Posted on 05/04/2003 1:07:07 AM PDT by Enough is ENOUGH
The big change came with the emergence of the 1960s generation into American politics. The radicals who first appeared during student protests in the late 1960s and early 1970s have now come of age. As a result of their influence, politics in our country no longer masquerades as "equitable" according to pluralistic democratic processes. We could term this group the "Radical Left."
With the emergence of the radical left, the politics of the 1990s are no longer symmetrical. There used to be debate between "liberal" and "conservative." But now, to the left of liberalism, is a new, powerful, radical, activist Left...the New Left's strategy is much like that of a Muslim car bomb with a noisy, sudden impact that is truly radical. Not unlike Muslim terrorists, they make no reasonable demands....It is difficult for reasonable people to identify exactly who these people are and what their strategy is for winning the culture war. They attack society without announcing any plan or agenda for the future...They believe that Western civilization is corrupt so they are attempting to break down the authoritative traditions of the culture...The radical left are active in politics...They are tenured professors in universities...They dominate much of the media. They do not have a high regard for the established democratic processes. They only want results.
These people did not appear suddenly. Their coming of age has been gradual and in many cases a concession to "the establishment" which they disdained. During the past 25 years, you could meet the Radical Left at any liberal arts college or large state university in America. They are the "perpetual students" who make up the political structure of the student union. You might find on one university hallway, for instance, the gay/lesbian/bisexual student association, a student run National Organization for Women chapter, a Greenpeace chapter, an Amnesty International chapter, a "Hunger Task Force," a "Pagan Society," etc. These groups advocate "multiculturalism," "ethnicity," "civility," "tolerance" and "diversity" on the university campus. Yet we often find the same people making up the memberships of each group. Ironically, their views are intolerant of those of traditional liberalism and conservatism. Their views are promoted by the editors of the student newspaper (which they run). They are heavily funded by the student government association (which they also run)
In the "real world" of post-collegiate society, we are seeing the emergence of this new radicalism in a growing number of interest groups. This phenomenon is epitomized by groups such as ACT-UP, a homosexual activist group that uses the AIDS epidemic as a political lever; radical feminist groups (N.O.W., Planned Parenthood, N.A.R.R.A.L.) who lobby for abortion on demand; international relief organizations (WHO, UNICEF, etc.) who advocate population control; radical environmentalists; etc. The religious element within each group are the New Agers, Pagans and Wiccans.
These people have no real agenda for reform, except for championing "the causes of the oppressed" and bashing the traditional values of Western civilization, which they vilify with their "politically correct" nomenclature. The respected ideas and personalities of history are derided as "ethnocentric, eurocentric, phallocentric, misogenous, and homophobic." Western culture's patriarchal heroes are vilifired as "dead white males." And here again, many of these groups manage to find funding from the state.
Nobody knows exactly what these people are so angry about and what they are fighting for. Even more baffling to the casual observer, is the fact that they do not share a love for our society, but seek only to attack and destroy it. Although they are essentially nihilistic, the Radical Left has gained political clout because they instinctively head for the power bases of society. They correctly understand that they university campus is the microcosm of society. After leaving the university, these people become newspaper editors, television journalists, political activists, public school teachers, university professors, and increasingly they are being elected and appointed to high public office.
The nihilism of the New Left is understandable. In the 1960s and 1970, liberals who disliked a capitalist society could advocate socialism or communism. But since these political philosophies have been so thoroughly discredited in the 1980s and 1990s, the only alternative to capitalism is anarchy or nihilism. Their strategy now is to define traditional conservatives in politics as being "out of the mainstream." The Radical Left uses shrill, hysterical rhetoric to discredit conservatives and attempts to define the "mainstream" as the Radical Left. Through vilification, they attempt to make the public believe that the center is actually the extreme Right. By doing so, they make the same people believe that the extreme Left is the center.
Misinformation through propaganda is one way in which the culture war is being fought by the Radical Left. We see this strategy in full page ads in the New York Times paid for by the National Organization for Women, which portray conservative religious figures such as Cardinal John O'Connor, Pat Robertson and Ralph Reed as "dangerous, fanatical, right-wing, religious zealots" who would force millions of women into seeking back alley abortions. (We should be amused that these figures are often given credit for having a more radical agenda than even the most strident reconstructionist.) They are making progress because most Americans get most of their information from the liberal news media which cleverly disguises the Radical Left's strategy to change public opinion in the mask of "neutrality."
This battle plan is going almost unnoticed by the public because it did not appear suddenly. This strategy of subversion has been working since the late 1960s. By using stealth and "ideological guerrilla warfare," the Radical Left has been slowly gaining power for over 20 years, not through numbers, but through capturing the power bases of society: the media, the schools, the political lobbies. The Radical Left now possesses the "heavy artillery" which they need to wage a long term war.
Emergence of a Theocratic Right
Part of the Radical Left's battle plan is to announce themselves as "liberal" because they know that there is no significant Radical Right to oppose them. ((If you keep referring to them as liberals no one is going to face the true facts that these fanatics are out to destroy everything that we value.)) The only opposition to this Radical Left is now coming from the moderate liberals and conservatives. The intrinsic problem here is that both of these groups are reasonable and pacifistic by nature. They are at a great disadvantage. Meanwhile, the rhetoric and emotion coming from the new radical pro-abortion/ homosexual/feminist/environmentalist/pagan Left is increasingly hostile and inflammatory. Moderates find it hard to inflame passions by merely being reasonable, fair, egalitarian and pluralistic. In fact, extremist passion can never be reasonable, fair, egalitarian and pluralistic.
The Radical Left does not shirk back from charging middle America with "intolerance and bigotry," because they do not embrace their agenda. This only makes the moderate liberals and conservatives cower back into their pacifistic shells in an attempt to become even more tolerant, egalitarian, fair and extremely reasonable. The Radical Left knows that they will react this way. Their accusations are merely a propaganda ploy to make themselves appear more mainstream than they really are. They are not really worried about the politics of the traditional conservatives. What they fear the most is a backlash from an imagined group of "theocratic terrorists."
The schizophrenic strategy of the Radical Left becomes even more understandable when we study their theology: a strong belief in an inevitable renaissance of ancient earth religions. The Radical Left fears an imagined "Religious Right" because they are the "Religious Left." They have already grasped the power of spirituality. They have reinvented a neo-pagan religion. The epistemology of the Radical Left seeks a consistent worldview which justifies homosexuality, lesbianism, feminism, environmentalism and paganism as part of a complete ideological circle.
(Excerpt) Read more at forerunner.com ...
Perhaps you could suggest a battle plan for going out and informing people who aren't in the choir.
For me, GWB has had the most practical plans, starting with his Pied Piper battle plan.
Maybe we should come up with a better term. I don't think any of those descriptions explains them to the public at large.
I kind of like anti-Americans.
You asked me to suggest a battle plan. The last time I made a pep talk was at a meeting for parents and coaches when my son was playing high school football. We were in the playoffs and were facing a team that was almost twice our size. The parents were saying how we were going to get killed since that same team demolished us early in the season. I became upset with their defeatist attitudes that would reflect on their kids while they were preparing for the game and spoke out for about 15 minutes. I can't remember what all I said but the next day my son asked me what I said at the meeting because all of the coaches were saying what I great speech I gave. Well, the game wasn't decided until the last minute of play and we darn near beat them. Throughout the final quarter our kids were getting hit hard and were being helped off the field but they would go back in again one or two plays later and play their hearts out. It was one of the best games I had ever seen and I had tears in my eyes because of their courage to keep trying. The boys grew up during that game.
The battle plan you ask me to suggest shouldn't come from me but from your own heart. If you or any of the others feel the pain of what these atheists are doing to our children and to our freedom and our value system I trust you will find a way to combat it. I just wanted to make people aware that it is much worse than it appears on the surface.
Now that sounds like radical left junk.
Buck up, man!
Everyone running around doing their own thing is not as effective as a good battle plan that lots of people sign on to in a war.
Hmmmm. That's got bite.
There's another term that's early in the alphabet that just came to mind.
I'm going to take left-wing fascists out for a spin around the block for a month and see how it fares.
You have great insight. Can you suggest a better term that gets this insight over better?
Here's to Right action.
Their main problem is that when confronted with biblical Truth, their system will completely breakdown. There is no room in their system for any toleration of biblical Christianity. There is no real neutrality. They know this better than most religious conservatives. Consequently, they are always preparing to stave off the inevitable challenge that biblical Christians may someday pose to their power bases.In painting a picture of an "extremist" theocratic Right, the Radical Left has prophesied their own demise. Their main fear is that people who call themselves Christians may someday start acting like Christians. Those "out of the mainstream" might someday start believing what they read in the Bible. And even more terrifying to the Radical Left, these Christians may want to impose the standards of biblical Law on society. When that day comes, the Radical Left knows that politics will no longer be a matter of democratic fairness and pluralism. Modern politics will become a new civil war of increasing division between the Radical Left and a "new" theocratic Right.
patriciaruth, I most certainly agree that GW is being very effective in swaying many people over to "right" and "wrong;" "good" and "evil." I think it no accident, in fact, that he specifically chose the words "Axis of Evil" and "evildoers" to describe Saddam and Bin Laden/the terrorists. He made it very clear, again, by stating: "You're either with us or with the terrorists." Boy, howdy, did that ever get the Radical Left up in arms. GW, America, calling people names!!! (Let's not forget, the left uses name-calling expertly, and throws mud quite well, too (remember how Katherine Harris was dragged through it, and criticized about her makeup/mascara....yep, that's the only thing they could do to her, because Katherine Harris was RIGHT and followed the RULE OF LAW....but the left needed a villain, and she was going to be "it.")
Another thing, though, with GW I found most encouraging. Every time, it seems, who goes out and talks to people, one on one, in small groups (which he seems to do much).....he's pulling another one over to our side. Why? Because, he's a good man, and they can see his honesty and sincerity. This happened on 9/11, too. If you've never read Fighting Back, I suggest you do so. It's a wonderful story about our President, written by Bill Sammon, a journalist. Among many interesting factoids in there, he tells about a registered Democrat Gore voting Principal who, after seeing how deeply our President was moved that day, while at her elementary school, and his concern about her certain disappointment that, because of the planes crashing into the WTC, he'd have to cancel his long-planned activities there and, instead, attend to the terrorist attacks, well, apparently at that moment, her eyes opened to who he really is and what he stands for and she became pro-Bush.
Now, if each one of us can do this same one on one with people, talking, sharing, showing our honesty and forthrightness....that we stand for something, I cannot but think that that would have, in the long run (maybe not on the spot), some effect of many people. The scales may drop from their eyes the more conservatives they come across who deserve respect because of their intelligence, kindness, and how they comport themselves. (Just talking out loud, here.)
Another big lie is the Progressive Caucus calling themselves that. They promote what you just said, which, at best, is backwards. And with regard to what they really are, they're a Socialist Caucus. Fidel Castro has supporters amongst that group (Rangel, Serrano, Diane Watson, and Sheila Jackson Lee, are just a few), as well as supporting the likes of Victor Chavez, Saddam Hussein (Jim McDermott).
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.