Understanding the Progressive Mind
All self-styled revolutionaries are criminals in the making.
40 comments
[Order David Horowitz's new book -- I Can't Breathe: How a Racial Hoax Is Killing America: HERE.]
Everyone in Washington understands the basic causes of inflation. If you print more money than you have real assets like gold to back it up, you devalue your currency and make everything cost more. If you declare war on fossil fuels, shut down pipelines, close vast oil fields like Anwar, and don’t approve drilling licenses generally, you cause the price of everything to go up, because virtually everything requires energy to produce. If you spend vast amounts of government money inducing individuals not to work, employers will raise wages to entice them to work, and that, too, will cause prices to go up. It’s not rocket science.
Despite understanding these consequences, the Biden administration has instituted all these inflationary measures, and avoided taking responsibility for them and the suffering they cause. They did this to advance their progressive agenda, which is really a reactionary socialist agenda that has not changed its fundamental premises since 1848, when Marx published what is and has always been the progressive agenda. The Biden reactionaries denied their responsibility for the costly and dangerous inflation their policies have created in the way they normally cover up their assaults on the public - with two obvious lies. First by claiming that the inflation was “transitory,” and then by blaming it on Vladimir Putin – calling it “Putin’s price hike.” The brazen character of these lies and the fact that Biden has kept repeating them in the face of devastating refutations reflects the fact that the Democrats know full well what they are doing, which is stoking the fires of a volatile inflation which is causing profound hardship to the very constituencies they pretend to care about – people on the lower rungs of the economic ladder.
There is another consideration to take into account. Runaway inflation has the power to destroy societies. Money is a social glue. It provides incentives to work and to be law-abiding. It is a bargaining chip that can deflect and avoid social violence. When you destroy the value of money you destroy an indispensable social bond. That is what happened to the Weimar Republic in the 1920s, and what led to the election of Adolf Hitler in 1933.
What, then, could the Democrats be thinking in pouring fuel on the fires of inflation? The Biden Democrats who have poured trillions of dollars into an already heated economy look on the United States Treasury as a bank, which can be robbed. As progressives, they feel licensed to rob the nation’s bank by the nobility of their mission, which is to save the planet. In their eyes, the money represents the fruits of exploitation made possible by a “white supremacist” capitalist system. In such a system, money is not earned but is extracted by socially sanctioned power. This is a system which they are pledged to destroy.
The money progressives rob from the nation’s bank will be redistributed according to the dictates of “social justice” – a measure based on their social whims. In the name of social justice, for example, the Biden regime has allocated $7.5 billion to put a black female astronaut on the moon because she is black and female. This is a preposterous virtue signal that violates the very spirit of America’s color- and gender-blind Constitution. But a government that has no respect for the Constitution or the nation’s laws needn’t be bothered by that.
Unfortunately, Republicans, and conservatives generally, are too polite, and therefore ill-equipped to confront the criminal nature of the Democrat Party and its government in Washington. It’s as though Republicans don’t want to embarrass thieves caught in the act and hurt their feelings. The harshest words Republicans will use to describe the Democrats’ campaign to free hundreds of thousands of violent criminals and stimulate a national crime wave is that they are “soft on crime.” Democrats – progressives – are not soft on crime, they are pro-crime. They regard it as “social justice.” Mobs of mainly black predators looting department stores in broad daylight is to them “reparations” – a socialist redistribution of income that provides “equity” to a group allegedly – but never specifically - oppressed.
Some years ago the Communist historian Eric Hobsbawm, wrote a book, widely praised on the left, called Primitive Rebels, about criminal gangs in Sicily whom he saw as Marxists avant la lettre. In other words, their criminality would be seen as social justice if they had draped their activities in the language of progressives like himself. Hobsbawm, by the way, was showered with academic honors notwithtanding that he had no regrets about the 100 million victims that his comrades slaughtered on their way to the new world. To Hobsbawm the promise of a socialist paradise was so great, that it was worth the risk that another 100 million innocents might be slaughtered to achieve it the next time. Leftism – progressivism – is a criminal mentality.
All self-styled revolutionaries are criminals in the making. What makes them revolutionaries is their rejection of the system itself, its institutions and laws. If not for this rejection, they would be reformers not revolutionaries. The rationale justifying the criminality of today’s progressives is Critical Race Theory. Critical Race Theory maintains that the Constitution is a “white supremacist” document – even though the words “white” and “black” don’t appear in its text. Because it is allegedly a white supremacist document designed to create a white supremacist society, “anti-racist” social justice warriors are bound not to respect either the Constitution or the laws within its framework.
How far have progressive criminals succeeded in subverting our system? Ketanji Brown Jackson who is about to become a Supreme Court Justice is a believer in and promoter of Critical Race Theory, which means she considers the Constitution a “white supremacist” document that social justice warriors like her are bound not to respect. And the entire Democrat Party thinks that’s okay and is ready to support her.
David Horowitz is the founder of the Freedom Center and the author of many books, including The Enemy Within: How a Totalitarian Movement is Destroying America.
Posts
Excellent analysis. Trotsky said it openly, revolutionaries have to be criminals.
𝘾𝙝𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙚 𝙔𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙇𝙞𝙛𝙚 𝙍𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩 𝙉𝙤𝙬! 𝙒𝙤𝙧𝙠 𝙁𝙧𝙤𝙢 𝘾𝙤𝙢𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙩 𝙊𝙛 𝙔𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙃𝙤𝙢𝙚 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝙍𝙚𝙘𝙚𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙔𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙁𝙞𝙧𝙨𝙩 𝙋𝙖𝙮𝙘𝙝𝙚𝙘𝙠 𝙒𝙞𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣 𝘼 𝙒𝙚𝙚𝙠. 𝙉𝙤 𝙀𝙭𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙞𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙉𝙚𝙚𝙙𝙚𝙙, 𝙉𝙤 𝘽𝙤𝙨𝙨 𝙊𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙔𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙎𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙𝙚𝙧... 𝙎𝙖𝙮 𝙂𝙤𝙤𝙙𝙗𝙮𝙚 𝙏𝙤 𝙔𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙊𝙡𝙙 𝙅𝙤𝙗! 𝙇𝙞𝙢𝙞𝙩𝙚𝙙 𝙉𝙪𝙢𝙗𝙚𝙧 𝙊𝙛 𝙎𝙥𝙤𝙩𝙨 𝙊𝙥𝙚𝙣... 𝙁𝙞𝙣𝙙 𝙤𝙪𝙩 𝙝𝙤𝙬 𝙃𝙀𝙍𝙀.....> http://Www.NETCASH1.Com
What the revolutionary criminals are doing today will have long term ill effects on all of us. But I'm just paraphrasing.
It's obvious that they have enacted the Cloward-Piven strategy. It's an offshoot of the Fabian Society's goal of crashing the World, and, thru fire, remaking it to their desires. The progressive agenda is anything but. It is regressive in every way possible.
Confucius once said “If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things.” If, on the other hand “names” are correct, you can’t get away with as much.
Lincoln once asked “If we call a dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?” He knew that a dog has four legs whatever we choose to call the tail. A tail does not become a leg just by saying so, and a man does not become a woman just by saying so either.
Ketanji Brown Jackson said she can't define a woman because she's "not a biologist". Of course she can define “woman” without being a biologist; that was just a dodge to avoid the question. If names and language can mean anything, as the left always insists, then the the law which is composed of names and language has no meaning. No one who, like Ketanji Brown Jackson, thinks that way should be allowed any where near a court of law except as a defendant.
Excellent. In my own experience of over half of the last century, I've known several so called "progressives" and yes, they were criminally inclined. They would easily lie, cheat & steal to get their way without any hint of shame. In hindsight, they were a bunch of hypocritical, wasteful adults with petulant minds who would never admit being wrong about anything even when the facts or evidence would smack them upside the head. It was always obfuscation and diversion whenever confronted with their own obvious mistakes. And the constant clean up the earth lectures and one liners about climate change. Uugh! They were the only ones constantly leaving behind a big pile of trash for someone else to clean up. (bottles, plastic cups, plates, paper trash, etc.) Around 2013, I made it a rule to never allow those kinds of people into my circle of friends again.
Because they are ideologues and so the ends justifies the means, even if the means are lawless and irrational.
The Founding Fathers were also ideologues. They had an ideology. A radical, revolutionary, and extremist ideology of individualism, liberty, and capitalism.
"A majority without an ideology is a helpless mob, to be taken over by anyone . . . . Political freedom requires much more than the people’s wish. It requires an enormously complex knowledge of political theory and of how to implement it in practice....
A political ideology is a set of principles aimed at establishing or maintaining a certain social system; it is a program of long-range action, with the principles serving to unify and integrate particular steps into a consistent course. It is only by means of principles that men can project the future and choose their actions accordingly.
Anti-ideology consists of the attempts to shrink men’s minds down to the range of the immediate moment, without regard to past or future, without context or memory—above all, without memory, so that contradictions cannot be detected, and errors or disasters can be blamed on the victims.
In anti-ideological practice, principles are used implicitly and are relied upon to disarm the opposition, but are never acknowledged, and are switched at will, when it suits the purpose of the moment. Whose purpose? The gang’s. Thus men’s moral criterion becomes, not “my view of the good—or of the right—or of the truth,” but “my gang, right or wrong.” - Ayn Rand
And so I was thinking to myself , how can I tie Objectivism and my hatred of altruism to anything and everything, and in the process show the world how much I hate America and what a coward I am. Hmm. I know, I will cut and paste a boring, extra long screed by Lenny Peekaboo for the 1 millionth time -- THX 1138
You been gone for a while. How sweet was that? I guess you had to be put in your coffin and buried in the dirt of Transylvania to get your mojo back, and just in time for Easter too.
A new month but the same old bile always emanates from you.
Because the near non existence of Whites in Africa proves CRT works ?
Even the leftists are learning that leftism is elitism in practice, maybe you won't need the republican party after all: https://rumble.com/vzeu09-it-begins.html
The real problem across the entire political spectrum is the refusal of the citizens of a self-governing country to accept and act on the sovereignty that is ours, alone. We HIRE legislators to make laws WE want. We HIRE executives to enforce OUR laws. In doing both of these, we delegate the authority for running a country under law to our employees. Running the country remains OUR responsibility.
Responsibility cannot be delegated. When those we hire fail to enforce our laws, the responsibility for enforcing them remains with the sovereign people: American citizens... We the People. THEY have failed in the power and authority delegated them. But WE are failing our responsibility to ensure our desires are carried out.
If the administration refuses to enforce the laws at the border, the RESPONSIBILITY for doing so remains OURS. If the government-unionized teachers refuse to teach our kids what they need to know to become fair, productive members of society and future voters, the responsibility to remove those teachers remains ours - they only are OUR employees hired to do what WE want.
This is not a description of anarchy - it is the description of a sovereign people in a self-governing nation. America is OUR nation - NOT that of the legislative or executive or judicial branches; they are hirelings. We must accept and act on OUR responsibility for OUR country while we still can.
Radicals, extremists, fundamentalists, absolutists are, for good or evil, the ones who shape the world, who push a society in the direction they see as noble, as virtuous, as right.
The Founding Fathers were not conservatives, they were radicals and extremists for liberty and capitalism. They were violent revolutionaries. Unfortunately they were political revolutionaries only but not ethical revolutionaries also. They were fighting for individualism, liberty, and capitalism on a moral foundation of altruism and self-sacrifice for others that almost immediately began to collapse after their revolution. What is needed is not a "conservatism" return to the year 1790, 1800, 1820, or 1870, but a furtherance and completion of their radical revolution, this time radically overthrowing the moral code of altruism and self-sacrifice and replacing it with the moral code of rational selfishness.
The Left today has its radicals, extremists, fundamentalists, absolutists. The Right today has impotent conservatism --- that's WHY the Right is losing. "Conservatism" is an umbrella movement, and umbrella term, riddled with devastating and paralyzing contradictions that can not succeed without a profound examination and moral revolution of rational selfishness untying the Gordian Knot of its contradictions.
"Today’s “conservatives” are futile, impotent and, culturally, dead. They have nothing to offer and can achieve nothing. They can only help to destroy intellectual standards, to disintegrate thought, to discredit capitalism, and to accelerate this country’s uncontested collapse into despair and dictatorship....
What are the “conservatives”? What is it that they are seeking to “conserve”?
It is generally understood that those who support the “conservatives,” expect them to uphold the system which has been camouflaged by the loose term of “the American way of life.” The moral treason of the “conservative” leaders lies in the fact that they are hiding behind that camouflage: they do not have the courage to admit that the American way of life was capitalism, that that was the politico-economic system born and established in the United States, the system which, in one brief century, achieved a level of freedom, of progress, of prosperity, of human happiness, unmatched in all the other systems and centuries combined—and that that is the system which they are now allowing to perish by silent default.
If the “conservatives” do not stand for capitalism, they stand for and are nothing; they have no goal, no direction, no political principles, no social ideals, no intellectual values, no leadership to offer anyone.
Yet capitalism is what the “conservatives” dare not advocate or defend. They are paralyzed by the profound conflict between capitalism and the moral code which dominates our culture: the morality of altruism . . . Capitalism and altruism are incompatible; they are philosophical opposites; they cannot co-exist in the same man or in the same society." - Ayn Rand
"The Americans were political revolutionaries but not ethical revolutionaries. Whatever their partial (and largely implicit) acceptance of the principle of ethical egoism, they remained explicitly within the standard European tradition, avowing their primary allegiance to a moral code stressing philanthropic service and social duty. Such was the American conflict: an impassioned politics presupposing one kind of ethics, within a cultural atmosphere professing the sublimity of an opposite kind of ethics." - Leonard Peikoff
And so I was thinking to myself , how can I tie Objectivism and my hatred of altruism to anything and everything, and in the process show the world how much I hate America and what a coward I am. Hmm. I know, I will cut and paste a boring, extra long screed by Lenny Peekaboo for the 1 millionth time -- THX 1138
You been gone for a while. How sweet was that? I guess you had to be put in your coffin and buried in the dirt of Transylvania to get your mojo back, and just in time for Easter too.
It's true what they say: All self-styled revolutionaries are criminals in the making.
The Founding Fathers were in legal fact ---- CRIMINALS.
By the laws of the monarchy of Great Britain and it's monarch dictator, King George, the Founding Fathers were self-styled revolutionary criminals violating the dictatorship's laws. The Royal Dictatorship proceeded to treat the Founders as criminals and would have gladly hanged every single one for crimes against the state.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.” ― Ayn Rand
And so I was thinking to myself , how can I tie Objectivism and my hatred of altruism to anything and everything, and in the process show the world how much I hate America and what a coward I am. Hmm. I know, I will cut and paste a boring, extra long screed by Ayn Rand for the 1 millionth time -- THX 1138
Thank you Captain Obvious. Like you actually think you imparting some heretofore unknown fact about the Founders. I think Ben Franklin beat you to it and he said it all in one sentence. That is how arrogant and ridiculous you are.
You have talked many times about your contempt for the Constitution and the Founders, so don't even try to come off as some great patriot. Objectivists are not "conservatives". We do not seek to preserve the present system, but to change it at the root. In the literal sense of the word, we are radicals --- radicals for freedom, radicals for man's rights, radicals for capitalism. THX 1138
You would have been thrown out of the Constitutional Convention. The Founders would have looked at you as if you were from Mars.....or Munich.....or Transylvania.
I actually ran into some Objectivists over at American Greatness. He was pushing Atlas Shrugged and then launched into an incomprehensible screed, kind of like your girlfriend and boyfriend do. They didn't have much fight in them though. After posting a couple of links they went away.
Some things or people, like you, will never fit into any system of government. Loser. Why can't you leave us alone to fix the mess the Democrats have created and to avoid the mess that you would create.
Anwar?
Horowitz undoubtedly meant ANWR (Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve), a vast area in northern Alaska. Only a tiny part of this (about 3 per cent, close to the Arctic Ocean) was tapped for oil, which exists there in abundance. There's as much oil there as there is in Saudi Arabia. Biden, of course, stopped the drilling.
Yup. My brother and I backpack every year in the Sierras or Rockies - have been since the mid-1960s. We both appreciate the environment, views, nature, etc. He backpacked through ANWR with the Sierra Club many years ago. The place oil companies want to drill is, "an icy swamp full of bugs; drill it;" it is NOT the picturesque country of anti-oil ads... And, by not drilling it, we only abuse foreign environments in countries with zero or no regulations or laws to protect it: Mexico, Russia, African countries, Valenzuela. Those closing ANWR are making the planet dirtier, not cleaner.
Mr. Horowitz is almost unique in his ability to reveal the evil beneath progressivism in simple, powerful language.
One of the main drivers of the destruction of our space program was public complaint about the public cost of such endeavors. It is no secret these complaints came from those relying on government largesse and their enablers.
Remember this song?
https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/gilscottheron/whiteyonthemoon.html
If we put a black woman on the moon, will that help?
Exactly. The Left are criminals on a social scale.
By what moral standard are you defining the crime? By the moral standard of altruism and self-sacrifice for others the socialism and collectivism the Left is fighting for are not immoral or criminal but noble and virtuous.
Is Robin Hood really a noble fighter for objective justice or "social" justice?
"It is said that [Robin Hood] fought against the looting rulers and returned the loot to those who had been robbed, but that is not the meaning of the legend which has survived. He is remembered, not as a champion of property, but as a champion of need, not as a defender of the robbed, but as a provider of the poor. He is held to be the first man who assumed a halo of virtue by practicing charity with wealth which he did not own, by giving away goods which he had not produced, by making others pay for the luxury of his pity. He is the man who became the symbol of the idea that need, not achievement, is the source of rights, that we don’t have to produce, only to want, that the earned does not belong to us, but the unearned does. He became a justification for every mediocrity who, unable to make his own living, has demanded the power to dispose of the property of his betters, by proclaiming his willingness to devote his life to his inferiors at the price of robbing his superiors. It is this foulest of creatures — the double-parasite who lives on the sores of the poor and the blood of the rich — whom men have come to regard as a moral ideal. And this has brought us to a world where the more a man produces, the closer he comes to the loss of all his rights, until, if his ability is great enough, he becomes a rightless creature delivered as prey to any claimant — while in order to be placed above rights, above principles, above morality, placed where anything is permitted to him, even plunder and murder, all a man has to do is be in need. Do you wonder why the world is collapsing around us? That is what I am fighting… Until men learn that of all human symbols, Robin Hood is the most immoral and the most contemptible, there will be no justice on earth and no way for mankind to survive.”
— Ragnar Danneskjöld in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, Part II, Chapter VII
"Understanding the Progressive Mind" To really understand a Liberal or progressive med,one must first understand that is a regressive mind. It is more about having a base nature, primal instincts and attitudes. The me generation on steroids
Excellent article! The Democrats have become fully Corbinized
@THX 1138
The most important thing to realize from your on-point comment below is that 19A pretty much prevents the execution of your ideas. We can have the republican liberty our Founders gave us by returning to the franchise they created to sustain it. Or we can have the empathetic democracy we have created by expanding the franchise to universal, overturning the dejure republic, substituting for it the defacto democracy they did their best to avoid.