“While liberal worldviews are future- or progressive -oriented, conservative perspectives are more past-oriented, and in general, are interested in preserving the status quo.” the report says. “The far right represents a more extreme version of conservatism, as its political vision is usually justified by the aspiration to restore or preserve values and practices that are part of the idealized historical heritage of the nation or ethnic community.”
West Point center cites dangers of ‘far right’ in U.S., Washington Times, January 17th, 2003
There are a few truisms about “liberals” (“progressives”, “left-wingers”, “communists”, “socialists”—all of which can be used interchangeably) that bear highlighting before we get into the above ridiculousness.
First, liberals [intentionally] abuse language beyond all recognition. (It is this M.O., after all, that gave rise to the term “Orwellian”.) Consider “women’s health” (read: in utero infanticide); “marriage equality” (read: men marrying horses); “fairness” (read: confiscation of people’s earnings to buy votes); etc. And thanks to their (liberals’) control of the public education system, generations have been miseducated and indoctrinated to such a degree that this kind of b.s. flies.
So one thing we must always be suspicious of whenever a liberal speaks, is that they’ll be employing this forked-tongue abuse of language.
The first glaring example of this in the above quote is the use of the term “extremism.” Be on the lookout for just how much play this word gets in the MSM and by political pundits these days. Note it will always and only be applied to conservatives. Why? The first order of business of any totalitarian regime is to paint all opposition to it as “extreme”, thereby duping the useful idiots into believing their subjugation is the only “sober, rational” choice. And all totalitarian regimes are, by definition, far-left. Consider: How can a conservative (or, in liberals’ parlance, “extreme, fringe, far-right”) philosophy which, by definition, advocates for limited government and individual liberty, be totalitarian? So no, the Nazi’s were not “far right extremists.” They were socialists, just like the rest of 20th and 21st century radical left-wing totalitarians.
Another truism is that liberals come in two varieties: the manipulators, and the manipulated.
The manipulators are evil, using men as pawns to feed their lust for power, while the manipulated are simply delusional (courtesy either effective brainwashing or mere stupidity). It is difficult to determine whether the author of the above quote is the former or latter, but in either case, the absurdity of his contention about liberals being “future-oriented” while conservatives are “past-oriented” is easy enough to dissect.
What are liberals’ two biggest platforms? Abortion and gay marriage (sorry—I mean “women’s health” and “marriage equality”).
Abortion. This means killing your offspring. Tell me, oh “party of science”: In what version of evolutionary theory does killing your own offspring lend itself to evolutionary advancement?
Gay marriage. This means not being able to biologically reproduce. Sure, thanks to advancements in reproductive medicine there are means like in vitro fertilization and surrogates and such by which two dudes can pretend to father a child, but there is no mixing of the couple’s DNA now, is there? So again, oh party of science, in which theory of evolution is the species advanced through pair-bonding over effectively cuckolded offspring? Has this ever been demonstrated to be an effective means of “evolutionary progress”? Certainly, as the party of science, there is ample evidence in your big quiver of scientific data to justify this urgent, sociological imperative of allowing sexual deviants to get married, right?
Of course there’s no scientific justification for doing what liberals demand we all accept; there is only their blinding hatred of Christianity (amongst other targets of their bitter hate) that leads them to insist we allow for the murder of babies and to honor any and all forms of sexual indulgence as perfectly normal.
Speaking of Christianity, I would further argue that eschatological religions (Christianity & Judaism in particular) are far more future-oriented than progressive’s secularism, which leads, invariably—invariably—to instant gratification, total self-indulgence, hedonism, etc.
Think about it: Both Christianity and Judaism have at their core a belief in “end times”, whereby one’s life must be lived with this future “goal” constantly in mind. Secularism, on the other hand? Well, that’s all bread and circuses now, isn’t it? I mean, what are the masses to do with themselves sans fear of heaven or hell or a just God? Oh, I know—internet porn!
So when conservatives argue against secularism and for a return to tradition and faith (Christianity or Judaism), it should be recognized, if one were being honest and aware of, you know, anything resembling reality, as being done out of a concern for the future of humanity. Liberals, on the other hand, while touting their dedication to the “future” and to “science” and “rationality” and “logic” and all other self-stroking descriptors, are really in it for nothing more than…you guessed it…absolute power, in the here-and-now.
How is that advocating secularism, which leads to hedonism, an agenda for absolute power? That was already discussed back here. But that’s only once pincer of the two-pronged attack of the totalitarians. The other is the slow screw turns of an ever more expansive, more invasive, and more oppressive statist regime.
Witness the establishment and extreme growth (in size and power) of federal agencies like the TSA, the NSA, the CIA, the FBI, DHS, ATF, DOJ, IRS, etc. Notice any similarities to every other totalitarian regime that has existed over the past century? You should—because there’s little light between what the United States of America is in 2013 compared to what the Soviet Union was in 1900’s.
What—the 1900’s? That was last century!
Yup. So the more the Liberal Establishment wraps its tentacles around the US population and its government and other power structures, the more we resemble a failed, century’s-old socialist state.
And this is a liberal’s conception of “future-oriented”?
Why yes—yes it is!
And lastly—let’s not kid ourselves about what the author is implying about this “future-oriented” vs. “past-oriented” Orwellian spiel. He tips his hand at “…idealized historical heritage of the…ethnic community.”
Translation into honest language? America’s going majority black and Hispanic, whitey, so deal!
And if you resist, you’re a radical, right-wing extremists who’s effectively a terrorist and therefore should be squashed by the power of the US military!
Ok, oh “party of science”: List for me all of the scientific and technological advancements brought to us by sub-Saharan Africans, Mexicans, and other such future Americans.
No, no—stop. I didn’t ask for excuse-making about the legacy of colonialism and racism and all that other happy horseshit. I asked for a list of scientific and technological advancements brought to us by blacks and Hispanics. Name them.
Any chart toppers—say, like, putting a robot on another planet, putting men on our lone satellite, inventing every form of telecommunication enjoyed the world over, advancements in transportation technologies, quantum dynamics, relativity theory, the human genome project, discovery of the double helical structure of DNA, neuroscience, modern medicine, computers, iPhones, flat screens, etc.? No? Nothing?
Oh…these were all done by whites and Asians.
So, in your (liberals’) “future-oriented”, “party of science”, “rational”, “logical”, “empirical” world-view, we should welcome replacing whites in the United States (not to mention throughout the rest of Western Civilization) with blacks and Hispanics because this will be to the benefit of human “progress”? This will be “the future”?
Tell me—based on your “science” and “evidence”, will this—the dispossession of whites at the hands of blacks and Hispanics—lead to a renaissance of scientific and technological output, or will the US quickly devolve—a la South Africa, Detroit, New Orleans, etc.—into a cesspool of tribalism, corruption, poverty, disease, and overall social pathology, without so much as a hint of advancement in science or technology?
Oh “party of science”, of “reason”, of “intelligence” and “logic”—pray tell, what do your “scientific models” predict?
Yes, certainly it is we who insist on a return to religiously-grounded principles, on a return to a respect for what got us here, and on the preservation of the white race as the majority population of the United States of America—certainly it is we who are not paying attention to the future; it is we who have no vision of what that future holds; and it is we who are hopelessly stuck in the past. Certainly it is liberals who are the champions of all good things to come, for only they have the wisdom to see the future clearly, and the intelligence by which to forge the utopia beheld in their infallible minds.