Yesterday was an amazing day in politics. As we now know, a deranged gunman with a grudge (above) killed five people in a newsroom at a small newspaper in Maryland. As if on cue, Liberals knew instantly who to blame. In the several hours before anyone knew who the shooter was, Politicians, media personalities, and entertainers beclowned themselves by blaming Donald Trump and Milo Yiannopolous (as if he matters!). “They have blood on their hands!”, they bellowed from their perches. Among them several sitting Congresspeople.
While it is conceivable that a Trump supporter could commit an act like what occurred at The Capital Gazette, it was highly unlikely to have been a Conservative. Remember, some Liberals also supported Donald Trump, which is how he got elected in the first place. I, like everyone else, had no idea if the gunman was a Trump supporter (he was not), but I was nearly certain it couldn't have been a Conservative one. How did I know?
Pre-emptive political violence is a phenomenon of Liberal behavior. Take the example of Presidential assassinations; no President has ever been assassinated by a Conservative:
- Lincoln, a Republican, was killed by a Democrat actor. (the Robert DeNiro of his day?)
- Garfield, a Republican, was killed by a deranged person ostensibly from the same party, but he was a lawyer who spent time on a "free sex" commune. No Conservative, he.
- McKinley, a Republican, was killed by an Anarchist.
- Kennedy, a Democrat, was killed by a Communist.
What are the odds of this being a coincidence?
And take for example what's been going on recently:
What explains this phenomenon?
And take for example what's been going on recently:
- Senator Rand Paul has been shot at, physically attacked at his home, and had his family threatened by an ax. Three separate incidents, all by violent Liberals.
- Ajit Pai, FCC Chairman, has had constant threats on his life, the most recent resulting in the arrest of a Liberal who specifically threatened to murder his kids.
- EPA Chief Scott Pruitt was verbally assaulted by a Liberal while dining in a restaurant.
What explains this phenomenon?
At the root of the Liberal/Conservative divide are four intertwined dichotomies:
First, at the base level, Liberals and Conservatives make decisions through different pathways. Liberals decide emotionally, and Conservatives decide rationally. That’s not to say anyone makes decisions entirely one way or the other. Most people are a blend of both with one mechanism dominating on average. Think of the Yin Yang Taoist symbol where each side has a piece of the other.
The second part has to do with limiting principles. A rational mind understands the concept of limiting principles and operates within those constraints. An emotional mind knows no limits. Everything is on the table. That’s why artists, musicians, entertainers, and entrepreneurs tend to fit in the Liberal category. These are the people you want to party with, and whose concerts you want tickets for. But it’s also why violence is an option; if everything is on the table, nothing is not!
Third, is the difference between Liberals and Conservatives on the importance they place on the individual vs the collective. Conservatives believe that individual rights are supreme over any group or collective. Liberals believe the opposite, putting group and collective rights at the top. Leonard Nimoy's character, Spock, in the original "Star Trek" series said it most succinctly, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." Therefore, it becomes easy to see how an individual or several individuals can literally become sacrifices to aid a group or a larger collective. Millions have been killed under this Liberal assumption in Communist countries by the likes of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.
Fourth has to do with an understanding of the nature of man. Conservatives intuitively understand that any sustainable system must acknowledge the nature of man. Liberals believe that they can control men, essentially denying their nature. This cannot be done without totalitarian control, and that can only be had with force. It goes that way throughout history when liberalism progresses to socialism and communism, as it always tries to do.
Third, is the difference between Liberals and Conservatives on the importance they place on the individual vs the collective. Conservatives believe that individual rights are supreme over any group or collective. Liberals believe the opposite, putting group and collective rights at the top. Leonard Nimoy's character, Spock, in the original "Star Trek" series said it most succinctly, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." Therefore, it becomes easy to see how an individual or several individuals can literally become sacrifices to aid a group or a larger collective. Millions have been killed under this Liberal assumption in Communist countries by the likes of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.
Fourth has to do with an understanding of the nature of man. Conservatives intuitively understand that any sustainable system must acknowledge the nature of man. Liberals believe that they can control men, essentially denying their nature. This cannot be done without totalitarian control, and that can only be had with force. It goes that way throughout history when liberalism progresses to socialism and communism, as it always tries to do.
Donald Trump is indeed capable of being misinterpreted by one of his supporters who might someday commit an act of violence against a “fake news, enemy of the people" news-outlet, but it won’t be one of his Conservative supporters.
That, I can tell you!
[SIDE NOTE ON RACIST VIOLENCE]
Racist violence is usually portrayed as coming from the "far right", the implication being that it is Conservative violence. It is not. For example, when the "Alt-Right" marched in Charlottesville and a participant drove into protesters killing one woman, the media portrayed this as being the act of a Conservative Trump supporter. Watch this Prager U video below to understand why this is not the case. (Hint: the alternative to the Right is the...Left. The Alt-Right has three core beliefs that are in direct opposition to what Conservatives believe, but are in full agreement with what Liberals believe.)
[SIDE NOTE ON RACIST VIOLENCE]
Racist violence is usually portrayed as coming from the "far right", the implication being that it is Conservative violence. It is not. For example, when the "Alt-Right" marched in Charlottesville and a participant drove into protesters killing one woman, the media portrayed this as being the act of a Conservative Trump supporter. Watch this Prager U video below to understand why this is not the case. (Hint: the alternative to the Right is the...Left. The Alt-Right has three core beliefs that are in direct opposition to what Conservatives believe, but are in full agreement with what Liberals believe.)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Behave.