Liberalism is dead


The #WalkAway movement showed us all that the Left has basically gone full-on fratricidal at this point. The Democrat Party is tearing itself apart in a sort of political civil war, in which the moderates, known about 12 years ago as "blue dogs", and the more pro-Big Business types, are being rapidly devoured by the bug-eyed lunatics like Rep. Adam Schiff and Rep. (!!!) Alexandria Occasional-Cortex Ocasio-Cortez.

Naturally, old-school liberals are deeply, deeply unhappy about this:

Half my blog has been my thoughts about the far-left and how it has hijacked and seized control over the Left itself. I, like many other liberals, have been fighting against this cancer for years, but I’ve seen in real time how many liberals are abandoning ship because they saw it as a hopeless situation.

It seemed to start with Anita Sarkeesian, who actually preached to people regularly that literally everything is racist, everything is sexist, everything is homophobic, and these things must be fought. Anita actually went to the United Nations and urged them to censor everyone on the internet who says even slightly mean things to women on the internet.

Then, Emma Watson joined, then all of the media and Hollywood joined, and now the Democratic Party itself is getting on board. Just the other day, Hillary Clinton, who is already hated by everyone except the far-left, told the Democratic base that they cannot be civil anymore.

Black Lives Matter started marches in the streets calling for the death of cops. Some entire towns, like Ferguson Missouri, were destroyed by riots. Whenever conservative speakers come to pretty much any college campus, the far-left shows up to start burning things, destroying private property, and assaulting everyone who speaks against them.

This shit is not exclusive to America. It’s happening in Canada, Australia, and all across Europe. The far-left is calling for socialism and communism, calling for completely open borders, forcing men to give up their money to their female coworkers, allowing migrants (regardless of background) to come flooding in to cities.


The hilarious thing about that particular blog entry, though, is that it was preceded just three months earlier by this little gem:

It is increasingly concerning to me how many people are joining the “I used to be left-wing” group. Of course, 99% of the time, the reasoning is that the left has been hijacked by its worst members. I understand the frustration – trust me, I fully feel this frustration – but abandoning your principles for another set of principles simply because the other set is correct about a select few social issues … is retarded. In my opinion, it proves you don’t have principles to begin with.


Let me explain something that should be obvious to all…

First of all, both the left and the right have their lunatics. The Left has social justice warriors and progressives. The Right has the Tea Party, hicks, rednecks, gun nuts, Fox News, the Westboro Baptist Church, neo-Nazis, the KKK, etc.

Abandoning the left entirely simply because one particular group has forcibly seized the face of it is also ignorant. Both sides have many different groups within them. Of course they do! If there are only two sides to the political spectrum, and there are billions of people on planet Earth, then obviously the two sides are going to have many, many subgroups. No two people think the exact same way. I’ve used this example many times, and I will again: Hippies and Antifa are both part of the left, but just try to explain with a straight face how they behave the same. You can’t, because they are nothing alike. So, just because they are both part of the left, that doesn’t mean they are anything alike.

Progressives and liberals hate each other. When progressives first started to rise, when they started claiming that everything in society is bigoted towards minorities and women, guess who the first – the very first – people to oppose them were. The correct answer is: Liberals! Before anyone on the Right started hearing the nonsense that comes out of the mouths of progressives, liberals were already on the case, like white blood cells attacking an infectious disease within the body. Except, liberals eventually realized that progressives weren’t any mere illness to the body, we realized we were fighting a cancer, and that we were going to need a lot more firepower to fight this cancer. Liberals started allying themselves with center-right conservatives for this very reason. Sure, we disagree on issues like abortion, gay marriage, marijuana, global warming, religion, etc., but at least we were (and still are) united on one thing: the progressive movement needs to be stopped.


So which one is it, eh, Mikey? Walk away and leave the Left to its complete and total moonbat-level barking-at-the-moon craziness? Or stay with the Left because of your precious principles and the supposed rightness of the liberal ideology?

With all due respect to the author of those posts - who seems like a decent enough chap, despite being a liberal and an atheist - the problem here is that the liberal ideology has come through more than a century of comprehensive and consistent failure, to find itself here late in the second decade of this one, completely bereft of any kind of philosophy, battle plan, logistical support, or anything even remotely useful to say.

To understand how we got to this point, of course, we must first ask what happened to split off the Left from Liberals:



Let us examine the core beliefs and structures that form the foundation of the entire liberal ideology. Here I will directly address the exact points that Dennis Prager noted as key differences between liberals and Leftists.

First: yes, different races are different. Yes, there are in fact real and measurable differences between (East) Asia, white (which is to say, European), Hispanic, (non-East) Asian, Arab, Jewish, and black intelligence. Yes, there are actual measurable differences in black versus white time preferences which lead to much higher rates of dementia in the former than in the latter.

It is not racist to acknowledge these things. They are facts. Racism is a feeling. Facts don't give the minutest quantum of a flying weaselpecker about your feelings. Liberals do not understand and refuse to acknowledge that race differences are real, substantial, and insurmountable.

Second: while it is true that liberals tend to be pro-capitalist, it is also true that liberals saw "managed capitalism" as the way forward. They believed that government needed to play a bigger role in stewarding capital and preventing abuses. And, actually, they had some good points to make in this regard. However, their overall track record on economic thinking has been, by and large, abysmal.

Listing the multiple and wanton failures of the liberal ideology in the economic sphere would take several posts worth of writing, and there ain't nobody got time for that.

Third: liberals might have believed in the nation-state once upon a time, but they made the terrible and critical error of substituting the state for the nation. In other words, liberals were, and to a very great extent still are, civic nationalists.

It must be understood very clearly that a nation is not the soil, or the government, of any given patch of land. A nation is made up of people. A nation is the collective distinct genetic history, traditions, religions, culture, shared values, experiences, beliefs, and - yes - races of the people.

It is for this reason that the Japanese, for instance, treat foreigners with such utter disdain behind their very polite and humble smiles. It is for this reason that Russians in Moscow look very much askance at the blacks and Caucasians who work menial jobs in shopping malls. (I'll explain the "Caucasians" reference later if anyone asks - it is an interesting topic.) It is for this reason that Native American tribes have very specific blood-ancestry requirements for membership - which, of course, is one reason why Sen. Elizabeth "Big Chief Spreading Bull" Warren's self-inflicted gunshot wound was so hilarious.

Fourth: old-school liberals, like John F. Kennedy and Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, absolutely did venerate the American heritage and loved their country. Their deep patriotism is not open to question - but the ways in which they expressed that patriotism is seriously questionable. More radical liberals, such as that rather long-in-the-tooth traitor, the so-called "Lion of the Senate", Sen. Edward Kennedy, were directly responsible for some of the most egregious offences against the American nation, such as the 1965 Hart-Celler Immigration Act, which in effect threw open America's borders and pretty much abandoned the idea of America as a genetically, religiously, and historically distinct nation.

And it is those more radical liberals who blended in with their progressive brethren and eventually morphed into the modern Left.

Make no mistake: the modern Left is directly descended from the Western liberal tradition.

Fifth: liberals did believe, once upon a time, in freedom of speech. Unfortunately, the entire modern notion of "freedom of speech" is founded upon the works of Enlightenment-era philosophers and historians, most of them French and English, who were at best deeply sceptical about Christianity. Men such as the French philosopher Voltaire - to whom is attributed that famous quote about defending to the death the right to say something offensive or disagreeable - and the legendary English historian Edward Gibbon, did not view Christianity in a positive light at all. In fact, Gibbon deliberately and very thoroughly downplayed the critical role that Christianity played in the development, protection, flowering, and supremacy of Western civilisation, for the specific purpose of elevating Islamic culture and history.

Due to significant progress made in historiography since the time of Gibbon, we know now that Christianity was, and is, the absolute bedrock of Western civilisation. But liberals dislike this idea intensely, and use the cover of "free speech" to directly attack Christianity and insist on the separation of church and state.

This is a false dichotomy.

The point of freedom of speech is not to protect the right to blaspheme against the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. (I note here that I will do my best to refrain from referring to them as Dad, Junior, and Spook in future posts - but I don't guarantee this...)

The point of freedom of speech is to protect the Church from persecution by the State.

Liberals failed to understand this. They failed to uphold Christian values. They failed to enforce anti-blasphemy laws preventing people from desecrating the name of the Father and violating His Law.

And then they wonder why they are impotent and irrelevant in the modern world.

Sixth: liberals like to claim that they champion Western civilisation. They have done precisely dick in the last 40 years to do what they claim.

This is not a new problem for liberals, by the way. When President BAMF, that is to say, Saint Reagan of the Right, was running the country and waging his four-stage Long War against the Evil Empire, liberals were horrified by what they saw as his brazen warmongering and flatly crazy foreign policy. Liberals at the time sought "accommodation" and "coexistence" with the Soviet Union - because the liberal ideology led them to believe that coexistence with and tolerance of evil was not only possible, but desirable.

History has proven in the years since that the legendary President Reagan was right - which is a big part of the reason why I call him Saint Reagan of the Right - and they were utterly, totally, and completely wrong.

It is of course worth noting that the Left is completely opposed to "liberalism", in both its classical and modern forms.

Classical liberals are what we today would consider "conservative"; they espouse(d) post-Enlightenment, post-Christian, post-nationalist values and philosophies, believe(d) deeply and strongly in freedom and liberty, and stand (or stood) for relatively small government with relatively benign and restrained influence that consistently stays within its means.

One must note here parenthetically that, given the utter failure of conservatism to properly conserve one single damned thing - the ladies' restroom being just one in a long and glaring list of such Noble Defeats - the similarities between classical liberals and modern American conservatives merely serve to underline the sheer magnitude of the failures of both.

Modern liberals are essentially squishy progressives. They are sympathetic to the Left, but they have not yet gone full retard. They know and understand that acting like complete bloody socialist lunatics tends to scare away the rather important donations made by businesses in order to help them win elections. Unfortunately, they are caught in something of a serious bind. They can see quite clearly that their cousins on the Left are absolutely bug-nuts crazy. But they can also see that the loudest, kookiest, and most unique voices generally get the most funding and attention.

So they either sign on to the loony agenda of the hardcore Left, or generally voice ineffective and rather pathetic entreaties for civility and moderation.

It is simply impossible for liberalism to function anymore. It has failed, completely and totally. Liberals have a choice between precisely three alternatives: go to the Left; migrate to red states and conservative areas; or go extinct. It is not difficult to see that most liberals have chosen to do the second - but because liberals appear to have a severe lack of self-awareness and any appreciation of the failures of their own ideology, they bring their failures with them, thereby turning red states blue and paving the way for the Left to follow them.

We see the results very clearly today in the electoral map. The midterm elections of 2018 showed that Republicans are now struggling in areas that were once solidly red - in large part because too many idiotic blue-staters moved in and brought their failed liberal ideology with them.

Make no mistake: once Texas turns blue - which, by the way, it used to be back in the days of President Lyndon Baines Johnson - that is the end of the American Republic. There will almost surely be no Republican or conservative President elected until the now-inevitable dissolution and destruction of the United States of America.

My liberal friends: your ideology is dead. Everything you believe in has failed. Your entire worldview is one giant anti-scientific, anti-Christian, anti-civilisational sham. Your options at the present time are simple: abject surrender to the rabid hordes of the Left; flee to less crazy states and countries; or go extinct.

The most likely outcome is the second. Unfortunately, being liberals, you always continue to make the same mistakes and you inevitably end up voting for the very madness that you fled in the first place - because you think that signalling your virtue is more important than actually fighting to preserve your freedoms.

Nonetheless, accept that your ideology is dead, and have done with it. You had a good run - but now it is time to admit that you have failed.

Comments

  1. First of all, both the left and the right have their lunatics. The Left has social justice warriors and progressives. The Right has the Tea Party, hicks, rednecks, gun nuts, Fox News, the Westboro Baptist Church, neo-Nazis, the KKK, etc.


    The water he swims in.

    How can you NOT realize what an SJW is, see them pop up all over media, late night, CNN, without getting laughed out, and not realize they are now mainstream and not merely fringe?

    I'll leave aside the historical ignorance of where he places the loser socialists and KKK.

    The rest of the things he disparages? Dem are GOOD things. And unlike Antifa, etc., will be glad to show you how to protect yourself, leave you alone if you leave them alone, clean up after themselves when they protest, fix a truck, cut trees, etc. instead of beating people up and ruining their livelihoods.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Even the KKK is frankly disparaged far beyond their actual impact. They are gone, but in the time that they were created the addressed a very important need... the newly-freed slaves, cut off from the lifestyles they had known, had turned to raiding and rapine, and the authority's hands were tied dealing with them.

      Funny story, a black preacher I have had long association with (Yes, he claimed Jesus had 'Trials and Tribadism" in the "Garden of Gastronomy") who used to be my chief about 25 years ago, used to talk about how he was driving past a KKK rally down in Georgia when his car broke down. He was stuck for almost an hour, when the rally broke up and all the members started driving past him on their way back to town. a few cars stopped by him and he was apparently convinced he was going to die, when a bunch of young men and the leader (The 'Grant Dragoon') got out and asked him if he needed help.
      They tried jumping it and filling his tank from a jerry can, and even came up with a pack of replacement spark plugs. They couldn't fix his car on the road, so they chained his car to the back of one of the pickups and towed it all the way to town... and one of the young men, who was a mechanic and ex-navy, fixed the car at cost for parts (I think he said it was the alternator).

      From what I understand, the last major Klan rally had a grand total of 70 attendees. One actual Klansman, 57 infiltrators from various government agencies, and about a dozen poor suckers that they brought to try to entrap them into doing something illegal.

      Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. ALL ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL BE DELETED.
Contact the Didact: mantlesapproach@gmail.com

Popular Posts