Twentieth (Twenty First) Century Politics in
The following was written by a friend of mine and sometime political scholar and has been placed on a separate page because of its length. I have never seen the truth put in such a perspective. It shows you just how evil and weak the left is, and makes you think.
Given the level of hatred, vitriol, and vengeful attacks by the socialist on anyone who exposes them and their agenda, he has asked to remain anonymous.
With the end of the Cold War and the wholesale self-combustion of state Communism, it is with a measure of embarrassment I admit my attention from the grand political field did wander. A number of left-wing political organizations in the western democracies either folded-up or performed a re-branding so extensive they were unrecognizable. This seemed to be the end of the matter. Some time later, an awareness grew in me that while the Bolshevik horde may have been driven from fence-line beyond the herbaceous border, there was something nasty lurking under the porch.
While the politics of the Cold War era could be fought with distinctive and accurate political maps, reliable recognition guides to types of enemy likely to be encountered and his ranges and dispositions already known, the threats of post-Cold War era, skulking there under the porch, were not nearly as easy to identify, let alone combat.
The original basis of Marxism and its derivatives was the advancement of the proletariat. With the extensive economic advances of the post-war western democracies, the proletariat found themselves in possession of their own homes, one, perhaps two vehicles, numerous electronic devices for entertainment in the home and the disposable income to afford one, perhaps two foreign holidays per year. Reaching forward from 1920 to 1980, we find the proletariat an endangered species in the capitalist economies. Field trips are required to locate remaining specimens and study them. Furthermore, the proletariat in the communist countries had seen the cure capitalism provided and desired the same. This eliminated subscription to Marxist principles in the proletariat, wiping out most of its support. This presented something of a problem for a distinct sub-species of Marxist which had existed within the capitalist economies, but which had not commanded as much attention as the greater external threats The intellectual left.
The evolution of intellectual left as a species requires careful adjustment of focus, contrast and a polarizing filter in order to distinguish them from their background. I conclude the root of their evolution begins with an interesting aspect of psychology, which may be illuminated thus. One takes a room full of students, or better, a canteen full of factory workers. Explain to them that the management are to choose between two courses of action, and seek their preference. In the first case, all of the workers will receive a pay increase of ten per cent. In the second case, most of the workers will receive a pay increase of twenty per cent, but the individual answering the questionnaire will only receive fifteen per cent.
Invariably, although the latter provides the greatest absolute increase in pay, the workers choose the first course of action. Human beings are social animals, and their position within the society in which they perceive themselves as belonging to carries a great weight in their calculations, a similar weight, perhaps greater, than meeting the biological requirements of their existence.
Italy, particularly southern Italy provides the best of example of this effect. This feature of Italian society is neatly drawn-out by the raptor-like powers of observation of Norman Lewis in 'Naples 44', his account of being an intelligence officer in liberated Naples. The middle-class and upper middle-class Italian families of the south have a high production of offspring, and to obtain respectable positions within society they qualify in the professions such as law and medicine. The result is a large over-supply of professionals who are unable to obtain positions within those professions. This places them in the unenviable position of back-sliding through the strata of society and heading for stations lower than their birth. Italy, in addition to its large proletariat, produced a large quantity of the intellectual left.
Thus, it is not so much their own absolute position both in material terms and within the strata of society, but their relative position to others where their centre of political gravity lies. This tension, angst they feel when others gain power over their own environment is not confined to the envy of wealth, but to any material which allows others to gain a power over their environment. Monetary wealth is merely the most common form of power, or ability to influence one's environment, a derivative of actual property, property being resources. The intellectual left also suffer this angst when they observe others control their environment through the use of resources such as machinery, particularly firearms. While their objections will be leveled at any machinery and method which permits others to control or improve their environment compared to other individuals, firearms crown the realm of left-wing demonology because they are so effective in producing this control of environment and thus this tension.
With a firearm, the armed man may remove at will those who would remove from him either his material advantages or his control of his environment. This ability, this power, is the equivalent of a large windfall gain in cash when expressed in terms of the angst which it produces in the intellectual left, were it to be measured in monetary terms Thus, an armed man is a wealthy man. With several swift strokes the man who possesses skill-at-arms can, should he find himself placed in a position where he must do so, remove immediate threats to the elimination of his material wealth and the disposal of his liberties. He becomes rich, almost before the very eyes of the intellectual left. Small wonder that the intellectual left arrange their demonology with monetary wealth and firearms at its head.
The angst of the left is due to a relative potential difference, a voltage which appears in their minds when others gain what they do not have. This being a relative difference rather than an absolute, they seek not the elimination of wealth and material, but the leveling of its production and possession, the process of which will never the less achieve the former, the elimination of wealth. However, their desire to level the production and possession of wealth is so strong that if they had to eliminate it entirely in order to level it, they would do so.
Just as Marxists would have the means of production taken into centralized control by a disembodied state to remove their angst, the left would much prefer firearms, weapons and skill-at-arms taken into a centralized control, whereby they would feel no more angst at the thought or sight of others influencing their environment so effectively A land where "only cops have guns." The predations of criminals on unarmed citizens would be a small price to pay compared with having to experience the desperate angst of seeing another citizen gain such a powerful control over their environment as the man with skill-at-arms. Furthermore, this cost would not be paid by the left, so they would be in no danger of suffering any angst, since these victims of crime would suffer on the social scale, losing possessions, property and liberty. What a relief this would be to the left in comparison to the angst of witnessing an individual shoot and kill those who would commit acts of violence of upon his person, or rob him of his resources.
Liberals would prefer this power of self-defense to be withdrawn from all of their fellow citizens and subjects in order to make them all equally poor, and vest it in the state only the state shall possess arms; Only the police shall exercise the use of arms. Should the administration of violence be necessary, then the police will carry out this administration, thus removing the desperate angst of the liberal hoplophobes when they observe their fellow men possessing and exercising powers over their own destiny which they themselves refuse to possess.
The inefficiency and impossibility of the state being available to exercise this power, the inability of the police to be omnipresent, and the resulting success of violent criminal behavior is a very small price to pay for the liberals, compared to the horror and envy they would experience at the sight of other citizens gaining, possessing and exercising this power, when they will not possess it nor exercise it. The successful predations of criminals is a small price to pay to relieve themselves of this angst.
Draconian measures against classes of individuals, in this case all gun owners, which follow single shooting incidents (or even non-gun incidents such as the World Trade Center atrocity) are desirable and praiseworthy. But similarly draconian measures against classes of individuals involved in daily gun crime which might involve prescriptive measures against entire areas of inner-cities or races, or classes of individuals such as young unemployed men as just further evidence of the evil of the right. In the former, the elimination of the tools by which homo sapiens controls his environment (weapons) are to be eliminated, regardless of the cost.
In the latter, the victims of capitalism must not only be protected, regardless of how many criminals operate from within their social division, but must be compensated. Sweeping legislation against the classes of gun-owners at any cost ! But equally sweeping legislation against the classes which produce criminals - never !
The fault lines of this angst of the left extend to infinity in both directions Their angst over the dissimilar distribution of power, of wealth, of control extends to both ends of the Cosmos and commentator Thomas Sowell as identified this phenomena as "Cosmic Justice" (described in his book "The Quest for Cosmic Justice"). The angst of the left is so desperate that in their political world, not only all present disparity must be leveled, but all historic disparity, howsoever caused, must be eliminated.
Thus, those whose ancestors were disadvantaged must be compensated and then advantaged in their current societies. Those races or creeds who suffered discrimination within their societies or at the hands of other societies must be compensated and then advantaged in their current societies. For the left, with an ideologically Marxist historical perspective, it is easy to find the disadvantage-ers, the Imperialist oppressors, and just as easy to find those who will provide compensation -- the evil capitalists.
Even the natural physical of cerebral disparity present in the population must be eliminated, because even this gives cause for angst within the left. Those physically or mentally the poorer relative to the populace must be compensated, and compensated using the resources of the evil capitalists. The very processes which draw attention to these differences, such as the grading of performance within schools and colleges, or even language which makes reference to the differences, must be eliminated in order to prevent the production of angst. In the happy socialist utopia the which constitutes the dream of the left, there would be no room for these processes of discrimination.
PC euphemisms in speech - "alternatively-abled
The fact that this very process, of selection and optimization is the very cornerstone of the mechanism which allocates scarce capital to produce the maximum utility to the populace of the nation is inconsequential. The evil capitalists shall pay this compensation and when capitalism is brought to its knees and bled white of its ability to produce, then the final objective of the intellectual left will have been reached. The very means by which their angst has been produced has been eliminated and the poverty of the Eastern Bloc countries and worse will be upon us all. Examples of these phenomena are
A lecturer proposed to a conference that the word "failure" should no longer be used when marking examination papers and should be replaced with phrase "deferred success".
Red ink is evil
Another suggested that work by schoolchildren should no longer be marked with red pen, as red ink was so much more upsetting for the child to see.
The humourlessness of the left
Humor requires a tension between two poles, the collapse of which creates the humor. This tension is an element of the tension which is composes the social-angst which the left seeks to avoid. Large quantities of jokes involve reference to differences in physical or racial disparity Another component of social angst.
NOTHING IS OUR FAULT - NO ONE IS RESPONSIBLE
One of the accelerators of the social-voltage which creates angst in the left is individual responsibility. If individual responsibility is ascribed for reaching objectives such as provision of one's own food and shelter provision of one's own education, provision of one's own safety, provision of one's own defense, then each individual responsibility is a slippery slope which would allow the individual of the left to back-slide into a fiery pit of social-angst should they experience failure.
As a result of this individual responsibility is one of the big demons in left-wing demonology. It must be eliminated. Their ideal is to create collective responsibility in as many areas as possible. The collective responsibility usually takes the form of state responsibility State responsibility for provision of labor provision of food and shelter provision of education provision of safety and provision of self-defense, a contradiction in terms.
With respect to this last provision, the objective of the left is to ensure that that only the state exercises the power of physical control, including deadly violence, over individuals, in order to prevent any single individual gaining power and control over their own environment using their own resources, and thus creating the social-angst which fills them when they see another individual succeed. This is the cornerstone of the left's hatred of firearms and those who wish to possess and use them. Only the complete reservation of these rights for the state will satisfy the cravings of the left. There can be no compromise in their campaign. Their objective is to remove all firearms from private ownership and proscribe self-defense even by the un-armed. A criminal attacking a victim is just a symptom of the evil within society caused by the inequalities brought about by capitalism. He, the criminal, is the real victim the left claim.
I can remember listening to a story being told by an equestrian friend concerning a schoolgirl who had announced her intention to become pregnant and give birth to a child. This she did. After several years the novelty of this child wore off and the child was left with the schoolgirl's parents. I think myself and my friend had muttered some notes of criticism, at which point the wife of my friend blurted "But surely it was the fault of the system for giving her such low expectations." The fact that hundreds of other schoolgirls had not taken this course of action was completely obscure to her.
The advantage of this position is that since fault lies with the system and the system is a capitalist system, then the liability must also rest with the capitalist system and it must compensate the victims or its evils The capitalist state, the taxpayer will not only compensate these victims, but support them.
POLITICAL BATTLE LINES
The mechanism of the gaining of political advantage in representative democracies is the process of gaining the agreement and thus the vote of undecided middle ground of swing voters. The right and the left are not to be convinced of anything other than their own positions since these are expressions of their concrete self-interests. In the left, the concrete reality of their psycho-pathogens, the result of their inability to cope. In the right, the concrete reality of their own abilities, their ability to cope. To pursue the swing voters the intellectual left assert to the public that the right "have harmed innocents" and as a result of this, it is they, they claim, who occupied the moral high ground.
With the extinction of the proletariat as a species, this left the sub-species, the intellectual left, without camouflage. The "harm of innocents" performed by their enemies on the right could no longer be claimed as the basis of their objections. At this, they were faced with breaking cover and displaying naked ambition and self-interest, or finding a new group of innocents whose cause they could champion and would provide them with camouflage for their own ambitions.
Fortunately for them, the fall of the Iron Curtain and the extinction of the proletariat in the capitalist countries came at a time with the discovery of a new and previously overlooked victim of their capitalist enemies on the right The environment. At the last moment, the intellectual left had been saved. They opposed the wickedness of capitalism, not because of their own ends, but in order to prevent "harm to innocents" - the black-footed ferret, among others.
In many ways, the environment made a better proletariat than the proletariat. The nebulous nature of the determination of the effects of human activity on the environment provided thick swampy cover for their operations and enabled them to maneuver to any point within it. Their battle-cry remains "But they have harmed innocents!" and their scheme of maneuver, to position themselves as high-lighting the advance of the political right against the innocents. The harm of innocent flora and fauna Hunting et. al. The harm of innocent children. The production of firearms. The harm of innocent law-enforcement officers "cop-killing ammunition"
The intellectual left are not the have-nots, whom now have, but the do-not-wants whom do not wish others to have. Their objection is not founded on the objection that they cannot have, but that others will have what they will not. The result of this fractionation of the current political base crude should be a new campaign map and a new identification handbook. We should be able to recognize the enemy, and as he appears, either upon the hustings, on the televisor or across the table at a dinner party, have ready the phrases to neutralize his position and expose his true colors.
Our previous handbook worked very well, evidence of which was the desire of communists to re-brand their Communism as 'nationalist', 'progressive' and other camouflaging terms. With the intellectual left championing the cause of innocents, defined as a set of individuals so broad as to include any victims of the right, their political campaigns are wide-reaching. In their case no complex assessment of any situation is required. All the are required to do is seek the victims of the right and they have found their innocents with their cause to champion. Even if these 'innocents' are men like Colonel Gaddafi, Ho Chi Minh, Mau Zedong, Joseph Stalin, and most recently Saddam Hussein.
Whilst I make no judgment as to the character of man who survived in an environment which was kill-or-be-killed and was more successful than those whom opposed him, I also make no judgment in the case of a man who has seen fit to threaten my existence and my interests. In the case of the former, that is his business. In the case of the latter, my only aim is to eliminate him, regardless. In their campaigns involving the defense of innocents of the ilk of Saddam Hussein, their case may start appearing a little thin to their audience and it may be necessary to highlight some extra evil intentions in the right, over and above their normal evil intentions, which requires the intellectual left to support such 'innocents'. In this case, the evil intentions of the right are to obtain more oil for their evil environment-destroying economy, for free - and not matter what the cost (One milliard dollars a month in the current example). Some examples
A Mountaineer once claimed to me that his time in the hills and mountains was frequently disturbed by 'noise pollution' from persons taking lessons in flying helicopters. He implied that this activity should be banned because it polluted the environment. Thinking on my feet, I replied (rhetorically) that 'my helicopter flying lessons taken over pristine wilderness were frequently polluted by various groups of persons with very poor dress sense and color co-ordination wandering about in an otherwise blemish-free landscape.' Naturally, this pollution of the environment should be banned.
Helicopter skiing draws the same opprobrium and for the same reason. Helicopters do the least damage to the environment for the skiers do not have to use huge concrete and steel apparatus to travel to the top of the mountain that they may ski down. Whether ski-tourers, who skin up the mountain and ski down do less damage overall is the subject of debate. It depends on whether you rate the actual presence of the skier in the mountains as damaging or not. He is present for twice the distance of the heli-skier.
From the same well of wisdom came the assertion that the practice of driving convoys of four-wheel drive vehicles across mountain ranges for fun should be prohibited, since it damaged the environment. I responded by pointing out that mountaineers should also be prohibited from hauling their gear to the start of the trail by four wheel drive vehicle for exactly the same reason.
In each of the above examples, the activities at the right were clearly at fault, and the activity should be prohibited because it was an activity of the right. The same activity by the left was blameless and harmless.
At a dinner party, an outraged member of the intellectual left exclaimed outrage at the Iraqi children killed as a result of collateral damage caused US Air Force bomb in the first days of the second Gulf War. He described his agitated telephone calls to the left-wing newspaper to which he subscribed, urging them to make these pictures front-page news. His self-righteous momentum was so great that he never saw coming the easy riposte from the hostess. That there had been no protest or interest in the thousands of Kurdish children gassed by Saddam Hussein. His fall was so heavy he was forced to admit that the hostess was correct, and with that lapse into silence.
In South Africa, the regime of apartheid drew such dense flak from the intellectual left not as a result of the oppression of innocents, but because the regime was supported by the right. The Marxist Mengistu regime in Ethiopia drew no criticism whatsoever. Amnesty International published an annual world guide to human rights and rated each country with a percentage score. The G7 countries scored in the nineties, or low eighties. Ethiopia scored seven percent, and South Africa, eighteen. Clearly the agenda of the intellectual left was not the protection of innocents, but the opposition to the right. The only press coverage the Mengistu regime received in the west as a few column inches which announced its demise. South Africa received yards of column-inches daily. The fact that these particular innocents enjoyed the same level of human rights as they did in East Germany, and twice what they would in Ethiopia gave the lie to the agenda of the intellectual left.
If their agenda had been the 'the protection of these innocents', then they must decide as a matter of policy to pursue either the country with the worst record in the protection of innocents, or, distribute their resources according to the distribution of the oppression of innocents. Any other agenda is another agenda entirely. They would have no trouble identifying the agenda of the following individual Consider the case of a sheriff with an excellent record of locating, pursuing and catching drivers exceeding the speed limit, and prosecuting them for this and any other crimes discovered in the process. Commendable dedication to duty ? Perhaps not. If that sheriff were a sheriff in one of the southern states of the Union and every one of those caught speeding were black. Is this a sheriff whose agenda is the elimination of speeding, or some other agenda ? The intellectual left would not be slow to identify the sheriff's real agenda for us. Equally, I am able to identify their real agenda for them.
On the political battlefield, the policy of the left is to maneuver until they are directly in front of the 'innocents', whom they claim they protect, and the right, when viewed through the lens of the press, is seen directly in front of the Nazis, or better still, arm-in-arm with them. Any innocents who just happen to be victims of some action by a party other than right (or worse, the left itself) will just have to be victims and suffer in silence and obscurity. It is only those innocents who are the 'victims' of the right which will find the left dashing to their aide, press corps in tow.
Witness the invisibility of the Mengistu regime, the apologia for the atrocities of the Vietnamese communists, the apologia for Eastern Bloc Communism throughout its entire history. "There is no famine in the Ukraine" George Bernard Shaw declared after visiting the Ukraine at the height of the famine. "I could not play a man who had no faults" Charlie Chaplin solemnly declared as he was asked if he could play Josef Stalin in a film. And yet South Africa, where blacks enjoyed exactly the same human rights as they did in East Germany, was treated as if the Devil himself owned the country.
With the decline of the proletariat as a source of innocent victims of the right worthy of the selfless protection by the left, the environment has taken on a new importance. In many ways it is better suited as an innocent victim, since its nebulous nature makes for enormous difficulty in making any scientific statement, and thus attributing benefit or detriment to any single human activity.
The earth's weather throughout the period of glacial advance and retreat shows a powerful swing through perhaps five degrees which takes place quite suddenly. Clearly the forces are large. And yet we are expected to believe that the advance of man's economy from wood-burning to coal-burning and now oil-burning is responsible for the temperature swings, and not the natural oscillation of the earth's climate. In the seventies, the global cooling was the most popular, but nearly none of today's 'environmentalists' were alive at that time.At the start of the coal-burning economy in the year 1700, the glacier above Chamonix began to advance and not only blocked the valley but eventually threatened to crush the village of Chamonix. The town summoned ecclesiastical help and a Bishop was brought in to perform an exorcism. With all retreated to a safe distance, a red flag run up the pole and sirens sounded, the Bishop performed, and the glacier retreated, and had disappeared back up the valley by 1820.
Are we to believe that the most powerful factor in determining climate change are the admonitions of ecclesiastics ? Certainly there is a strong correlation between the two, as we have seen from this example. A graph of temperature spread over the last several hundred thousand years gives the proper perspective. Our current position is merely that of a small life-boat tossed to the top of a current temperature increase. I view the current concern with this subject with the same disregard I would a discussion between the crew of this storm-tossed open boat as to whether lighting a cigarette would make the next wave higher or lower Never mind the cigarettes Give me a stiff drink. Meanwhile, the global warming model oscillates with a global cooling model on a thirty year cycle.
I witnessed a discussion between anti-hunting greens. He had no way of dealing with the fact that most mammals in European countries meet their death, be it swift or lingering, as a result of mouse-traps, mole-traps, rat-traps, poison and other devices. The largest group of murderers are the sub-urban middle-class. His response was, when analyzed, that hunting was a thought-crime. The difference was that in the set of individuals above, the process of bringing about the death of the mammals brought them no pleasure, only an increase in utility. In the hunters, the process of bringing about the death of the mammals brought them pleasure and utility. Furthermore, he added, people who enjoyed this process were more likely to be a danger to other human beings, since they enjoyed killing.
(I felt it inappropriate to quote Hemingway to him "Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter." - Ernest Hemingway, "On The Blue Water A Gulf Stream Letter." Esquire, April, 1936 ).
As Prince Phillip, Duke of Ediburgh, and husband of the Queen of England, pointed out, "If you committed adultery and did not enjoy it, would that mean that is was not a crime ?"
Clearly, as a member of the intellectual left, opposition to the right, and their evil intentions came first. The slaughter of the mammals in their thousands by the middle-classes was inconsequential and merited no attention. The interests of the mammals were not of any consequence and the left had no interest in them. Their own politics were to be found in some quadrants of mammalian slaughter, and it was in these quadrants that the attack on the right, in the usual disguise of the left protecting innocents, took place. In the same way, the slaughter of innocents by tyrants in the machinery of their police state merited no comment in the decades preceding this. Especially by the tyrants of the left.
Naturally, since the environment is 'to be protected' hunting must be stopped. Most television programs on African wildlife feature footage of the age of plenty, then footage of inter-war hunting. (I have an excellent two-volume leather-bound compendium of hunting with the rifle throughout the world written just after the turn of the century and it begins it's chapter on Africa by dismissing the common misunderstanding that 'Africa had been shot-out'). The implication of the television programs, implied if not express, was that 'hunting' denuded Africa of its teeming game. In fact it was the same factor which denuded Africa of its large mammals which denuded Europe of its large mammals. Habitat destruction and farmers and ranchers with crops, flocks and livelihoods to protect. Over ninety-nine per-cent of animals killed by hunters in Africa are killed for the bush-meat trade by local 'hunters' and trappers.
The innocents are under attack from the right, and must be protected. Any innocents which are being eliminated as a result of some other cause can be left to be eliminated in silent obscurity.
Human Rights and Asylum Seekers
A wind-fall gain to the intellectual left in Europe has been the arrival of economic migrants falsely titled 'asylum-seekers'. It is not easy to portray these individuals as victims of the right, unless one is a Marxist theorist, but when they arrive they suit the purposes of the intellectual left. Those laws which determine that the state, the taxpayer, shall provide for them mean that as every migrant arrives, they provide a further tax on the taxpayer. Naturally they migrate to the state which provides them with most, and within Europe this is currently the United Kingdom.It becomes obvious that the Twentieth Century has been a struggle between right and left all along, with the values, the political psycho-pathogens of the left and their opposition by any means to the right being far more important to them than any other values to the point where the enemy of their enemy is their friend. We lost in Russia, won in Spain, managed to get the situation in Germany and Italy under control but lost Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, lost in China, Korea and Vietnam.
As I understood the phrase 'asylum-seeker' as it was used in the Cold War, it meant an individual who could be of aid to the country to which he was fleeing who was being hunted by the country from which he had fled. He was a man with the KGB ten minutes behind him. Someone escaping from the poverty and bankruptcy of Romania does not fall into this category, and I am unable to think of a reason why I or anyone else owe him any money, let alone the provision of a lawyer, housing and a subsistence income.
For the purposes of taxing the taxpayer to pay for this, the intellectual left have re-branded the elements of Marxism which distributed the proceeds of capital among the proletariat as 'human rights'. The asylum seekers, we are told, have 'human rights' and only the evil right would deny them these rights, and all the financial benefits which are currently given to them. 'Human rights', are 'rights' like any other. The mechanism of 'rights' takes many forms within a state and an economy, but invariably there is a debit and a credit to any 'right' For the granting of a particular right, there must be a withdrawal of that particular right from some other account.
For the 'right' to walk across someone else's land, the utility of that strip of land for those minutes must be debited from the rights of the owner of the land. To assign 'human rights' to an individual one must do the same. The 'rights', whatever they are, must be debited from the account of another. Personally I see no reason why my account should be debited in order to assign 'rights' to these individuals.
The intellectual left would have us believe 'human rights' are to be assigned to humans the world over in the same way Marxism assigned these rights to the proletariat. The account to be debited is not named, but you can be certain it will be the account of the evil right. No reference is made by the left to the states which have clearly cleaned out the accounts of these individuals before they escaped. Certainly any proposal to merely eliminate those in charge of these states in order to bring about the end of embezzlement would be met with howls of protest by the intellectual left. This would be much cheaper, and a lot more fun, but would not provided the intellectual left with a tax on capitalism that the assignment of 'human rights' to 'asylum seekers' provides them with.
The enemy, institutional Communism and its supposed championing of the cause of the proletariat, was driven from the perimeter with force and steadfast resistance, but the enemy within, that nasty unpleasantness which appears to be lurking under the porch, is a much more subtle customer. I am filled with alarm at the thought that we have only just begun a task as long and difficult as the original. The first step, which I am working upon, is to produce a block-printed recognition guide suitable for handing to other ranks and for pasting upon the walls of ready-rooms, in order to ensure that we know our enemy when we see him. The second is to produce a set of standard responses to ensure that once the enemy is brought to battle, a barrage may be brought upon his position without so much as a ranging shot. During the Cold War, we had the practice of this drill down to smooth, easy, powerful and destructive movements. It must be the same in this war.
After writing the second edition of "20thCPiP" I felt confident enough to write about the politics of the left from a different angle. With the revision of "20thCPiP" I felt that I had achieved a definition of the unit of account of the phenomena in question. This is the high-point in any scientific investigation and I feel that we have reached that point with understanding the politics of the left.
The unit of account of the measure of the politics of the left is the 'socio-volt'. It is a measure of the 'social-angst' which the left experience when they perceive others within society gaining or possessing greater control over their destiny and their environment than they themselves possess. It is thus, a relative measure, between two points and not an absolute measure, hence, the term 'volt'.
SOCIAL VOLTAGE IS...
Homo sapiens' control over his environment and destiny is gained when he is able to understand and manipulate resources, such as tools, or use his intellectual powers to model the environment in which he finds himself and manipulate it to his advantage (hunting, agriculture). He may be so successful at this that he creates a surplus of his own resources and is able to trade with other homo sapiens his surplus resources for their surplus resources, which might be labor, to make a combination which creates a further surplus (manufacture). Given the physical and cerebral disparity of homo sapiens, as well as the great disparity of circumstances within which homo sapiens finds himself when dispersed across the planet, there will be differing levels of success.
Ordinarily this would be the end of the story in other animals but in homo sapiens, a social animal which works in groups, aspects of his mentality experience angst when other members of the team or other teams achieve greater control over their environment. The social position of the individual experiencing the angst within the group will be changed by the advance of others, and their greater control over resources and the environment.
WHY DO THE LEFT EXPERIENCE SOCIAL-VOLTAGE ?
The angst mechanism will have evolved in homo sapiens (and likely began to evolve in the groups of higher primates) due to the necessity of a group member to obtain power and status within the group in order to reproduce successfully. Those with lower power and status will reproduce less and less successfully. Their genes will die out. Those who suffer angst when power and status are reduced relative to others within the group will at least start to do something to redress this diminution of their importance and are more likely to pass on their genes.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR LARGER GROUPS, SOCIETIES ?
In the much larger groups such as modern societies, this angst, this social-voltage which individuals feel when they experience others gaining greater control over their environment manifests itself as the political psycho-pathogens of the left.
HOW WILL THEY ELIMINATE SOCIAL-VOLTAGE ?
+ Centralized Ownership of Resources and the Means for Production
Centralized Control of the Means of Individual Control of the Environment
That no individual or group of individuals shall own or obtain more resources than others and create social-voltage with those who do not possess such resources. Centralized ownership of the means of production is presently very unfashionable. The most the left can achieve is to reduce the speed of the capitalist machine and thus the mechanism which steadily increases the socio-voltage to even greater levels. Reducing the speed of the capitalist machine requires bleeding off cash into non-productive activities Supporting unproductive people. There are limited numbers within the G7 societies and but their numbers may be boosted by legislation which admits persons from other countries on (spurious) grounds such as 'asylum seeking'. In a way this process is superior to the one used in the old Communist economies, because the capitalists have to work hard and the socialists are supported in idleness. The capitalists must support themselves as well as the socialists. In some ways this is a superior method to achieving social-justice through sending the bourgeoisie and class-enemy to Gulags.
That no individual is able to control their immediate environment, even if they have the skills and abilities do so and create social-voltage with the less able.
The right of self-defense should be reserved for the state. The state shall provide for defense of the individual. In this manner, the left do not have to suffer increased social-voltage by witnessing other individuals control the behavior of others by violence. Self-defense provides a two-fold increase in social-voltage. Firstly, the left must witness an individual control their environment more effectively than they are able to. Secondly, the left must witness an individual, the criminal, be controlled by the self-defender. Particularly powerful means of controlling one's environment, of self-defense, such as firearms, become the object of control by the left in themselves, such is their power.Elimination of the Process Designed to Grade or Quantify
Elimination of Emotional Triggers and Language Which Triggers Thoughts of Social Voltage
The left aim to reduce or eliminate the grading of the qualities of individuals, most of which for the majority of the population takes place in schools. Grading increases social-voltage in two ways. Firstly, it forces the left to witness others being ascribed greater effectiveness (and thus greater ability to control and acquire resources, greater ability to reproduce). Secondly, yet more resources, such as important positions of employment within societies, will flow to those individuals graded. To this end the left wish to eliminate grading in schools, colleges and universities.
The left wish to eliminate even those images and words which trigger thoughts of social-voltage in their minds, hence the large array of euphemisms which they produce 'person of color', for 'black;' 'alternatively-abled' for 'crippled;' or 'disabled'; 'deferred success' for 'fail'; and the desire to replace marking of schoolwork in red pen with a color which does not produce as much angst as red.
It is by these means that the left will reduce their 'social-voltage.' By outlawing that which causes them to experience 'social-voltage' they hope to reduce their angst at seeing others more successful than themselves.
The left wish, not only to eliminated social-voltage in the present, but to compensate for all historical social-voltage. There are no limits to the distance in time and space to which they wish to extend the principle of elimination of social-voltage. This manifests itself as 'Diversity' and 'positive discrimination' whereby those whose ancestors have suffered the experience of social-voltage in the past must be 'compensated' in the present.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill
| Back to the Profound Thoughts Page |