2520. Battleground USA —The Left

I continue the second part of my opinion piece on the subject, which is based primarily on how people are motivated to act in distinct ways that depend on beliefs. I quit watching TV several years ago, and political happenings and intentions are much easier to read from other sources or a few days later. When news is entertaining, we are being mislead in some way. You are probably aware of the media bias that supports government as it hides the truth.

Here are the major players in our political arena. Each has their ideology, and the Left lives ideology with religious zeal. It’s their way of life, and the groups have joined in common cause. Dedicated to work with the others, they expect to settle their differences after the Constitution is dead. An old Marxist motto still lives today: Everything is political except politics, and that is personal. Another one from the Sixties, Never trust anyone over thirty.

THE LEFT identifies everyone in groups with some common feature or allegiance, that is, the individual has value only as a member of something. Unable to accept the individual as capable of fending for himself as liberty guarantees, the Left focuses on ‘guiding’ the collective in groups. As more and more are made dependent on government for financial uplift that tends to separate the groups and classes, government must keep them from fighting among themselves. It requires the government grow much more immense to make everyone dependent in some way and then prevent the lawlessness that follows government-stimulated lack of respect between groups. It makes government appear to do what is essential, while in background it promotes the rule of man over the rule of law.

Progressivism — This is the revived and presently used name for the collective interests of the Leftist ‘religions’ shown below. Each has an interest in bigger government. The regulatory bureaucrat structure is built to advance the interests of leftist religions and thus endow the USA with “promises” of progress. It has already changed the federal government into the executive-administrative aka regulatory state as it currently operates.

Liberalism — People come before principles. (If people rather than individuals are the most important, why does not the Constitution describe it that way?)

Fascism — Government tells businesses how and what to produce and uses bureaucratic power to enforce it.

Socialism — Government ownership of businesses that has the political disadvantage of making government responsible for outcomes. People may call it socialism, but the leaders want no more of it; their failures become too obvious.

Environmentalism— Government central planning assisted by left-leaning groups aimed at destroying private property rights. (The Declaration of Independence as first drafted read as “…life, liberty, and property” instead of “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.” Slave-holding states would not sign if not changed. To see their political battle set to music, watch “1776.” It’s pretty accurate history turned by superb talent into great entertainment.)

Marxism — Also known as the long and evolutionary march of totalitarian ideology. It’s primary aim is to destroy free enterprise capitalism and its undergarments—family, religion, and private property rights—along the way. Marx was proved wrong by World War I; the workers of the world did not rise up and refuse to fight fellow workers. Marxist strategy changed in the 1920s. Their aim since has been to superimpose another culture on top of existing ones. They tried it with revolutionary violence in the 1960s and failed. The revolutionaries put on coat and tie and have infiltrated and pretty much boss much of the public and private institutions in the U. S. They are succeeding at replacing our Judeo-Christian culture with a secular one.

Communism — In the heart of every communist is a totalitarian screaming to break free. Communists know best how everyone should live, and they intend to dictate it. Working cooperatively with others on the Left and leaving their differences for resolution much later, they are currently making progress in developing the totalitarian state right here in the good old U. S. of A.

Communists in the Soviet Union learned two major lessons.

1) They can’t make totalitarian progress when central economic planning fails, as it inevitably does. In the U.S. they are already implementing a new strategy and have been for over two decades. Government leaders ‘sign up’ big corporations to work with government. A coalition to help central economic planners work with and tell companies what results are desired. Producers produce what they think will work. That way, when the economic results don’t pan out as planned, the blame can be passed to corporations, and they don’t answer to the public. Government skates free as not responsible for economic dislocation or depression. The big corporations have already bought into their scheme with policies to outsource overseas and promises to enlarge the government-company teamwork.

2) The Soviets could not overcome the Russian middle class, and so the powers that be in the U.S. are now on the warpath to demolish it here. Have you noticed a decline in the number and well-being of the middle class? The upper classes are left alone, and the lower classes are subsidized and made dependent on government. The middle class deteriorates.

The current Progressive agenda is a mixture and merger of all of the above. None are standing still. Two steps forward works with only one step back they sometimes have to take. They are relentless too. The most dominant are already destroying our constitutional republic. The most powerful are winning, and we blog readers are losing. They already tell us how to live our lives; we call it loss of freedom and a lot of other things that we have trouble identifying, but we know it ain’t right for Americans.


Filed under Culture & Politics, Dear daughter, Sociology 101

5 responses to “2520. Battleground USA —The Left

  1. Cinnamon

    Sir Guy,

    This is a great analysis and I agree with just about every word. The Left must, and will if they are not stopped, destroy both the middle-class (and by middle-class, I don’t mean the professional classes per se but ordinary working people) and religion in order to fulfil their agenda, and I believe that in the U.S. they are on the verge of succeeding. This generation is the last Christian generation and the last middle-class generation. The West is dividing into two classes, rich and poor; most young people coming up now will never have the opportunities I , and many of your other readers, had to carve out a middle-class life. It will only be the highest achievers, the most Machivellian, or those who inherit wealth who will lead anything resembling a middle-class lifestyle while the rest will be slaves. Christianity will survive, but only underground, where it cannot shape the larger culture.

    I came across the following comment a few weeks ago on another blog. Although it describes a world of American immigrant Catholicism that I am too young to remember, it still fills me with a deep sense of loss for a time where belief in a transcendent God was the binding force in the lives of ordinary working Americans:

    “You and I no longer fit in the Catholic Church either. I was looking at an old ‘yearbook’ from the 1940’s from the very Church I belong to now. There were several hundred men in the Holy Name Society alone – from young men to patres familias to widowers and everything in between. They sent membership to ALL the young men of the church who were fighting WWII at the time. And the letters they got in return were so touching – from a beach at Tarawa or in the Ardennes snow or in dire boredom on a remote base – letters telling how much the church, their families and the manly Holy Name Society meant to them. Incidentally, the Holy Name guys never used God’s name in vain and spoke up when and where it was done. They are pretty much extinct as is the living church, the liturgy stands in the midst of humanity like a great tree stripped of its fruits.”

  2. Meow Meow

    Sir Guy, I would also love you to define “The Right.” I’d like to hear how you define it/what it stands for as you see it. What are its goals and standards? How has it changed over time? What would a right-leaning government look like for the U.S. and how would you define a “right’ leaning person. Also, must a right-leaning person always be Christian/religious? My “conservative” for lack of a better word grandparents were either very secular or didn’t believe in prosletyzing/evangelizing. Maybe had a more private faith. They had strong moral codes and always voted republican…(Does “Right” always mean Republican?) Politics and parties have shifted a lot since i was young…..sometimes the terms don’t seem to mean the same as I was taught growing up. I very much enjoy your condensed histories/definitions as I don’t have time to read much these days other than short Internet articles (Working 3 jobs and all… anytime I have left over is for my family) I know you are busy too though.
    Thank you.

    Your Highness Meow Meow,

    I regret to say you ask for too much. I’m torn as I don’t recall ever not answering as requested. You need to ask a professional historian or read one’s book, as I lack the time.

    At this moment I have The RIGHT in final edit for posting within the hour. Over time I expect your questions may be answered, if this blog theme continues as envisioned.


    • Meow Meow

      What do you know Sir Guy it looks like you just published a post about this very subject! Thanks!

      Actually this was the first time I had asked for your definitions on the Right, i hadn’t requested this previously. Sorry if something I wrote led you to believe you hadn’t answered a previous post of mine.

      Your Highness Meow Meow,
      It wasn’t you I mentioned. It was me. I try to address, answer, or relate my response to all questions, period. Just a practice I like to keep, but didn’t with yours.

  3. anon...

    I may be wrong on this. But ever since Reagan left office, we started going downhill.
    Perhaps it’s NAFTA which forced women to go work outside to make ends meet in the 90s.. I don’t know

    Your Highness Anon…,

    I think you’re right in this regard. The middle class started to take notice of what was being done to them.

    NAFTA by Bush, CAFTA by Clinton, open borders by Bush2, and toxic culture immigration presently. All weakened the U.S. Also, Jeb was dropped from the race. I think he was intended to integrate Mexico, Canada, and the U. S. into a common currency. With little else to do, it would have unified the North American Alliance on trade, open borders, and currency in order to balance Europe’s economic and political size. Perhaps it’s been overtaken, but I doubt it. New concept: We are expected to accept T.P.P., which is unfair trade on steroids.


  4. Sarina

    Avoiding TV is totally relatable, however since you’re from the US, I think it was an especially hard decision, considering how there’s some great entertainment there.

    My country’s local tv stations are outright poision, at least for women. The average guy only sees prostitutes and sleazy girls on screen, NEVER a normal, decent woman. But the horrible aspect is how these women mock gentlemen, how they criticise guys that are family type calling them ‘suckers’ for not getting a mistress, finding excuses for adultery saying that all men should cheat if they’re smart. When I constantly hear trash like this on TV, it makes me think there’s an agenda behind it, no wonder our local men are so disrespectful, they never get a healthy, appealing image of a woman.

    Your Highness Sarina,

    Don’t know your country but it doesn’t matter. TV in U.S. will soon be the same as yours. If we Americans are to restore our country, TV is a helluva good place to start. If millions of mothers especially—but women generally—start boycotting products they see advertised on unrespectable shows, write letters to the companies, turn off TVs or particular shows, and let everybody know about it, then things can be made to change.

    The Left has effectively driven Glenn Beck into the background by paying or calling in favors to write and boycott against his advertisers. Others like Sean Hannity have suffered similar fates at the hands of leftist politics. If the Left can do it, why can’t others? They too are important, educated, and influential to the extent that they use their God-given talent and determination to change things to restore America. Somebody has to start someplace.

    And you say, “Why women and mothers? We don’t have the time.” Right. Men neither. However, that isn’t the issue. The subject is really morality, decency, kindness, family, love, human connections, children exposed to porn, and a catalog of other issues that are primarily of interest to women much, much, much more than men. Until, that is, wives also make it their husband’s interest.

    You know, all that good and sometimes even mushy stuff we used to have in America that held us together more than apart, that enabled moms to coordinate a respectable family, home, and contribute to a respectable community. Now I ask you, who wants more to stop the hanging of TV garbage around the necks of children and other TV watchers? It really boils down to this, men are unqualified when compared to women trying to breathe morality back into our morally depleted culture. I say again, until, that is, wives also make it their husband’s interest.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s