Leftism:
High on Buzzwords, Low on Thought, By Bruce Walker, 2/4/19.
The left does not need to argue with conservatives and other
normal people. This is because the left has co-opted language so
that clear thinking is impossible. Buzzwords preclude whole serious
thought and channel virtually all cognition along predictable and entirely
theoretical, rather than empirical, lines.
While leftists can "think" only along these lines, the
real danger is that conservatives accept these buzzwords as well, so
conservatives also have shackled minds that rely, almost entirely, upon an
entire vocabulary created by leftist totalitarianism. A few words
and phrases help show how this works.
"Homophobia" is a rickety neologism intended to
encompass virtually every variety of analysis of that leftist insistence that
homosexuality and its offspring "transgender" and so forth have no
problems. In fact, there are at least three different and usually
conflicting approaches to this issue.
Judaism and Christianity in their historic forms consider
homosexuality a sin. Darwinists, who disagree with Judaism and
Christianity in almost every respect, find homosexuality, which dramatically
diminishes natural procreation, to be an evolutionary dead
end. Psychologists, decades ago, considered homosexuality a
disorder. Why, then, lump all these reactions into a single
"homophobia" label? It prevents any real serious analysis
or reflection.
Along similar lines, the "ideological spectrum," the
idea that political thought can be categorized based on a geometrical model
that does not exist and has never really existed, infects virtually everything
in political discussion. Even conservatives swallow whole the
profoundly silly idea that political positions can be explained by identifying
a position as lying along an "ideological spectrum."
Even more idiotic are those words historically used to calibrate
points along the nonexistent ideological spectrum: reactionary, conservative,
liberal, progressive, radical, and revolutionary. A sober study of
politics is impossible when using these baby words. Thomas Jefferson
was simultaneously revolutionary,
reactionary, progressive, radical, liberal, and conservative.
As we approach the 2020 election and see that more and more
potential and declared Democrat candidates are women, get ready for the dull,
dreary, lifeless leftist malediction "sexist!" to be forced more and
more into political debate. What was the original argument behind
feminism and sexism? Both sexes were oppressed by being forced into
roles that...blah, blah, blah. This original argument meant that ending
sexism liberated both sexes.
Feminists never really believed in or wanted
equality. That would have meant that men would be given equal
standing in child custody cases. Women would have the same duty to
support a household that men had. Women would not be believed in
court simply because a teary-eyed woman evoked more sympathy than an
unemotional man. We were all going to be equal in every sense.
But, to paraphrase Orwell in Animal Farm, the real guiding idea was
this: "Both sexes are equal, but one is more equal than the
other." This showed up early in symbolic changes. So
hurricanes could no longer be named after women, which is also why we speak
today of "Father Nature." (Oh, wait – we don't!)
Every billboard dealing with domestic violence shows a woman,
never a man, as the victim. The "Violence Against Women
Act" might as well be called the "Violence Against Aryans Act"
because most victims of violence are men, not women. Although women
now live longer than men (until 1950, men lived longer), nevertheless, demands
for more money to "women's health" was angrily demanded.
The laws that were passed a century ago in the "Progressive
Era" at the insistence of feminists to protect women and children, laws
prohibiting factories and mine-owners from employing women and children in the
most dangerous jobs, now, magically, became discrimination against women.
Whines from spoiled, rich dopes like Hillary that men earn more
money than women are exactly like the similar screeches by Nazis of higher Jewish
income – the idea that income was related to effort or skill is summarily
dismissed in both cases. The fact that women own more and spend more
than men is never mentioned.
As with feminism, all leftist buzzwords and pseudo-ideologies are
irrational and immoral. The purpose is to retain some appearance of
thought while, in fact, destroying free minds and independent
thinking. The key to defeating this misology is to directly
challenge the language and assumptions upon which it rests its rickety
foundation. That requires us to discard the lexicon shoved upon us
and to show moral courage. If we fail in this, our slide into the
abyss can only be slowed but never stopped.
Along similar lines, the "ideological spectrum," the
idea that political thought can be categorized based on a geometrical model
that does not exist and has never really existed, infects virtually everything
in political discussion. Even conservatives swallow whole the
profoundly silly idea that political positions can be explained by identifying
a position as lying along an "ideological spectrum."
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody
GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment