August 5, 2017

Latter-day Leftist Lunacy

It's yet another indication of these morally inverted times that I find myself moved to write about the lunacy of those who espouse the 'left' side of the political spectrum. By left, I refer of course to those concepts considered liberal and socially progressive. 
Those concepts used to sound noble, even self-evidently so. Now they require ironic quotes to denote their new degeneracy as expressed by the current crop of rabid practitioners.

Once, I even wrote an essay denouncing conservatives as fearful and reactive. Today, I have to acknowledge the 'right' as exhibiting common sense in a world of suicidal progressives. Every day brings new examples of the insanity of the left. And like all insane entities, they're not even aware of their sickness. No, they're convinced in the justness of their cockamamie causes, and oblivious to their inherent contradictions.

The left believe in 'diversity,' all the while doing everything possible that will erase diversity! They want to fling open the doors of their nations to an inflow of immigrants from all over the world, but especially, these days, from the Islamic countries. This will diversify the indigenous cultures, they proclaim. They also encourage inter-marriage among all the diverse cultures, races, ethnicities, etc, in the interests of 'diversity.' However, they can't extrapolate their reasoning to its logical conclusion, which is that, over time, everyone would be absorbed into a multicultural mish-mash in which few diverse characteristics survive.

If we look at Europe, we see the rapid disappearance of the very ethnicities that made Europe what it was-- a collection of homogenous societies, each with its unique language, traditions, religions, shared beliefs, national characteristics, music, literature, and so on. The first step in dismantling all of this diversity was the creation and imposition of the economic union, which culminated in the present EU.

In the EU, the individual sovereign nations gave up their national currency to adopt the 'euro.' The euro currency was imposed regardless of the large differences in the strength of the local economies (but that's a story in itself). As trade barriers came down (which sounds like a benefit) and movement of citizens across borders became freer, there began a mingling of cultures. But said mingling, and 'necessary' uniform supra-national laws, were also accompanied, inevitably, by a dilution of each individual culture... the uniqueness of each country began disappearing (at a faster pace than it had already, under the all-pervasive influence of proliferating Americanism).

Whether individual European ethnicities would survive the growing homogeneity of the EU in the long run became a moot point when the Brussels parliament decided to throw open the gates of immigration to a flood of so-called refugees from the Muslim world. Today the question is not whether French or German or Italian or Swedish culture will continue to exist in some identifiable fashion. No; now one wonders if Europe will endure at all as its former collection of Caucasian countries, or will it become a racially hybridized outpost of Islam.

While I've always prided my country on its overt multiculturalism, I now realize that such a society can only cohere peacefully under ideal conditions. Those conditions presume for granted a stable economy that provides decent jobs for the great majority; a common set of social norms and values accepted by all the diverse sub-cultures; a balance in the numbers or 'social weight' of the main ethnic groups, along with tolerance of the special interest groups that may exist. If any of those factors becomes aberrant or shaky in some way, then the multicultural mix can become unstable, if not explosive.

In countries where multiculturalism seems to work, it's usually because the society is dominated by one 'group' whose outlook and values are accepted as standard by all new-comers and minorities. And, no special interest group exerts disproportionate influence over the collective. Once you get an influx reaching critical mass, of immigrants with significantly different ideas from the 'indigenous majority,' things can rapidly deteriorate. This is exactly what is happening in Europe as thousands of migrants from the middle East and North Africa flood into the EU bringing their jihadist Islamic zealotry which they don't even try to disguise.

In the quirky logic of the neo-left, every special interest group deserves all the rights of the 'majority' (however that is defined). What happens when one group wants rights that oppose the rights of another group? In practice, of course, this formula just doesn't work; which is exactly what we've been seeing since at least the eight-year Obama regime. How can, say, Christians have religious freedom when they're forced to acknowledge 'marriages' between same-sex (or the various trans-gender 'identities') couples, against their beliefs?

Note that it's not a matter of the majority simply tolerating the rights of a minority. No, they must be compelled to place the minority's rights above their own! Something has to give; and for 'whatever' reason, it's almost always the majority or the traditional member(s) that are forced to defer to the minority.

Democracy originally meant that the majority held sway, even if by the narrowest margin. That's how most 'democratic' elections are conducted. Now, the left refers to 'liberal democracy' when talking politics. Apparently, in liberal democracies, the majority no longer rules but must accommodate itself to the desires of every group that can capture the attention of the media.

In the leftist paradigm, the majority is identified as the enemy (the white, European, 'power-holders') who must be stripped of their influence and even wealth. In the USA, every possible 'evil' (i.e. perceived social slight) identified by the hyper-sensitive leftists is immediately attributed to the 'white majority,' even by ideologically programmed caucasians themselves. It's the same suicidal racism that is unfolding in Europe.

In Planet-Left, the tail wags the dog, where the tail represents some bleating minority with a good sense of PR, and the dog is the hound of civil society. Problem is, there are many tails to this bedraggled canine; they all want to wag this dog in a separate way. It's a formula that clearly must result in chaos... and that's what we're seeing!

One of the primary, lethal weapons of the neo-left is political correctness, just as in the old Soviet Union. Anyone who dares to point out the inconsistencies and sheer foolishness of the progressive agenda is attacked as a reactionary social pariah, and under relentless media censure, soon serves to illustrate to the populace what can and cannot be stated and what views are now acceptable. By such means, liberalism has completely subverted Western society in the span of a generation.

It was all done before, in the late, great USSR, in the guise of Communism. The same social poison is again being administered, this time to the USA and its Western flunkies. It always sounds so good-- we're all going to be 'equal,' all given a basic monthly income, all given free health-care, and we'll all live happily ever after. People may give up the fairy tales of childhood only to embrace new adult fairy tales sold to them by the invisible matrix that hides in plain sight!

Sadly, there is, practically speaking, no way to reverse this descent into madness, chaos, and final destruction. The reason I can be so categorical is because changing the direction of society (especially after a couple generations who've been programmed in one way) would necessitate the stating of bare, harsh, and by now unbelievable, truth. And that is essentially impossible; we have hard-wired the mechanisms of our destruction. How would the corporate media suddenly start telling truth when all they've ever done is tell lies? Who would dare be the first to tell truths in a miasma of endemic deception? How could a population fed lies all their lives suddenly accept the myth-busting truth?

No society can survive when truth has become anathema, as it has in the modern, Western world. It's been said that 'the truth hurts;' and today's coddled neo-lib generation can't tolerate anything that hurts, be it physical, emotional, political, or moral. They preach tolerance for all kinds of perversions, but not for anyone who speaks truth to their delusions.

And so we've come to the point where no one (of influence) can speak the truth publicly about climate change; about Muslim immigration; about the 'LGBTQ+++ community;' about US aggression world-wide; about the risk of WW3; about looming ecological catastrophe; and on it goes. Consequently, policy decisions continue to be made on the basis of pure nonsense and falsehood, in every area that matters, with unavoidable, ultimately disastrous results. That those results have not yet manifested in everyone's lives doesn't mean that they will never happen-- this is what the vast masses are oblivious to.

Aye, we've slid too far down the slippery slope to be able to scramble back up to sanity. As virtue is its own reward, so is folly its own consequence. Tant pis, as the French put it. The only question that matters now is, how long will it be before the explosion; before the real violence begins?

No comments:

Post a Comment