A Guide to Truth from the Hard Right
By William J. Dodwell
Liberalism defined
Political liberals can be defined in three groups, all dangerous:
· Category 1 – Intelligent proponents who earnestly believe in liberal tenets and actively promote bigger government. This group includes subversives who operate stealthily behind the scenes, as well as well-meaning do-gooders, academics and guilt-ridden uber rich.
· Category 2 – Also intelligent, but phony, apologists who do not really believe in liberal principles but pretend to espouse them for their own political, professional or social advantage. Included are many journalists, other media professionals, as well as Hollywood celebrities, whose careers depend on adherence to liberal views and who therefore foster political correctness. Corporations also subscribe out of regulatory and media pressure, as well as commercial expediency.
· Category 3 – The dupe, as in Lenin's “useful idiots”; the naïve, the docile, the apathetic, the ignorant, and the just plain stupid; also, able bodied parasites who shirk personal responsibility and opt for government largesse. Collectively, they embody the increasingly threatening "low information voter". Lacking in critical thinking skills, they are particularly susceptible to demagoguery, superficial arguments, psychological tactics, and emotional appeals, and thus readily succumb to political correctness. And they are legion. Slothful government dependents and most youth fall into this category.
Categories 1 and 2 encompass the leftist intelligencia and activist leaders intent on advancing their worldview through support for government expansion and control executed through taxation, spending and regulation. They claim virtuousness in always standing up for the underdog, regardless of merit, and seek power by wielding influence through mass media support and funding from labor unions, naïve aristocrats, and of course, taxpayers. They promote a one-world globalist mindset that makes them inclined to dismiss sovereignty, and they overly conciliate, or even capitulate, on the global stage. They obsess about race and diversity inserting them in almost every issue in an effort to defuse opposition. And they minimize the traditional family but sympathize with same-sex marriage, and capitalize on the social costs of single-parent homes dependent on government assistance. And, of course, they promote the environment as fragile in need of government protection from rapacious man-made agents. Category 3, by far the largest liberal group, comprises the pawns. They consist of the uninformed masses who succumb to that media and activism. They are the “Kool Aid drinkers”.
But liberalism is not just an intellectual construct. It also operates on an emotional level. Liberals think limitless income redistribution is humane and deserving no matter what, especially at the expense of the rich. They dismiss personal responsibility as a factor and disregard the overall economic impact of government dependence. Heart rending indoctrination about the downtrodden and aggrieved, indeed brainwashing, plays an important role. Trying to understand its irrational acceptance can be like trying to comprehend why so many smart Muslims embrace Sharia law (other than because of the retributive justice meted out for noncompliance). To be sure, in the ideological wars, some liberal vs. conservative differences are philosophically irreconcilable. They’re like debating a preference for strawberry ice cream over butter pecan, or reconciling the proverbial glass-half-full and glass-half-empty dichotomy.
Liberalism is a truly pernicious force that must be contained. It threatens our economic and social freedoms in the name of a collectivist agenda aimed at expanding government, often while enriching lawyers in the process. It adopts a globalist egalitarian mindset under the guise of promoting world peace and helping the poor and aggrieved that denies our exceptionalism. Liberals advocate income redistribution as they ignore the distinction between the industrious and the lazy, the talented and the ordinary, the risk-takers and the risk averse in the belief everyone is equally entitled to a certain level of prosperity. The Left practices overt discrimination through affirmative action, assigning entire segments of the labor market to minority groups to effect a perverse notion of equality. The liberal powers that be also encourage a certain anti-white male bias in the professional business ranks to maximize diversity and diminish institutions considered traditional Republican bastions. The leftist orthodoxy gets a huge assist from partisan and corrupt mainstream media that suppress or denigrate dissenting expression. And, of course, the left wing agenda is also celebrated in academe and Hollywood where many advocates seek to damage America through extreme secularization. (Oh yes, we’re not supposed to challenge their patriotism.) In exchange for campaign contributions from special interests, notably unions, environmentalists, and the plaintiffs’ bar, liberal politicians support legislation written to grow the government bureaucracy and create litigation opportunities for lawyers, often to the detriment of individual rights. Indeed, trial lawyers control the U.S. Senate.
Some liberals want to destroy America by exploiting the docility of the masses to create a Marxist society. This model is predicated on an ersatz altruism that promotes mass equality for the sake of ingratiating the “have-nots” to the beneficence of the state, largely through transfer payments. The goal is to achieve a certain critical mass that ultimately defuses the challenge of the “haves”. The Left tries to disarm the people by dumbing them down, especially through media and the public education system, in order to foster the acceptance of ever larger government as expressed through votes for Democratic candidates. In the process, the schools de-emphasize critical thinking skills making youth susceptible to leftist propaganda throughout their lives.
Liberals distort opposing points of view and freely hurl gratuitous charges of racism, hate, extremism, and mean-spiritedness at every turn to suppress dissent. They demagogue every issue along class, racial or gender lines to divert attention from substantive argumentation. And media co-operate, viciously mocking conservative figures as they have Sarah Palin, George W. Bush and Dan Quayle, but would recoil in horror if the same treatment were directed at liberal icons such as Nelson Mandela, Ted Kennedy, or even Oprah Winfrey. As a consequence, many conservatives cower in silence afraid to express what they think in the face of fascist political correctness, thus facilitating the liberal advance.
And, the Left revels in the double standard, conveniently exempting its own for their hypocrisy. In addition, it designates meritless liberal symbols for worship. For example, the media celebrated a seemingly ordinary Princess Diana for years, and even since her death, for doing yeoman’s work appearing in grandstanding photo-ops with starving African children and besmirching the British crown, which the Left considers an anti-liberal elitist emblem. Moreover, the Obama administration in particular flouts the Constitution with impunity in the attempt to achieve a new social order by circumventing or ignoring the law through agency mandates, executive orders, and unelected czars.
The conservative response
Philosophically, the Comprehensive Conservative promotes truth over politics. This means recognizing and expressing reality while upholding what is right regardless of political expediency. We say that which politicians cannot, that is, we criticize voters as well as public figures. The Comprehensive Conservative does not always agree with the Republican Party, but is compatible with the tea party. To the extent truth can be reconciled with the body politic without compromising principle, we support non-violent, lawabiding political activism. To be sure, in order to prevail elections must be won. Otherwise, we risk suffering the consequences in the form of usurious taxes, stultifying regulation, slow growth, and a diminished quality of life.
Conservatives might take solace in believing that eventually enough economic damage from liberal policies will turn the electoral tide, but in the meantime problems can become intractable making the solutions all the more difficult. Astronomic debt from chronic socialism did not deter voters in Europe. Indeed, today government indebtedness and control might be irreversible there in the face of politically unsustainable austerity. Likewise, persistent Democratic policies in the U.S. could create entrenched conditions that preclude a return to normalcy that depends on economic growth and the attendant free market opportunities that conservatives promote.
The conflict between politics and truth is particularly acute in view of President Obama’s re-election in which over 70% of Hispanics and Asians voted Democratic. Indeed, the changing demographics of the electorate and the growing entitlement mentality throughout threaten conservative representation in government. But our approach is to stand on principle, particularly regarding the immigration issue, and support a concerted effort among conservatives to educate and persuade the uninitiated. This is a daunting task given the predisposition to government largesse among so many voters, their susceptibility to class warfare appeals, and their demonstrated disinterest in substantive communication about the economic and social wellbeing of the nation.
After all, this is an electorate that elected and re-elected Barak Obama despite an unqualified and questionable background, and an abysmal record of policy failure and venality during his first term. Alas, too few Americans are intellectually engaged in the issues that threaten our freedom and quality of life, not even relying on those who expose the truth for them. Too many succumb to the lies and frivolous distractions of the Left. As such, our struggle between philosophy and practice may be insoluble, at least in the short term. Perhaps we can appeal to the fence sitters. And maybe this presidency is anomalous because of its racial significance to so many voters. But next time around we may have to deal with the same sentiment about gender significance in Hillary Clinton.
Nevertheless, we stand for truth rooted in the principles of our founding. It is the ultimate disinfectant against liberal orthodoxy if expressed repeatedly in industrial strength proportions in the context of particular problems. It is hoped that this steadfastness will enable conservatives to prevail in the end, even in the face of attacks in the name of the mindless liberal litany of racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe and xenophobe.
Conservatives are fighting back in defense of limited government, individual freedom, free enterprise, the rule of law, property rights, federalism, secure borders, and a strong military as codified in the U.S. Constitution. We support the meritocratic principles that established this country against overzealous egalitarian degradation, and we express a visceral antipathy for political correctness in the process. The rallying cry of disaffected Americans is in full force, especially motivated by the abuses of the Obama administration. The tea party ascendancy and the drumbeat of talk radio and allied media will still gird the conservative electorate for wholesale change. Politics are polarized perhaps more than ever – too much for Republicans in Congress to compromise in legislation. Rather, they must block the Left with every vote until conservatives achieve sufficient representation. In the absence of victory, we support a non-violent obstructionist policy whereby no bill is better than a bad bill. Ignore the “extremist” label as it has become meaningless in its current application to anyone who embraces the basic tenets of our founding.
Since many conservative politicians tend to be too pragmatic to do what’s right all the time, it’s up to grass roots activists to intervene. We must goad elected officials to ensure truly conservative representation and correct the disconnect common between them and their constituencies. In other quarters we have to educate voters to change public opinion that will hold politicians’ feet to the fire at the ballot box. In the process, we have to persuade an irrational electorate that votes according to such factors as racial significance, likeability, single and sometimes frivolous issues, and a perverse guilt.
We reached critical mass before. We have to regain it and build on it in the wake of Obama’s re-election. Conservatives have to promote their principles by debunking the lies and propaganda of the Left, and wooing the hearts and minds of the voting public while never compromising core beliefs. Thus, the conservative idealogue is not to be disparaged. We must win converts wherever possible through well articulated and aggressively delivered messaging, as well as galvanize the base to achieve an optimal turnout in elections. Conciliation is not the answer as too much is at stake. We’re long past polite differences of opinion with the Left. Animosity is inevitable. Our country’s survival depends on it. Let’s rumble.
© 2012 William J. Dodwell