UI – Part 562 – Morphing Societies – The Parties of Persuasion (Right and Left)
IHistory is a story about changes in attitudes. Over time, the result of wars, leadership and the environment, societies changed, drifted apart or were reborn. In the U.S. we are unique as two sides of the aisles, denoted by political parties, have become the voice of We The People. Having 50 states makes multiple parties nationwide almost impossible. At the national level a third party to elect a President, for example, would need to be present in each State.In Europe each country can have segments of society defined by their common desires or objectives, each with their own political Party, and vote for representatives in each locality. The Party with the most votes has a representative and when seated in parliament can offer many faces. Parties can arise in a short space of time. A recent example, the Brexit Party in the UK.
Right and Left
Political views today have been shaped by history and immigration.
The Right, the conservative, peace loving, small government, capitalistic, personal achievement, independent minded thinkers have historically been the rulers. They embrace, maintain and enforce the Constitutions of their founders. They did not always do the right thing to keep order, as dissidents were too often sidelined, the debate minimized, and business leaders and successful industrialists prevailed in keeping policies enacted that favored growth (and private business). They love their countries and want them preserved, the ideals, the freedoms and the culture. But they recognize the need to maintain population growth, and if not from the indigenous base unable to produce 2.15 per couple, they will allow for immigrants, properly vetted as additions to society, to assimilate and be productive. Needing to expand a work force does not suggest any immigrant will do; they must be able to work, be financially secure or well educated, be a benefit to the host country, and not burden the host by being needy and arriving with a hand outstretched for welfare or other entitlements. Chain migration, when family members, immediate and/or extended, can accompany an approved immigrant, problems, burdens, have arisen.
The Left, the intellectual elites, the liberals, the philosophers and free thinkers have competed for control and the ability to impose their views, making laws as they go, viewing constitutions as fluid. Today they include the feminists and those having a loose definition of what is a human being, going well beyond male and female. They have taken upon themselves the mantle of guilt for the trappings of wealth, life-styles, and gracious living to appear more accommodating of the oppressed and the poor. They may reach out their hands, while keeping them far from their own pockets to support the poor. They want the government to provide what they will not provide themselves, government becoming charity to subsidize and welcome the needy from foreign lands, properly vetted or not. Assimilation is not an objective; adding to their cubbies of victims to whom they make appeals is. In opposing the ‘right’ they take stands that are counter to their own philosophy. They adopt practices of the more militant forces that have succeeded, such as the political Islamists, and remain ignorant or refuse to accept reality, when they enable, allow and embrace ideologies that would in direct confrontation destroy the leftists. Philosophically and ideologically Islam and Progressive Liberals are at opposite poles, yet the left appears to welcome Islamists, at least when the argument suits them.
As societies have become more dependent upon workers from the outside, due greatly to a lower desire for children, foreign cultures arrive. Are they to join their new world brothers and sisters or live independent of them? When parallel societies are permitted, gettos or neighborhoods or like minded, like language (not the host country language) communities, form and avoid blending in. The Left allows this. The Right would prefer it not happen. The political climate of the day dictates and as has happened in Europe the emergence of voices that shout above others are now heard demanding privileges for their ideological ways, using fear tactics. What is feared has been demonstrated by terrorist acts and violent protests where innocents are harmed and one ideological group has demanded recognition and protection via contrived blasphemy or hate laws, even claiming as an ideological believer they are a race. It is as the liberal view allowing a person to be the sex or identity they choose, regardless of what others actually see.
The Politicians – Those that Govern
It is the leaders that are elected that enable what is happening today to occur. Whether or not you favor the direction, it is not in your hands, except when you vote. Then you must insist the voting system is not subject to corruption. There are moneyed liberals and conservatives that spend wildly to advance their own viewpoints or biases. It is the dollar that supports the politicians that sacrifice their souls to those that fund their campaigns and aide them in obtaining power. They will owe their power to the purse that aided them in their conquest. Some are selected to run for office, ideal candidates considered viable in obtaining the votes needed. The candidate becomes the puppet of the left or the right. Those who hold the most strings get to say how we live our lives and who our neighbors become.
Beware of corrupt politicians whose voice is not their own, whose pocketbook grows too quickly, and whose double-speak, rhetoric, sounds sweet and tempting, but uses a forked tongue approach. Victims of the left are more than victims, they are victim-victims. Used and abused.
When looking back, history will support the conclusion that conservative values rest with ‘supremacy,’ but that is no longer the case. Strong men at the time took the reins of government and supported and directed businesses to grow globally through colonizing poor countries and accessing resources and a labor force to mostly benefit the homeland. The leading countries were Western European and Great Britain. Their empires grew along with their wealth. The treatment given indigenous people in the colonies are suspect. Those that catered to the wishes of the overlords were given a modicum of respect and in some cases able to vastly improve their lot. Dissension, however, was scorned and met with lashes, incarceration or even worse. Slave labor was common. However education was introduced and access was given to a broader population which aided in progress being made.
Christian values, even Christianity, was introduced and promoted. Churches were visited with regularity and the Bible, the Word of God, was taught and used often as a guide and to reflect positive lifestyles as God would approve. The earliest primers in schools were Bibles. The ABC’s and basic math were accompanied by the good book.
At the turn of the century, into the 1900’s, change took place. Those downtrodden and used, rebelled and the threat of a military to curb their resistance was dismissed. There was the Boar War, as an example, India and Gandhi as another. Colonies sought Independence. They were able and could operate on their own; often prepared, educated, and equipped for this transition by those who had taken advantage of them in the first place. Positive change, not without resistance, was occurring. God became an instrument for their freedom. The masters taught them and they wanted to be their own master.
A Changing Landscape
Change led to the elimination of slavery, in Europe, the UK and in America. The motherships let the colonies go, for a variety of reasons to include the cost to maintain distant armed forces as protection and growing resistance towards colonization itself. A conservative, Abraham Lincoln, fought the South to achieve freedom for those enslaved. It was the liberals that held on to slavery. Such transitions are never easy, but when it reflects upon doing the right thing, what is good for all people, open minded as to the common good, with laws promulgated accordingly, a better world evolves.
Oppression is the obstacle that was most overcome. Opportunity for everyone became the mantra. The ‘supremists,’ noted before, came around, reluctantly at first, but in time, willingly. They were selfish (as we all are in many ways), wanting for themselves more than for others, and that is called ‘racism’ by the left. But the ‘left’ have selfish preferences too; the hypocrisy of their claims is much too obvious. The Left, gun in hand aiming at their feet, wants more for themselves than others. That is the reason for the Socialist leaning. And even when they lose they do not always admit failure, or concede. History shows that the Democrats often criticise their opposition for past practices that were indeed their own indulgences. Slavery, the KKK, cities in ruin, even raids on Social Security, are a mark on the history of liberal politicians and administrations.
Fiscal responsibility rests with conservative values; balance your checkbook. But that is not the case for the liberal whose spending practices create deficits that are viewed as simulative, as long as money can be printed at will.
The transition did not occur overnight. Politicians, Democrats in fact, well into the early and mid-1900’s debated, resisted and campaigned against segregation, but then attitudes and views morphed into a greater acceptance of others. The voting booths were opened to more citizens, including women. It is still happening.
The supreme white dominators were challenged. They met resistance that opened their hearts and minds, but not without attempts to stay the course. The light of truth and reality faded the thick fabric as acceptance as equals emerged. Progress has been made. More is needed. Progress continues. Yet there will always be prejudices. There will always be a desire to achieve or make gains over others. But a blending of all parts of society has been underway.
A criticism of the liberals, the left, is their penchant to use the past and forget progress to champion their platforms. Ignorance is made more obvious as social media spreads the truth, fighting as it must fake news. People are smarter than propagandists realize.
What can a color become? In America ‘white’ has come to symbolize conservative values, which the left appears to regard as representing a superior attitude. ‘White’ has had many meanings, such as purity, the good guys (with the ‘white’ hats), good versus evil as white versus black, innocence, a new beginning as a blank canvas, and simplicity. Yet when labeled conservative ‘white’ has been used as a target of attack. Attack their authoritarian or controlling nature, the holding the reins of power, even the words they may speak or the ideas, even programs, that may come up with. What comes from the side of the ‘white’ cannot be the truth as the left sees it, whether or not in reality it is true.
“White” is a catch-term, not a color, for those wanting less government, balanced budgets, equality of opportunity, less regulation, less entitlements, less immigration, and protected borders. The ‘whites’ are not alone in their thinking. Fairness, free trade, and incentives for productivity fit the conservative ‘white’ construct. In addition a practical, rational, and affordable approach to new methods or programs finds its foundation in the conservative circle of oversight. It is called out by the left as the anti-socialism faction, against the needy, the dependent and the oppressed. That would suggest too anti-immigration. But the color is not what is important in this new ‘white.’ It is an identity for all having conservative values or viewpoints, regardless of ethnicity or race, which is used to stir emotions that are evidenced by hatred. Added to the term ‘white’ is ‘privilege.’The Social Justice Warriors, using their media cohorts, introduce concepts, using words that paint pictures opposite the true meaning. An example, “earned income tax-credits.’ There is nothing earned by those who receive such payments from the IRS. They did nothing, earned nothing, just received welfare from tax-payers. There are many whites, asians, hispanics and blacks that are privileged. There are many more of those noted that are not.
“White” is the target. Hatred of conservative values is the reality.
The label unfortunately falls to the caucasian, or ‘white folks’ (a phrase used by Michelle Obama), a group gradually becoming a minority. A result is that the caucasian is subject to abnormal abuse as having been the supreme race of history. They have become, in the political diatribe of the left, an ID Group.
Forget the Past
Liberal leftists seldom forget the past, find it hard to relinquish even as great strides have been made in most societies. To give up the past is to yield to a platform where identities have been blended into the whole, as with conservatives made up by blacks, hispanics, asians, and more, not just white. Progress erases many of the human rights abuses and oppressive practices by advantaged entities, but the liberals want to look under the erasure, read what is written under the redactions, and continue as if there has been no progress.
And look at the caucasians on the left that have joined this cabal of haters. Their rhetoric and their hearts and minds are not in sync. They have been educated by liberals that dominate educational campuses, from high school thru University. They have lost their identity, blinded by a passion, peer pressure, and an atmosphere that instills fear should they not agree. If a study were conducted liberal left caucasians may have become feminists, gay, transgender, even altered their race (by filling out forms as black or Indian or the like), in response to the pressure to abhor whiteness.
The most common application of the term ‘racist’ has been against those considered white. It is harder to accuse a black person of racism than a white person, not because they are not just as racist, but out of political correctness. But, today if that black person is conservative or Republican, they are ‘racist’ according to the Left or Democrats.
Political correctness has mitigated the obvious, mellowed the rhetoric and provided cover for class and ethnic hatred. However, today the evidence of past transgressions against our fellow man has arisen from the ashes of burning fires in politics itself. The liberals verses the conservatives. A middle ground, like the middle class, has been emptied and the poles made larger, with evil hearts and wanton desires for power evidenced by acts of defamation, lies, and calls for targeting the opposition in ways to engender violent acts.
Reversal of Trends/Segregation
Odd is that at the moment many adherents of the political Left have come to request they be segregated. This is not based on color or ethnicity, but political viewpoints. Such ‘safe spaces’ are intended to avoid the opinion of others, even when there is truth. Has ‘truth’ become that which is ‘truth’ as a preference, and thus not a rational or proven ‘truth’?
There are those that choose to live in the past and not accept progress has been made and is continuing. I contend that is more for political purposes, or simply an entrenched bias that has blinded those awake in the past and asleep in the present.
Order, peace and prosperity was a goal of the conservatives, the ‘supremacists’ in the past. Today the conservatives still want peace, a preference over chaos, and seek proactive productive populations and a large middle class. They want security for people in their homes, borders maintained, immigrants properly vetted, and a competent, capable police force. Respect for others, even when their views differ, is essential. Sticking to the rule of law is logical and necessary. This makes for order. Conservatives abhor dependency, especially on the government. They are charitable with respect to the sick and needy. They would prefer aide be provided through worship centers and non-profit aide organizations eliminating the burden and expense of the bureaucracy of bloated, inefficient government agencies.
Conservatives may not all believe in God, but they have no problem with those that do. Conservatives have a problem with ideologies that call themselves ‘supreme’ and order their followers to ‘submit.’ When there is no allowance for independent thought, constrained by authorities, political and religious, to never consider other paths, or be exposed, educated, in alternatives, justification to resist and call for change, even elimination, is reasonable.
Thus the problem with Islam, and particularly with political Islam and the jihadists; Islam may be an example of extreme, even fundamental, conservatism. But it goes too far. It imprisons those born into this ideology. It favors one sex over the other in a harmful dominant fashion. As slavery was bad, so too Islam enslaves all those born into or having converted into Islam. There is no way out. Islam hides behind an almighty that insists on fighting those that have not submitted, and those who doubt or debate the structure and laws of this ideology. Yet if prevented from leaving Islam by a religious manmade law that requires punishment for leaving the flock, even death, then a dictatorship of a men’s only club with severe restrictions on choice has been formed.
There are cases too where minorities that complained much as to treatment by a larger class have grown in size to become the majority. They are now doing as those they were most afraid of and using their strength in numbers to take advantage of the new minority.
Where people are free, Islam cannot continue. It cannot co-exist either. It can change (assimilate) or leave. But to change Islam is to eliminate Islam, stripping it of its manmade laws and total domination of followers. It becomes a private faith as all others, not political. The worship center, mosques, and government, state, are not in concert with each other. They are separate. And how this ideology as a religion is practiced must comply then with common law, thus no honor killing, no death for apostasy, same rights for men and women, no VGM, no men permitted to beat their wives, no multiple wives (polygamy – in America at least), no blasphemy laws when Muhammad, Allah or Islam is criticized or debated, and no parallel society. Assimilation into host countries, abiding by the Constitution and laws without question, would be required.
As the ‘Supremacists’ of history had to change, so too must the ideological supremacy and requirement for submission of followers be eradicated.
….to be continued (in a few days). The topic will be ‘A Drift Left,’ and a comparison of philosophical differences between right and left.
Grace and Peace