Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: Is IT THE ROAD TO SERFDOM
4/9/2011 1:58:21 PM

Dhimmocracy in America


Research is great isn't it? One my challenges is getting all the reading done. I am not a speed reader per say I am a scanner and rely on my knack and keen eye for finding the key points of any discussion pro or con as any debater would do prior to prepping for a discussion/debate. Bringing light to all sides will always shine brightly on winners. Don't you agree?

The below is a quote from a blog I cam across. Now this appears and feels like a fair dinkum description of the situation here in America:
Quote:

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2005/10/dhimmocracy-in-america.html
To make matters worse, they are mostly African-Americans. Any attempt to deal with them is going to bring the wrath of the Multicultural Mafia down on the head of whoever does it. You can see why the mainstream media shy away from this topic, and why law enforcement is treading so gingerly. Arrange a mass bust at an ul-Fuqra compound, and you’d have the entire army of Sharpton, Jackson, Sheehan, and their uncritical media entourage swarming around you like hornets. There’s no political payoff for any functionary who attempts it.

I can see why people are afraid to go there. I’m afraid to go there, too: down that road looms a Race War. When the shooting starts, that’s how it will be played in the media, and no politician will be able to allow it to continue. We are pretty much stuck on this one.

It’s the omnipresent cultural poison that has infused every nook and cranny of American life: the PC desire to avoid being labeled a “racist.” And there’s always some race-hustling poverty pimp or fund-raising civil-liberties group out there ready to hurl the epithet in all directions. Do you see the conundrum? We have enclaves of Americans who hate America, who have proved themselves willing to do her harm, yet reining them in will be deemed a “hate crime.” Figure your way out of that one.


I see this happening already. If you disagree with ZerObama, the Progressive Republicans, the progressives among the Democrats, the Unions, the Bankers or any of the Elitist and Academia. There seems to be very little wiggle room for peace. I understand because personally, I have given all the ground I am willing to give to intolerance of me and my kind.

My line in the sand is drawn, as you probably already know. I am done being tolerant of those that will not tolerate me and my beliefs. Peace comes to those that know where they stand.

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: Is IT THE ROAD TO SERFDOM
4/9/2011 4:47:43 PM

Mohammed and Charlemagne, Revisited

April 7th, 2011 by Andrew Bostom |
No Comments
378 visitors have read this article

A guest book review/essay by the Norwegian writer, Fjordman.

The Inheritance of Rome: A History of Europe from 400 to 1000 was written by Chris Wickham, a Professor of Medieval History at the University of Oxford, England. He was also the editor of the work Marxist History-writing for the Twenty-first Century from 2007, which received praise for its distinctly Marxist outlook in International Socialism, a journal associated with the Socialist Workers Party in Britain, a party of revolutionary Socialists.

The Inheritance of Rome consists of roughly six hundred pages densely packed with names, often excessively so compared to deeper insights into historical trends. Although the author has dedicated several chapters each to the Byzantine and Arab Empires in addition to Western Europe, which is fine, he is rather weak in comparing how these cultures used the Greco-Roman heritage differently, for instance Greek natural philosophy or secular Roman law.

He talks about Arab conquests and “raids,” but doesn’t explain Islamic Jihad as a word or concept. By reading this book and this book alone you will have no understanding whatsoever of the fact that Europe was for over a thousand years targeted by a religiously sanctioned war of conquest, certainly not that in the minds of many Muslims this drive for world domination continues to this day. In fact, you will learn more about Tunisian olive oil than about Jihad.

Even though he writes extensively about Charles Martel and the Carolingians, he barely mentions the Battle of Poitiers in AD 732 when Martel’s troops halted the Arab Muslim advances into Western Europe north of the Pyrenees. This is, quite frankly, incomprehensible when considering the amount of detail he spends on issues that are of lesser importance.

I am not claiming that there is no information of value in these six hundred pages. I did find bits and pieces of interest here and there. Yet the book suffers from fundamental flaws and should for that reason not be used as the main source of information about this era. It may at most be used with some caution to supplement information you get from other, better works.

Wickham mentions The Seven Voyages of Sinbad the Sailor, one of the most famous stories from the Thousand and One Nights collection of traditional Middle Eastern fairytales, along with Aladdin’s Wonderful Lamp and Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves. Many of these tales have a pre-Islamic origin in Persian, Indian or Egyptian folklore. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, but is it surely a sign of the times that the author mentions fairytales, but says almost nothing about the unique institution of Jihad or the fact that Europe and the rest of the world have been at the receiving end of an unprovoked religious war for nearly 1400 years.

The Iberian Peninsula very slowly converted to Islam in the face of continuous pressures and discrimination, but the process took centuries there as elsewhere. Major centers became majority Muslim first. Wickham states (page 342) that “A sign of this is the strange minority movement known as the ‘martyrs of Córdoba’, Christian extremists led by Eulogius (d. 859) and Alvar, who deliberately provoked their death in the capital by insulting Islam in public in the 850s. There were less than fifty of them, and they were clearly unrepresentative of the still-large Córdoba Christian community, despite the fascination their writings (conveniently in Latin) have had for recent scholars; but the desperation of their stand implies that they saw only extreme measures as adequate against the steady advance of Muslim hegemony.”

Notice how this acclaimed professor without a hint of irony calls Christians “extremists” merely for standing up for their religion. Muslims killed them for “insulting” Islam, which has been punishable by death for Muslims and non-Muslims alike since the birth of this creed.

Professor Wickham cites the Cairo Geniza documents, a large collection of Jewish manuscript fragments found in the storeroom of the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Old Cairo, which illuminate the social history of this medieval society. He doesn’t mention how Bat Ye’or, who was born in Egypt, and others have proven from these documents that the lives of non-Muslim dhimmis was difficult, dangerous and always humiliating under Muslim rule. The jizya, the special tax imposed on non-Muslims as a punishment for merely existing, constituted a serious financial burden for the poor. The Koran 9,29 indicates that the payment should imply a degree of humiliation and that the dhimmis should “feel themselves subdued.” Shelomo Dov Goitein, a German-Jewish Arabist who earlier had a somewhat romantic view of the relationship between Jews and Muslims, was forced to reconsider after studying this material in detail (here, p. 170):

“…in general, taxation [by the Muslim government] was merciless, and a very large section of the population must have lived permanently at the starvation level. From many Geniza letters one gets the impression that the poor were concerned more with getting money for the payment of their taxes than for food and clothing, for failure of payment usually induced cruel punishment… An Islamic state was part of or coincided with dar al-Islam, the House of Islam. Its treasury was mal al-muslumin, the money of the Muslims. Christians and Jews were not citizens of the state, not even second class citizens.”

The influential Belgian historian Henri Pirenne (1862-1935) asserted that the definitive break between the Classical world and the Middle Ages in the West was not the downfall of the Western Roman Empire following the partition in the year 395, but the Islamic conquests in the seventh century. While civilization in Europe had previously always been centered on the Mediterranean, the center of power was now established north of the Alps for this first time.

Post-Roman Western Europe was a mosaic of “barbarian,” usually Germanic kingdoms: the Ostrogoths in Italy; the Vandals in North Africa (who sacked Rome in AD 455 and whose name, justly or not, became a synonym for senseless destruction, vandalism); the Suebi in the Iberian Peninsula (Galicia and northern Portugal); the Visigoths in Spain and south of the Loire; the Burgundians, possibly of Scandinavian origin, in the valley of the Rhône.

The Anglo-Saxons established themselves in Britain. By the early 500s there was not an inch of soil in the West that was subject to the effective rule of the Emperor in Constantinople, but they still recognized his authority in theory. Even Clovis I (ca. AD 466-511), the Christian king of the Franks and founder of the Merovingian dynasty which ruled much of the Gaul (France) until the rise of the Carolingians in the eighth century, prided himself upon receiving the title of consul. No one before Charlemagne ventured to assume the title of Emperor.

The Romans left various legacies, from the roads and legal traditions they used for keeping their far-flung Empire together for such a long time to, eventually, the spread of Christianity. Above all, the imperial idea itself was kept alive in Europe by more or less legitimate heirs to Roman imperial claims well into the modern era, in some cases into the twentieth century. The city of Rome continued to exist in diminished size after the Empire. It wasn’t completely under the control of the Carolingians, but it enjoyed great prestige as the cradle of the imperial tradition. Most kings/emperors, including Charlemagne in the year 800, were crowned there.

The vast Carolingian Empire of the ninth century was divided into three parts. The Treaty of Verdun in 843 divided the territories into three kingdoms between the grandsons of Charles the Great (Charlemagne) and surviving sons of Louis the Pious. The middle realm soon fragmented, but West Francia or the West Frankish Kingdom became the precursor France. East Francia, centered on the German-speaking lands of Central Europe, evolved into the Holy Roman Empire, which survived in name at least for many centuries. It was formally abolished in 1806 by Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821), who had crowned himself Emperor.

The designation “holy” dates back to Frederick I (1122-1190), with the byname Barbarossa (Italian: “Redbeard”), who was crowned Emperor by the pope at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome in 1155. He drowned while on the Third Crusade to liberate the Holy Land from the Muslims.

Wickham is critical of Henri Pirenne’s work Mohammed and Charlemagne, published posthumously in 1937. Pirenne argued for the partial continuation of Mediterranean Roman civilization after the collapse of effective imperial rule. Wickham states – correctly – that his theory was largely “pre-archaeological.” Later studies have demonstrated that Pirenne underestimated the extent to which trade declined in the western Mediterranean region. Roman civilization collapsed almost entirely in the northernmost province of the old Empire, Britain, and there was much less shipping in the West well before the Arab invaders arrived.

Nevertheless, while Pirenne’s thesis does have to be modified in some of its details, he remains correct in pointing out that the Arab invasions brought major additional changes and that nobody in the West dared to call themselves “emperor” before the Islamic conquests of the seventh and eighth centuries AD. Previously, they had referred at least in theory to the Emperor in Constantinople. Yet the Eastern and Western provinces, the latter including the pope in Rome, drifted further apart after the Muslim presence complicated communications and drastically altered the political situation and military dynamic of the Mediterranean world.

From the mid-700s on, navigation between the Italian Peninsula and what remained of the once-proud Byzantine Empire almost ceased due to Muslim piracy. There was no longer any major traffic in what the Romans had called Mare Nostrum (Our Sea), except for the Adriatic and the northeastern corner of the Mediterranean that was still largely controlled by the Byzantine fleet. As Ibn Khaldun proudly proclaimed, “the Christians could no longer float a plank upon the sea.” A little bit of commerce was maintained by the Jews, who existed as minorities under both Christian and Muslim rule and were able to trade among themselves.

As Pirenne states in Find all the books, read about the author, and more.Mohammed and Charlemagne (page 174), “It may be said that the Islamic invasion was as decisive for the East as for the West of Europe. Before this invasion the Emperor of Constantinople was still the Roman Emperor. The policy of Justinian in this respect is characteristic: he claimed that the entire Mediterranean was subject to the Imperial authority. After the invasion, on the contrary, the Emperor was reduced to the defensive in Greek waters, until in the 11th century he appealed to the West for assistance. Islam immobilized and engrossed him.” Navigation continued in diminished quantities only in the Christian East, or the Orient, where a few ships sailed from Venice along the Adriatic coast. In southern Italy and the Byzantine heartland, a civilization survived with cities. Page 184:

“In the Occident, on the contrary, the coast from the Gulf of Lyons and the Riviera to the mouth of the Tiber, ravaged by war and the pirates, whom the Christians, having no fleet, were powerless to resist, was now merely a solitude and a prey to piracy. The ports and the cities were deserted. The link with the Orient was severed, and there was no communication with the Saracen coasts. There was nothing but death. The Carolingian Empire presented the most striking contrast with the Byzantine. It was purely an inland power, for it had no outlets. The Mediterranean territories, formerly the most active portions of the Empire, which supported the life of the whole, were now the poorest, the most desolate, the most constantly menaced. For the first time in history the axis of Occidental civilization was displaced towards the North, and for many centuries it remained between the Seine and the Rhine. And the Germanic peoples, which had hitherto played only the negative part of destroyers, were now called upon to play a positive part in the reconstruction of European civilization. The classic tradition was shattered, because Islam had destroyed the ancient unity of the Mediterranean.”

Muslims did not create the European weakness of the post-Roman era, but they certainly exploited it for a long time. Gradually, new political, military and cultural institutions emerged in the West out of the ashes of the Roman world, a new version of European civilization. It is possible to see parallels to the situation today, when Muslims and other external enemies prey upon internal European weakness. Perhaps, now as then, over time novel political institutions and innovations will evolve out of this chaos to reverse European decline and restore cultural innovation and dynamism on the Continent. Only time will tell.


All Articles Copyright © 2007-2011 Dr. Andrew Bostom | All Rights Reserved
Printing is allowed for personal use only | Commercial usage(For Profit) is a copyright violation and written permission must be granted first.

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: Is IT THE ROAD TO SERFDOM
4/12/2011 9:40:05 PM

SOROS NPR CONNECTION GROUNDS FOR ENDING GOV'T. FUNDING

By NWV News writer Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
April 12, 2011
© 2011 NewsWithViews.com

Billionaire and New World Order advocate George Soros is the latest person to be exposed by the always controversial Internet journalist James O'Keefe. Soros, through one of his multi-million dollar front-groups, the Open Society Institute, donated $1.8 million to National Public Radio on the condition that Open Society and NPR keep the transaction secret.

In a surreptitiously recorded telephone conversation released by the young O’Keefe, Betsy Liley, an executive with NPR is heard saying that the Open Society Institute opted against on-air credit for its $1.8-million donation to NPR last year to avoid negative publicity associated with the firing of Juan Williams, an NPR senior news analyst who also worked for Fox News Channel.

The tape marks the third time this month that Mr. O’Keefe has released a secret recording involving a top NPR fund raiser. In each case, the NPR official is heard talking to a staff member of Mr. O’Keefe’s Project Veritas who was posing as a donor from the fictitious Muslim Education Action Center.

The tape’s release came on the day when the House of Representatives was voting to end federal funds to NPR.

As a preface to the latest recording, Mr. O’Keefe narrates: “In another phone call to NPR on the morning of February 28, Betsy Liley … explains about George Soros deciding not to use on-air credits in exchange for his donation of $1.8-million.

“Betsy Liley went on to explain this was not the first time George Soros’s Open Society Institute had donated to NPR. In fact, the public will learn for the first time that George Soros’s Open Society Foundation has donated to NPR in the past, starting as many as 15 years ago.”

Ms. Liley was suspended after Mr. O’Keefe released the first tape of her and her boss, Ronald Schiller, at lunch with the donors who turned out be pulling a ruse. Two days later, Mr. O’Keefe released a tape in which Ms. Liley explained how the donors could keep any donation to NPR anonymous and off the radar of government auditors.

O'Keefe's revealed NPR fundraisers Ron Schiller and Betsy Liley at lunch with two men play-acting as Muslim contributors. The NPR duo are seen and heard telling the supposed contributors what they obviously wished to hear from the two "development" executives.

Ron Schiller is heard on the video saying, "[V]ery little of our funding comes from the government." He's also heard saying, "The current Republican Party, particularly the tea party, is fanatically involved in people's personal lives and very fundamental Christian — and I wouldn't even call it Christian."

"Basically, they believe in white, middle America, gun toting — it's pretty scary. They're seriously racist..." said Schiller.

Schiller has since left his job as NPR Foundation's senior vice president for development.

He went further in his pandering comments to the two men when he said he was proud when NPR let Juan Williams go last year after Williams said on Fox News he would be concerned if he boarded a plane with fellow passengers in Muslim garb. "He lost all credibility and that breaks your ethics as a journalist." Schiller says.

Of course, Schiller failed to mention that Williams is not a reporter but a political commentator.

NPR responded almost immediately after the O'Keefe video began to air on the Internet. NPR officials claimed, "The fraudulent organization represented in the video repeatedly pressed us to accept a $5 million check, with no strings attached, which we repeatedly refused to accept."

"We are appalled by the comments made by Ron Schiller in the video, which are contrary to what NPR stands for. Mr. Schiller announced last week he is leaving NPR for another job," stated the NPR media release.

O'Keefe's Project Veritas gained notoriety in 2009 in another covertly made video that showed individuals — O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, daughter of syndicated talk show host and Christian Pastor Doug Giles — posing as a pimp and prostitute seeming to get advice on gaming the tax system from a representative of ACORN, a leftist community activist organization that significantly helped President Obama capture the White House.

That undercover journalism operation all but destroyed ACORN which witnessed Obama distancing himself from their executives and programs.

This exposure of NPR confirms the suspicions of millions of Americans. Lawmakers are currently debating whether to cut federal grants and contributions to a decidedly slanted left-wing news organization.

"Anyone with half-a-brain can tell NPR is left in its news coverage and in fact in all of its programing," said political strategist Mike Baker.

'If they want to be a propaganda arm for the radical left, that's fine. But they should do it on their own 'dime' not the taxpayers'," he said.

Maria Archuleta, a spokeswoman for the Open Society Institute, said Soros' organization has had a longstanding policy of not taking on-air credit for its grants to NPR.

Soros had given $237,411 in 1997 and 1998 directly to NPR for four grants to support a criminal-justice series, coverage of crime and related issues, and reports in Central Asia, Ms. Archuleta said. The organization has also provided 34 grants from 1997 to 2010 to local NPR member stations and specific programs that have totaled nearly $3.4-million.

Recipients have included WNYC radio, Pacific News Service, and Minnesota Public Radio. The local grant information has been publicly available on Open Society’s annual informational tax return, Ms. Archuleta added.

“Some of our donors have chosen not to use the on-air credits. So George Soros and the Open Society Institute gave us $1.8-million and they have decided not to use on-air credits because of what is happening in Congress,” Ms. Liley said on the O'Keefe tape.

“In the fall, when Juan Williams was fired, a number of the conservative press linked the George Soros gift and the Juan Williams firing to each other and suggested that this was the liberals run amok. Which, they’re separate things. They have nothing to do with each other. No one here has even met Mr. Soros. I bring it up as just an example of choices that different people make.”

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Later in the tape, Ms. Liley said: “The Open Society Institute was getting, the conservatives were, on some of the Web sites, were having people call his foundation. The press was calling, and so it became, they got roped into the Juan Williams thing, which they didn’t feel like they needed to be.”

"It should be noted that Juan Williams is far from being a conservative," said Mike Baker. "Williams is a big-government leftist and internationalist. However, Soros was always vocal about his hatred for Fox News especially for libertarians such as Glenn Beck, Judge Andrew Napolitano and John Stossel and connecting the dots isn't hard in the world of the radical left."

© 2011 NWV - All Rights Reserved

Share This Article

Click Here For Mass E-mailing

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts


May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: Is IT THE ROAD TO SERFDOM
4/13/2011 12:45:47 AM

A repressive bureaucracy, an out-of-touch political class, mounting debt, failing industries and an angry populace caught between government benefits and enforced poverty

What We Can Learn from the Soviet Union


- Daniel Greenfield Sunday, April 10, 2011

Take a tour of North Korea or the former Soviet Union and you will encounter massive structures and tremendous projects, epic in scope which are nevertheless complete failures. North Korea has been building a 105 story hotel since 1987. Even if it ever gets finished, there aren’t any people to stay in it. China and the USSR specialized in massive and massively disastrous dam construction projects. The Banqiao Dam failure alone killed almost 200,000 people. That’s more than every natural disaster in American history combined.


The Soviet Union used wheat as one of its national symbols, but despite being a vast agricultural empire, had gone billions into debt to buy Western wheat. Even as the Warsaw Pact nations were talking about destroying capitalism—by 1986 they had racked up 138 billion dollars in debt to Western banks to pay for basic subsistence level imported goods.

What went wrong? There was one easy clue. Altogether Soviet farmers used less than 5 percent of the land for private farming, they produced a third of the agricultural produce. Meanwhile the massive system of collectivization at the heart of Communism couldn’t even feed its own people. But all the while agricultural officials went on reporting record harvests each year.

The system was completely broken but only the people at the bottom had any inkling why. And there was no way for them to communicate that up the chain of command. Even if they had been able to, their only reward would have been a jail sentence. Those at the top could not concede that the system was broken, let alone why. Instead they put the country deeper into debt to pay for the consequences of their disastrous economic program.

This is not just history. It’s the present. It’s us.

A repressive bureaucracy, an out-of-touch political class, mounting debt, failing industries and an angry populace caught between government benefits and enforced poverty

Think about a country with a 15 trillion dollar debt whose leaders and media insist that everything is going swimmingly. A government which goes into debt for grandiose projects every year—and none of them ever amount to anything. A new year and a new trillion dollar budget, packed full of projects that are dead ends. Grand ideas that make the politicians feel good about themselves, but can never work. We beat the Soviet Union—but these days we look a lot like it. A repressive bureaucracy, an out-of-touch political class, mounting debt, failing industries and an angry populace caught between government benefits and enforced poverty.

North Korea has been building a 105-story hotel since 1987—and we still haven’t even managed to construct a much smaller replacement for the World Trade Center. But during the Great Depression, New York city and state governments built the Empire State Building in a single year from blueprints that were done in two weeks. Why can’t do we do in 2011 what we did in 1931? How is it that 80 years later, with space age technology, computer modeling and instantaneous data access— we’re less competent than our ancestors were?

We have gone from a pragmatic goal-oriented society to a political society governed by ideology

What changed is our society. We have gone from a pragmatic goal-oriented society to a political society governed by ideology. The emphasis has shifted from the results, to how you get them. 90 percent of the effort is directed at the methodology and 10 percent at actually getting it done. Everything is politicized and nothing is accomplished. A project used to begin with a vision and end with a structure. Today it begins with diversity and ends with a bailout.

We’re losing our competence, the same way that the Russians lost theirs. The same way that people living under every ideological tyranny does.

A pragmatic society sets goals and relies on methodologies that are based on the real world. An ideological society however develops its goals and methodologies in relation to its ideology. Imagine two people who are expected to fix a car. Both are given a manual. The pragmatist’s manual has the schematics of an internal combustion engine. The ideologue’s manual is a thousand pages and explores the political implications of the internal combustion engine. After a few hours the pragmatist drives away and the ideologue decides that the car should stay broken until someone designs an ideal engine with no negative political implications. Scale this up, and it’s how we do everything today.

An ideologue believes that the feasibility of a project derives from his ideology. That is why liberals will argue that wars they don’t believe in are unwinnable, but wars they do believe in are winnable. A stimulus package they disagree with is hopeless, but one that meets their political criteria is the only thing standing between us and the abyss. Where people are supposed to reality-test, they have an ideology-test. If it passes political muster—then it must work. If it doesn’t—then it can’t. If a politically approved idea fails, then either it didn’t follow the party line closely enough or it was sabotaged. If a politically disapproved idea succeeds—then it’s a menace and it must be shut down because failure is still imminent.

A Chinese engineer during the ‘60s and ‘70s was expected to use Mao’s Little Red Book to develop his methodology. A Soviet scientist was supposed to do his research based on general principles laid out by political appointees. There was no reality testing. When ideology finally collided with reality, it was either hushed up or blamed on foreign spies. The United States stayed ahead because its society was less shielded from reality testing. Grandiose failures could still happen, but they were the fault of individuals or groups—not of the central ideology. When the Soviet Union finally became big enough to fail—it collapsed. The United States kept on going. But now we’re caught in the collapse of a liberal ideology that has overtaken the country.

Ideology creates a reality gap as its proponents try to use it as a guideline for getting things done. Some ideologies have bigger reality gaps than others. The more utopian an ideology is—the more the gap yawns. As the gap increases, the proponents go down the rabbit hole and lose touch with reality. They don’t go insane, what they do is begin treating the real world like a puzzle they can solve if they can just get all the pieces to fit. That mindset makes them extremely manipulative and ruthless in pursuit of their goals, but absolutely incapable of understanding why those goals fail.

When given power, they address every setback by trying to expand their sphere of control. If a welfare program is bankrupted by high food prices, then they impose price controls, if the supply of food dries up, they nationalize the agricultural sector, if the harvests fail then they collectivize farmers. Each failure is blamed on outside factors which they strive to control. Once they control all the major internal factors, then they settle down into a vast bureaucracy in which officials report only good news up the ladder. That way there may be no food, but the reports going to the top say that food is plentiful. Eventually hunger or food riots set in and the state collapses.

Policy detached from reality is guaranteed failure

Policy detached from reality is guaranteed failure. Ideological policies are certain to fail in the long run, and ideological tyrannies insulate themselves from knowledge of those failures. Measuring all success or failure only in light of compliance with the tenets of the ideology makes corrections very hard to apply. How do you fix a problem with broken tools? You can’t. Politicization creates a broken methodology. Ideological methods used to fix problems create more problems—because the real problem is the ideology.

We don’t lack abilities or resources. The damage is cultural. A society overseen by an elite that believes “Everything is Political”, that the ideological compliance of a product or a deed is of primary concern, is hobbled by that way of thinking. An ideological society bleeds wasted energy. Its rulers are more concerned that everyone only do things their way, than that anything actually get done. Multiple overlays of regulations and procedures breed apathy, corruption and defeatism. People and businesses either go rogue or stop trying to anything at all and just hold their hand out and get on the dole.

These conditions create a large number of human sheep and a growing number of human wolves. The society implodes, along with whatever law and order it provided, and the wolves take over. From Utopia to the Jungle in one easy step. Peel away the propaganda and a surprising number of our enemies look exactly like this. And we’re going down the same road. Clinton and Obama are low marks in American history. What follows after them may be worse.

As the society’s morals and codes break down—the human wolves come out to feed

As the society’s morals and codes break down—the human wolves come out to feed. Revolutions are begun by idealists, but completed by tyrants. Brutality and ruthlessness in the name of an ideal are delegated to those who practice it for its own sake. As the Russian Revolution paved the way for Stalin—the chaotic mix of idealism and brutality practiced by liberal elites may open the door for our own monster. The man of vicious cunning that desperate liberals will turn to save their failing system in their darkest hour. The wolf among the fold whose brutality they will mistake for competence, and whose disdain for the individual will be taken for the mark of the true believer. That dark hour has not yet come, but if American liberals are faced with the prospect of absolute failure in the face of economic collapse—there is no telling who may rise in such a desperate moment. Liberals elevated Obama to stop the War on Terror. Whom they would elevate if Wisconsin goes national can only be imagined.

We are at a dangerous intersection now, committed to a course we cannot sustain in any way, shape or form—but one we also cannot break from politically. The elites have warped everything from economics to foreign policy into unreal forms to sustain the illusion of momentum. We are crashing, but they pretend that we are soaring to the skies. The ability to communicate their peril to the general public and devise workable solutions will determine whether we will remain strapped in our seats during the crash or whether we will learn to fly again. Everything from the economy to the Islamic threat hinges on being able to communicate the peril to the public so that the ideological blinders fall away and we become a pragmatic society again, capable of making the decisions we need to survive.


Author
Daniel Greenfield

Daniel Greenfield Most recent columns

Daniel Greenfield is a New York City based writer and freelance commentator. “Daniel comments on political affairs with a special focus on the War on Terror and the rising threat to Western Civilization. He maintains a blog at Sultanknish.blogspot.com.

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: Is IT THE ROAD TO SERFDOM
6/22/2011 2:54:46 AM
NBC has really crossed a line with their stunning omission
of "under God" during the Pledge of Allegiance in the
opening segment of U.S. Open coverage. A number of
religious and media organizations have responded,
including the Media Research Center, calling the omission
"brazenly deliberate."

The MRC is calling on citizens to personally respond to
NBC executives. See details and action items below.

Your friends at Grassroots Action

+ + + + + + + + + +

From the Desk of:
David Martin, Executive Vice President


NBC committed an act of overt religious bigotry designed
to offend Christians on Sunday by removing the words
"under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance during their
final round coverage of the 2011 U.S. Open.

Even worse, was the omission was repeated twice --
prompting Dan Gainor, VP of Business & Culture at the
Media Research Center to remark, "It was absolutely
not accidental. It was brazenly deliberate."

NBC did offer what a number of religious leaders have
called a pathetic apology, but in their refusal to
admit any wrongdoing, NBC has only compounded the offense.

We are working with faith-based organizations across the
country to demand NBC identify and fire those responsible
for this overt insult, or admit to being guilty of
giving aid and comfort to religious bigots!


++++ Please join us in this fight by taking TWO IMMEDIATE STEPS

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!