I don't believe any of us could in any way add to what he has written. But I'd like to focus on just one of his small comments and take off on a tangent of my own (it won't be nearly as beautiful or well-researched as his, but allow me some room anyway. I'm a layman … :)
I know you agree with me that 'socialists' have been around since time immemorial, having existed under countless labels as the history of humankind has unfolded. They will never cease to exist, no matter the defeats they suffer. Each defeat is seen only as a setback which occurred as the result of the ignorance and stupidity of mankind. They will always return, after licking their wounds, because they represent a segment of mankind that believes that a superior ruling elite (which appears to genetically pass its arrogance down through the generations) knows best how the world should be run. They do not recognize God. They despise Him. His eternal words stand in their way. They value human life only as a means to an end. They harbor no allegiance to anything except their timeless ideological agenda. And they see truth as nothing more than an obstacle toward the realization of that agenda.
In America 2004, socialism (as evidenced by, and embodied in, its loathing of everything genuinely American, and its revulsion when confronted with truth) is alive and well in leadership at the highest levels -- especially on Capitol Hill and in the Supreme Court.
The attack on America that is occurring today is unprecedented. Under attack are the God whose hand played the most intimate role in her founding and her rise to greatness, the Founders who risked their lives fortunes and sacred honor to leave us an inheritance worthy of all three, and the values that laid the groundwork for a republic that rose out of the ashes of what this author rightly calls the only genuinely successful revolution in the history of mankind.
And the most venomous and hate-filled of these attacks are being orchestrated by people within our own borders – people who sit in seats of national leadership. One of them is seeking the Presidency. One of them is seeking the Vice Presidency. (One of them is seeking re-election to a fifth-term senate seat in my own state of Pennsylvania). And perhaps two hundred or more of them sit in Congress, and on the highest court in the land.
The rabid socialists within our borders, and the terrorists without, share two very deadly traits: (1) they place little or no value on human life, and (2) they define reverence for truth as an obstacle, rather than a virtue.
All one needs to do is take a good hard look at the agenda of the anti-American forces at work in the world today. Where in the focus of that agenda do human life, and human dignity, lie?
We are forever confronted with the human atrocities these critics of America commit. But we choose not to look at them … at least not for very long. They are too offensive. Yet, because the words of the perpetrators so often belie their deeds, it is only in examining, and remembering, their deeds that we can comprehend the truth about who they are. You can't put 2 and 2 together and visualize a 4, if, because it was too hard to look at, you've discarded one of the 2's along the way.
We look away from the videos of innocent American office-workers leaping to their deaths from the fiery inferno that was the World Trade Center. We choose not to witness the charred pieces of American bodies hung from a bridge above the Euphrates. We would rather not see the slow, torturous decapitation, or hear the agonized cries, of Nick Berg, or those unfortunates who followed in his footsteps.
Closer to home, we (apparently 50% of us) applaud the Vietnam vet who seeks to be president. We ignore the fact that he sees nothing wrong with the murderous torture known as partial birth abortion.
The video, 'Silent Scream' which has been on the internet for many years, depicts an early-term (eleven week) abortion via real-time ultrasound. An abortion from the victim's vantage point. If we were willing to witness it, we would see a child (fully formed, absolutely identifiable, who has had brain waves for six weeks, and a functioning heart for eight weeks) screaming as it is torn apart, dismembered, crushed and destroyed by the cold steel instruments of the abortionist.
In partial birth abortions, children six months closer to being naturally born, are tortured in no less brutal a manner. And I would imagine their screams are even more audible.
One of our Presidential candidates, and many of the hundreds of other socialists in our government, see nothing wrong with such human torture. Because, after all, it furthers an all-important political ideological agenda.
And their reasons offered for condoning the murder of the innocent unborn (almost always 'the concern for the health of the mother' … ) are untrue. As usual, life and truth take a back seat to agenda realization. Life and truth are simply roadblocks on the road to something far more inglorious.
How many Americans who will pull the lever next to the Kerry/Edwards ticket in November comprehend their stance on PBA? How many of these voters have seen ‘Silent Scream’? How many of them would see no connection between a stance on partial birth abortion and a cavalier view of the value of human life (and human liberty, and human dignity) in general? Do these same people believe that a John Kerry, or a John Edwards, or any of their socialist clones in Washington, value the life of the average American any more than they do the tiny victims of PBA?
Human life (whether in-utero, or walking down Main Street) … and truth … are of little value to a socialist.
And yet most Americans, who find all of the atrocities mentioned above repulsive, choose to not recognize that they exist, or to exile them from our consciousness as soon as conveniently possible, or to declare them somehow irrelevant to 'the big picture'.
They are 'the big picture'.
Neil Cavuto, who generally has the courage to attempt to force us to see (either literally or figuratively) the ugliness which threatens us all, recently wrote a wonderful piece on just this subject. Here is an excerpt:
Show me the senselessness of their killings. Show me the evil behind their killings.... Show me all of it. And don't sanitize it. Don't blur it, mask it, color it or frame it. Don't gloss over it and try to make us not see it or be appalled by it. You see, I want us appalled. I want us angry. I want us outraged. I want us sickened.... I want all of us who survived hell to see hell, to see the tears and know the loss. I want us to relive those days, every day, and not forget for a moment the evil that perpetuated it, condoned it and sanctioned it. For some, it's heady stuff. But I say, these are heady, sickening days. The war on terror is that kind of war. It is ugly. It is gory. It is stomach-churning. We do ourselves a disservice as victims when we don't show our victims. We do ourselves an injustice when we don't look at the injustice of terrorists. That's why I say, with some caution, to relax our caution. Nothing rouses a nation's anger in a war more than when we see the victims of a war -- our victims, our friends and our countrymen. They did not have to die. But they did. Why should we gloss over the fact that they did? I think it cheapens their sacrifice when we try to sanitize their loss. There's no nice way to say someone was beheaded and butchered. There's only one way to talk about it, and that's to show it. I want us to get angry, outraged, furious and incensed because this is evil in its purest and simplest form. We must see it for what it is, not cover it up for what it is not." … Neil Cavuto
The terrorists in Iraq are surely more ‘bloodthirsty’ than the socialists in the halls of Congress. But those who demean, or refuse to acknowledge the sanctity of, human life and dignity share a 'connection' that makes them allies on at least some level. (Have we given much thought lately to Mary Jo Kopechne? Or Vince Foster? Or Ron Brown? Or the tens of millions of innocent pre-born children who, because of the inconvenience they posed to a living, breathing woman, were not allowed to continue living? … just a handful of 'lives deemed worthless' from an unending list … )
The one area in which their (the socialists' and the terrorists') alliance is always visible is in their need to bring America to her knees. America is what stands in the way of ultimate success to those who view both life and truth as dispensable. Men cannot be allowed to extinguish the lives or liberties of other men when the country in which they live acknowledges a God who granted those gifts, and forbids their destruction. Such a nation’s past, present, and future must be defiled (by lies) and destroyed (by removing her underpinnings).
The defiling continues. And the underpinnings are weakening. And we whose charge it is to prevent both had better develop a stomach for looking into the ugly faces of those who are causing the destruction. There is no courage in turning away.
~ joanie
Beautifully said joanie.
And pray tell who might that be? :-)
The only change I would make to your excellent post is to substitute "elitists" for "socialists", but that's a technicality.
Human life (whether in-utero, or walking down Main Street) … and truth … are of little value to a socialist.
It's time we understood that.
Bump for later. Thanks for the ping.
China has ditched the socialist model for its economy, and political reform will doubtless follow, in time.
I believe Red China is the evil empire of our time and that they are in fact behind the scenes in much of the external and internal confrontations we face. Not that they are necessarily the puppet master by any means...we have plenty of foreign and home grown enemies who are still bent on socialsim/marxism/totalitarianism and tyranny on their own...but they are certainly trying to use those others to their advantage. Where possible, they are also trying, IMHO, to orchestrate them for their own purposes.
They have adopted a fascist economic model, but at their root they are still the communist masters. I believe a failurte to recognize this will lead to a much, much worse conflict and confrontation than what we faced with the Soviets. And precisely because the Chinese have been intelligent enough to abandon the failed marxist and maoist economic failures. They are showing us and the world a psuedo-market economy that is still rooted in totalitarianism and they are soaking up our own capitol, monies and manufacturing to fuel it. If it ever reaches its own critical mass...we are going to be in very deep trouble...I believe we already are.
I believe we must find a way to confont them as Reagan did the Soviets and bankrupt them before that time...to the point that they fail and the people within China either fall into civil dissarray or create their own republican institutions (they have done so before). The vast majority of the people in China are still significantly repressed, problem is, 8-10% if 1.4 billion is a BIG number and can easily be used to make it appear as though reform is in the wind when it is not for the other 1.25 billion.
Anyhow, as you well know, for this reason, along with the continued outsourcing of most of our manufacturing, the continued rampant illegal immigration on our southern borders, the continued push for more and more "command economy and control" modules in our own government and because of the continued external threats from other sources is why I have written the:
Dragon's Fury Series of Novels.
Hopefully it is a warning note that can be heard by more and more people...one that causes them to reflect and think about current circumstances in a light that fosters more vigilance regarding the foundational principles which have made this nation what it is...and to which you spoke so well.
Awesome.
Thank you so much for drawing my attention to this.
Should be required reading for every American.
Socialism and its proponents on the American Left are EVIL and must be confronted and defeated.
Good stuff, joanie...thanks fer the ping to the article and your comments...MUD
Thanks for the ping to his "masterpiece" (and it is).
Yours is one, too.
Joanie, thanks for your fine post, and to you and saquin and First_Salute for bringing this article to our attention. My only objection to it is that the article assumes that the America hating was something new in 1993.
Certainly, the Tories weren't terrifically psyched about an independent America, although I don't know that they can be called "America haters." Their sympathies, certainly, weren't loving of the American ideals. That God endows individual man with equal liberties to all other men was unthinkable to stratified, aristocratic England. Still, it was revolutionary only insofar as it denied devine rule. King George was amazed when Washington resigned his commission, for the King realized that Washington could have been king. He didn't. That was revolutionary.
That all men are created equal was yet concept. Therefore, there wasn't much objection to it.
Andy Jackson broke through the American aristocracy with his comman man's revolution. Indeed, into the early 20th Century, Democrats could brag that their party brought suffrage to all white men. This was true.
I say this as an aside to the next movement which was knee-jerk anti-American, for it was of the effort to extend the ideas of the revolution to all men, but was unaccepting of any delay or failure in it. I believe that the America-hating purists do so from their self-generated disgust that those ideals are not bestowed upon anyone anywhere. That is, any failure, anywhere, is the failure of the American revolution itself. If there is a starving, betrayed soul in Palestine, it is America's fault, for America's promise wasn't fulfilled. Same for anywhere and everywhere else, except, of course, here, where that dream is available to all who are willing to do what it takes to make it happen (such as following the advice of late of Bill Cosby). Sadly, they don't see that in America, those who succeed do so because they do that which creates success, and those who don't succeed don't do what those who succeed do, and -- and this is what makes America unique -- there is nothing in the political America that denies them that opportunity. Critics fail to understand that it is defeated culture that creates defeat, and vice versa.
In the 1840s and 1850s, the abolition movement arose under the proposition that the ideals of the Declaration ought be extended to all men. This, indeed, was Jefferson's triumph -- that which made him a hypocrite -- that "All men are created equal." Had he not written it, he'd be no hypocrite. That he wrote it made for the idea of abolition. The abolitionists, though, as today's fools who denigrate Jefferson, got impatient fast, and denied him of his right, and denigrated him for the particular failures of the Declaration rather than applauding him for making those failures failures as opposed to social norms. So, when slavery wouldn't just go away at their word, the abolotionists turned on that which first empowered their movement, the Declaration. The radical abolitionist Wendell Phillips said -- and believed, that the Constitution was "a league with death and a covenent with hell."
Leftism is impatience. It is right as is the clock, twice a-day, and it is only so right in history.
This appeared again in the 1880s and 1890s in the populist revolts against the railroads the banks. And again, most prominently, in the election of 1912, when the socialists took almost 900,000 votes, taking therein the highest pure socialist portion of the vote ever in America. Now, before you go saying that the socialists in those days were more pure, and that socialism has taken hold of one of the two major parties, so every election they yank a good part of the electorate and American sentiment, regardless, I put to you that while the socialists of 1912 polled 900,000, the "Progressive Party" of 1912 polled over four million votes and 88 electoral votes -- while standing very directly for such things socialistic as that written by its major press organ, The Outlook,
"You may go on with your business so long as you conduct it subject to the regulation of the Government, make goods which conform to its standard, pay wages and provide conditions which are satisfactory to its superivising Bureau, charge no greater price for the product than the Government regards as just, and take no illegal measures to crush your competitors."
This was the party of Theodore Roosevelt in 1912.
I'm no expert on the New Deal, although I know enough of it to know that the lesser ideas of the 1912 progressives were enacted into law by FDR and his Congresses under the agency of extreme crisis. I also know that that period, as with the progressives, had no patience for the American Founding. And, as with the progressive period, it was hardly beneficial to American blacks, and, in its attempt to mandate equality, it evaded core matters of equality of opportunity. The great 1950s and 1960s civil rights movement was a product of the American Founding more than anything else, except its success in bringiing equality and justice to more people across a people than any other political system in history. As in sports, when the team is getting beaten like a dead mule, it acts like one; but when the team gets closer, it tastes victory, and fights for it more heartily and more successfully. Civil rights in America are a product not of dissatisfaction but of success.
Socialism and Leftism and anti-Americanism is bastardization of Americanism. Without Americanism, however, there is no complaint.
To the Left, when Americans die, it is the fault of the success of America; when others die, it is because America has failed to meet its promise. They are so foolish.
Thanks for the thoughts and the article.
Excellent embellishment of the author's fine analysis...
In one short paragraph you have struck sham socialism at its core -- which is anathema to "God, family and country," as well as "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" -- in one fall swoop.