Why is it the right’s duty to eradicate the left?
This essay by Daniel Greenfield explains why the right, in this constitutional republic, has a duty to eradicate the left. He may not explain how this eradication be fulfilled. That is left unanswered like a giant elephant in the room.
A civil war has begun.
This civil war is very different than the last one. There are no cannons or cavalry charges. The left doesn’t want to secede. It wants to rule. Political conflicts become civil wars when one side refuses to accept the existing authority. The left has rejected all forms of authority that it doesn’t control.
The left has rejected the outcome of the last two presidential elections won by Republicans. It has rejected the judicial authority of the Supreme Court when it decisions don’t accord with its agenda. It rejects the legislative authority of Congress when it is not dominated by the left.
It rejected the Constitution so long ago that it hardly bears mentioning.
It was for total unilateral executive authority under Obama. And now it’s for states unilaterally deciding what laws they will follow. (As long as that involves defying immigration laws under Trump, not following them under Obama.) It was for the sacrosanct authority of the Senate when it held the majority. Then it decried the Senate as an outmoded institution when the Republicans took it over.
It was for Obama defying the orders of Federal judges, no matter how well grounded in existing law, and it is for Federal judges overriding any order by Trump on any grounds whatsoever. It was for Obama penalizing whistleblowers, but now undermining the government from within has become “patriotic”.
There is no form of legal authority that the left accepts as a permanent institution. It only utilizes forms of authority selectively when it controls them. But when government officials refuse the orders of the duly elected government because their allegiance is to an ideology whose agenda is in conflict with the President and Congress, that’s not activism, protest, politics or civil disobedience; it’s treason.
After losing Congress, the left consolidated its authority in the White House. After losing the White House, the left shifted its center of authority to Federal judges and unelected government officials. Each defeat led the radicalized Democrats to relocate from more democratic to less democratic institutions.
This isn’t just hypocrisy. That’s a common political sin. Hypocrites maneuver within the system. The left has no allegiance to the system. It accepts no laws other than those dictated by its ideology.
Democrats have become radicalized by the left. This doesn’t just mean that they pursue all sorts of bad policies. It means that their first and foremost allegiance is to an ideology, not the Constitution, not our country or our system of government. All of those are only to be used as vehicles for their ideology.
That’s why compromise has become impossible.
Our system of government was more
ht/ nm
Daniel Greenfield hits it out of the park again! What do we do about it, indeed.
“The left is a treasonous movement”
The left is a suicide pact. This is an awesome article.
This article got lots of attention here (this item plus two bull pen submissions) and I hope it will make a big splash all over. I am hopeful, perhaps too hopeful, that some Democrats will read this and it will give them pause and prod them into actually thinking about where they are heading.
It would be an awesome article if he completes his thoughts. He stops short of explaining what has to be done.
The “Progressive”, “Liberal”, “Leftist” or “Democrat” belief systems in America today are non other than the “-isms” of the past – Communism, Socialism and Fascism.
They unhitched themselves from the Constitution in the early to late ’60s and have infected Academics, Media, Religion, Politics and even Science.
They no longer hide in the shadows, but proudly and aggressively pursue their agenda in the open.
The question is: What do you do when you identify your neighbors, co-workers and other personal contacts as such? How do you “eradicate” these belief systems at this level?
The left is preparing by bringing as many islamist soldiers as they can to fight on their side. They know they are outmatched and need them to bolster their ranks.
Until we take back the education system this is a moot argument. Kids are being brainwashed into socialist group think by silver ponytail hippies, some of whom have shorn their hippie style and appear mainstream.
Andrew Breitbart also insisted that pop culture needed to be taken back, but never really expounded upon a plan as to how to do that. That’s a tough one. I don’t participate in it, but that puts me in the minority.
No easy answers to this, as the left has been on a mission for 100 years.
F A S C I S M & T O T A L I T A R I A N I S M
the new Democrat party
Today’s left are today’s “Royalists” of revolutionary war days. We expelled them after the war, but failed to realize we should deport them after every census as the mental disorder still keeps cropping up. This idiots want a “Crown” to take care of them and grant them a few things now and then.
Of course, we can’t expel or kill them. But, if we reversed the leftist trends in the military and granted ONLY veterans the right to vote, the rest of us could just come here to trade BarBQ recopies because the country would take care of itself.
@PHenry – 100 years, indeed! While there’s no specific date to the start of this as a deliberate socialist effort, a convenient one is the 1884 founding of the Fabian Society in Britain.
“Democrats have become radicalized by the left.”
And the Republicans have become radicalized by the Democrats.
The game of ‘ignore the Constitution’ is and has been the game of the land for over 100 years.
And this is why Militia memberships are up 250% in the last couple years.
I read Aynnd’s book Anthem while a junior in high school back in 1978. It was required reading.
The prologue has stayed with me all these years and is as valid now as it was when the USSR was a formidable advisory and Communism seemed to be accending worldwide. After the collapse of the USSR in 1991, and communism in general, we have been lulled into a sense of complacency as the Left. like termites, bored into our institutions.
The first paragraphs talk about the story is general.I particularly like the last paragraphs as they as valid today as they were in 1946.
Author’s Foreword
Ayn Rand
This story was written in 1937.
I have edited it for this publication, but have confined the editing to its style; I have reworded some passages and cut out some excessive language. No idea or incident was added or omitted; the theme, content and structure are untouched. The story remains as it was. I have lifted its face, but not its spine or spirit; these did not need lifting.
Some of those who read the story when it was first written, told me that I was unfair to the ideals of collectivism; this was not, they said, what collectivism preaches or intends; collectivists do not mean or advocate such things; nobody advocates them.
I shall merely point out that the slogan “Production for use and not for profit” is now accepted by most men as commonplace, and a commonplace stating a proper, desirable goal. If any intelligible meaning can be discerned in that slogan at all, what is it, if not the idea that the motive of a man’s work must be the needs of others, not his own need, desire or gain?
Compulsory labor conscription is now practiced or advocated in every country on earth. What is it based on, if not the idea that the state is best qualified to decide where a man can be useful to others, such usefulness being the only consideration, and that his own aims, desires, or happiness should be ignored as of no importance?
We have Councils of Vocations, Councils of Eugenics, every possible kind of Council, including a World Council—and if these do not as yet hold total power over us, is it from lack of intention?
“Social gains,” “social aims,” “social objectives” have become the daily bromides of our language. The necessity of a social justification for all activities and all existence is now taken for granted. There is no proposal outrageous enough but what its author can get a respectful hearing and approbation if he claims that in some undefined way it is for “the common good.”
Some might think—though I don’t—that nine years ago there was some excuse for men not to see the direction in which the world was going. Today, the evidence is so blatant that no excuse can be claimed by anyone any longer. Those who refuse to see it now are neither blind nor innocent.
The greatest guilt today is that of people who accept collectivism by moral default; the people who seek protection from the necessity of taking a stand, by refusing to admit to themselves the nature of that which they are accepting; the people who support plans specifically designed to achieve serfdom, but hide behind the empty assertion that they are lovers of freedom, with no concrete meaning attached to the word; the people who believe that the content of ideas need not be examined, that principles need not be defined, and that facts can be eliminated by keeping one’s eyes shut. They expect, when they find themselves in a world of bloody ruins and concentration camps, to escape moral responsibility by wailing: “But I didn’t mean this!”
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead.
They must face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.
—AYN RAND.
April, 1946
sorry for the typos
Don’t forget the RINOS
You all ask: “WHAT IS THE END GAME?”
Read the Declaration of Independence. Then, dig DEEP into your Jefferson, Madison and Sun Tzu.
I copied from this blog or one of the others I judiciously read. If this excerpt is YOURS, please stand up and claim proud credit:
“The Left is doing what Lenin counseled: “Probe with the bayonet. If you meet steel, withdraw; if you meet flesh, continue.”
“Leftist disruptors have steadily escalated their tactics deeper toward outright violence, without evoking a matched reaction from either the forces of order or the common citizenry. Our passivity has persuaded their strategists that there will be no such reaction. Their next step should be obvious.”
“So the only outcome is that one side wins and the other loses. There’s no truce to be had, no possibility of a tie. And the frightening thing is that the Left is so foolish, so stuck in its bubble that it has no understanding that it can only push so far before the people with all the guns and all the training push back.”
When in a war, be on the side with the guns.
Maybe a bit more succinctly stated: History WILL repeat itself.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. ~ Thomas Jefferson