Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Greenfield: The Tyranny of Idealism
The Sultan Knish blog ^ | Tuesday, October 06, 2015 | Daniel Greenfield

Posted on 10/07/2015 4:49:32 PM PDT by Louis Foxwell

Tuesday, October 06, 2015

The Tyranny of Idealism

Posted by Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog

Of all the Alinsky rules, the most relevant one is, "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." But he simply codified and made pragmatic the most destructive of the left's rules which is, "Make the enemy live up to his ideals." Even if those ideals are often the invention of the left.

Ideals are by definition impossible to live up to. Human societies aren't ideal, they're real. Ideals are absolutes and an unfliching attempt to live up to them destroys individuals and societies. More subtly, the failure to live up to them justifies hatred and self-hatred toward nations and peoples.

People naturally want to think the best of their creeds and cultures, their societies and their states. This is both the best weapon and the best breeding ground of the left. There is nothing that creates leftists and draws them like the accusation that a nation is failing to live up to its ideals.

Absolutes are a goad, but they are not an answer. A nation is not an ideal. It is a structure that allows people to live. A nation pursuing an ideal is a prison. It is the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. It is North Korea. Or it's Europe swamping its cities with Muslims or Israel pursuing a "purity of arms" that its enemies do not abide by. The pursuit of such ideals is a death wish. It's a totalitarian suicide.

Religions embody ideals. Nations do not. A religion is built around a deity that can forgive its worshipers for their flaws. The wheel of sin turns toward redemption. Failure in religion is itself a learning experience that allows for self-improvement. Unless warped, it does not lead to a state of self-hatred, self-destruction and death.

But the state has no God. It is a bureaucratic idol composed of activist politicians and their clerks. It cannot redeem itself. Only damn itself. When it pursues an ideal, it borrows the narrative of religion without any divine understanding. Fanatics stand at the helm who are corrupt and goaded to extremes by their own failures, made incapable of forgiveness by their own human weaknesses.

The ideal state is a cult. At its head is the cult of personality. It ends with Jim Jones dispensing the Kool Aid. Or Rabin shaking Arafat's hand. Or Merkel opening the borders. Or Obama rattling through another teleprompter speech filled with borrowed inspirations and empty hopes.

The ideal state can only find its redemption in death. The death of states is the grand gesture that inspires leftists to believe that "Imagine" is the anthem of the future. What the state cannot do, the planetary collective will somehow accomplish. And yet the ideal state was the collective that was meant to accomplish what individuals could not do.

A state in pursuit of an ideal must always fail and in its failure discredit itself. The process of failure teaches self-hatred.

Think about how each time that America or Israel struggles to conduct a pure war that kills the fewest enemies possible, it only intensifies the wave of hatred and self-hatred indoctrinated by the left at each failure. It is the pursuit of an impossible ideal that feeds the hatred. The closer we come to an impossible notion of a pure war, the more our failures are used to spread shame and disgust.

In the tyranny of idealism, superior morality is not rewarded, it is punished.

Those closest to the ideal feel the failures most keenly. Those furthest from it are completely immune to them. A nation that genuinely values ideals can be taunted for failing to live up to them. It is the nation's own weakness for exceptionalism that makes it vulnerable. Once the exceptionalism is made conditional on impossible ideals, then it can be goaded to destroy itself by trying to live up to them.

There is nothing that saps morale and clouds decision making like the failure to live up to one's ideals. Once ideals define perspective, then the nation begins the race to the abyss of those ideals.

Functional nations pursue practical goals that are in the interest of their peoples. Ideal states are gulags, concentration camps, where human beings are tools for achieving ideals. A functional nation can be free, but an ideal state must be totalitarian no matter how often it prates about freedom. A nation can only be free when it accepts human flaws and frailties. An ideal state loves freedom, but hates free people. It cannot accept individualism or the wisdom of crowds. It bends them to its ideal.

The only way to escape the tyranny of idealism is for a nation to accept its flaws.

Once a people become susceptible to the tyranny of idealism, they begin to accept that their lives are conditional on the fulfillment of a set of ideals. And that they can therefore be sacrificed to them.

It follows them that America and Israel must accept the death of its people at the hands of terrorists rather than violate some impossible ideal about civilian casualties when fighting terrorists. Scale that moral calculus up to the nuclear and this ideal mandates that nations must die rather than fight back.

Likewise, Europe's refugee idealism demands that it accept hordes of invaders even at the cost of its existence, because its existence is conditional on ideals rather than realities. Survival by violating ideals becomes a fate worse than death. Religious martyrdom becomes a secular national suicide.

In this environment, the left thrives. Every failure of ideals becomes a cause for self-hatred. The peoples of the free world are taught that they violate their own values by living. Even their passive existence is a carbon crime, a volitional act of white privilege, that can never be wiped clean. Every attempt at self-defense, every attempt at existence, deepens their crime. The only escape is death.

Leftist politics pretends to offer ideals it is for, but it most acutely campaigns not for, but against. The leftist activist knows the society that he hates better than the one he loves, he has a much clearer understanding of the world that he wants to destroy than the world he wishes to create.

His politics are not creative, they are destructive. He has been nurtured on the foul milk of self-hatred. It has taught him to love himself by hating others. His arrogance is a contempt for an ordinary mass of people he fancies himself superior to because he wishes to destroy their way of life and remake it along some impossible ideal. The remaking cannot be done, but the destruction is always feasible. The leftist is always destroying someone else to atone for his own failure of ideals.

This is the way of the left. Its leaders and societies are predatory failures, consuming and destroying the life force of their peoples, and then expanding to destroy their neighbors and the world. The collective buck is always passed to some new group of victims and suckers. It will be their job to make the failed ideals of the past viable through sacrifices, self-hatred and self-destruction.

What the leftist does best is teach self-hatred. It is the main course in our educational system today. Its students are taught to despise their family, their culture, their religion, their way of life and their nation for failing to live up to the tainted ideals of the left. And to gain their self-worth through a rejection of these things and the embrace of their destruction. And so the leftist is born.

A set of ideals whose fulfillment requires our destruction reveals either our falseness or their falseness. The answer distinguishes the fanatic from the philosopher. Only the fanatic demands that people pursue ideals which will destroy them, whose terms make their existence impossible.

Our leftist philosopher-kings are not philosophers, they are feudal fanatics who bind peoples to ideals that destroy them because it feeds their twisted madness and their sense of superiority. They are not interested in the terms on which people can actually exist. They are not interested in people at all except as subjects for their gleeful malice and as puppets for their political psychodramas.

The absolute is never the answer except to the tyrant. And only a madman filled with hatred demands that a nation choose between self-hatred and self-destruction.

Human existence is the only possible resistance to the inhuman demands of the ideal state. This is the restating of the Declaration of Independence that governments exist for the life, liberty and happiness of human beings, not for the fulfillment of ideals which would destroy them.

Governments are not meant for angels, but for men. A state exists to enable, first the existence, second the freedom, and third the happiness of human beings, in exactly that order of importance.

A state whose policies destroy human existence has nullified itself. A state may only nullify their freedom if the very question of their existence is in question. And it may only nullify their happiness for their freedom. These are human terms. No other terms are either wanted or acceptable.

Governments are not religions and no political movement can place its pet philosopher in place of God. No man can demand more of other men. Only God can demand the impossible because He can also grant the impossible. No political system can forgive. It can only amass more guilt and sin, more hatred and self-hatred, more madness and destruction. Human beings cannot exceed themselves.

A healthy idealism aspires to a more human state of living. It does not demand absolutes. An idealism that demands absolutes is a trap. It is easy to tell the difference between the two.

Human ideals feel better about themselves as they improve. Inhuman ones feel worse because the ideal is never meant to be reached. An irreligious absolute offers no redemption. Instead the failure to do the impossible becomes the means of breaking people of their human qualities and making them into monsters.

We can only achieve human terms of existence for nations and peoples by accepting our flaws. Perfection is as impossible for a people as it is for a person. And within our flaws, we create an existence that is not based on the collective impossibilities of an ideal, but on the realizable goodness of our human flaws. Instead of seeking to create a perfect state, we individually become better people. Instead of the tyranny of idealism creating monsters, we give ourselves the freedom to be human beings.

Instead of building suicidal ideal states, we create societies in which we have the freedom to be good while refusing to lapse into a self-hatred borne of frustrated idealism which prevents us from seeing the goodness of our fellow men and the evil of our enemies.


TOPICS: Government; History; Politics; Religion
KEYWORDS: greenfield; sultanknish

Front Page mag - A Project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center

Daniel Greenfield Ping List Notification of new articles.

I am posting Greenfield's articles from FrontPage and the Sultan Knish blog. FReepmail or drop me a comment to get on or off the Greenfield ping list.

I highly recommend an occasional look at the Sultan Knish blog. It is a rich source of materials, links and more from one of the preeminent writers of our age.

FrontPage is, a basic resource for conservative thought. Lou

1 posted on 10/07/2015 4:49:32 PM PDT by Louis Foxwell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell; daisy mae for the usa; AdvisorB; wizardoz; free-in-nyc; Vendome; Georgia Girl 2; ...

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.

2 posted on 10/07/2015 4:50:31 PM PDT by Louis Foxwell (This is a wake up call. Join the Sultan Knish ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
Thanks, Louis

All i can say is WOW!

Greenfield has amazing insight. Not sure if ive ever heard it put this way before.

Thanks for sharing, Bookmarked the website for the future

3 posted on 10/07/2015 5:57:02 PM PDT by T-Boy (Godspeed for our troops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

Mr. Greenfield’s philosophy on the dangers of liberal idealism. It needs to be read slowly, with time spent in contemplation to be fully appreciated. The message is so true but troubling since there is no way to cure the mental derangement.


4 posted on 10/07/2015 6:25:41 PM PDT by iontheball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

Thanks for the ping.


5 posted on 10/07/2015 7:15:01 PM PDT by PA Engineer (Liberate America from the Occupation Media. #2ndAmendmentMatters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

I know everyone here loves Daniel Greenfield but there’s some flaws in his thinking. He writes that “we individually need to become better people” and “we create societies in which we have the freedom to be good while refusing to lapse into a self-hatred borne of frustrated idealism...” and I agree with a lot of that and I know he’s writing to kind of counter the left’s push to punish our nation for past and present sins - and that’s his point but... isn’t the whole world (and our nation in particular) in turmoil precisely because we differ on what “becoming better” means?

We live in a fallen world with sinful people who mostly try to maximize pleasure and minimize pain - often at the expense of others - more than they seek after a relationship with their Creator. Here, we all are both perpetrator and victim. In our struggles to deal with life, we want God to be good on our terms and when we think he isn’t living up to our expectations we abandon our search and often blame him. We then go back to finding “comfort” in what the world has to offer to salve our pain or provide “excitement” and purpose.

Our nation enjoyed the liberty it did for so long because we used to be in agreement about the nature of man and his predicament and what true goodness meant (being holy because God is). No, not everyone was “Christian” and we were never a Christian nation but most gave intellectual assent to those values - even if they did not personally hold or practice them. Our fore fathers set out to build what was the best they could given that the heart of man was the real problem and always would be. Hence the checks and balances on power being concentrated and also the selection of men of high moral character for leadership positions. But they were not idealistic - they were very much realists. The Republic as it was constituted was the best one could expect given the fallen world we live in.

That was yester year, as it were, and we, as a nation, sadly, have long abandoned those beliefs. Without shared core values we are going to have a very hard time reaching agreements about anything - including what is good - hence the present state of affairs. Just as many nations before us we are at the end. Going forward it only gets worse. There is no solution if we are not willing to examine our own hearts individually and nationally in light of God’s revealed truth.

We individually come to Christ with the realization that we cannot make ourselves better. And just because we think we are better than our neighbor we are not anywhere close to God’s standard. We submit to his authority and accept his remedy for our condition and live to please him. We essentially come under new management. That is the only hope we have - “Christ in me, the hope of glory.” Jesus didn’t come to make this world “better” or us “better” he came to redeem the lost. That’s, you and I. Apart from him we stay lost and our future is not a good one. While Christians believe there’s a new world coming, we also believe that we should be salt and light in this present one. That means we seek to both show and do what is good by how we live (and what the Bible declares as good) and preserve what is good according to the biblical definition. Jesus said the world will most likely hate us if we do these things just as it hated him. Who’s getting their necks cut in the middle east and who’s getting shot here? So, that’s the tough part. We know that this world system is passing away. Ultimately, we are awaiting the arrival of the rightful King who will establish his own kingdom that will never end and who will judge everyone according to his revealed truth.

“Creating societies in which we have the freedom to be good,” is a noble sounding goal. It’s just that it may never happen again in our life times. Better to live your life now to please the Master and lay up treasure in heaven for later. The immediate future does not look bright. According to prophetic scripture, it gets very, very dark before the dawn.


6 posted on 10/07/2015 9:23:03 PM PDT by Lake Living
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson