Why is Hollywood Rehabilitating Totalitarianism?

Townhall.com ^ | July 27, 2010 | Nick Rizzuto

[No Truce With Kings]

"Why is Hollywood Rehabilitating Totalitarianism?"

Ooh! Ooh! I know! I know! Pick me!!!!

It's because . . . they are Hollywood.

Want a better explaination? Read this.

[mjp]

Director Woody Allen recently suggested that "it would be good…if [President Barack Obama] could be a dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly." Allen’s statement is a good example of how the Hollywood political culture is completely lacking in principle, as those words could only be uttered by an individual who has no appreciation for or grounding in the classical liberal political tradition. Allen’s apparent comfort in saying such a thing leaves little doubt that this kind of ignorance now permeates Hollywood.

Despotism is defended by libtard political philosophers, by philosophers of law,by jurists, and lawyers.Their basic error consists in giving law precedence and primacy over natural justice, rather than the other way around. Instead of regarding natural justice as the fountainhead from which man-made law springs,the source of its authority, and the measure of its legitimacy, the libtard view turns things upside down. It regards positive law, the man-made law of the state, as the sole source of justice, the only determination of what it is right or wrong for individuals to do in relation to one another and to the community itself. The denial of natural rights, the natural moral law, and natural justice leads not only to the positivist conclusion that man-made law alone determines what is just and unjust, it also leads to a corollary which inexorably attaches itself to that conclusion that might makes right. This is the very essence of absolute or despotic government.

[Ted Grant]

Liberals tend to be results oriented, while conservatives tend to be process oriented. This is one of the main reasons that the two sides have difficulty communicating.

In the health reform debate, liberals insisted that there were 30 million uninsured and that they wanted them insured. They were focused on the goal and weren’t terribly concerned with how we got there.

During the same debate, conservatives were concerned with the process: what would the new system look like, how would it be administered, etc. Liberals have no patience for those kind of details on the ground level, and leave that up to professional bureaucrats.

In this context, it’s easy to see where Woody and friends are coming from. They are fixated with the goal and don’t care what they have to do to get it, since they have a consensus that the goal is a good one and is the priority.