Friday, July 8, 2016

After Dallas: Are Liberals Evil or Stupid?

If you are a conservative the Obama years put you into a bit of a quandary. You have to wonder, did Obama and the whole liberal universe plan this, or are they, in the immortal words of Lina Lamont, dumb or something?

My personal opinion is Lina Lamont's. Only, you'll remember, when she would say: "What do you think I am, dumb or something," she was acting in a way that she thought was smart, but in fact sabotaged her interests.

That's what I think liberals do. They think they are really smart, but in fact they mess things up, especially for their own supporters.

Correction: Liberal politics is usually calculated to benefit liberal elite interests, and create lots of powerful jobs for liberal elitists, and get liberals political power. But the bottom line for Democratic voters is not so good.

That is why the sniper shootings in Dallas, July 7, 2016, demonstrate to me the folly and the stupidity of liberal politics.

Gosh, liberals, don't you think that all your race politics of the last 50 years, culminating in the Black Lives Matter movement, tends to encourage idiots like Micah X. Johnson who "wanted to kill white people."

Of course they don't. It's conservatives who are the racists. Liberals are the ones advocating for civil rights. Right?

I tell you what I think is the problem. It is the liberal "activism" culture. For liberals, the give and take of electoral politics isn't enough. There has to be something higher and fuller for politics than just elections and routine government. There has to be a movement. There have to be marches, and manifestos, and non-negotiable demands, and peaceful protests. Because injustice.

And sometimes there is a justification for the stylized violence of the street protest. Back in the 19th century, the workers were out of the system, and they rioted until they got the vote. In the 20th century African Americans in the Jim Crow South were denied the vote, and they marched until they got it.

But today every good little girl in college is taught about the moral virtue of marching on City Hall if you have a grievance. Every well-born youngster dreams of a life in "activism." That is what politics means to the youngster that has been carefully taught. What the good little girls are not carefully taught is that the street protest is a show of force. It is a threat of violence; it is the first stirring of civil war. So there is a question that ought to be asked before every campaign: is this issue really so important that the resort to actual violence is justified?

For the liberal, the answer is yes, because, as I have written, it is always 1848, when the working class had just arrived in the city and was suffering from the crash after the great railway boom, and it didn't have the vote.

Yes, but what about white cops killing young blacks, what about institutional racism, what about the militarization of the police, what about...?

Good point. Does that justify trashing Ferguson, Missouri, and inner city neighborhoods in Baltimore, Ohio, and driving jobs out of the city? Does that justify killing cops in Dallas?

Because that's where we end up with the activism culture. It's one thing when liberals use it to demonstrate decorously against evil fossil fuels and the Keystone XL pipeline. All very civilized, darling. But the civilized liberal activism culture gets translated on the way to the street. First of all the trained community organizer needs to use more vivid means to lead his street demonstrations in the inner city. And then there is the little problem that young men are wired for mayhem. The great challenge of civilized society is to reverse the instincts for violence in young men and divert them into career competition and sports.

Are you shocked and appalled that young men from the West are traveling to the Middle East to sign up with ISIS? I am not. Of course young men will march to the sound of the guns. That is what young men do. So it doesn't at all surprise me that a couple of young black men (or more) decided to shoot up the cops in Dallas. That is where the street rhetoric of Black Lives Matter leads. Liberals used to call it "escalation" when they were objecting to the Vietnam war.

I understand, of course, that the Democrats are playing on a bit of a sticky wicket right now. African Americans were promised a new era of Hope and Change in 2008. Instead they have suffered much more than most from the housing bust, and the subsequent slow recovery. (Remember, the whole point of loosey-goosey home mortgages was to benefit minorities, who ended up hardest hit in the crash). Imagine what would happen if African Americans don't turn out to vote in November. Imagine if instead of voting 90-10 for Democrats blacks only voted 85-15, or worse.

Now imagine what the other members of the Democratic Coalition of the Fringes are thinking about black violence, especially now that Asian and Hispanic officers are getting sucked into the meat grinder of blame and recrimination.

Like I said. I don't think that liberals are evil. I just think they are human, all too human. Like Lina Lamont.

And liberals don't seem to realize that when you let slip the dogs of activism you really can have no idea where it will all end up. Liberals have the idea that their "activism" is civilized and noble. But it is still a show of force. Its purpose is to threaten and intimidate, and you never know where any campaign of force will end up.

1 comment:

  1. you do know the technology exists to fabricate dreams and visions.