Liberalism and Political Correctness Heralds the Destruction of America

'There is no greater weapon the left deploys than the ignorance of the average American.'

We are in the most trying times in American history, probably the most dangerous times in the entire history of human civilization. Since the conception of rulers and the ruled, knowledge has been kept from the masses, the rulers being viewed as something akin to gods. The advent of technology has given every single person the ability to gain knowledge of anything they want, knowledge is no longer kept hidden from the people, it has become inundated with so much garbage that there are very few who can sift through to find the truth.

It's a sad state, to see the actions of the left and their flowery words in such contrast, yet a minority of people even care to actually look at their actions. The media, which has essentially become state-run, since the repeal of the Smith-Mundt act, they do not herald truth but talking points and agenda driven lies. People accept it as absolute truth, they do not see the truth, and when truth rears its' ugly head, the left lashes out.

Liberalism has a two separate realities, one of theory and one of reality. People hear the theory, and accept it as reality, the social engineers rely on people making decisions based on their feelings and ignorance. Liberalism can only succeed through the destruction of a nation's culture and ideals, and it has succeeded. We do not argue or focus on any issues of true substance, it is over bathrooms and legalizing criminality.

I have been reading 'Starship Troopers' by Heinlein, this book was written before my time, but it's words are prophetic.

I found myself mulling over a discussion in our class in History and Moral Philosophy. Mr Dubois was talking about the disorders that preceded the breakup of the North American republic, back in the XXth century. According to him, there was a time just before they went down the drain when such crimes as Dillinger's were as common as dog-fights. The Terror had not been just in North America--Russia and the British Isles had it, too, as well as other places. But it reaches its peak in North America shortly before things went to pieces.

"Law-abiding people," Dubois had told us, "hardly dared go into a public park at night. To do so was to risk attack by wolf packs .....

Nor were parks the only places parks the only places--these things happened also on the streets in daylight, on school grounds, even inside school buildings. But parks were so notoriously unsafe that honest people stayed clear of them after dark."

...

"They had many more police than we have. And more courts. All overworked."

...

"Many. I'm raising a dachshund now--by your methods. Let's get back to those juvenile criminals. The most vicious averaged somewhat younger than you here in this class...and they often started their lawless careers much younger. Let us never forget that puppy. These children were often caught; police arrested batches each day. Were they scolded? Yes, often scathingly. Were their noses rubbed in it? Rarely. News organs and officials usually kept their names secret--in many places the law so required for criminals under eighteen. Were they spanked? Indeed not! Many had never been spanked even as small children; there was a widespread belief that spanking, or any punishment involving pain, did a child permanent psychic damage."

...

"As for 'unusual,' punishment must be unusual or it serves no purpose." He then pointed his stump at another boy. "What would happen if a puppy were spanked every hour?"

...

"Never mind. Long enough. It means that such punishment is so unusual as to be significant, to deter, to instruct. Back to these young criminals--They probably were not spanked as babies; they certainly were not flogged for their crimes. The usual sequence was: for a first offense, a warning--a scolding, often without trial. After several offenses a sentence of confinement but with sentence suspended and the younger placed on probation. A boy might be arrested many times and convicted several times before he was punished--and then it would be merely confinement, with others like him from whom he learned still more criminal habits. If he kept out of major trouble while confined, he could usually evade most of even that mild punishment, be given probation--'paroled' in the jargon of the times.

"This incredible sequence could go on for years while his crimes increased in frequency and viciousness, with no punishment whatever save rare dull-but-comfortable confinements.

...

He singled me out again. "Suppose you merely scolded your puppy, never punished him, let him go on making messes in the house...and occasionally locked him up in an outbuilding but soon let him back into the house with a warning not to do it again. Then one day you notice that he is now a grown dog and still not housebroken--whereupon you whip out a gun and shoot him dead. Comment, please?"

...

"I don't know," he had answered grimly, "except that the time-tested method of instilling social virtue and respect for law in the minds of the young did not appeal to pre-scientific pseudo-professional class who called themselves 'social workers' or sometimes 'child psychologists.' It was too simple for them, apparently, since anybody could do it, using only the patience and firmness needed in training a puppy. I have sometimes wondered if they cherished a vested interest in disorder--but that is unlikely; adults almost always act from conscious 'highest motives' no matter what their behavior."

...

"I agree. Young lady, the tragic wrongness of what those well-meaning people did, contrasted with what they thought they were doing, going very deep. They had no scientific theory of morals. They did have a theory of morals and they tried to live by it (I should not have sneered at their motives), but their theory was wrong--half of it fuzzy-headed wishful thinking, half of it rationalized charlatanry. The more earnest they were, the farther it led them astray. You see, they assumed that Man has a moral instinct."

...

"These juvenile criminals hit a low level. Born with only the instinct for survival, the highest morality they achieved was a shaky loyalty to a peer group, a street gang. But the do-gooders attempted to 'appeal to their better natures,' to 'reach them,' to 'spark their moral sense.' Tosh! They had no 'better natures'; experience taught them that what they were doing was the way to survive. A puppy never got his spanking; therefore what he did with pleasure and success must be 'moral.'

"The basis of all morality is duty, a concept with the same relation to group the self-interest has to individual. Nobody preached duty to these kids in a way they could understand--that is, with spanking. But the society they were in told them endlessly about their 'rights'.

"The results should have been predictable, since a human being has no natural rights of any nature."

Mr. Dubois had paused. Somebody took the bait. "Sir? How about 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'?"

"Ah, yes, the 'unalienable rights.' Each year someone quotes that magnificent poetry. Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die if he is to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'?

CONT.

...

Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called natural human rights that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost.

Quotes are filling up too much space, I'll paraphrase a section I can't seem to find at the moment.

It deals with political correctness, and how it destroyed the old Republic. How we have to be sensitive and understanding to those rabid animals (criminals, terrorists) who want to kill us and destroy our culture. There is no greater danger, our freedoms are at stake; it is forbidden to speak your mind if it is not the acceptable form of 'liberal thought'.

Let's assume, that there are holes in liberal thought (granted in truth, those holes are gaping and growing larger). One cannot point these flaws out, without being branded a racist, or insensitive. So that wrongness is perpetuated and formed into policy, we are seeing instances of this abhorrence through Obamacare, through unmitigated illegal immigration, through placing rules on warfare in a war the other side that has no rules.

The PC movement has become so overbearing, the only natural response is that of a reactionary movement. One that is opposed, and potentially has an equal amount of danger attached to it. It is a symptom of an unbalanced system, where the extremes will grow and gain control.

Western culture is systematically being destroyed, to herald in globalization and multiculturalism. A nation that has no cohesiveness, will not last, it does not matter where the people hail from, what matters is that nation live under one banner, with one culture that binds all of us together, regardless of race.

The liberals have no sense of morality, they were never taught these ideals, all they care about is what is best of themselves; no matter the detriment to society as a whole it imparts.

Look at the democrat controlled inner cities, they are shambles. Detroit is a wasteland, Chicago resembles that of a third world country with its' level of violence. The left screams about how police are racist and slaughtering with impunity, ignoring the violence committed by those demographics that have embraced the left; and at the same time these same people call for the disarmament of all Americans (because those same police will protect them). What kind of logic is that?

The left will boast at how socialism is a superior system, how capitalism is so terrible. We would not be living in an age, with the level of technology and comfort, without capitalism. Socialism is the death of civilization, collapse does not occur overnight, it is the slow rot of death.

Liberalism and political correctness must be opposed. The light of truth must shine, but how can that truth be understood by the left, they do not have the capacity to know nor the care to know. It is a cancer, and our leaders, our media nurture this disease.

The cure is simple, yet difficult. It starts with educating the youth, the generations before, that have already been indoctrinated with this cancer; they are lost. We can fix the problem, which starts with the purging of liberal thought from schools, and instilling the younger generations with true critical thinking.

I see the protests, and the people involved in these leftist movements.

I'm not being facetious when I say this, but they resemble that of wild animals. Their very language is devolved, unkempt, and no sense of any morality or values. There criticisms are in direct contradiction to their actions: BLM is a good example, protesting police violence on the innocent- by resorting to violence against innocents; and a complete disregard to the majority of violence against them by their own communities.

It's like if I had a giant nail in my leg, and a tiny splinter in my toe. I go to the doctor and tell him I need to get this tiny splinter out, how terrible it is; while the nail in my leg is bleeding out and killing me. The doctor points out the nail, I call him an idiot, a racist, etc.

Those who are already indoctrinated, it is too late, we just have to forget about them and focus on the youth who still have a chance, before liberal thought has destroyed another generation.

I am a millenial, and somehow against all odds, I am one of the few who has overcome this terrible crime done against America.

Excellent article, 100% True, This will trigger quite a few snowflakes, they are blind to the damage they are causing...

Just want to add, Liberals seem to blame the far right for violence, But the majority of violence i have seen over the past few years has come from the LEFT, When will this issue be acknowledged by the left?

Proof of this violence and anger can be found in the comments below.....

The cure is simple, yet difficult. It starts with educating the youth, the generations before, that have already been indoctrinated with this cancer; they are lost. We can fix the problem, which starts with the purging of liberal thought from schools, and instilling the younger generations with true critical thinking.

This sounds SOOOOO similar to how religious leaders of the past have spoken to indoctrinate their followers into hating others who are different. Today's political climate is almost indistinguishable from the religious zealotry we have heard so much of in the past and even today.

Politics is just another version of religion, Republicans are the "Christians" (Conservatives) while Democrats are the "Muslims" (Liberals). Instead of arguing over things that happened hundreds or thousands of years ago they argue about current issues with the same kind of fervor and vitriol.

I wish people could understand that it doesn't HAVE to be a one or the other only kind of scenario, you can also recognize that both parties and ideologies are a seed for hate and division that is used to divide us instead of allowing us to realize that we are all neighbors and that we are in this together regardless of who wins a rigged election.

The ideology you just promoted is the definition of extremism, eradicating the competition and snuffing out their existence in favor of your own ideology and existence.

This kind of thinking has got to stop for our species to move forward. The only way we will reach other stars and preserve our species or survive at all will be through cooperation, not what you have explained in the OP.

I forgot to add a couple things.

The first is the leftist push of global warming. It is a pseudo-scientific movement, that closely resembles that of another movement that occurred almost a hundred years ago: eugenics. The majority of the scientific community believed in eugenics, not through scientific knowledge, but through their own biased research. It enabled the Nazi regime to commit all those horrors, it created a push for sterilizing and killing off undesirables, the brainchild of abortion. Any contradictions or errors that are pointed out in the global warming movement, are even now being called for those critics to be imprisoned.

The global warming equation, or environment impact that people have is I=PAT. Environmental Impact = Population Affluence and Technology. So we will soon see which variable the left will seek to reduce, they will either kill off millions of people, reduce rich nations to third world countries, or ban technologies that send us back into the middle ages. Most likely, they will seek to reduce all variables, which has potential to be worse than the most terrible of genocidal maniacs.

Another thing I would like to point out, which is related to the left and reveals their racist and genocidal motives. This has to do with the reduction in crime. There are two effective ways to reduce crime (not punishing criminals, that's a different issue): that is to create more educational and employment opportunities, or through killing off those most likely to become criminals. The left has chosen to kill off those most likely to become criminals, through abortion.

A large portion of the black population live in impoverished inner-city areas. 80% of abortion centers are located in these areas, now it is argued that abortion is a choice. If you are an impoverished single woman who is pregnant, does it really feel like you have a choice to have that child? What type of life will that child have? Over 50 millions blacks have been slaughtered, the roots of abortion stem from eugenics. Given better opportunities, how many would have found it a necessity to abort a child? While I agree that abortion should be legal, it shouldn't be because there was no other real option.

Proof of this violence and anger can be found in the comments below.....

So, calling people who have a different understanding of the political circus 'snowflakes' is not a sign of anger? Why use a catch phrase that demeans others unless you are angry? And not even an original catch phrase, one that is now generally accepted as a pejoritive for those on the left by those on the right.

Forget all the posts to follow Cola, you provided the spark for violence and anger in this thread all by yourself.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The ideology you just promoted is the definition of extremism, eradicating the competition and snuffing out their existence in favor of your own ideology and existence.

That's exactly what this op did.

Also, they used the ignorance and fears of people by saying our culture is under attack and that we live in "probably the most dangerous times in the entire history of human civilization".

Overall, the message in the OP is to scare people with all the expected rhetoric, such as the liberals control the media, they are brainwashing your children, liberals are immoral animals, racism, etc.

Absolutely no substance to the OP. It is a partisan, fear-mongering rant that the author simply made up.

I have a 15-year-old daughter. I am teaching her how to be a productive, caring, and fair citizen of this world.

I am teaching her that there are different cultures, and people who don't look at things quite the same way she does. I am teaching her that these different cultures can all live together in peace, and still have their own way of looking at things. I am teaching her the importance of things like equality under the laws.

I am teaching her that there is suffering and that we will all be judged (and will judge ourselves) some day on how we deal with that suffering - whether we ignore it in favor of our own well-being, or whether we try to do what we can to end that suffering. I am teaching her to stand up for her own AND for others' rights - but only in non-violent ways.

I am teaching her that it is wrong to kill, lie, steal from or otherwise hurt others. I am teaching her to be kind and thoughtful of others' feelings.

I am teaching her to be responsible with the environment when it comes to her carbon footprint, because to do anything else would be shortsighted, selfish and harmful.

I am NOT teaching her that some cultures are inferior to ours. I am NOT teaching her that her rights come before others'. I am NOT teaching her that it's okay to call others derogatory names just to go against "political correctness".

I am homeschooling my daughter. She is kind, unselfish, caring, thoughtful of others, extremely intelligent and articulate for her age, and she is going to be an AWESOME citizen - one that I will be very proud of.

Oh, and I am a liberal. And there are many, many more, just like me.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Cooperation comes with the understanding that everyone is after the same goal. This requires everyone have a similar ideology, competing ideologies will always lead to conflict.

I'm not advocating to go back to religious indoctrination, nor am I proposing we kill off those who disagree. A sense of unity comes from the cohesiveness of a culture. We cannot have differing cultures, and expect to cooperate completely if we are to succeed.

Ideologies are not created equal, most have failed, and those that are still here are destined for failure. Western civilization has become dominant due to the unity we have gained through culture; that culture is one of freedom. When oppressive ideologies, such as liberalism or religious zealotry infect our thought, it destroys what we have built.

To be an American, you must have American culture; not the materialistic lifestyle, but the ideals that millions have fought and died for. Those ideals are being systematically destroyed by the left, and without a steady hand to cultivate the next generations to understand and rise above liberal thought; the only opposition will be that of extremism of the right.

We cannot cooperate, if our values and ideals, if our basic ideological beliefs are diametrically opposed.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

You think my post was "violent and angry"??

This folks, is why they get the name "snowflakes" They are somewhat delicate....

a reply to: GodEmperor

To be an American, you must have American culture

We cannot cooperate, if our values and ideals, if our basic ideological beliefs are diametrically opposed.

does it get cold in that teepee?
how do you build a totem pole?
by the way your understanding of politics is laughable, a left wing party in america?
lol

a reply to: GodEmperor

And of course the Left is to blame because they are basically one person that thinks the same...., ya, in your mind.

It is BS Divide and Conquer posts like this, that are giving way to the destruction.

What I think will help? Vote 3rd Party, we need an argument that is better than Left vs Right.

Vote Johnson or Stein, just to break this damn cesspool Political System.

a reply to: introvert

Do you not see the hypocrisy in your comment?

You do not seek to understand my view, and have diverting to minimizing my concerns.

Essentially, you are a mirror image of what you claim me to be.

There are similar flaws and inconsistencies in the right, but I am concerned with the greatest of danger to the longevity of the American republic.

a reply to: GodEmperor

I'm not advocating to go back to religious indoctrination, nor am I proposing we kill off those who disagree. A sense of unity comes from the cohesiveness of a culture. We cannot have differing cultures, and expect to cooperate completely if we are to succeed.

Diversity is what made America great. Not some totalitarian utopia you envision. I think they tried that in Germany...how'ed that work out?

a reply to: GodEmperor

Heinlein was a man before his time, and a favorit author of mine. He was also called a socialist in his day.

a reply to: GodEmperor

When oppressive ideologies, such as liberalism or religious zealotry infect our thought, it destroys what we have built.

No mention of the right or conservatism though. They are equally to blame. Both sides refuse to meet in the midle where the best results would be, but as we have it both sides fight each the whole way never compromising. Eradicating one extreme for another is not the answer, both need to find a middle ground, that is where the unity lies, not on one or the other political extreme.

We cannot cooperate, if our values and ideals, if our basic ideological beliefs are diametrically opposed.

I agree, but you seem to lean right and they are one half of the opposition and are equally guilty of the situation.

a reply to: olaru12

Diversity is what made America great

100% correct, Then why are liberals trying to stamp out diversity? Look at what's happening in europe, it is a systematic removal of all diversity that's occurring there.

originally posted by: ColaTesla
a reply to: olaru12

Diversity is what made America great

100% correct, Then why are liberals trying to stamp out diversity? Look at what's happening in europe, it is a systematic removal of all diversity that's occurring there.

I can play that game. Look at the makeup of a Trump alt right rally. "Make America White Again" eh?
Trump is echoing the OPs ideology; but with a little more NLP subtly.

a reply to: kaylaluv

That was a good post, it's obvious that I have failed to communicate my thoughts.

You may consider yourself liberal, but you are not. True liberals are not emotionally driven, they completely understand the implications of their policy actions; the vast majority support liberal policy because the social engineers have appealed to their emotions.

For example, immigration. Would the left support amnesty, if the vast majority of those 'undocumented workers' would be voting for conservatives when legalized?

That seems like a fair enough question, what if that number of illegals, solidified a republican majority for the next 100 years? Would the left still support amnesty, regardless of the negative political impact on their own party?