Progressives on the Brink

American Thinker ^ | May 24, 2018 | Jeffrey Folks

[Kaslin]

Because they view President Trump in these extreme terms, progressives view themselves not as violent extremists, but as "the resistance."  But resistance implies that there exists something worthy of resisting.  The progressive resistance began just seconds after Trump was declared the victor on election night.  The resistance was not engendered by anything Trump had actually done.  It was just a refusal to accept any candidate who varied from the left's own line of thinking.

That sort of reaction, reminiscent of what happened with the election of George W. Bush, is a dangerous turn in American politics.  It implies that the left refuses to accept any political action that does not accord with their own ideology.  The left now demands the right to govern permanently and without opposition, regardless of the outcome of elections.  This is evidence that the left today has lost respect for democratic institutions and that, if they were ever to find themselves firmly in control of government, leftists would not willingly relinquish power, even if voted out in a fair election. The Trump era has exposed the dark, vindictive, and oppressive side of liberalism, but that side has always existed.  "Progressives," as they prefer to be known, have a long history of extremism going back to Woodrow Wilson's Sedition Act of 1918 and FDR's many power-grabbing activities, including the 1937 attempt to pack the Supreme Court.  Progressive thinking, because it attempts to impose an extreme vision of society on a public that resists its measures, is by its very nature authoritarian, antidemocratic, and elitist.  Liberalism is not the "party of the people," as it has long claimed to be: it is, rather, a despotic philosophy that because of its intention of imposing "advanced" thinking on the masses can govern only through deceit and force. 

[arthurus]

it will take several conservative POTUS’s in a row to restore order

It would take several Trumps in a row. The most conservative pols I can think of could not continue to prevail against the progs. Cruz, my onetime favorite can't do it. Trump showed us that. Trump is not an ideological Conservative. He is a practical businessman who understands that the progs have to be flushed. The nation is too rich for such a flushing to be more than a hiatus on the way to the Oligarchy.

[laplata]

Exactly. Please see my post 19.

[donna]

In 1995, the Democrats were forced to unlock doors and allow Republicans inside offices at the Capitol that they had not seen since 1954. Remember how they hated Newt:

The 1994 elections resulted in Republicans gaining 54 House and 9 U.S. Senate seats. When the Republicans gained this majority of seats in the 104th Congress, the Contract was seen as a triumph by party leaders such as Minority Whip Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, and the American conservative movement in general.

[for-q-clinton]

OH man I remember that. The house check writing scandal and all the inbred corruption from the democrats and the get along GOP. That was a huge earthquake. And 2016 was even more HUGE. I was anti-trump at first, but then I got onboard when it was Hillary vs. Trump. And I’m glad I was wrong in the primaries. Trump is the real deal. He has the backbone no other politician has.

[Bryanw92]

>>We’re going to see violence.

That is the bottom line. They declared that we are an enemy to be destroyed. To them, compromise or consensus is us surrendering to them. We kill them or they enslave and kill us. There is no other way anymore.

[laplata]

>>We’re going to see violence.

That is the bottom line. They declared that we are an enemy to be destroyed. To them, compromise or consensus is us surrendering to them. We kill them or they enslave and kill us. There is no other way anymore.

><><

Yes, that’s the only way now. We’d better realize that they will show us no mercy at all. But that’s already obvious to most.

[donna]

We’ve been trying to drain the swamp for decades now. I’m thinking Trump is an answer to prayer.

[Elsie]

>>We’re going to see violence.<<

We’ve had that guy who rampaged at one of Trump’s properties; ranting and raving some kind of BS...

[PGalt]

Comey, Clapper and Brennan should be on the FBI Most Wanted list...

Oh, wait...

“Who will protect us from our protectors?” - Mark (RIP) Scott

[elcid1970]

Then that acquaintance wants you dead, too. Think about it.

[laplata]

That’s a good example. It’s going to get worse.

[Sivad]

I was a very young teen when Mario Savio led the fight
for “free speech” on the Cal Berkeley campus. Years later
it hit me that his version of free speech was only free
only for liberals.It has played out that way. Fairness
turns out to be whatever helps the left and hurts the
right. No, defeating them is the only option.

[SkyPilot]

Thanks for the article Kaslin. Some excerpts:

If it is true that President Obama ordered Attorney General Lynch and Director Comey to avoid bringing charges against candidate Clinton and to spy on the Trump campaign with the intention of throwing the election to Clinton, and if high officials at the FBI knowingly requested a FISA warrant on the basis of evidence known to be false, these actions will represent the most serious political crimes in the history of the country.

It is true.

The present-day atmosphere of political division does not excuse criminal behavior on the part of members of either party. Yet the Democratic Party has been radicalized to the extent that illegal behavior now seems to be an everyday reality. Hopefully, leaders within that party will realize the dangerous ground they are on and pull back before further crimes take place. If not, America will suffer even more division – in effect, a political civil war – with great damage to our republic.

The Democrats won't pull back, but only double down. We are already in a political civil war, and have been for quite a long time. If the power elite, the globalists, members of the media, and Democrat leaders are cornered with imprisonment, they will stop at nothing in an attempt to bring down the country.

It may be a long summer: riots, mayhem, violence.

But, we have finally have a President who has both eyes wide open. And, if he has to, the President would not hesitate to call upon our military to quell the violence.

IF (a big if, but I am hopeful) the elite and Left are finally held to account, and we start seeing arrests, indictments, and trials - the Left will react like a cornered animal. In fact, many of them already are reacting that way. What we need to do is pray first, and keep up the pressure. We need to continue fighting.

[vette6387]

” Liberalism is not the “party of the people,” as it has long claimed to be: it is, rather, a despotic philosophy that because of its intention of imposing “advanced” thinking on the masses can govern only through deceit and force. “

Yes, and this is why the Left never really tells you what they want to do, because if they were to do so, they would be finished as a political entity. It’s only when they achieve any measure of control, that the idiot voters find out what they are “really” all about, and then it’s usually too late. Just look at Venezuela.

[vette6387]

“The left has spun off into total lunacy.”

No, that’s where they’ve always really been. Right now they are really pulling out all the stops, because they can see that in Trump, they have met their destructor. Incrementalism was working fine for them, until Trump came a long and exposed their game. Now they see that “all that they have worked for” is likely going to go down the drain.

[Bryanw92]

>>But that’s already obvious to most.

It’s not. Even here in on FR, many (most?) still hold to the idea that there is middle ground or that the Left will “come to its senses” and join us. They still get upset at a joke that might make the other side not like us. They still want to take the mythical high road to a consensus instead of taking the high GROUND for a victory.

[oldtech]

Never figured out why the Left are called progressive. Seems pretty regressive to me.

[bert]

It dates back a hundred year.....

To what extent did President Woodrow Wilson provide a “New Freedom” for the American people?

When Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat won the election of 1912 he received only 42% of the vote. The Progressive candidates; Roosevelt, Taft and Debs totaled 58% of the vote. Clearly America still sought progressive change. Wilson, an educator and the son of a Presbyterian Minister, recognized this and embarked on a program to continue Progressive reform called the “New Freedom.”

[laplata]

Right on!