Monday, July 09, 2012

Right-Left Mythology is a God of Destruction

Stop for a moment of silence, ask God what He want you to do next. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

-In this campaign of disintegration the Right-Left mythology is a perfect god
send to the forces of destruction.

It provides them with a crude and simple but highly effective instrument which can be applied to almost any situation and by which any number of different issues can be merged together in a mass of confusion and ideological clap-trap.

For example, there arc Liberals and Conservatives, there are Republicans and
Monarchists, there arc anti-clericals and clericals, there are Communists and Fascists, there are Socialists and Individualists, there are Semites and AntiSemites.

All of these are different oppositions, which have no necessary connection with one another, yet all of them are brought under the Leh-Right headings and thus forced into ideological alliances which may be unnecessary and absurd. Moreover, when you have got your opponents neatly ticketed you can then repeat the same process on any section of the in—dividing the Socialists into Socialists of the Left Centre and Socialists of the Extreme Left, or the Liberals into Moderates or Progressives, so as to submit them to the same process of confusion and disintegration.

Now the fault—or, it you like, the advantage, of the method of division is that it has no rational basis. it grades men and ideas according to their relation to a central point ; which, as a rule, has no existence.

Yet in spice of this irrational character, Left and Right become the centre of fierce ideological loyalties and enmities which overpower men's reason and sense of justice and drive them to acts of violence and inhumanity which would disgrace a tribe of cannibals.


http://archive.catholicherald.co.uk/article/9th-november-1945/3/europe-is-belay-turned-into-_in-inferno-01-hatred-

THE LEFT-RIGHT. FALLACY

by Christopher Dawson

I am very glad to -have an opportunity of explaining more fully., the reasons why I object to the current terminology of Left and Right, most of all so far as Catholics are concerned.

It is obvious to-day that we are faced with the prospect of a return to barbarism. The ancient tradition of Western Christendom which was founded on the three pillars of Faith and Freedom and Law is withering away before our eyes, and in its place there is arising an enormously powerful but completely inhuman system of social organisation, which is usually known as totalitarianism.

This system is destroying all the forms of civilised life and moral behaviour which had been developed by a thousand years and more of continuous strenuous effort, and it is not only bringing back the old evils of barbarism—like slavery and massacre and torture—but also introducing new forms of organised evil and injustice which the old barbarisros could never have imagined or devised.

Islands of Civilisation It is our duty at 'the present time to do all in our power to preserve every existing breakwater against this flood of barbarism.

If we can maintain islands of civiiisation--if, for example. these islands can be such islands—then there is a chance that the tide may turn and that the submerged forces of Christian culture, will be able to re-assert themselves.

This task far transcends politics; but it has its political side, and if we surrender our political judgment and allow ourselves to be hoodwinked and blinded by the political tactics of totalitarianism, we lessen our powers of resistance on still more important issues. '

Now the traditions/ Western political order was founded on law and liberty. The ounimon bond of loyalty to the State did not exclude all kinds of lesser loyalties and corporate rights through which the rich diversity of Western Culture was developed. And this twofold tradition has been inherited by Western democracy by which I understand not aft abstract ideology, but simply the historic system of selfgovernment by representing institutions and ministerial responsibility and free elections and free discussion, which has been worked out in this and other Western countries in modern times.

The Totalitarian Tactic

This system like the older system from which it is derived cannot work unless there is a common bond of loyalty and a will to no-operate in essentials, in spite of all disagreements and divergencies of interest. This agreement is essential to the existence of a free society and consequently it is the key-point against which the totalitarian attack on Western Culture is directed. •

The tactics of totalitarianism are to use every difference of opinion and tradition and every conflict of economic interests into an absolute ideological opposition which disintegrates society Into hostile factions bent on destroying one another.

In this campaign of disintegration the Right-Left mythology is a perfect god
send to the forces of destruction. It provides them with a crude and simple but highly effective instrument which can be applied to almost any situation and by which any number of different issues can be applied to almost any situation and by which any number of different issues can be merged together in a mass of confusion and ideological clap-trap.

For example, there arc Liberals and Conservatives, there are Republicans and
Monarchists, there arc anti-clericals and clericals, there are Communists and Fascists, there are Socialists and Individualists, there are Semites and AntiSemites.

All of these are different oppositions, which have no necessary connection with one another, yet all of them are brought under the Leh-Right headings and thus forced into ideological alliances which may be unnecessary and absurd. Moreover, when you have got your opponents neatly ticketed you can then repeat the same process on any section of the in—dividing the Socialists into Socialists of the Left Centre and Socialists of the Extreme Left, or the Liberals into Moderates or Progressives, so as to submit them to the same process of confusion and disintegration.

Now the fault—or, it you like, the advantage, of the method of division is that it has no rational basis. it grades men and ideas according to their relation to a central point ; which, as a rule, has no existence.

Yet in spice of this irrational character, Left and Right become the centre of fierce ideological loyalties and enmities which overpower men's reason and sense of justice and drive them to acts of violence and inhumanity which would disgrace a tribe of cannibals.

The process of social disintegration by political faction has been;spreading like an epidemic in modern society.

It is transforming Europe, the most highly civilised region in the world, the home of Christian culture. into an inferno of hatred and suspicions.

It can only be checked by a great moral effort on the pan of all those who have not yet been dragged down into this whirlpool of destruction.

The Remedy The obvious remedy for these evils is to be found in the old natural and political virtues which have been denied and discarded by the new barbarians: the virtues of justice and goodwill, the virtues of truth and potience, above all, the virtue of prudence, which Aristotle defines as a truly rational and practical state of mind in the field of human good and evil. it is only by the exercise of these virtues that it is possible to save society from the political disintegration that threatens it, and maintain an island of society amidst the rival barbarians of Left and Right.

For what we are faced with is not a false ideology which can be met with rational argument, but a kind of contagious social malady which may be deliberately encouraged by coldblooded political schemes, but which is in itself a thoroughly irrational thing.

It is true that the Left-Right division existed long before the rise of modem totalitarianism, but from the beginning it was tainted with similar moral evils. For it originated in the French Revolution under the shadow of the guillotine and the reign of terror, at a time when politics were merged in civil war and when the totalitarian techniques of purges end liquidations and singleparty dictatorship were first evolved. Where such conditions exist the irrational dualism of Left and Right is natural enough, since every man is forced to take one side or the other, and he stakes his neck on the victory of his party.,

But in this country we have no excuse for adopting such divisions or such methods. They arc in contradiction with our whole political tradition, in which parties arc not instruments of revolution but form complementary parts of the normal machinery of constitutional government. Here the whole Left-Right business is an alien importation which only became popular at the time of the Spanish Civil War as a rather unreal reflection of a situation which tins no parallel or precedent in our political experience.

To-day the whole thing has become infinitely more serious owing to the breakdown of Western civilisation and the rapid spread of social disintegra tion in continental Europe. But this situation makes it all the more necessary that Sc should keep our heads and refuse' to allow our own political life In be involved in the Motional ven

detta of Left and Right, That way leads to destruction. The way of life is the way of justice which turns neither

to the Right nor to the Left. ,

The Law of Justice The political' older of the Christian State was founded on the belief in a law of justice which did not depend on the right of the stronger or the will of the majority, but on the eternal law to which kings and peoples alike were subject. This truth lies at the bask of the common law and is embodied in the English Coronation rite which is the oldest and most sacred thing in our political tradition. And this belief in justice still survives to-day, though its spiritual foundations are often forgotten, so that " law and order " seem no more than a tiresome convenience that we take for granted.

-Nevertheless, it is the most precious thing we have, and there are countless thousands in Europe to-day who are perishing for lack of it. And so long as there are men who stand for justice and truth against the violence of party passion and the lies of party propaganda, there is still a hope for Europe and for Christian civilisation.

Romney is a Example of the Right-Left Mythology is a God of Destruction

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2876138/posts

Soros Wants Mitt Romney
michiganman567.hubpages.com ^ | 2012

Posted on Tuesday, April 24, 2012 6:15:55 PM by SoConPubbie

George Soros, gave his endorsement to none other than Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination. The reason why George Soros chose Romney is as he says, there isn't a bit of difference between liberal...uh hem.... moderate Republican Mitt Romney and Democratic President Barack Obama.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2876138/postsPosted on Monday, July 02, 2012 10:47:53 AM by Nachum

The Obama campaign has seized on remarks made by Romney adviser Eric "Etch-A-Sketch" Fehrnstrom this morning on MSNBC, to the effect that the individual mandate in Obamacare (and Romneycare) is not a tax. Fehrnstrom allowed Chuck Todd to push him off message--and re-ignited the fears that conservatives have long had about Romney's will and ability to fight. In response, conservatives--who had just coalesced around opposition to what many now call "Obamatax": Mitt, start fighting, or give up and let someone else do it.

Fehrnstrom's point--in defense of Romneycare--was that the Supreme Court was wrong to uphold Obamacare under the taxing power. The individual mandate was never intended to be a tax, Congress never called it a tax, and it wasn't a tax in Massachusetts, either. Fine--but now that Obama's lawyers went to court and called it a tax, and Chief Justice John Roberts called it a tax (and spare us the non-distinction between "tax" and the "taxing power") Obamacare is, undeniably, a massive tax on the middle class. Obama lied. It's that simple.

The GOP primary is over, and this is not a mistake that Fehrnstrom can merely shake away. It's going to be used--and already is being used--by the Obama campaign to save itself from the tax argument, and to label Romney as a liar (when that label belongs squarely on Obama, who campaigned against Hillary Clinton's individual mandate in 2008). Perhaps this is why Rupert Murdoch has been calling openly for Romney to "drop...old friends from [his] team and hire...some real pros," as he did on Twitter yesterday.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Romney Turned Obamacare From Tax Into Gaffe: No Formula For Winning
Crystal Wright

Jul 06, 2012
Tweet


Sign-Up

The Supreme Court ruled Obamacare constitutional as a tax with the pivotal vote of Chief Justice John Roberts, the politician. Despite Obama campaigning it wouldn’t be a tax on the middle class, that’s exactly Obamacare is. According to the Congressional Budget Office, as reported by the Wall Street Journal, “three quarters of those who pay the mandate tax will make less than $120,00 a year” and those people need jobs not more taxes.

Instead of coming out like every other Republican under the sun and agreeing it’s a tax, Mitt Romney’s campaign adviser Eric Fehrnstrom said Romney agreed with president that it’s a penalty not a tax. Then Romney reversed himself July 4th and said it was a tax. Well duh! In a scathing editorial on the goof up, the Wall Street Journal noted “he [Romney] offered no explanation so the campaign looks confused in addition to being politically dumb.”

Romney can ill afford any more mistakes like this. Don’t forget earlier this year, in March, Fehrnstrom infamously declared Romney’s strategy from the primaries to the general would be akin to an Etch-a-Sketch, one in which Romney would just shake up his campaign and start over. Maybe Romney needs to shake things up and start cleaning house because these sophomoric mistakes reinforce the perception he’s silly putty on the issues. Rupert Murdoch agreed tweeting, “Met Romney last week. Tough O Chicago pros will be hard to bat unless he drops old friends from team and hires some real pros. Doubtful.”

Another big Achilles heel for Romney is Romneycare. “The tragedy is that for the sake of not abandoning his faulty health-care legacy in Massachusetts, Mr. Romney is jeopardizing his chance at becoming President,” wrote the Wall Street Journal. In an appearance on CNN in March, I discussed the Supreme Court’s oral arguments on Obamacare and said the same thing that Romney would have to admit his signing the individual mandate into law in Massachusetts was a mistake in order for him to be credible on the topic against Obama.

The time has come for Romney to step out of the sand and take an aggressive stance on the issues and take the fight to Obama not throw in the towel like Senator John McCain did in 2008 for fear of being called a racist. Since President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, no president has run for re-election and won when unemployment is at 7% or above. Now isn’t the moment for Romney to blow that trend. Since Obama took office the jobless rate has been persistently stuck at 8% or above for 40 plus straight months, despite the fact Obama has spent $5 trillion in three and half short years. That’s more than what President George W. Bush spent in eight years in office.

All the king’s horses and all the king’s men can’t repackage Humpty Dumpty aka President Obama into a leader in another four years because he has no record to run on. If he’s given more time, Obama will drive the country further into this black hole of economic misery. But we need Romney to convince us he’s the better man. It’s all in the message. So, let’s “shake it Romney,” there’s no time to waste.

No comments: