The world turned upside down
Bookworm on May 21 2009 at 9:09 am | Filed under: Uncategorized
Britain joyfully welcomes every two-bit Pakistani Islamic radical into its country, but it took an intense, years long legal battle to force the British government to allow the Gurkhas — men who wore the British uniform — to settle in Britain. First, major kudos to British actress Joanna Lumley (best known to Americans for her role in Absolutely Fabulous) for putting a public face to this fight.
Second, just take a minute and think about a country that strongly prefers immigrants who hate it and wish to destroy it, to immigrants who love it and have willing fought or it. Then take another minute.
Then read these two speeches: Obama’s and Cheney’s. Then think some more about whether our political leaders should fight for us or against us, and whether they support our enemies or our friends.
It’s always the same. The Left wants to tear down the society in which it lives. It will embrace whichever nation, or force, or ideology that joins with the Left in a desire to destroy the Left’s own society. The consquences of joining with and supporting such the people behind those ideologies is irrelevant. Destruction — the purification of the corrupt Capitalist culture through total immolation — is the prerequisite to the Leftist dream of restructuring a corrupt society in the Marxist mold.
Email This Post To A Friend
7 Responses to “The world turned upside down”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
All,
It is never surprising how individuals insulated from outside realities can fail to understand the difficulties involved in translating ideals into actuality. The first, most common failure is the act of projection and self-deception. The idealist states that the world should be composed thusly – for example people should be generous. Then they project – all people WILL be generous, and we must make rules to enforce this generosity. Then they deceive themselves – people who protest against the enforced generosity are against generosity of any type; followed by rationalization – those who did not protest but did not give were unable to be generous or in need of generosity. The next level of deception is the one where they deny human nature – once having received generosity, a person will then be willing to share in their new-found largesse.
It is a circle of reinforcing failures; the problem is that they do not blame the translation of the ideal into reality for the failure, but rather the people who point out that the translation is either unworkable, overly idealistic, or simply fraught with opportunity for fraud and corruption. They cannot believe – since they are adherents of an ideal – that their vision of the ideal is not translatable. I am a Christian, I believe that there will be a second visitation of the Lord. I also understand that when this happens the world as I know it is over. Gone. Forever. The ideal that a heavenly power will visit upon the world, separating the wheat from the chaff, will utterly destroy the world. The righteous (of whom I am most likely not a member) will ascend to a perfect realm. The wanting (of whom I, being honest, am a member) shall remain in this imperfect world or be damned to the inferno, forever denied the gates of heaven and left to contemplate our failure. Unlike so many of the left I can accept two things about my ideal. One – it will not come to pass without great suffering by many, including the innocent. Two – I am not worthy of the ideal, not worthy to lead the ideal, and though I work to make the ideal possible for my children and others, I shall not profit from it. They want to make their ideal without harming anyone (at least anyone who is among their friends/supporters/beneficiaries who are indebted). They want the ideal to leave their own power, money, and influence intact. They want to become gods and have power over life, death, hunger, war, and thought.
The biggest problem they face is that the world will not let them; the world has a way of destroying places that are incapable of rational defense and irrational tolerance of anti-social activity. The simplest of these is revolution; the most painful is extinction.
I cannot wait for the ‘10 elections, or the ‘12 presidential run; this administration has done something I had not thought possible – make the Carter admin look competent. Now to wait for the turnover, promote conscious representatives, and pray that the tipping point is not passed and we may stop short of a new revolution or civil war.
And believe me, I’m praying hard – because my rational analysis doesn’t give me conclusive hope on its own.
SSG Dave
“A man is known by his actions, not his words. And there, I’ve said too much.”
I cannot wait for the ‘10 elections, or the ‘12 presidential run; this administration has done something I had not thought possible – make the Carter admin look competent. Now to wait for the turnover, promote conscious representatives, and pray that the tipping point is not passed and we may stop short of a new revolution or civil war.
As I have said before, the ability of America to stop civil strife and disintegration in Iraq would become vital for America’s fate in the future.
That has been my derived answer for “what has Iraq given to America” for the past few years. It started as a glimmer and now it is almost real. Almost, but not quite there. For the conditions have not yet progressed to the critical point in America, as it did in Iraq.
I’m posting my links again. They really contain all the answers. SSG Dave…you’re wrong in labeling them as idealists and explaining it away that way. While there may be a few honest idealists among them, the fact is that their goal is the destruction of this nation. I don’t know if a step back is possible.
1) http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/frankfurt_school_reigns_suprem.html
http://www.newtotalitarians.com/FrankfurtSchool.html
http://catholicinsight.com/online/features/article_882.shtml
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/hate_crime_legislation_back_do.html
The 1) link is the primary article, and the others are links contained within
the article. The primary article is a good one. The others are shocking. At
least they were to me. Maybe this will be old hat to you – I don’t know – but
if they are not, I hope they will shock you into thinking about this great
country and how the heck we’re going to get out of this mess.
Book…that last comment of mine(10:57) had a bunch of links and fell into the “moderation” crack…could you please fish it out???
Thanx…
you’re wrong in labeling them as idealists and explaining it away that way.
He did not use the label “idealist”.
Second, just take a minute and think about a country that strongly prefers immigrants who hate it and wish to destroy it, to immigrants who love it and have willing fought or it.
The country doesn’t prefer them, the government does.
But Britain has never attempted to give citizenship or equal status to the people that fought for it. Indians were always Indians, Gurkhas always Gurkhas, and that satisfied the British Empire. Whereas for the Americans, we have offered many indigenous climates and locales the opportunity to become states. Some have accepted, some have refused to make a decision. Recently, of course, America no longer offers statehood to any territories, but Britain has never offered equal status, ever.
The Romans offered more equality and cultural equality than the Britons.