom have benefited from decades of Civil Rights legislation—are steadily being turned off by the very non-FDR issues of abortion, gay and transgender rights, the decline of public schools, and the deteriorating economy. Blacks are waking up to the fact that they are heavily campaigned to every four years, but see scant attention being paid to high crime rates, and the culture rot being promoted by the elites.

Jews who are not Orthodox have been some the staunchest supporters of the Dems, but are finally waking up to the fact that antisemitism has always been the purview of the Left. One can hardly imagine a greater perfidy than the notion—eagerly portrayed by propagandists of the Allies—that Nazism was a movement of the Right. I guess no one noticed that “Nazi” was an acronym for National Socialist German Workers' Party.

And, at the very same time, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) was regarded as a dominion of the Left.

Those arguing that the socialist movements of Hitler and Mussolini were on the Right hung their hat on the fact that nominal private ownership of business was still allowed, conveniently forgetting that those very businesses were strictly controlled by the government.

At any rate, all but the most diehard Tikkun Olam Jews are acknowledging the virulent antisemitism of the Left. Practicing Catholics have long been turned off by amoral proclamations of the Dems, but some are still laboring under tired prejudices of the past. Biden making the sign of the cross before an abortion speech was not a good look.

With improvements in technology, farmers are doing a whole lot better than they did in the 1930s, and are drifting away from the Dems. The white South became 100 percent Democrat during the Civil War, but that started to change 50 years ago.

The last remaining Democrat bastion consists of the major cities, but owing to crime, massive corruption, and minorities leaving the fold, this too is starting to disintegrate. The disgraceful performance of such degenerate officials as Alvin Bragg and Fani Willis are proving to be a major embarrassment, and a “Come to Jesus” moment for Blacks trapped for generations in the Dem swamp.

I think that THIS circle will be broken.

Thanks for reading Mike's Point Of View! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Sunday, April 14, 2024

Swastikas Are Progressive Now

By @ Sultan Knish Blog 

After Hamas supporters vandalized a synagogue with a swastika, leftist cheered this prototypical Nazi act as a progressive commitment to human rights.

“A swastika clearly has a deep and painful history for the people in our community, it’s a symbol of hatred and death,” Rabbi Ethan Witkovsky of Temple Beth El said.

However Malcolm Harris, a former Occupy Wall Street activist and author of ‘Palo Alto’ and other books published through Hachette, explained that swastikas were progressive now.

“Israel’s genocide has literally reversed the meaning of a swastika on a synagogue from a Nazi threat to a condemnation of genocide,” Harris, who also writes for The Nation and Wired, argued.

Harris claims that he viewed vandalizing a synagogue with a swastika as “an anti-zionist condemnation of Israeli genocide.” And if vandalizing synagogues with swastikas, the ultimate symbol of Nazi behavior is only “anti-Zionist”, not antisemitic, then there really is no difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism, and between leftist anti-Zionists and Nazi antisemites.

David Austin Walsh, a postdoc at the Yale Program for the Study of Antisemitism, who has a book on the “far-right” coming out from Yale University Press, chimed in, “I’ll stipulate for the sake of argument that tagging a synagogue with a swastika has an ambiguous or multivariate meaning. How are we to determine which is the intended meaning?”

Marshall Steinbaum, an Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of Utah and a Senior Fellow at the Jain Family Institute, whined that, “I wish we lived in a world where spray-painting a swastika on a synagogue still meant Nazis”.

In the UK, where the London Met Police had previously arrested and threatened anti-Jihad protesters for flying the St. George’s flag, an officer explained to a Jewish woman complaining about swastikas at a pro-Hamas hate rally that the swastikas needed to be viewed in context.

In certain contexts, such as Neo-Nazi rallies, swastikas might be bad, but when leftists and their Islamist allies aim swastikas at Jews, these Neo-Neo-Nazis were actually progressive.

While the debate about whether vandalizing synagogues with swastikas and waving swastikas at Jews was antisemitic, the progressive swastika was making its way around the world.

A swastika, along with “Free Gaza” was painted over the home of Holocaust survivors in Belgium while outside Temple Beth Israel in Philly, two women scrawled a swastika and the “from the river to the sea” call for destroying Israel and exterminating the Jews. A Swastika alongside a Star of David was drawn on the University of Michigan Hillel building where Jewish students attend events. Instagram comments on the student paper from many students defended the vandalism as a statement against Israel and in support of the terrorists.

Islamist and leftist movements who defend Hamas and its mass murder of Jews on Oct 7 could hardly object to the swastika which is a mere symbol. What’s worse, burning entire families alive, raping women and holding them hostage, or drawing a few lines on a wall?

Once the Left had accepted the legitimacy of Hamas atrocities as “resistance”, all that was left was redefining the swastika as a righteous repudiation of Jews and Israel.

The “reversal” of the National Socialist swastika from a symbol of the worst kind of evil to a progressive symbol is itself a symbol of the mainstreaming of antisemitism on the Left.

This was not something that happened overnight or in the aftermath of Oct 7.

Anyone who has been paying attention to the state of the American Left had seen it coming.

After the Hamas kidnapping and murder of 3 Israeli teens in 2014 that foreshadowed Oct 7, Steven Salaita, a Muslim professor whose “academic work” tried to connect American Indians to the ‘Palestinians’, tweeted support for the murder of the teens and other Jews.

“If it’s ‘antisemitic’ to deplore colonisation, land theft, and child murder, then what choice does any person of conscience have?” Salaita tweeted. “Zionists: transforming ‘anti-semitism’ from something horrible into something honorable since 1948.”

When the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign withdrew its job offer to him, academic associations and the media rallied to Salaita’s defense. The American Association of University Professors, the Modern Language Association and the Middle East Studies Association celebrated a man who had tweeted that antisemitism was becoming “something honorable”.

The Chicago Tribune provided Salaita with a platform to claim that he wasn’t really defending antisemitism. Salaita received a six figure settlement, the chancellor who fired him was ousted and the violent bigot’s latest book about the incident is due from Fordham University Press.

Flying a progressive swastika is the climax of making antisemitism into “something honorable”.

The path to the progressive swastika and the “honorable antisemitism” had plenty of stops that all involved mainstreaming antisemitism while swearing up and down that it was only anti-Zionism. The media mainstreamed hate sites like Mondoweiss where editors and contributors admitted that, “I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, but I can understand why some are” and “Liberals like to deceive themselves about Jewish power.”

The DSA, which has led the campaign for Hamas, had invited a representative of Melenchon’s Communist allied party from France, who claimed that when a “man of the left” is “called an anti-Semite, it means he’s not far from power.” That same party became the only one to refuse to condemn Oct 7 and political figures from the party accused Israel of killing its own children.

In 2014, academia and the media were justifying antisemitism. By 2024, they’re rehabilitating the swastika as a progressive symbol. And this change is about more than the Jews.

Jews tend to be the canaries in the coal mine. Fanatics and totalitarian movements may start with the Jews, but they never end there. The Jews are just a convenient inciting incident.

Both the Nazis and Communists understood that the persecution of Jews would legitimize the worse crimes they intended to commit. When the Nazis began rounding up and killing Jews with no protest, it became easier to justify the killing of the German disabled and mentally ill, and later the larger eugenics program that would have wiped out the Slavs and many other peoples. And when the Communists began shutting down synagogues and executing rabbis, it became easier to justify the takeover of the church and to build a cult of personality around Stalin.

While there are single-issue antisemites out there, major movements that start waving fascist or progressive swastikas don’t intend to limit their plans to just killing Jews. The Jews are a symbol of the power they want, as Melenchon put it, and the justification for it, as Islamists contend.

Hamas, an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, originally financed by the Nazis, claims that it just wants to destroy Israel. But other arms of the Brotherhood tried to seize control of the entire Middle East during the Arab Spring, have been integrated into Al Qaeda, and operate in America and Europe to aid Islamic terrorists around the world. When they brandish the swastika, it’s not cautionary, it’s aspirational. And the same is true of their leftist allies.

By defining the Jews as the new Nazis, leftist movements like the DSA justify the mass murder of the Jews, and the violent tactics they use to seize power to fight the Jews. But the DSA’s vision of totalitarian socialism, National Socialism one might say, will not end with the Jews.

The swastika, whether used as a banner or a symbol of reversal, mainstreams antisemitism, not just to call for the murder of Jews, but for the killing of all those who stand in their way.

The progressive swastika is a symbol of death for Jews and for everyone else.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.   Thank you for reading. "

Tuesday, April 9, 2024

The Progressive Agenda: Destroy America in Order to Save It

They believe that only a complete teardown can cleanse the nation of its sins.

by | Apr 8, 2024 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Good Reads, Opinion, Politics

It used to be that, for all their disagreements, Republicans and Democrats at least shared a common belief about sustaining the constitutional republic they were gifted by founders who sacrificed their lives, honor, and considerable fortunes for the sake of liberty. Conservatives believed in a smaller government, lower taxes, less regulation, and a strong national defense, while liberals pushed for mostly the opposite. But at the end of the day, they could share a drink and see each other simply as people preferring different paths to the same mountaintop. There are exceptions, of course, but while many on both sides would question each other’s judgment, motives, and even their patriotism, they did not question their opponents’ very humanity. But then came the rise of progressives, essentially reintroducing the word “evil” into the domestic political lexicon.

Begging for an opportunity to spread their gospel of collectivism and cultural Marxism, they pounced on the George Floyd affair in that awful summer of 2020. With the aid of woke media and leftist utopians, they tried to force everyone to bend the knee to an organization, Black Lives Matter, founded by self-proclaimed “trained Marxists.” But then came the predictable meltdown of BLM, reduced to bankruptcy after raking in tens of millions of dollars from guilt-ridden white Americans afraid to exclude themselves from the madness and risk being called white supremacists. So the flagrantly anti-American rhetoric from Americans themselves finally played out its hand, right?

Wrong. While normal people and leftist politicians have now taken to quietly distancing themselves from the actions and statements they accepted or publicly embraced while the country was burning, the real and lasting goal of BLM and its enablers has been achieved – and will be terribly difficult to unwind. Indeed, the deep stain they have left on the nation is the stranglehold they succeeded in placing on public and private institutions that so willingly embraced the radical vision and quickly embedded it into the heart of their missions. Institutions and agencies dedicated to pursuits such as national security, tax reform, or the arts are now driven to alter their standards, or even their identities, by acquiescing to the concept of “equity,” meaning guaranteed outcomes for the self-proclaimed victims of oppression by virtue of their race.

Joe Biden: Born-Again Progressive

Far from responding with his traditional mainstream liberalism, Joe Biden granted the permission concept to the ascendant radicals by agreeing to things he had never come close to endorsing in the half-century since he landed in Washington. He voiced his view that America is systemically racist, those who voted against him are semi-fascists, and that it’s legitimate to use the justice system to imprison and bankrupt your opponent. He suddenly agreed that fossil fuels must be eliminated from the planet in favor of the green utopian vision, that gender identity is fluid, and social justice means letting more criminals loose. And these are just some of the progressive ideas once laughed off the stage but now elevated to a virtual mission statement by Democrats. Biden perfectly exemplified the progressive worldview with his recent mea culpa following the brutal murder of Laken Riley – not to the victim, but to the assailant, for calling him an illegal rather than undocumented. This is what it has come to.

New banner Memo - From the Desk of Senior Political Analyst Tim Donner 1 

Democrats were long associated with the working class but are now in the grip of let-them-eat-cake progressive elites using a green shield to signal their virtue and solidarity with radical leftists over issues like rising prices, crime, and an open border – all problems from which they themselves are well protected. Biden’s military has now elevated a DEI purity test for hiring, lowering the threshold that had always been applied in defense of the nation: merit. And elite academic institutions, as we were so painfully reminded during the hateful antisemitic debacles at Harvard and Penn, are training the young to embrace toxic critical race theory, ban speech they don’t like, and hate the idea of America.

Did we think the summer of 2020 would be just a stage, an overreaction that would certainly flatten out and normalize over time? No such luck. In fact, the country is not even close to shedding the widespread destruction to people, property, and communities that were justified – or even welcomed – by cowardly left-wing politicians and elite media. You will long remember that reporter famously describing a “mostly peaceful protest” with a building consumed by flames directly behind him.

But far worse even than ripping apart the fabric of inner-city neighborhoods across the land populated by the very people these mostly well-healed white progressives purport to represent was the effect they have had on private and public institutions. The anti-racism screed became the litmus test for every white, privileged American. It required people to go far beyond proclaiming their opposition to racism. Instead, they would need to prove their anti-racist credentials by taking concrete steps to acknowledge their role as oppressors and actively participate in one movement or another affirming the resolution that America is irreversibly – or, as Hillary Clinton might put it, irredeemably – racist.

Simply put, progressives can’t handle the truth, so they lecture the rest of us and refuse to admit their ultimate goal of remaking the country. Thus, the only path to success is to shove their twisted ideology down our throats at every opportunity. And the media has joined the Democrats in turning the outlandish and wildly unpopular beliefs held by a small slice of one party – liberal is no longer a rank pejorative to most people, but progressive is – into the defining ideology of one of America’s two major parties.

The institutional damage foisted on all of us by progressives “re-imagining America” threatens to be long-lasting. The question now is whether those who so easily embraced the flat-out anti-American radicalism of 2020 will admit the grave error of their ways before the progressives spread their hideous tentacles even further.

 
Read More From Tim Donner

Monday, November 27, 2023

Global Warming is a Corrupt, Criminal, Misanthropic, and Neo-Pagan Movement!

By Rich Kozlovich 

On November 25, 2023 John Horvat II published this article at American Thinker, Poll finds it takes faith to believe in global warming saying:

Many people wonder why Pope Francis focuses so much on climate change. Indeed, two papal documents concentrate exclusively on the matter. The latest apostolic exhortation, Laudate Deum, bitterly complains about how the People of God have not heeded earlier warnings. The pope’s trip to Dubai’s COP28 eco-conference only highlights this dire gospel of impending climatic doom. Part of the mystery behind the intense focus is solved by looking at an October poll of Americans of Faith and their attitudes toward climate change. Pope Francis has especially targeted American Catholics as failing to understand the crisis.

 As a result of this piece I decided to go back into my files, and this isn't all there is:

Francis: The Apostate Pope - Francis’ doctrinal views are most definitely Globalist, Internationalist, and Liberation theology from his encyclicals, preaching, and actions. He has been modifying several Catholic dogmas such as the ordination of women, embracing LGBT in the church, allowing the legal recognition of same-sex couples (marriage), and others that were previously anathema to the church..............Francis has deliberately inserted himself into doctrinal issues such as economics, politics, immigration, and climate change. He is an outspoken critic of capitalism and free-market economics, the very entities that brought hundreds of millions of people out of poverty all over the world.  It is Capitalism that allows for prosperity, not Socialism.........

Pope Sings the Praises of Obama’s Global Warming Agenda - Pope Francis was quick to praise President Barack Obama’s plan to fight global warming during a Wednesday morning speech at the White House. Francis extolled Obama for “reducing air pollution” and taking the fight against global warming seriously.“It seems clear to me also that climate change is a problem that can no longer be left to a future generation,” Francis told those gathered at the White House. “When it comes to the care of our common home, we are living at a critical moment in history.”......
 
How a controversial letter from Pope Francis shaped climate politics and the Biden 2020 campaign - “We have a good one now,” Vice President Joe Biden laughed as he read aloud a leaked draft of Pope Francis’s landmark encyclical on climate change. It was June 2015, and Biden was addressing a White House-sponsored forum on clean energy investment, his first public appearance since his son Beau’s death from cancer in May. The vice president was in good spirits. Just the day before, numerous media outlets had obtained an early copy of Pope Francis’s book-length letter on the environment. For Biden, the contents were encouraging: Francis framed climate change similarly to the way the Obama administration did — as both a moral and economic issue.........
 
His Holiness Pope Francis is Misleading People on Climate Change - Pope Francis and I were both Chemistry majors undergrad.  We may not have been in the same school, but I am confident he knows of the Le Chatelier Principle as applied to gases.  It says: “When a system at equilibrium is subjected to a change in concentration,  temperature, volume, or pressure the system reacts to counteract the effect of the change and a new equilibrium is established.”  This is a critical relationship in understanding the atmosphere as it is a closed system in a gravity bottle more efficient than any container we have yet created.  Gravity is so efficient we lose only 200 kilograms, 440 pounds, of hydrogen and helium every year; gases we do not care not about and from the five quintillion tons of air surrounding Earth.  That said:  If we add anything to the atmosphere something leaves, per the laws of nature as revealed to man by experimental work.........It appears Pope Francis has sold out to the forces of darkness that choose to alarm the people with a declaration easily shown to be a lie!  We know that on examining “man-caused global warming” in the light of his education, which is identical to mine, there is no substance.  The facts of the matter are simple and easily confirmed as we show in our demo experiment.........
 
Caruba's Corner: Global Warming? The Pope is Wrong- I have devoted the better part of more than two and a half decades speaking out against the charlatans that have created and maintained the greatest hoax ever imposed on modern man. At the heart of this hoax has been the United Nations environmental program and at the heart of that program is an agenda to initiate a massive redistribution of wealth from industrialized, successful nations to those who have suffered, as often as not, from being ruled by despots of one description or another. It is with profound sorrow and disappointment that I must now speak out against Pope Francis, the leader of 1.2 billion Catholics, whom observers have noted has “a green agenda.” He has become an outspoken advocate on environmental issues, saying that taking action is “essential to faith” and calling the destruction of nature a modern sin..................

The Climate Skeptic’s Guide To Pope Francis’ U.S. Visit: Talking Points About The Pope and Global Warming  - Get Your Climate Skeptic's Guide To the Pope's Visit. No Visit is Complete Without One!  Highlights: 'When the Pope speaks on climate change, he is not speaking authoritatively on Catholic doctrine. He is merely offering his opinion.' Scientist: 'Most of the scientific claims cited in Pope’s encyclical are not true.' 'There has been nothing short of an 'Unholy Alliance' between the Vatican and promoters of man-made climate fear. The Vatican advisors can only be described as a brew of anti-capitalist, pro-population control advocates' 'If the pope from 300 years ago could see our world today, he'd say it was actually cleaner and healthier than his own era.' 'The Vatican is aligning itself with a UN climate agenda that is at odds with major aspects of Catholic teachings and doctrine.'.........

When the average person thinks the way this Pope thinks it’s understandable, because the average person is typically uninformed, misinformed, and for the most part is either only moderately interested  or not interested at all.  But that's not acceptable for someone in a major leadership role.  For those in major leadership positions to spew out this kind of nonsense is not only  inexcusable, it’s criminal  

People in major leadership positions, including the Pope, are at the center of the information world.  To believe they don’t know these claims of "manmade" catastrophic climate change is the greatest hoax perpetrated on humanity since evolution, is irrational!   

The Pope, along with all those on the left, profess to be so concerned about the poor and the weak, yet if the plans and schemes the left and the environmental movement wish to impose on humanity, "to save the world", were implemented, they would do nothing more than deliver the only thing for which the left/green movements are most famous:   

Dystopia!  Poverty, misery, suffering, disease, and early death.  He and all the rest must know that.  And on top of that, they're not saving the planet!!!!!

He made nice with the last socialist mass murderer left in the world, Fidel Castro,  never saying a word about the incredible lack of justice in Cuba’s legal system.  Yet he visited a prison in America to highlight they’re overcrowded because these “poor” prisoners can’t afford bail.  No mention is made of whether these prisoners deserve to be there or not.   
 
And as far as I can tell he’s not mentioned, at least publicly,  anything about the persecution and murder of Christians in Muslim controlled lands, which amounts to genocide, which is prescribed in the Koran, and as far as I can tell, he's been silent on the horrors perpetrated by the Hamas Nazis.  Apparently "Islam’s atrocities don’t fit his narrative."

We use words to convey instructions and to give meaning to thoughts and ideas.  Physicist John Droz noted in his slide presentation "Science Under Assault" the green movement is great at slight of hand word morphology. What was originally called Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming morphed into Anthropogenic Global Warming, then Global Warming, then Climate Change and finally - at least until the next change - Climate Disruption.

Why did the green/left find all these changes necessary? Simple.  Reality and ideology don't always play well together, or even in the same sandbox.  So, here's a dose of climate reality:

  • Climate is constantly changing.  
  • It has constantly changed throughout the Earth's history. 
  • Mankind isn't responsible for those changes.
  • Mankind is incapable of predicting those changes and totally incapable of stopping those changes. 
  • The forces behind climate change are:
    • Incredibly powerful
    • Not fully understood
    • Naturally occurring.
  • We can't predict weather correctly to any real degree of accuracy for even one or two weeks out,  yet were expected to believe climate, which is infinitely more complex than weather, can be predicted 50, 100 or even 150 years out.

So, when the evidence keeps piling up to show how nonsensical their claims are, they morph these phrases into something that becomes even less definitive. Climate Change became part of the mythology tenets of the neo-pagan green religion. Belief in manmade climate change is an misanthropic nature worshiping religious movement.  If they were alive today, the ancient nature worshiping Germanic Druids would be totally comfortable with the modern green movement.  Both require human sacrifice. 

However, although 'true believers' may be sincere in their misguided perceptions, the leaders within the movement are not misguided at all.  They know exactly what they're doing, they know what they want, and they know how to go about it.  These are the globalist, including the Pope, who recognize this is nothing more than, as one time President of France Jacques Chirac once stated, the first step in global governance. We really need to get that! 

Words mean things, but we need to understand that words are like history.  Both can be used to misdirect and confuse while promoting misinformation and misdirection to manipulate the public into accepting schemes that are detrimental to humanity as a whole. 

Unfortunately most will never take the time to find out what the facts truly are because it's so much easier to go along and get along. And if society is looking to the the mainstream media for help, well, that's an effort in futility. 

They're part of the problem, not the solution.

Friday, June 9, 2023

The Religion of the Left: Sacred Destruction and the Search for Lost Gods.

By June 08, 2023 @ Sultan Knish Blog 

“Abortion is sacred,” Planned Parenthood declared. Biden told Dylan Mulvaney that banning transgender child mutilation is “immoral”. The head of the Public Religion Research Institute preaches about the “sacred work of white discomfort” in defense of critical race theory.

It is a mistake to think of the Left as a secular movement. People don’t throw their lives away for a set of ideas. They don’t turn on their parents, societies and entire way of life over abstractions. Only something that touches their deepest selves and offers them that sense of purpose and meaning in a broken world that religious people call revelation and holiness summons that fire.

That leftists don’t believe in a central deity is confusing to monotheists, but what they believe in is far older, a hybrid of primitive mysticism, laboriously revived by western romanticism, and theoretical acadamese nurtured by over two centuries of dilettante students, professional radicals and assorted megalomaniacal cranks who litter the history of socialism.

What these two strands of the western leftist worldview have in common is their conviction that there is an underlying sense of order, found in sociological patterns or energy auras, theories of race or tarot cards, that explain everything and that by mastering them we can transcend and fundamentally transform the universe, and everything in it, including our societies and ourselves..

This is the continuum linking paganism, academic theories and conspiracy theories.

Where leftist theology starkly divides from western and eastern monotheism is in the notion of divinity not as a central intelligent point of being, but as a hidden meaning scattered throughout existence to be decoded by human intelligence and spiritual striving. That is why leftists were attracted to eastern religions before dumbing them down into New Age mysticism.

To the Left, there is no God, but we all have the potential to become gods by mastering the secrets of the universe, whether that means technotopian transhumanism or becoming one with the AI gods they intend to create, forcing everyone into an ideal society that will unlock human potential, or figuring out the right energy patterns to usher in the age of aquarius. While seemingly very different approaches, the various utopian strands of leftism speak to a common yearning that pits them against the traditional beliefs of the societies they aspire to overturn.

The Left’s intellectual pursuits are primarily aimed at analyzing how power is distributed in a society. These academic and journalistic critiques build up to justifying its own power grabs. And the Left excels at analyzing and seizing power because power is its only source of meaning.

Much as ISIS leaders boasted that their brutal executions and mass rapes were their forms of prayer, politics is the religious practice of the Left. It has become the only truly meaningful expression of its beliefs after its social experiments in implementing its way of life through cults, communes and private arrangements fell through. Such side projects have been replaced by a white collar movement embedded in the managerial class of governments and corporations.

This movement is animated by a culture war in which all morality is reduced to power. The redemption of the nation and the salvation of the planet depend on a leftist takeover implemented by a white collar cult that has put its career aspirations and wealth at the service of leftist dogma in return for the conviction that the professional aspirations and privileges of its members are redemptive. An Ivy League education, an academic position, and a corporate executive’s office are no longer just personal achievements, but a moral crusade.

Mimetic movements like the Left take on the characteristics and eventually become the thing they are imitating. After spending all that time working from within the system, they have become the system. And the system has become them. Bureaucrats and CEOs have adopted the protective coloration of leftist virtue signaling to cover their many sins much as leftists adopted the protective coloration of government and corporations to cover their agenda.

The bloated ranks of government, academia and corporate monopolies merging into one blob is a symptom of leftism. The Left always thinks in terms of systems rather than people, of rulesets rather than values (despite devoting a good deal of its cultural propaganda to asserting that it does the opposite, but the easiest way to understand leftism is to invert every one of its claims to find the truth) and it is turning societies into hives of systems and rules.

But systems are leftist forums of religious experience and moral fulfillment. A leftist church is any institution and its service is a collective takeover of that institution. But the momentary triumph of the takeover is never enough. When these systems fail to achieve their utopian promise through technocratic rulesets, as they always must, they come to serve their primary purpose of destroying everything that sinfully exists to clear the ground for a glorious tabula rasa, a blank page,and a new form of man, for a new creation.

Each leftist failure serves as evidence that not enough of the past had been destroyed to make way for the future. That is why killing or sexually mutilating children, or racism, are sacred.

Much as to ISIS and Islam, destruction is sacred, so it is to all radical movements.

When construction fails, the only path forward is through destruction. Communist dictatorships drove millions out of cities or farms, controlled everything they read and thought, and when that failed killed millions. Declaring war on whiteness or deconstructing sex are more precise and intimate forms of destruction meant to also usher in a new future.

The “right side of history” requires completely remaking mankind. And that’s an ugly business.

Construction is tedious and the Left isn’t any good at it. Building systems and rules is different than actually creating anything. What the Left excels at is taking over existing systems by exploiting their weakness. But when the Left is actually able to build its own systems and rules to implement its own agenda, it discovers that the systems and the rules don’t actually do anything. Leftist bureaucracies ossify into pointless exercises once they no longer have enemies to defeat. When the USSR was stalemated by the Cold War, its Communist Party lost any reason for being and collapsed under the realization that it had no function except stealing.

The most reliable way to kill the Left is to give it total power, but deprive it of external ambition. In real life, George Orwell’s 1984 dystopia would not have lasted for generations, let alone centuries, its dedicated sadists and fanatics, as embodied by O’Brien would have killed each other off, as the Bolsheviks did, leaving behind a cowardly bureaucracy with no vision.

The fanatical sadists are overriding the normative impulses of the professional managerial class that the leftists have become in America, as they did in the Soviet Union. Riots or mutilating children remind them that they’re not just diversity deans or think tank experts, they’re the radical vanguard of a movement that is going to achieve what all religions have failed to do.

Abortion, mutilating children and racism are sacred acts because they promise to break through the complacency of the system, the routines of a suburban lifestyle, the commute, the meetings and the minutiae of inhabiting the system with orgies of blood and pain. Like Pol Pot murdering everyone wearing glasses for being westernized, the leftist system strives to transcend itself through ritual acts of destruction in the hopes of finding the secrets of the universe.

Transgender experiments on children began out of a conviction in human malleability. If men can become women, then they can perhaps become more than men. Eliminate sex roles and the family structure, and it becomes possible to imagine an entirely new form of society. And, less ambitiously, destroying western civilization is a prerequisite to building a new civilization.

What does a post-civilization look like? Like the surgically mutilated post-men and post-women, like the children never born, like ex-Soviet ghost cities and mass graves from China to France, these are the evil dreams of things that never were because they could never be.

Religion without god is a dream that slowly becomes a nightmare, cults of personality, human sacrifice and the search for meaning where there is none. Madmen create their own patterns, they find their own truths in the burning sun and in hallucinogens, and then write them in pain and terror on the bodies of their willing and unwilling followers searching for a reason to live.

The Left is not, as it believes, a new story, but a very old one, and though it prides itself on knowing many things, true and untrue, about the world, the one thing it does not know is that which men of religion and philosophy make a point of knowing, the knowledge of the self.

Leftists correctly believe that the world is filled with meaning, but what they fail to understand is the meaning of that meaning, believing that within those patterns are the secrets to absolute power, when what actually lies in those patterns of meaning is the One who made them.

Denying that truth, they worship power and then blood, they search for paradise and find death.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.

Monday, May 29, 2023

Left Wing Extremism Linked to Narcissism and Psychopathy

The study also showed that many of the subjects did not personally practice the beliefs they fervently push onto everyone else...