Tag Archives: liberal

The Failure Of The Progressive Dream

Intelligent people going back thousands of years have returned again and again to desiring a particular type of leader: The Philosopher King.

Some leaders have actually tried to embody Plato’s Kallipolisian ideal, including Marcus Aurelius of Rome and Matthias Corvinus of Hungary and Croatia, not just by being super-intelligent, but by studying and applying the craft of leadership, the ideas and ideals of kingship and stewardship.

The problem with the idea of a Philosopher King though is each of us, from the brightest to the dullest, are as human as every other, and a Philosopher King would be as prone to human failings as you and I.

This humanity-chained Hercules of the mind came to full and ugly fruition in the Progressive dreams of the 20th century, and bloodbaths resulted.

Like most of us, Progressives and Leftists want to fix things. The problem with their root ideology though is that they believe mankind can be perfected. They believe that when social problems are done away with, a new and perfect humanity will take over. They believe the heart of the problem is in the System, and that fixing the System will free our basic goodness.

This was the dream of Marxists, Communists, and Socialists.

The problem with this dream is how to apply it, how to bring it about.

Seeing the squabbling ineffectiveness of the democratic republic in the US and various constitutional monarchies such as the United Kingdom, governments going nowhere fast, Progressives knew they needed efficiency and efficacy in their perfect transition government, and that means one person at the top, and knowing the impenetrable corruption of the true monarchies of Europe, they needed a true believer who would use the perfect power of being the one person in charge to bring about the transition to progressive perfection.

They needed a Philosopher King, with the intelligence and will to rule mankind into utopia. They needed someone who was already on the other side to pull the rest of us over.

This combination of the Philosopher King and the progressive view of a perfected mankind is toxic 100% of the time.

The belief that mankind can be perfected makes the idea of a single person holding ultimate acceptable, given that person appears already perfected. The wrongness of the idea that mankind can be perfected means this will fail every time.

This is what happened in Russia, in China, and even in Germany. Progressives around the world, including in the US were enamored of all these regimes when they began, because they agreed with the root goal of each of them, the perfection of mankind.

Whether the progressives were useful idiots, manipulated by  lofty words and high goals, or whether the leaders began as true believers is immaterial: The siren call of a perfected mankind is hard to resist for someone who holds this false view.

Conservatives have generally held a view quite contrary to progressives, that man is not perfect and cannot be made perfect under their effort or the effort of any other person. This is the root disagreement between progressives and conservatives.

When you recognize that humans are incapable of perfection, you create and support systems that decentralize power, that create tension internally so that competing groups each with different sorts of power will keep each other in check.

Systems like a republican government or a government governed by a Constitution all hold the people comprising them to an external standard which is to be applied equally to all, regardless of power or money.

While we’re in no such dream state today, the squabbling ineptitude of Washington DC does serve its purpose, and the Constitution still holds us to an achievable dream, not of human-kind’s perfection, but of the ability to live free of those who would seek to perfect us but would destroy us in the process.

Featured Image Credit: WildCulture: Francis Fukuyama: Political Order & Political Decay

Harvey Milk: Sexual Predator

stampSome have said that my reality-based assessment of Harvey Milk is “uncivil.” Our historical revisionist friends on the left tend to get a bit snooty when you publicly deconstruct one of their meticulously fabricated mythical martyrs.

I find that odd. To me, even the mere notion of elevating, to hero status, a man who statutorily raped teenage boys, is what’s uncivil.

Read the rest at World Tribune.

The United States of (Conservative) America

Liberalism/Socialism is a failed philosophy, from it’s do-something-diseased adherents to it’s lack of accomplishments besides the enslavement of entire populations and the beating down of everything good and beautiful and worthwhile.

And here’s more proof:

Good, Good, Good, Good Intentions!

I’ll take socio-political philosophies for 400, Alex.

“Tried in just the US of A for over 70 years and still hasn’t succeeded any better than it did anywhere else, though it had significantly more resources and better minds here than anywhere else.”

What are social welfare programs?

The reasoning for minimum wage, social security, and Fannie Mae–all programs of the 1930s–was similar: Let’s use government to help people get higher wages, have money for retirement, and buy houses. The intentions were good and Americans bought the good intentions and ended up with broken programs and high taxes. After that, some Americans wanted more government programs to save us from the previous government programs. And so on. Seventy-five years later most of those original programs are still around sucking the wealth of the nation, and Americans are left with less liberty and higher taxes.

(The Tyranny of Good Intentions)

Money, Money, Money, Must Be Funny, In A Rich Man’s World!

Pass The Check!

Liberal leaders in California are realizing they can’t have their cake and eat it too. The world doesn’t operate according to their wet dreams, it operates according to timeless and inescapable laws against which there is no protest.

For 15 years (Los Angeles Mayor) Villaraigosa was an organizer for the Service Employees International Union and the city’s teachers’ union. Now he is trying to cope with, and partially undo, largesse for unionized public employees: “I have to sign the checks on the front, not just the back.”

(Former Los Angeles Mayor Richard) Riordan and (investment advisor Alexander) Rubalcava say two numbers—8 percent and 5,000—define the city’s crisis. L.A. has conveniently but unrealistically assumed 8 percent annual growth of the assets of the city’s pension funds. The two main funds’ actual growth over the last decade have been 3.5 percent and 2.8 percent. And Villaraigosa added 5,000 people to the city’s payroll in his first term.

(George Will: Nightmare Numbers in LA)

And When You Go To Arizona, Be Sure To Wear Your Tanning Lotion There!

People who think that the strong immigration enforcement laws recently passed in Arizona are unpopular and unconscionable need a fact check.

Even in the liberal mecca of Massachusetts, 70% of people favor a ban on government benefits for illegal immigrants.

Yes, America was founded by immigrants. Our fathers and grandfathers were immigrants. But they were legal immigrants, going through the systems and structures, such as they were, for normalization, naturalization, and citizenship.

There is a system, however broken, for citizenship. And if there are problems with the system, let’s fix it. But to allow scofflaws and criminals to benefit from the nation they refuse to honor and respect confounds reason. And to encourage such outlaw behavior even by otherwise law-abiding and peaceful people does not engender respect or love or other such feelings we hope to develop in those who wish to sow their seed in the fertile soils of the United States of America.

On Government

UPDATE: This was not from Honest Abe.

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.

Lax credit and easy spending policies are products of both Democrat and Republican leaderships in years past. The conservative movement has recognized the failures of this more so than their compatriots in the liberal movement. Calls for the privatization of Fannie and Freddie, two of the main contributors to the whole system of easy credit, are not likely to be heeded by the current elected leadership in Washington D.C. And Fed Chairman Bernanke believes such easy credit is the best policy, despite it’s contribution to the economic failures of the last several years.

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.

Political correctness is losing favor across the ideological aisles. This false equality of outcome which relies on enforced restrictions on true equality, that is, the equality of potential, has been a pernicious evil in our country. But other perniciously evil policies continue to thrive here. Policies that drag down those who have achieved in order to not unnecessarily burden those who will not achieve with that natural and good desire to become something other than the abject failures. Except that’s not right, you can only fail if you’ve started at something. Many of these haven’t started anything and therefore aren’t failures but worse. Any system that encourages people in any way to remain nothings is evil for it robs them of their humanity as surely as Nazi extermination program robbed so many of their humanity.

You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.

In that iconic moment when Joe the Plumber‘s question drew out then Senator Obama‘s statement that we need to spread the wealth around, it revealed a misunderstanding of economic systems that time has not changed. If you want to grow jobs, you make it easier for companies to make and keep money. If you take what they make for your own wealth redistribution programs and to “spread it around” you hurt not just the business you wanted to stick it to, but all its employees and potential employees as well. This isn’t rocket science.

You cannot further the brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred.

Ever since FDR, liberal leaders have been adept at pitting class against class. There is no inherent nobility in the individual man whose mind and heart must be won. There is only the group, the LGBT, the blacks, the whites, the lower class, the middle class, the upper class, the “them”, the “us”, the hispanics, the wage earners, the corporations, the haves, the have-nots. Targeted fiscal policy meant to assuage the ire of a particular class are unconstitutional as they do not benefit every American equally, which is a requirement of federal policy. It’s vote-buying and favor peddling. And the result is a torn and fragmented society beset by such tensions within it cannot unify to address situations without.

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.

The poor will always be among us. This doesn’t free us from a responsibility to assist them. Instead it requires we develop consistent and repeatable patterns of assistance with several criteria. There must be a filter that prevents moochers and freeloaders from taking resources that would be better appreciated and taken advantage of by those deserving poor. And the money for such charity must be given willingly, not taken without recourse. A rich man who does not give to charity only illumines the shallowness of his own soul. He does not deserve theft of his goods, only the scorn of society.

You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn.

This is a failure of nearly everybody in leadership in Washington D.C. and a result of an uncareful electorate who do not take real pains to determine the true character of the candidate or who believe that character doesn’t matter.

You cannot build character and courage by taking away man’s initiative and independence.

Just as by helping a butterfly escape it’s chrysalid prison you doom it to a short, painful life and quick, ugly death, by taking away the responsibilities of a person or natural societal group, you end up with stunted and immature people who will continue all the ills aformentioned.

You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.

There are few things more evil than to do for someone else what they are capable of doing themselves. Particularly when they are not in dire need and what they need to accomplish is a task that would encourage or build in them traits of character not already full-fledged in their being.

Enhanced by Zemanta

If…

A Liberal: He's offended and it's my fault.

If a conservative doesnt like guns, he doesnt buy one.
If a liberal doesnt like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesnt eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands everyone know it and demands legislative action!

If a black man or Hispanic is conservative, they see themselves as independent and successful.
Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders what government program is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesnt like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they dont like be shut down (the so-called Fairness Doctrine for example).

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesnt go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his through the government.

If conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.
If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like hes in labor, and then sues.

If a conservative reads this, hell forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because hes offended.

Thanks to IronicSurrealism for this email forward.

AskMen.com has a short article about why we get offended and what we ought to do about it (Caution: AskMen.com has some small images of scantily clad women if you don’t have ad-blocking software in your browser). Here are some of their solutions, read the whole article for their explanations and more solutions:

Find a middle ground to react
Read things in context
Have a sense of humor about it
Ignore it