Last Crusade 43: Lies, More Lies, and Leftism
To be Leftist is to lie, and to live a lie.
Falsehood is the core principle and the sole principle of their political philosophy.
Leftism is, and always has been, an attempt to return to the practices of ancient system of hierarchic privilege for the elite in the name of completing, perfecting or purifying the revolutionary abolition of that ancient system of elitism which took place in 1776, and ushered in the modern world.
The central lie of their philosophy is that the French and Russian revolutions were continuations and improvements upon the incomplete American revolution, rather than the direct opposite.
For this reason, they call themselves by all manner of false names, liberal, progressive, and radical, when they are not.
They are wolves who, once wolves became an endangered species, fooled the unwary shepherd by donning the skin of their victims. They preach tyranny in the name of freedom, elitism in the name of equality, injustice in the name of social justice, seek an abolition of all rule of law, all moral restraint, all courtesy, civility and decency, in the name of liberation, tolerance, and utopia.
It is all lies.
The Left wish for the practices, but not the return of the theory, the standards, or the restrictions which made that ancient system of crown and miter as tolerable, when it was tolerable, as it was.
Chairman Mao of China, for example, had all the powers and privileges of an ancient Emperor, but without the restraint in the name of dignity and ceremony the Son of Heaven also had to shoulder.
False Advertising
First, the lie about what they are. They call themselves liberal and progressive and radical.
Leftists are not liberal. The Founding Fathers were liberal, if we dare to use that word in its original and correct meaning; and yet the Left seeks everywhere and at all times to undo their work. Leftism is illiberal.
They are not progressive. Progress is what they oppose, since they seek everywhere and at all times to regress to a stratified social system of unequal laws. Leftism is retrogressive.
They are not radical. A radical seeks change to all social structures down to the root. The Left seeks a return to the social structures of caste and class, masters and servants, rulers and peons, chiefs and slaves known to mankind since the Paleolithic.
The Leftist opposition is instinctive and incoherent. They respond to a liberal social order markedly beneficial to them with ingratitude amounting to hatred. This aversion is inexplicable. It is mere emotional reaction. They are, in point of fact, reactionary.
Inequality
All variants of Leftism promote inequality of the law. There is to be one rule for the elite, one for the elite’s protected class of serfs and mascots, one for the commoners, and one for the untouchables who also act as scapegoats to bear the blame for any and all evils in life.
Such hierarchies are as old as man. The only real political progress in all of history was leaving that behind and finding equality under the law.
Leftism wishes to undo that evolution, and devolve back into a simpler, crueler and more savage form.
Different versions of Leftism might have different membership in mind as to who fits in the mascot class and who in the untouchable class.
The SJW leftist in modern American selects the blacks, the sexual perverts, Islamic jihadists, and woman as mascots and he targets white males and Christians, the rich man, and the Jew as scapegoats. The Alt-Right select whites and mascots, and Jews as scapegoats. The Nazi select Aryans, a fiction race of Germans from India as mascots, and Jews as scapegoats. The Red selects a fictional economic category of proletarians as mascots and Jews as scapegoats.
All of them hate the Catholic Church as well. Our founder was Jewish, after all, as were the first twelve members.
Liberalism What
The world revolution which took place in 1776 can only be called liberalism. Sadly, and no matter how confusing the term, there is no other word for it.
It can be called classical liberalism, if you like, or limited government of rule of law, but it was nothing less than the overthrow of the very idea that God made men unequal at birth by anointing some families and bloodlines and races to be rulers and others to be ruled: a rank none could lawfully change.
Deliberate Confusion
Are you confused to learn that the conservatives should rightly be called liberal and that the liberals should rightly be called reactionary? That Left does not mean Left and that Right does not mean anything?
This confusion is deliberate. It prevents any discussion of the truth about Leftism, namely, the simple fact that there is no truth about Leftism. None at all.
The fact that our language is too corrupt to carry rational speech is almost never discussed, because, in fact, it cannot be discussed. Our language has been deliberately and widely corrupted to such a degree by the falsehoods of the Left, that the daydream of Orwell’s Big Brother has at last come to pass: the matter cannot be discussed rationally.
Or, to be precise, the matter cannot be discussed rationally without introducing such changes to the vocabulary as to render the talk incomprehensible to the casual reader.
In order to discuss this matter, one must learn a whole new language.
One must learn what the word liberal means, what the word liberty means, what the word property means, what the word equality means, what the word Leftist means.
You might think you know, dear reader. You do not.
You have been hearing the words in the wrong meaning, usually in the direct opposite of their true meaning, your entire life.
The Parable of the Wolves and Sheep
Dress a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and you will have two types of fools being fooled by you: the gullible fools who will come pet the sheep and be surprised when they die beneath bloody tooth and claw; and cynical fools, who curse the whole flock and drive them all away, and that night freeze for lack of wool.
The devil laughs at the gullible, but he laughs doubly at the cynical, for the sheep without a shepherd starve as well.
The Bolsheviks rose to power by saying altruism and compassion to the poor required a temporary dictatorship of the proletarian. Only a few mass murders would be needed. Just as an emergency measure. Making an omelet means breaking some eggs.
Roughly one hundred fifty million eggs were broken by communism in the Twentieth Century.
Every true believer in the Bolshevik utopia who ended his days starving in a death camp was a gullible fool, as were all the European intellectuals who flattered the mass murderers, and the artists who adored them, and newsmen ran interference and hid the new about them.
Now the cynical fool is just as unwary a victim, but he congratulates himself smugly on seeing through the deception. In truth, he is doubly deceived.
Seeing the Bolshevik equate altruism with mass murder, the cynical fool believes him, and denounces altruism. Hearing the feminist equate female liberation with the murder of the unborn, the cynic believes her, and curses women and their liberation to the devil. Reading a professor who equates equality with punishing success and stealing from the rich, the cynic believes him, and concludes that equality does not exist and would not be desirable if it did.
The Leftist lie is a remarkable bit of work, since it traps both the gullible who accepts the wolf in sheep’s clothing as a sheep, and the cynic who reject all sheep as wolves in disguise. Both are too mentally lazy to do the work of separating inner sheep from the outward appearance of sheep. Both react only to surface appearances.
It is time to draw aside the woolen outer coat, and see how the wolf beneath is hidden.
Leftism What
Let us start by saying what Leftism really means.
Leftism is portrayed as the revolutionary philosophy of the future, as men evolved from good to great; whereas the Right are the reactionary philosophy of the past, the realm of our ape man ancestors or the primordial slime from which life spontaneously rose.
Whatever is new and good and shiny is called Left; and whatever is old and ugly and hoary is called Right.
The false definition used by Leftists is not a definition at all, but a Madison Avenue ploy to appeal to the sense of novelty in the listener.
In technical terms, it is a false to facts association, that is, an attempt to lure an unwary victim into links two unrelated ideas into one by the mere repetition of the two as one. It is Pavlovian conditioning.
Nothing in reality links a ringing bell to the promise of food to come, but the dog can be fooled into acting as if it did, merely by putting the two together in his sight, over and over again.
It it not hard to condition a dog. Or an innocent schoolboy or television viewer or news consumer. Just say “Freedom is Slavery” or “War is Peace” or “Masculinity is Toxic” or “Trump and Russia and Russia and Trump” over and over again, and the unwary will soon associate the two unrelated ideas into a single snarl in his brain as if one idea logically implied or required the other.
If you notice, this “Pavlovian” definition of Liberal as “New” defines nothing and means nothing.
Revolutionary Marxists in China are called conservative hence right if they oppose the changes allowing for more private ownership of land and trade goods. Woodrow Wilson’s party in America is called progressive hence left, even though he favored racial segregation and opposed female suffrage, just as had all his ancestors back to the Neolithic.
The revolutionary National Socialists of the German Worker’s Party, who wished radically to reorganize society along the lines of science-fictional eugenic breeding and direct government control of the economy, are called right because they opposed even more radical the science-fictional daydream of a utopia without private property.
To the Nationalist Socialist, the abolition of private control over private property de facto was sufficient: the Nazis were willing to allow property ownership to continue, de jure, as long as the owner was a Helot.
The Nazis, like all Leftists, were liars. Their claim was that they could preserve the German spirit, German traditions, and the mystical German bond with the soil, by means of radical socialist revisions to the law, and the assumption of power by the elite, allegedly to solve the current emergency, in reality as a permanent police state that abolished all prior forms of law.
Of course, the Nazis preserved none of these things, nor had any intention to do so, any more than their twin brothers in the Communist regimes intend to redistribute land or share all property equally, to each according to his need.
But some fools still regard the American Constitutional political philosophy rightly called liberalism as being mired in the past, hence conservative, hence right, and regard the Nazi lip service toward preserving German culture as being mired in the past, hence also right.
The two things are opposite, and yet, like the dog salivated at the bell, merely by the repetition the totalitarian National Socialism and Free Market Limited Government are one and the same, many are deceived.
Perhaps they believe it themselves. Some engineers ignite their petards when they plant them.
The Self-Deceived Deceiver
Whether any given Lefts will believe such lies in his own head is a matter for a psychiatrist to ask, or an exorcist, or a telepath.
I do not know and do not mean it the falsehood is false in that sense.
I mean it is lies in this sense: an honest man is the same in thought, word and deed, whether alone or when scrutinized. His soul is in God’s hands, and he fears to sin, even when no mortal eye will see.
A Leftist is someone who follows an ideology rather than a religion.
This has several implications. He is likely to be one who thinks truth is relative; or that logic is word-tricks; or that reality is optional; or that beauty in the eye of the beholder; or that political rights are collective and impose duties on others, never on oneself; or that all human interactions are secret part of a system of oppression by the strong against the weak, who are locked in an endless Darwinian struggle of the fittest, with no peace, and no armistice between them possible or desirable. Or perhaps he believes many or most of these absurdities.
An ideologue, no matter what lip service he pays, is someone to who talks and acts as if God is dead.
For him, liberty imposes no corresponding duty on a free man. Instead, Liberty is the absence of external restriction on the impulse to indulge in any sin one’s dark heart imagines. Liberty is escaping detection, or escaping criticism, or both.
Hence, for him, the only sin is intolerance, and the only virtue is to tolerate all sins.
Not every Leftist believes all, or even most, of these proposition, but all Leftists believe at least one or two, and none will speak in public against the others.
Do they believe their own lies? It is impossible to say, since the Leftist will not and cannot answer honestly about anything he thinks or says.
I leave it as an exercise to the reader to decide whether it is worse (1) to be a jaded and cynical purveyor of insolent paradox, hatred, evil, and blithering nonsense merely uttered as a sociopath might utter an apology without meaning a jot or tittle of it, or (2) worse to be a sincere but neurotic true believer in self refuting paradox, and puppet of hatred, a worker of evil, and a self lobotomized slave to blithering nonsense: a condition of total intellectual bankruptcy and moral chaos which, sadly, can be blamed on no one else.
Since sin darkens the intellect, if either option is true at first, after a time it would grow indistinguishable from the other option.
Aslan removes the gift of speech from the beasts who abuse that gift, and those whom the gods destroy, they first drive mad.
Liberty and Equality What
A society with ranks earned by birth and enforced by law is unequal. A society without separate laws and privileges for elites, mascots, commoners, and untouchables is equal.
Equal means being equally bearers of the stamp and image of God. It means treated under the same standards of law enforced indifferently, without favoritism, as no respecter of persons. No sane man ever speaks of human equality in any other aspect, unless perhaps you mean two women of the same dress size, or two bald men having an equal number of hairs in his scalp.
That is all the word equal means. That is all it has ever meant.
Liberty mean that nothing, internal vice nor external tyranny, keeps you from living up to the natural duties you must perform. That is all the word means.
Leftism is imposing hierarchy in the name of equality, vice and tyranny in the name of liberty. That is the truth of the question.
Leftism is anti-liberalism pretending to be a new and perfected form of liberalism, finishing the evolutionary ascent begun, but allegedly not completely by, the classical liberals of the enlightenment.
Americanism and Antiamericanism
In other to have the power to deceive, a falsehood must be mocking or mimicking a truth, or else it is not a falsehood. Lucifer must appear in the guise as an angel of light, or else no one is lured to his beauty.
In this case, the truth is that all men are created equal, and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are the right to life, the right to liberty, and the right to property.
The falsehood is that the American revolution that guarantees legal equality, but since it still allows for any differences in social prestige, wealth, or influence, therefore has not achieved true and perfect equality, which is to say, social equality.
Americanism guarantees justice, but since it still allows for unhappy acts of unfairness in hiring and firing, befriending and betraying, marrying, childrearing and patronizing and serving one another, therefore Americanism has not achieved true and perfect justice, which is to say, social justice.
Americanism guarantees security in the enjoyment of one’s property. Even the king cannot enter the hut of the poor man without a warrant from a magistrate. Likewise, the mansion of the rich man cannot be looted by the starving mob. But since Americanism still allows for one man to envy property he has not earned and to which he has no right, therefore American has not achieved the true and perfect form of property rights, which is to say, socialism.
Hence, the Left claims the title and legacy of the Liberal, by claiming that true and perfect liberty means total control of every thought, word and deed by the state; true and perfect equality means total subjection to the elite Nanny State Thought Police who will dictate the content of every human interaction, based solely on group identity; true and perfect property rights means the total abolition of property rights so that all goods and services, and all your life and your life’s work, to be under the absolute command of whatever commissars and taskmasters the Police State sees fit to impose.
Hence, the Left claims the title and legacy of the Liberal, by claiming that true and perfect liberalism is the absolute abolition of liberalism, and a return to a hierarchic system even less fair and even less tolerable that the class system and caste system of old.
A Glimpse of History
There is falsehood even in the names they hide beneath.
Leftism began in 1789 in France, and culminated in 1917 in Russia, and is the fastest spreading religion in history.
The French Revolutionaries said they were overthrowing the ancient regime in the name of liberty, equality, and fraternity, and, instead, they imposed the Terror, raised the guillotine, and elevated an Emperor, who then came within arm’s length of conquering Europe.
No greater threat to liberty, equality and fraternity had ever been. No prior conqueror had been motivated by ideology.
The monstrous & grotesque crimes committed by the revolutionaries are a matter for abnormal psychology to study.
Corpses were sexually molested to the mocking jeers of crowds. Marie Antoinette’s innocent maid, herself a loyal revolutionary, was beheaded, and the severed head was rouged and powdered and bewigged in the latest fashion, so that it could be impaled on a pike and displaying mockingly outside the bars of Mme Antoinnette’s window.
Altars were overthrown and priest slain by torture, almost as if the Left has no point nor purpose aside from attacking the Church.
The Russian Revolutionaries said they were overthrowing the ancient regime in the name of socialism, a theoretical system invented by a warped intellectual lunatic named Marx, wherein all laymen would live like monks in a monastery, sharing all property in common, until the Apocalypse of a worldwide proletarian revolt followed immediately by the New Jerusalem of a classless, leaderless, moneyless Utopia.
The Revolutionaries contemptuously abandoned all pretense at civilization, betrayed each other, butchered the royal family, including women and children, and set about killing in such astronomical numbers, that the French enormities were shamed.
Lavrentiy Beria, the Soviet head of security, had girls picked up off the street and brought to him for rape. Soviet scientist Ilia Ivanov’s attempted to create an ape-human hybrid, and idea so freakish and morbid belongs only in a science fiction horror story. Stalin organized a famine to punish small farmers and reworded his supporters with their grain. Mothers ate their children in hunger. The Leftwing New York Times won a Pulitzer Prize when their writer, Duranty, suppressed the news. And so on, with victims whose numbers are astronomical.
Altars were overthrown and priest slain by torture, almost as if the Left has no point nor purpose aside from attacking the Church.
First Objection Answered
The natural objection raised at this point is to say that Napoleon, Stalin, and Hitler did not represent true, honest, and real authentic secular leftwing utopia, and that utopia has never been tried, so no objections to utopia can be raised. The Left is not a monolithic bloc! There are good Leftists in the West, democratically inclined Leftists, who do not butcher thousands and tens of thousand of innocent souls with inhuman remorse, celebrating the crime after!
I have a one-word answer: Abortion.
Who draped New York skyscrapers in celebration when an infanticide bill was passed into law there? Not the conservatives. Not the Christians.
Like other crimes of the Left, baby killing is done in the name of the revolution, in the name of freedom, in the name of liberty, in the name of uplifting the oppressed. As if motherhood were oppression rather than the greatest glory of the human race.
Second Objection Answered
When you hear nattering wags utter the tired canard that ‘true socialism has never been tried’ you may borrow the wise words of Mr. Hans Schantz, from his book THE HIDDEN TRUTH:
“Would you say the Aztecs never practiced real human sacrifice, because they never did get their crops to grow reliably no matter how much blood they shed?”
Third Objection Answered
Again, you may hear the objection that Russian and Chinese and Indonesian and South American and Cuban and French leftists and socialist might indeed butcher men in the millions, and rape and steal and lie and lie and lie without leave or let, but that the civilized and polite and ever so honest socialists and Leftists in England and America would never, ever do such a thing.
The civilized and polite and ever so honest socialists and Leftists in England and America interred the Japanese, lynched the blacks, took the world off the gold standard, abolished private ownership of guns, and orchestrated a slow motion invasion of Christendom by a hostile paynim population, and cheer and fund Antifas, race riots, police being shot by snipers, schoolgirls being nail bombed by terrorists, and on and on.
This is a difference of tactics, not of strategy. In Russia and China and Mesoamerica before the revolutionaries seized power, they always attempted to win by stealth, deception, and misdirection, the object their powerlust craves.
True Liberty
The truth is that, the American colonists, by having a non-hereditary executive able to be demoted by vote rather than, as in the English system, by regicide, rid the common law of the vestiges of hierarchy Norman conquerors imposed on Saxon commoners to maintain the social order.
Senators came into position by appointment by the several states, rather than, as in the House of Lords, the franchise being restricted by birth.
There were other, minor tweaks, so as to maintain the independence of the judiciary and such, but the American Constitution was basically the English constitution with certain unwise infelicities corrected.
In that sense, it was not revolutionary at all.
In another sense, it was the most revolutionary revolution the world had ever seen, since at no time prior, had men ever lived in nor maintained a social order without hereditary hierarchy.
To be sure, there was still an order within the American constitutional system, but no position was inherited, and, more to the point, with one sole exception, no position in the federal government disqualified a candidate on the basis of birth. (That being that the President must be born a US Citizen to stand for the office.)
While some Leftists, including Leftists called by the name of Alt-Right, claim that the intention of the framers was that neither women nor blacks could stand for other offices in the federal government, since this is not the written, it is not the law.
The function of this non-inherited federal order was to see to the peaceful transfer of power, and quell the twin dangers from tyranny and from democracy.
This, of course, is another word never used correctly. The Founders spoke of democracy only in contempt, since a direct rule by a mob is even more prone to tyranny than an absolute monarchy.
The Theory of the Christian Commonwealth
Safeguarding the rights of the individual is nigh impossible, since there is no one to watch whatever watchmen are granted the seductive powers of coercion maker and enforcers of law, by their nature, must have.
Liberal theory says that a moral people, that is, a Christian nation can be trusted with self rule, since they will abide by the safeguards of a limited government of checks and balances, divided into a federal system of enumerated powers and written laws.
Christian gentlemen, if they are faithful, will follow and fear a God whose law is above human law, and so the need for human enforcement of daily acts of kindness and courtesy to one’s neighbors is minimized.
A Christian, in other words, can be trusted, at least somewhat, to restrain himself without the restraint of law, to keep the law and keep the peace.
He can be trusted with a firearm and with a ballot box. He will put his nation above his faction. His conscience is healthy, and must be free.
A pagan or a postchristian, on the other hand, is controlled entirely by shame, by social cues, peer pressure, public opinion, fashion, and passion. He cannot be trusted to obey the law, except when the threat of punishment is clear and near.
If he has a ballot, he will vote himself largesse out of the public coffers.
If he has a gun, he will assassinate political opponents. If even a single shot was ever fired at a president of the United States that came not from a gun in the hands of a Leftwing nut, I cannot bring it to mind.
His conscience is his enemy, and so he is at continual war with men of good will. He hates the honest for their honesty, and accused them of lies. He hates the successful for their success, and accuses them of stealing and double dealing. He hates the beautiful for their beauty, the wise for their wisdom, and the faithful for their faith.
He accuses, and accuses, and accuses, but, somehow, it is always his own flaws that he attributes to the innocent.
True Equality
There is and always will be differences in degrees of achievement in many fields: political leaders, war heroes, artistic geniuses, wealthy merchants, brilliant scientists, popular entertainers and beloved sports figures.
Success in one is no guarantor of success in another. Elvis Presley may be as wealthy as a plutocrat by the sad end of his life, but he lacks the academic achievements of Einstein. Eisenhower or Grant might parlay the medals and rank earned in war into a political career, but be poorly regarded compared to other holders of high office.
Obviously, no honest man talks about equality to mean an homogeneous identity of all human qualities, what we might call social equality. Such an idea is the stuff of nightmares, fit only for a dystopian science fiction story, such as HARRISON BERGERON by Kurt Vonnegut.
Heaven gives each man different talents and advantages at birth, or different defects, in order that those blessed with abundance in one area or talent might share, uphold and defend those not blessed.
All men are born as naked, helpless children, unable even to turn over without a gentle mother’s helping hand, to remind us that we all stand in need, and to rebuke us lest we forget to aid those who stand in more need than we.
However, talk of social equality is so commonplace that it has drowned out all rational talk of equality, leaving the word as unloved and useless as a mentally retarded and crippled orphan.
Even men otherwise wary and perceptive, are easily deceived into thinking the Leftwing definition of the word is the actual meaning, and not the opposite of the real meaning.
Many a cynical idiot declares with pompous emptyheadedness that no equality exists in nature. Cynics who idiocy is particularly acute declare with voice more pompous and heads more empty that no equality exists in any form anywhere in the universe, as no two objects are identical in all respects.
Obviously again, no object is equal to its twin unless it also differs in some respect. Since A is A, then A is not not-A. Two billiard balls similar in shape and size differ in color, even two particles with no distinguishing characteristics cannot occupy the same spot in space at the same time. And so on.
Hypocrisy not a Bug, but a Feature
But, rest assured, when the Leftist speaks of social equality in this backward, Alice-Through-the-Looking-Glass way, he in no way means a syllable of what he says, nor does he live or act as if he does.
He goes back to speaking and thinking about equality rationally the moment the particular political discussion he wanted to derail has been derailed.
If he meant it, he would have long ago sold all his possessions and given away all his worldly goods to any man who possessed less than he, lest he be unequal in wealth; nor would he use any English words a freshly arrived illegal alien would not know, lest he seem unequal in learning; nor use any braincells the slowest victim of autism cannot equally use, nor stand on any foot if even a single amputee with a pegleg cannot stand likewise, or see with eyes the blind men lack, lest he be unequal in mind or body.
Such social equality is not even a figment of hysteria. It is merely an accusation, and an insolently insincere accusation at that.
The accusation is that since the Americans eliminated kingship as a means of selecting leaders by birth, not by merit, then therefore Americans should also rob the rich and distribute his wealth to the poor, punish the successful, blind the sighted, and allow the sexual pervert the same honors of matrimony as the decent and the chaste. And also dismember the hale and blind the sighted, et cetera.
True and perfect equality, so the accusation runs, would prevent any son from inheriting even a single groat of his dead father’s wealth.
Obviously the Leftist cannot admit his real motive, for the old hierarchical social form contains an injustice born solely out of a need for the sons of conquering invaders to keep the sons of the invaded from rebellion.
A stratified class-based or caste-based society maintains privileges based on birth because of a danger that ambitious and talented children of the lowborn, if allowed upward social mobility, might achieve the power and influence high rank grants, but will have no loyalty to the ruling regime that has oppressed them and their ancestors for so many years.
The Left wishes to return to exactly that sort of society, but it is impossible to persuade free men to give up their guns and their dreams and their dignity and accept chains and fetters if the matter is stated bluntly.
The only way to do it is the very successful way the Left has been using throughout the entire modern age, since the French Revolution, if not earlier: by pretending that liberty, equality, justice, and rule of law is not enough.
Liberty, equality, justice, and rule of law are portrayed, first, as being merely awkward adolescent stages between the primitive childhood of the ancient regime, and the glorious maturity of utopia.
- Liberty will become perfected into social liberation, that is, your neighbor’s good will pay for your sins and entertainments, and his sweat fill your larder….
- Equality will become perfected into into social equality, that is, each man will share all the fruits of his success with the unsuccessful to eliminate any cause for envy…
- Justice will become perfected into social justice, so that the innocent will be condemned and the guilty exonerated, according to skin hue or group identity, not merit…
- And rule of law with become perfected into rule by an unrestricted, anarchic, irresponsible elite, answerable to none, preferably anonymous.
Mass murder will then follow, as reality will simply refuse to cooperate with the Utopian program, and the preselected pre-condemned guilty-before-birth scapegoat class will be burnt as a holocaust.
Those Who Forget the Past…
Lest any reader think these words exaggerate, I draw the reader’s attention to the events of the Twentieth Century, the two World Wars, the various depressions, recessions, and economic convulsions caused by Leftwing meddling in the market, the loss of art, the death of poetry, the degradation of motherhood, virginity, and womanhood, the endless denigration of man as merely a bald and unfit ape produced by blind chance; and more to the point, I draw the reader’s attention to the mass murders, mass expropriations, and universal regimes of irrational and unconvincing lies, lies, and more lies promoted by the Left after their beloved spokesman, Nietzsche, in 1882 declared God to be dead.
My fellow Christians, and I myself for many a year, believed the great mass of Leftists to be sincere if mistaken in their belief that war was peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance was strength.
May God forgive us our naivety.
The victims of these endless lies might indeed be fooled, at least during their youth, especially considering how carefully the Left has maneuvered itself into positions of monopoly in the fields of entertainment, news reporting, teaching, and on and on.
But the perpetrators of the fraud cannot be unaware of the obvious.
A schoolboy with one semester of economics can see all the flaws in socialism. A child can see that is it unfair to condemn the innocent based on race or group identity. Any rational man can see that justice cannot mean injustice, equality cannot be tyranny, rule of law cannot mean the abolition of law.
An idiot can see when rich and successful people in America pretend to be American Indians, or pretend to be Negroes, or pretend to be the victims of oppression and unfair treatment, when they are the wealthiest, most pampered, and most privileged creatures in all human history, that this is wrong and disgusting.
Such yearning for victimhood as a red badge of courage is an insult to those who have ever suffered real victimhood. It is moreover a double insult to anyone who cherishes honesty, because now he must be chary of his own charity, lest he be bamboozled.
Ideology is Idolatry
As I said, even otherwise wary and alert conservatives blithely accept Leftwing vocabulary and Leftwing Newspeak, and so become unable to articulate any defense of altruism, equality, liberty, or rule of law. They regard themselves as defective because they have no ideology.
Fools. Ideology is the defect.
Ideology is what crippled men who flee Christ find to fill the void left behind by a rejection of the moral order of the universe and the meaning of life.
Ideology is an ersatz religion, a substitute, a mockery: a hired harlot or perhaps a dingy blow up doll used by the desperate who wish for the joys of the marriage bed, but have no wife to love or to be loved by.
After a century of unambiguous results, no one can honestly believe socialism will work the next time it is tried, provided we merely butcher more innocent people, and kill more priests and pastors.
Of course they know their arguments are garbage, and their evidence testifies against them. That is why not a single Leftist left make arguments, or proffers evidence, or attempts any rational discussion to persuade the undecided.
Instead, the accuse the undecided of being bigots, either racists, or haters of those afflicted with sexual disorders, or haters of woman, or (ironically) haters of the Jew.
Chaos
The chaos, the murders, the lies, the breakdown of society, the race riots, the poverty, the misery, and the hatred they spread are not accidents, and they are not unintentional side effects of a theory that is sincerely held but simply wrong.
Chaos is the theory. It is the point. It is the goal.
A Leftist who actually cared about greenhouse gas emissions would promote nuclear power plants. But an energy shortage, an oil crisis, is the goal. Lack of energy in merely one of many factors mean to produce a permanent state of poverty produces a wealth gap between rich and poor; this in turn renders the poor helpless and unable to imagine rebellion.
The minimum wage laws likewise add to the factors encouraging a permanent poverty class, as does union thuggery, and high crime rates.
Surely you did not honestly think the Left hate cops because they love the criminals? They hate cops because they need the poor to be suffering continual crime. It helps keep them poor and dependent.
Likewise, a Leftist who honestly wished the best for woman would hate and denounce and oppose the Shariah laws, whose practice demotes women, and makes them vulnerable to the most grotesque and crippling mistreatment of any group anywhere on earth. Likewise, for any Leftist who honestly wished the best for sexual deviants. Under Shariah, they are executed, not cured.
But, in the current generation, the Mohammedans are more useful as a tool to erode Western civilization, toppling skyscrapers and conquering London and so on, by creating endless chaos, than any other group: so they occupy a privileged position in Leftwing regard.
Likewise, a Leftist who honestly felt even the smallest drop of compassion for the poor would be a more ardent Capitalist than Ayn Rand. The events of the last three centuries make it plain for anyone with eyes to see what lifts the poor out of poverty.
The accusation of the Left is that America’s wealth is due to her legacy of slavery. This is a goofy accusation, and it makes no sense even on its own terms. By that logic, since slavery has made a comeback in Africa and Southeast Asia, these regions should be burgeoning with wealth, instead of sliding surely into chaos.
Slavery produces wealth very poorly compared to the free market: the Old South was economically backward compared to the free and industrialized North, and since the Southern generalship and fighting spirit was in all respect superior to the Yankee, it is the Union’s economic superiority, nothing else, which lost the war for the Confederates.
Slavery, and the moral and economic weakness slavery produces spelled the doom of the slaveholding Confederates. There is irony.
And so on for all Leftwing policies. Once you see the pattern, you cannot not see it.
Nothing but Accusations
Nothing is actually meant to accomplish what it says it sets out to do. None of it is real. It is all just talk, or, rather, shrieking accusation.
Since the accusations actually contradict each other, none of them can be taken at face value.
If a conservative is a misogynist for saying that femininity is innate to women, then he cannot also be a transphobe for denying that a eunuch with silicon boobs attached to his nipples is barred by birth from being feminine. If a conservative is a homophobe for saying homosexuality is a choice, not a genetic fate, he cannot also be a binarian bigot for saying there are only two sexes, established by one’s genetics, a matter not open to choice. If a conservative is a jingo for saying his motherland is worthy of patriotism and love rather than a racist hellhole, then he cannot also be a xenophobe for wanting to exclude illegal aliens of trespassing into such a hellhole and suffering such racism.
Conclusion
Liberalism seeks to undo the liberal world order established after the post-Reformation monarchic theory of divine right to rule lost all credibility.
What they want is an elite, backed by a class of loyal mascots, ruling poor and wretched peasants who have no rights and no dreams, and with a jackboot eternally stamping on the faces of a class of untouchables, scapegoats forever blamed for all ills.
What they want is for God to be dead, and themselves on His throne. Their hero is the Father of Lies. Alinsky, author of RULES FOR RADICALS, their gospel, dedicated his book to him.
No wonder they are liars.
About John C Wright
John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title.
