If you haven’t noticed, our war with the Left has taken a turn for the better.
So, in keeping with my general opinion that ideologies that are counter to our constitutional understanding of freedom should be sent packing as unceremoniously as possible, it follows that when I find the Left down, if only for a moment, the most logical thing to do is kick them…only not in a way that sates my appetite, but rather make them hurt.
Intentions matter in this war.
So by hurt, I mean to make them despair, to make them doubt themselves. To hold them up for mockery in front of their own, for they have built-in defense shields against our mockery. I want their followers to come away so disillusioned with their rhetorical heroes that in their despair, they may actually turn to self-reflection. Then I want to be there leading their way back to the light. If leftwing leaders lose face with their herd, to the extent they can known shame, they will feel it, and they will retreat, if for no other reason than to avoid being strung up by their own mobs.
With that sort of pain in mind, at every turn we should harass them, blight their path, as much as a way as to cause them to doubt themselves as to cause them to flee. If they are going to hate us, let’s make them hate us for the right reasons, so that we have the ability to reveal to the world, their world, their weaknesses and fears.
We need to define, then undermine, the pillars they have erected which prop up their self-image and vanities.
Proverbs 26:12; it’s a Law
Going forward, our operating rules should be based on Proverbs 26: 1-12, the first eleven verses outlining the universally-understood deficiencies of the “fool”, all rules worth digesting as they apply to the minions of the Left; from college students to petty politicians to internet trolls.
But those eleven verses merely set up how much more degraded is the King of Fools by comparison, as defined in verse 12:
“Do you see persons wise in their own eyes?
There is more hope for a fool than for them.”
The pillars that hold up the so-called “intellectual Left’s” self-image, Barack Obama being a prime example, are all based on an image of self that while largely false, and often funny, as in ha-ha funny, also contain the ingredients of their own self-destruction.
(As a philosophical aside about the role of Satan in our current struggle, almost all the myths about dragons, going back to the Epic of Gilgamesh, including Tolkein’s dragons taken from Nordic legends, and created before Middle Earth, was they all had a vulnerable spot. The idea was that the dragons’ creator did not want them to be invulnerable, for they might some day attempt to overtake their creator.
(If Satan has anything at all to do with the Left, trust me, Old Clootie placed vulnerabilities in them to insure they never got too big, as power-madness tends to drive people to do. Vanity (Obama), gluttony (Hillary) and envy (Karl Marx) come to mind, but so does the over-arching belief in all of them that their creator, Satan, does not really exist. In short, one of the Left’s greatest vulnerabilities is one that it does not even know exists; that they are products of an invisible hand and that Hand implanted a kill-switch.)
So, I’ll be doing a few pieces about how our side can engage them in such as a way as to make them look like fools among their own. This is only the first.
Class, Political Class, de class, and no class
You may recall this past March an incident in New York where Charles Schumer caused an ugly confrontation with the wife of former Carter cabinet member, Joseph Califano, herself the daughter of William Paley, owner of CBS. It seems Hillary Califano had voted for Donald Trump. Unapologetically, I might add.
I don’t know if they were friends, or Schumer was simply squeezing palms as most politicians do in such places, but when he heard of Hillary Califano’s Trump vote he flew into a snit, loudly challenging her at the table, even following the Califano’s as they retreated to their car, barking “Why, why, why?”
This wasn’t Joe’s Bar and Grille, but a swank, exclusive Manhattan restaurant…
…where these things just aren’t done. Charlie made a scene. But worse, he forgot his place, especially in this toney public place. His was a de class exhibition, a very pedestrian way for a member of New York’s finer set to comport himself in front of others of purportedly the same class.
Well, you see, there’s the rub, for the political class Schumer belongs to really isn’t equal with New York blue bloods. . Without some other pedigree, they are a cut below. Even Joe Califano’s membership is partially-by-right of marriage, his wife, daughter of a blue-blood member of Old Media, which incidentally, proves the Rush Limbaugh theory that in terms of class status, the scions of the Media stand over both political parties. New York is filled with blue-bloods, and today they are likely “liberal”. But just 70 years ago they would have just as likely have been Republican, with only minor variations in what that evens means to Old Money.
So, just as Republicans are junior members to Congress’ senior Party, so are all politicians in Washington to real media Brahmins.
The Natural Laws of Class in America are not the same as the Natural Laws of Class worldwide
As a reminder, there are natural laws involved, and America, as in all things historical, is separated from the rest of the world because we have no direct lineage with royalty and aristocracy. This is not to say that those laws do not operate on Americans. Even in America we have “Men’s who thirst for Kings” but they are of relatively recent origin. That’s why this is important to know.
Today, it seems a segment of our society seeks to proclaim themselves royal, and to offer all sorts of federal and state postings for people who will support them in this endeavor. Their last effort was in 2016, and while the full scope of that plot to turn America royal has not yet been revealed, it was thwarted by the same “damned” people who kept those regal yearnings buried for the first 175 years of our existence
European history is instructive in that it gives us a glimpse, both structurally as to what a bureaucracy-based royal kingdom might look like, and what slow cultural suicide actually looks like, in progress now.
But most of all, in chronicling the historical shift away from European royalty to modern bureaucratic royalty, we find that psychological process being driven by men like Karl Marx who were “wise in their own eyes” (above).
Even before the French Revolution royals hired men who could read and write to manage their books. Factotums, or factors, A lucky one might be appointed court chronicler for a few extra bucks. Others taught at universities. But none were ever paid as much as court musicians, which explains why we still listen to music by Bach and Mozart while no one but the stuffiest scholar ever read “The Reign of King Egbreath IV of Bohemia” because it was written by a courtier whose entire rice bowl depended on his praising “Eggy”.
The French Revolution was partially based on this jealousy, and the post-Communist Manifest revolutions of 1848 almost entirely. By the time the royal houses of Europe were eventually “thrown down” (actually bought off and sent into very luxurious political retirement) by inbreeding and World War I, the governments and revenues of Europe were simply passed over to an educated political class who had waited almost 200 years for their time to come. Their bureaucracies have been growing every since.
As any ordinary citizen of any West European country from 35 to 85 can tell you, the greatest burr in the peoples’ saddles have been the burdensome weight of their governments, now three tiers deep. Even the tiniest dream of getting ahead on their own, e.g, a small business, is dashed by fees, volumes of forms that have to be prepared and approved, and the armies of state inspectors who come around every day of the week just to inspect, carrying even more papers to be signed in triplicate.
The European bureaucrats did not repeal royalty in 1918, it merely replaced it, substituting itself, with all the perquisites of power, including box seats at Wimbledon, the World Cup, and Monaco Grand Prix. And they no longer drive Fiats.
As I hope you still know, America did not rise from those same loins. We had no noblemen that any Frenchman would recognize at the time, even though John Kerry has sought French approval for at least 40 years. At the beginning, we had landed gentry, but they rejected nobility by signing documents saying that ordinary farmers and merchants were no lower in class than themselves, which no Frenchman would ever agree. Almost all of America was involved in the free pursuit of producing wealth, mostly in buying and selling, and building their House and passing it on. (This was how Donald Trump made his wealth, the same as Mr Drucker of Hooterville made his.)
I’ll turn you over to Schweikart and Allen’s Patriot History of the United States to find out how the American political class grew, especially after the Civil War, compared to the Europeans. Even as late as World War II and the Cold War, we were still not the same. Even though Wilson and FDR had bequeathed a great bureaucratic army, I can find little to make me think there were any who truly yearned for the kind of un-earned nobility the Left thinks it deserves. Looking at the civil strife and violent language we see today, I suspect Harry Truman and JFK alike, not to mention Ike, would have sent troops to quickly shut down the street violence and might even have locked up half the Congress and college administrations had they used the sort of threatening language, restrained free speech or promoted racial violence, as they do today.
Marxist penis-envy for entitled wealth and power came through the back door. I don’t think scholar-historians have ever inquired into when the American academic class became “wise in their own eyes”, i.e., super fools, but I’d guess the late 60s. So we see standing before us three generations since the Second World War who have nestled themselves, like a dragon in a gold vault, into an impenetrable cocoon, taking over half of the academic institutions in the country, while extorting the other half, producing absolute frauds in law and jurisprudence, the Law Firm of Skillings, Fastow & Madoff, yet totally unaware of that vulnerable spot just under their chin, put there just to insure they never get too big.
It’s the religiosity of this belief in their own invulnerability, but the hidden insecurity it may not be so, that forces them to shield themselves from external attacks. Exposure means death.
We need to begin a program to expose and exploit these insecurities.
When seen in this light, Charles Schumer suddenly appears smaller to all the people who have believed the political class is big. He has made not only himself, but the entire political establishment appear smaller than it holds itself out to be. In short, he has inadvertently demoted himself and his party back toward a status more in line with what the Constitution intended them to be in the first place, a coterie of popinjays seeking the approval, and the financial favor, of their betters.
Publications: Famous Common People I Have Known and Other Essays
(Both books in Kindle format only, Publishers and agents welcome, as both need to revised)
Support: Yes, I’ve never been paid a nickel to write.
Donations can be made to firstname.lastname@example.org via Paypal