[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Satans Mark/Cashless Title: We Have Officially Reached Peak Leftism If it seems to you that the Left has, collectively, lost its damned mind as the curtain rises on the last act of the Obama administration, you are not imagining things. Barack Obama has been extraordinarily successful in his desire to — what was that phrase? — fundamentally transform the country, but the metamorphosis is nonetheless a good deal less than his congregation wanted and expected. We may have gone from being up to our knees in welfare- statism to being up to our hips in it, and from having a bushel of banana- republic corruption and incompetence to having a bushel and a peck of it, but the United States of America remains, to the Left’s dismay, plainly recognizable as herself beneath the muck. Ergo, madness and rage. We have seen an extraordinary outburst of genuine extremism — and genuine authoritarianism — in the past several months, and it will no doubt grow more intense as we approach the constitutional dethroning of the mock messiah to whom our progressive friends literally sang hymns of praise and swore oaths of allegiance. (“I pledge to be a servant to our president” — recall all that sieg heil creepiness.) There is an unmistakable stink of desperation about this, as though the Left intuits what the Right dares not hope: that the coming few months may in fact see progressivism’s cultural high-water mark for this generation. If there is desperation, it probably is because the Left is starting to suspect that the permanent Democratic majority it keeps promising itself may yet fail to materialize. The Democrats won two resounding White House victories but can hardly win a majority in a state legislature (seven out of ten today are Republican-controlled) or a governorship (the Democrats are down to 18) to save their lives, while Republicans are holding their strongest position in Congress since the days of Herbert Hoover. The Democrats have calculated that their best bet in 2016 is Hillary Rodham Clinton, that tragic bag of appetites who couldn’t close the deal in the primary last time around. “Vote for me, I’m a lady” isn’t what they thought it was: Wendy Davis, running for governor of Texas, made all the proper ceremonial incantations and appeared in heroic postures on all the right magazine covers, but finished in the 30s on Election Day. With young people trending pro-life, that old black magic ain’t what it used to be. For the Left, it feels like time is running out. So it isn’t sufficient that same-sex marriages be legalized; bakers and florists must be locked in prison if they decline to participate in a gay couple’s ceremony. It isn’t sufficient that those wishing to undergo sex-change surgery be permitted to go their own way; the public must pay for it, and if Bruce Jenner is still “Bruce” to you, you must be driven from polite society. It isn’t enough that the Left dominate the media and pop culture; any attempt to compete with it must be criminalized in the name of “getting big money out of politics.” Not the New York Times’s money, or Hollywood’s money, or the CEO of Goldman Sachs’s money — just the wrong sort of people’s money. Every major Democratic presidential candidate and every Democratic senator is on record supporting the repeal of the First Amendment’s free-speech protections — i.e., carving the heart out of the Bill of Rights — to clear the way for putting all public debate under political discipline. Like it or not, you will be shackled to hope and change. The hysterical shrieking about the fictitious rape epidemic on college campuses, the attempts to fan the unhappy events in Ferguson and Baltimore into a national racial conflagration, the silly and shallow “inequality” talk — these are signs of progressivism in decadence. So is the brouhaha over the Confederate flag in South Carolina in the wake of the horrific massacre at Emanuel AME Church. For about 30 seconds, the political ghouls of the Left were looking to pick another gun-control fight, swooping in, in their habitually indecent fashion, before the bodies had even grown cold. But that turned out to be a dead end, since the killer acquired his gun after passing precisely the sort of background check that the Left generally hawks after a high-profile crime, regardless of whether it is relevant to the crime. We might have spent some time thinking about whether law enforcement was too lax in the matter of the murderer’s earlier encounters with them — the South Carolina killer had a drug arrest on his record but was able to buy a gun because he had been charged only with a misdemeanor. But the Left isn’t in any mood to talk about whether the cops aren’t being hard-assed enough. So, instead, we had a fight over a completely unrelated issue: the Confederate flag flying at the state capitol in Columbia. You have to credit the Left: Its strategy is deft. If you can make enough noise that sounds approximately like a moral crisis, then you can in effect create a moral crisis. Never mind that the underlying argument — “Something bad has happened to somebody else, and so you must give us something we want!” — is entirely specious; it is effective. In the wake of the financial crisis, we got all manner of “reform,” from student-lending practices to the mandates of Elizabeth Warren’s new pet bureaucracy, involving things that had nothing at all to do with the financial crisis. Democrats argued that decency compelled us to pass a tax increase in the wake of the crisis, though tax rates had nothing to do with it. A crisis is a crisis is a crisis, and if a meteor hits Ypsilanti tomorrow you can be sure that Debbie Stabenow will be calling for a $15 national minimum wage because of the plight of meteor victims. I bear no brief for the peckerwood-trash cultural tendencies that led Fritz Hollings, then governor, and the rest of the loyal Democrats who ran segregation-era South Carolina to hoist the Confederate flag in 1962. My sympathies are more with John Brown than with John Calhoun. Yet Lost Cause romanticism was very much in fashion for a moment, and not only among Confederate revanchists; Joan Baez, no redneck she, made a great deal of money with her recording of “The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down” in 1971. About every third Western of the era had as its hero a conflicted Confederate veteran, his wounded honor and stoicism in defeat compelling him to roam westward in search of a new beginning. That story lives on into our own time: Who are Mal Reynolds and the Browncoats if not another remnant of the Lost Cause relocated from Virginia to the frontier in space? Of course the Confederate flag is a symbol of Southern racism. It is a good many other things, too, none of which was the cause of the massacre at Emanuel AME. It is strange and ironic that adherents of the Democratic party — which was, for about 140 years, not only the South’s but the world’s leading white-supremacist organization — should work themselves up over one flag, raised by their fellow partisans, at this late a date; but, well, welcome to the party. Yet Democratic concern about racist totems is selective: The Democrats are not going to change the name of their party, cancel the annual Jefferson-Jackson dinner, or stop naming things after Robert Byrd, senator and Exalted Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan. Hillary Clinton is not going to be made to answer for her participation in a political campaign that featured Confederate-flag imagery. The Confederate flag, and other rebel iconography, is a marker of Southern distinctiveness, which, like American distinctiveness, is inextricably bound up with the enslavement and oppression of black people. But only the South is irredeemable in the Left’s view, and it has been so only since about 1994, when it went Republican. Which is to say, the Confederate flag is an emblem of regional distinctiveness disapproved of by 21st-century Democrats. Their reinvigorated concern is awfully nice: When the South actually was a segregationist backwater that African-Americans were fleeing by the million — when Democrats were running the show — they were ho-hum. Today the South is an economic powerhouse, dominated by Republicans, and attracting new African-American residents by the thousands. And so the Left and its creature, the Democratic party, insist that Southern identity as such must be anathematized. The horrific crime that shocked the nation notwithstanding, black life in Charleston remains very different, in attractive ways, from black life in such Left-dominated horror shows as Cleveland and Detroit, and the state’s governor is, in the parlance of identity politics, a woman of color — but she is a Republican, too, and therefore there must be shrieking, rending of garments, and gnashing of teeth. This is a fraud, and some scales are starting to fall from some eyes. Americans believe broadly in sexual equality, but only a vanishing minority of us describe ourselves as “feminists.” “Social-justice warrior” is a term of derision. The Bernie Sanders movement, like the draft-Warren movement of which it is an offshoot, is rooted in disgust at the opportunistic politics of the Clinton claque. Young people who have heard all their lives that the Republican party and the conservative movement are for old white men — young people who may be not be quite old enough to remember Democrats’ boasting of their “double-Bubba” ticket in 1992, pairing the protégé of one Southern segregationist with the son of another — see before them Nikki Haley, Bobby Jindal, Susana Martinez, Carly Fiorina, Tim Scott, Mia Love, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Elise Stefanik. None of those men and women is bawling about “microaggressions” or dreaming up new sexless pronouns. None belongs to the party that hoisted Dixie over the capitol in South Carolina either. Governor Haley may be sensitive to the history of her state, but she is a member of the party of Lincoln with family roots in Punjab — it isn’t her flag. What’s going to happen between now and November 8 of next year will be a political campaign on one side of the aisle only. On the other side, it’s going to be something between a temper tantrum and a panic attack. That’s excellent news if you’re Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, or Carly Fiorina. It’s less good news if you live in Baltimore or Philadelphia. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
(Edited)
A positive article in a grim time. Basically, the author argues that the left has gone completely nuts and is lashing out in every possible way (especially on race) because Obama's term is almost done and A.) America is still America and B.) Obama will not likely be followed by a President who is anywhere near the leftist he is. Some perspective: the GOP runs 70% of state legislatures, the Democrats only have 18 governor's offices, and the House is comfortably in GOP hands. This hasn't happened for nearly 100 years and it's not likely to change anytime soon. The left knows their time is done for this generation, so they are panicking. That is the author's argument and it's pretty a good one. I am way better at policy than politics, but it seems to me that people in 2016 will vote for whomever they trust to fix the tepid economy. I'm not sure who that is yet, but it certainly won't be another leftist academic with no real world experience.
Peak, nothing. This is nothing. The peak is yet to come and there is nobody to contest it.
I am definitely not as optimistic as you on the future outlook. Just the fact that Hilary can gain traction in an absolutely toxic environment where the Left is able to ignore some of the more obvious scandals says volumes for the amount of doom we may be destined for. In a more humourous development, we may repeat (1992) history where another Jurrasic Park and Terminator movie is coming out this year while a Clinton and a Bush begin to square of in a political battle for office. Remember, Cinton won the battle last time. And Americans love to relive history, if the flop over a red and blue flag is any indication...
You must be living in cave and have so for the past 40-50 years. The Left hasn't even hit its stride yet. It won when it started gaining control of the public schools in the mid-late 60s. We now have almost three generations of leftist indoctrinated public school K-12 sheep and not quite the same of College graduates. Once the Greatest Generation and those currently over 55 or so has totally died off there will be no-one left to challenge the Left as no- one will know any better or remember a time when there was even just a modicum of Conservative philosphy, thought, much less opposition. In the newest generation, those under 5 years old, minorities are the majority. The Left currently already owns most of the minority votes. They will get it all in another 15 years or so. Every public institution has either been co-opted by or succumbed to the leftist propaganda and influence, if not control, including SCOTUS. The Left preaches and the MSM codifies the message. What will break-up that alliance? There is no hope for the U.S. of ever reversing the continuing movement to the left. What is considered center today was considered to be well left of center just 20 years, not to mention 50 years ago. Conservatism in the U.S. is already dead as a major political force. The Left will se to it that it becomes extinct. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I blame the right wing that has given prosecutors and law enforcement so much power on that one.
The Greatest Generation was the FDR generation. The fiction is that the GOP is a contender party. The GOP dies after the Great Depression. It hung around as a party because the 2 party system was enshrined by then so by default the second party was just called Republican. Because the nation was yearning for a change - like they were in Britain - they elected the Republicans who ran as a sort of Democrat light party under Eisenhower - in Britain they voted out Churchill - so clearly there was some mood to just try something new. The GOP lost again but Nixon - Ike's VP saw that the GOP can win if it cobbled together all the disenfranchised and pissed off people in the USA and glue them together with anti-communism. It helped that segregationists in the south were as anti-communist as Catholics in the north east were, etc. So Nixon changed the GOP party and while we all assume Reagan changed the party - he just built on what Nixon created demographically. By the end of Bush's era, the GOP had become a more tribal and regional party and not attracting new blood like before. So while Nixon and Reagan helped the GOP survive - it really is a dying party, demographically speaking now that Americans are sick of militarism after Iraq and there is no more Cold War to galvanize for.
You haven't seen anything yet. The left will continue it mission until this entire country is an insane asylum filled with bumbling psychotics led by bumbling psychotics.
Maybe you can whip out your basic 6 thing and write a program that predicts when this will happen.
Because they mindlessly followed their rulers in everything from rationing to war? The tail-end baby boomers and front-end GenX is the greatest generation. They created the personal computer, internet, smart phone, and so many more things that have made our lives so much better.
No, because they voted for FDR 4 times and his Vice President.
Hey LaRoucher, Falling for a cult of personality doesn't make one great. There were many great American generations. The last TWO were: 1.) The generation that created the automobile, steel, and airplane industries. 2.) The generation that created the computer, internet, and mobile phone industries. America has also had some rotten generations, especially the "Silent Generation", who created very little and are now sucking the lifeblood out of the economy with their Socialist Insecurity and MediScam handouts.
I don't support LaRouche - never have - that is something from your old generation - and only one generation has been dubbed the Greatest Generation and it's FDR's era people.
Because leftist Tom Brokaw said so?
Because leftist Tom Brokaw said so? Yea, because he invented the term for his book. Geez. It does not mean it is true. But you can't start using his idea to label others that way.
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|