Monday, October 02, 2006


Let's face it, when you get right down to it, all of liberalism is fueled by a singular strategy-a strategy which has been continually perfected and relentlessly executed over the past forty years. That strategy is to promote and exploit divisiveness. Everything liberal politicians do is based on this simple principle. Tell the people that are given to hating the most, that they are the ones who are hated. Tell the people who expect the most, that they deserve more. Tell blacks to hate whites. Tell women to hate men. Tell the lazy to hate the motivated. Tell the poor that only conservatives are rich, and then be sure to tell them to hate them for it.

Class warfare, race baiting, name calling and man-hating-all with a singular goal: to get themselves in power by promoting and exploiting divisiveness. Of course, once this divisiveness turns into frenzy, these same people suddenly act as if they actually want to solve a problem that didn't even exist before they did everything they possibly could to create it. To liberals, every issue, every situation is an opportunity to divide. History, religion, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the death of a soldier, a political debate, the hurricane which devastated New Orleans. Every tragedy exploited to divide. Every victory belittled to divide. Every incident, every word, every distorted statistic, every holiday-you name it, they will find some way to divide it.

Unfortunately, it's not just the politicians who promote and exploit divisiveness; it is the people as well. Malcontents, jealous of anyone with any sort of success, come up with any way they can to attack those who are more successful then they are. Someone is rich only because they stole something from them. Certain groups are more successful only because they took advantage of them. Work has nothing to do with it. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Planning ahead has nothing to do with it. Even luck has nothing to do with it.

And what do these kinds of people view as the solution to this imaginary injustice? Why special rights, privileges and opportunities for themselves, of course. Level the playing field. Get something for nothing. Take from the rich, the white, the male dominated, homophobic society that has already given them everything. Take what they have, what they built, what they earned-whether it be money, property, liberty or opportunity-and find some way, some justification, some cause or some guise to redistribute it to the people who have done nothing to earn it. To people who refuse to compete on merit. To people who insist on taking more out of society than what they put in to it. To people who don't give a damn that their inclusion comes only at the expense of someone else's exclusion. The strategy is simple, really-promote divisiveness and then exploit it for your own benefit.

But differences have given liberals the perfect opportunity to stop any rational discussion dead in its tracks. Differences have led to polarization. Differences have led to countries within a country. Differences have led to the dreaded xist-ism-monger-phobia. Differences have allowed liberals to add any of these four sounds to the end of any word they choose, virtually guaranteeing that they can get away with anything they want.

Worse yet, liberals actually have the nerve to turn around and endlessly accuse conservatives of divisiveness. To them, conservatives- who believe everyone should be held to the same standards-are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives-who believe everyone should have the same rights regardless of the guises used to justify different ones for different people-are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives-who sacrifice their time, money, careers and often their lives to defend the true meaning of freedom and liberty-are somehow divisive.

But the reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who are trying to make some contribution to our society. The reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who expect others to at least try to do the same. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something out of a society far beyond what they are willing to put back in. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something for nothing.

More here. See also here



Korea: Test tube on socialism vs capitalism: "Permit me to add something to Secretary Rumsfeld’s observations on the different results in North and South Korea. (Living in South Korea for a year was one of the things that cured me of my youthful leftism.) The Korean people may be the most ethnically homogeneous people on earth. About 60 percent have one of only three surnames: Lee, Kim, and Park. North and South Korea had the same history from the dawn of history until 1945. The Korean peninsula is small, and about 45 percent constitutes the South. At the time of partition through about 1960, I’d say, the economy of the North was more developed than that of the South. The North had a smaller population, but one that was arguably better educated than the South’s. The North had more industry, too. During the 1950s, the South was absolutely destitute, and survived on food donations from the United States. Thus, in 1945, an “experiment of nature” was carried out. Take a small, homogeneous country and divide it arbitrarily more or less in half. Then install one kind of government in the north and another kind in the south. Close the curtain. See what happens. The results speak for themselves, don’t they? Fifty years of Communism produced famine, or near famine. Fifty years of an increasingly free-market system produced prosperity and wider political freedom. What more does anyone need to know about socialism?

New disclosure rules reveal where union bosses spend: "For the first time, federal disclosure rules are shining sunlight upon union spending priorities, and many rank-and-file members won't like what they reveal. Fortunately, they can do something about it. Among other pursuits, unions such as the AFL-CIO and National Education Association (NEA) spent 60% or more of their discretionary dollars on partisan political activities in 2004-2005, compared to 40% or less on actual work-related representation activities."

Increasing freedom increases growth: "States that have lower taxes, smaller government and flexible labor markets tend to have comparatively more economic growth. An annual report from the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) and Canada's Fraser Institute attempts to quantify each state's economic freedom, and then examine what this means for economic growth. This year's report points to good news for all but a few states, most notably New Mexico."

The Antifederalists were right : "September 27 marks the anniversary of the publication of the first of the Antifederalist Papers in 1789. The Antifederalists were opponents of ratifying the US Constitution. They feared that it would create an overbearing central government, while the Constitution's proponents promised that this would not happen. As the losers in that debate, they are largely overlooked today. But that does not mean they were wrong or that we are not indebted to them."

From Far Left to libertarian : "The question of how I became a libertarian ultimately is a question about how I changed my mental model of the political system from one of 'good guys vs. villains' to one of the importance of limited government, individual liberty, and personal responsibility. I travelled the route from Far Left to libertarian. I think that quite a few libertarians have travelled that route, and yet I cannot think of anyone who has gone the other direction. This leads me to suspect that: 1. Far Leftists and libertarianism have much in common. 2. Libertarians know something that Far Leftists do not."



"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)

Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.


No comments: