April 24, 2010

American Liberals and Neo-Nazis: Intention is the Mother of Atrocity

When society sees spectacles such as the recent Neo-Nazi protests on the city hall lawn in Los Angeles, they understandably recoil in horror. Society is shocked and appalled because this is a group who's values are repugnant to most Americans. Instantly people connect the imagery used by the Neo-Nazis... the swastika...the jackboots...with a very dark chapter in human history. Most importantly, people make the moral connection between these protesters core philosophy and the Third Reich. They invariably represent totalitarianism... they represent death.

Few people are willing to be a part of that kind of ideology. Sam the Skinhead has to carry around the "perception-burden" of Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler, and ultimately the Holocaust. Those associations are precisely what makes Neo-Nazis so threatening to Americans - more so than even their actual ideology - which from my research is undefined from group to group. The thinking is: We know what people like these are capable of; History is our guide.

Is it always?

Behold the American Liberal. Somehow, they have found a way to divorce themselves from the atrocities that their core philosophy has caused. It is a philosophy whose end result, has been totalitarianism and death on a scale that Adolph Hitler couldn't have believed possible with his Final Solution. That core philosophy -if you didn't know- which Bolsheviks, Maoists, American Liberals, Progressives, and others all have in common is: Marxism. The times and places may change - but Marxism is like the mitochondrial DNA.

In America, we openly have proud "Socialists" and "Liberals". They were no more present at the Killing Fields of Cambodia than these California Skinheads were present at Auschwitz - yet just as morally culpable. In many cases, some American Liberals are in fact more culpable than any rank and file Neo-Nazi in terms of collective guilt for the results of their chosen philosophy.

This philosophy has outlived Nazism by six decades and counting. It has a estimated body count of at least 80 million souls ( some estimates exceed 100 million - but we may never know). These victims were not men, women and children who died as casualties of war but were exterminated because of who they were (or thought to be). This is a number set against the calculated genocide of the Nazis Final Solution. In just two examples, the 1937-38 "Great Purge" which 'liquidated' 690,000 people and 1932-33 genocide which 'liquidated' 4 million Ukrainians and 2 million Southern Russians, we already have eclipsed the Nazi Holocaust before it was ever even conceived.

In one of history's sick jokes - the Soviets sit as judges at NurembergPhotobucket

There have been attempts to explain away a connection between the past Marxist-inspired horrors and American Liberals - but all have fallen flat. Their defense has been based on ethnocentrism (we would do it better), historical supposition (if only Trotsky had succeeded Lenin), or simple denial (isn't the Khmer Rouge a type of make-up?). Liberals have even attempted name changes like "The New Left", in an attempt to put distance between themselves and their brethren- the only problem being that Socialist atrocities continued post-Stalin and in Africa, Central America, and Asia had yet to reach their apex.

California Democrat Maxine Waters Proudly Sputters Out the Plan

So now we get to the crux of the issue. Why do we as a society openly scorn one evil system while tolerating another? Do we as a society have room in our moral consciousness for only one 'bad guy' no matter how evil and rotten others may be? What is the difference?

The answer is simple: Intention. Marxism sells equality and utopia for all. Nazism sells the superiority of a particular race and utopia for a selected group. One is inclusive and the other exclusive. Both believe in command economies and a subservient market. Both lead to death and destruction. One, however, was beaten and destroyed on May 8, 1945. The other continues to exist in some wretched form or another.

Liberals sell intentions which are easy for people to grasp and morally innocuous. Just like the song, "Imagine", they sell a vision for the world that is hard to argue with...except of course for the fact that the pursuit of it has caused more misery and death than any other system ever conceived- including Nazism. When one cloaks their actions in the mantle of equality and tolerance, people are afraid to question them - even if it is clearly a rouse to hide ones own thirst for power and other base desires. It is brilliantly evil.


Selling "intentions" is precisely what American Liberals do. They cannot sell "methods" because they have none which have ever worked. They cannot point to past success here in America because every Marxist-inspired program is considered unsustainable and "broken". They most certainly cannot point to past successes in the rest of the world lest people become aware of the horrific consequences which are the reality. (Some will inevitably point towards western European socialism as a model of success - but this is the easiest precept to debunk and I do so here: Sending Liberals to their happy place.)

Liberals have gotten a pass simply because of their supposed intentions...Hope...Change...all intangibles which cannot in themselves be argued against...Feed the Children...Health Care for All. If history has taught us anything it is that: Marxism and Socialism cannot attain these things. In fact, the history of Marxism in practice has taught us that: Intention is the mother of all atrocity.

Worldwide the Left have used their grand intentions to excuse every manner of barbarity, destruction, and genocide. They don't feel they should ever have to account for anything because they intend a better- more just and equitable world for all. American Liberals have the gall to claim some moral high ground and to be a foil to Neo-Nazis and other despotic movements. If that isn't the pot calling the kettle black...

So the next time you see a news report or article about Neo-Nazis protesting some place or another, ask yourself why there isn't a crowd shouting down the clown wearing a Che Guevara or hammer and sickle shirt in the counter-protest. The very fact that nobody does shout them down, or that we have politicians who proudly call themselves Liberals and Socialists, is a testament to just how insidious and successful the American Left has become. They are the ones who are in power - not some bald-headed kids with anger issues.

Stay Tuned, Friends!

Interesting Links:
Chavez's monument to Che destroyed in less than two weeks
Liberals' Dirty Little Secret: The ethnocentrism of the American Left
Sending Liberals to their 'Happy Place': The Truth about European Socialism

Stay tuned....

April 12, 2010

The Mayor's Gift of "Free"

My first epic political poem about a kingdom and their new 'mayor of the palace'. Enjoy.

Not so long ago,
and not so very far
A kingdom unlike any other stood
and shone as if a star

Invention and innovation,
freedom from tyranny,
the mayors could only rule as long
as the sum of years: one plus three

No, things were not always good
but life was far from bad
though some had forgotten it,
they had more than other Kingdoms had

Now in this place there lived two groups
who held their sway at Court
elected to manage many things
and to the people they'd report

First there were the '
who thought that
they knew best
'Intentions' were what mattered most
though they rarely found success

Next there were the '
prudent and profound,
but unable to communicate
their plans would run aground

Outside of Court lived all the rest,
people of all kinds
Once frugal and independent,
but growing lazy over time

So busy collecting pleasurable things,
they ignored the events at Court
In turn their children took little time
to understand management's report

One day a man with glowing eyes
from the ranks of
said, "Let me be your Mayor,
and I will change this useless Court!"

The people cheered, it sounded good
he seemed a special man
While the
Impotates looked befuddled
sitting on their hands

Dazzled and nearly dizzy
the people crowned him like a King
hoping they could quickly return
to collecting their pleasurable things

But the Mayor had a plan
to make himself beloved
a plan that busy people thought
would come from Him above

He strutted out one lovely day
on the Courts broad balcony
And shouted to all the people below
"I will give you free electricity!"

Pediwarts cried tears of joy
"Dear people, is He not grand?"
Again, the
Impotates sat
firmly on their hands

Many folks were not so sure
some even were aghast
They had heard of schemes like this
destroying kingdoms in the past

One came up from the crowd
asking if it was true
and, "who will pay for such a thing?"
"Well...someone richer than you!"

"And what of those kingdoms,
destroyed in the past?"
"Fables, good people, fables!
Our kingdom will surely last!"

Poor folks were taxed but little
and indeed the lights seemed free
Others paid a little more
because they had the means

Day and night people used their lights
they had no bills to fear
they used as much as they saw fit
double from prior years

Electric plants could not keep up
demand had grown too large
So the Mayor said "To certain things,
we add a wee surcharge"

So plants were built called Kingdom Co.
and though they came on line
they only could keep up with things
for a certain time

Pediwarts now quite pleased
asked, "If electricity is a right...
then why not water? clothes? or cars?
All basic things for life!"

The Mayor decreed, it came pass,
and dissenters were shouted down
"How dare you question free things for all!"
Impotates made no sound

The money to get all these things
was difficult to acquire
so new taxes were created
with reasons quite inspired

So many things now called "free"
enough money could not come in
the ranks of those once 'of means'
now had grown quite thin

The poor would have to pay their share
and laws were put on walls:
six hours of light was now the max
and clothes- one size for all

A car would have to last ten years
and water - one litter per day
The best chance for the food you want-
is to be in line by eight

Of course the Mayor and his friends
lived by different rules,
Pediwarts stood in no lines
and had the pick of food

In a kingdom once so shinning bright
on a course they had embarked...

a once proud people sat wearing rags
for eighteen hours in the dark

The end.

stay tuned....

April 8, 2010

Liberals' Dirty Little Secret

Merriam-Webster defines ethnocentric as "characterized by or based on the attitude that one's own group is superior." I can find no better term to describe liberals in America today. But not in the way you might think...

That liberals wholeheartedly believe their own political group to be superior is no revelation - one could level the same charge at us centrists and conservatives. The dirty little secret of liberals is, however, that the group they deem superior is none other than - Americans! And not just Americans, but specifically the white, Anglo-Saxon, protestant variety!

I are asking how it's possible that liberals, the very same group which equates even casual patriotism with nationalism, could actually believe Americans to be a superior people.How is it possible that liberals, who invented racial witch-hunting, are unrepentant WASPs? But if one looks closely at liberals in the age of Obama the answer is clear.

We all know that liberals fancy themselves intellectuals - although I am not sure how being a 'lit' or art major enables one to clearly assess political and economic theory. Then again, being clueless has never stopped actors, musicians, or other entertainment types from blabbering on about leftist theology. So let's give them the benefit of the doubt: Liberals are smart - much smarter than the rest of us.

(I will give you a moment for the nausea to subside.)

Now that we have that out of the way, let us see how our 'intellectual' progressive friends are harboring secret thoughts of American superiority.

Certainly American Liberals know that since "Communism" was never achieved, or achievable for that matter, what we have instead are examples of Socialist nations of varying races and cultures.

Stalin was the progressive's progressive

Certainly educated liberals know about the carnage and suffering caused by socialist regimes worldwide: Ceausescu in Romania, Lenin and Stalin in Russia, Kim Il Sung in Korea, Mengistu in Ethiopia, Neto in Angola, Najibullah in Afghanistan, Mao in China, Pol Pot in Cambodia, Ho Chi Minh in Viet Nam, and many others...

Over a decade before the "holocaust", untold millions died in search of Socialism.

Certainly they know that worldwide consensus puts the death toll of the quest for a socialist 'paradise' at nearly a 100 million people in less than a century - an unparalleled crime against humanity. Even if one was to combine every alleged abuse by the United States since its founding, it could not approach the atrocities wrought by the Left since 1918.

Certainly Liberals know that no matter what type of propaganda, cajoling, or force, was used that few of any elements of past socialist system were efficient, viable, or able to fulfill its intended purpose. They know, that in reality, the standard of living was miserable for the masses in the "Socialist Republics" and under no other system have "workers" suffered so much.

Liberals: Dead Cambodians mean nothing to us.

Certainly they know that Socialism was never a popular moment in any of the countries it existed in to any degree. It was, however, forced upon the people by comparatively small violent groups. They know that nearly all of the Eastern European nations, devastated by World War Two, had their socialist governments foisted upon them by the Soviet Union (with the complicity of Franklin Roosevelt and his immediate successors).

Certainly American Liberals know it was popular movements which helped free people from state socialism. In an ironic twist, it was often labor unions (ie. the workers) and students which were on the front lines against the socialist dictatorships. And none of the countries have reverted back to their former systems regardless of the difficulties they now face. They know that these people value their freedom far more than any of the supposed benefits of Socialism.

Certainly they know that life is miserable in the countries still living under Socialist regimes. One has only to compare their standard of living with ours, or ask a Cuban why he risks his life to cross the ocean on a raft, or study the fate of Tibetans and the destruction of their culture.

Socialism was a plague Africa wished had never come.

So how do American Liberals justify their eagerness for socialism with so much recent historical proof of its ineffectiveness and bloodshed? Since we assume they know all of these things, then one can only conclude that liberals think that somehow "Americans will do it differently...Americans will do it better!"

To American Liberals, all of those examples of failed state socialism are nations of Slavic peoples, Asians, black Africans, Magyars, Hispanics, and other 'inferior' peoples. We can only conclude that, since the vanguard of American liberalism is made of moderately wealthy, Anglo- Saxon descended whites, that they honestly believe that they can do what no others have been able to do - make Socialism work.

It is either stupidity...or ethnocentric bravado.

What else could it be? If you observed a line of a hundred people who, one by one went into a dark room, only to come out one by one, beaten and bloody, what could one concluded? One should think that whatever was happening in there was bad. Yet in this case, liberals think that there must be something wrong with all the people who have gone in! Or perhaps it was the way they went in that was wrong!

This logic would be acceptable if we had only a few isolated examples. Yet what is a better warning against adopting a philosophy that has failed in so many different cultures and circumstances? Would it not be wise to learn from the experience of others?

Will the these victims lost lives be in vain?

(And the worst part? The fact that each socialistic element which has been adopted by America, itself, has failed. So, not only are Liberals ethnocentric... they are blind to their own failures.)

Let me leave you with words from a Russian blogger (someone who knows a lot more about socialism than any Berkeley graduate) named Stanislav Mishin: "...the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple...Prime Minister Putin, less than two months ago, warned Obama...not to follow the path to Marxism, it leads only to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride..."


Friends, I really hope it does not get to that.

stay tuned...I am just getting warmed up!