America Becoming a Totalitarian State

Let’s create a scale as shown below

Total Personal Freedom  ___I___I___I___Total Government Control

The scale above reflects the autonomy of the individual versus some form of government that will inevitably exist in any group of interacting human beings.  An interesting exception to what would normally develop in any group of people is the dynamics that emerge on the television show, “Survivor”.  As you may have noticed over the years, being a “leader” of the team is ultimately a death sentence as eventually a leader will be voted out after the team has been reduced considerably.  A natural leader always emerges due to his or her athletic prowess or intelligence that helps the team win various competitions.

Eventually though, a counter conspiracy develops as part of the group realizes that the leader, the one who has helped them win victories is too popular and must be knocked off in order for at least one of the conspirators to win.  While interesting to observe, it is not real life.  The competition has a scheduled ending with only one victor, whereas in real life, a society does all it can do to survive in perpetuity.  In real life, a valuable leader who is just and under whose leadership the society prospers is valued by the society.  Of course, there are always those with dark ambition who may attempt and succeed in overthrowing even a good leader, but that merely to replace the person, not the office itself.

A family, led by a parent living in an isolated area has a government, the parent is king, the leader of the clan.  A group of say, half a dozen friends, will have a leader or even more than one, the dominant person that the others look to whether they admit it or not.  The reason is simple, while most people really don’t care about being a leader, they understand the need for one and prefer the order that a leader brings to the group.

Read any history book, all of human history is always understood and memorized by milestone occurrences or watershed moments caused by nations and events which are created by actions of the leaders of nations.  The great world powers of antiquity were led by men and their governments.  The Egyptians had their Pharaohs, the Persians and Greeks, their Kings, the Romans, their senate, then their Emperors.  The subsequent medieval and middle ages saw various kingdoms arise in Europe led by kings and nobles that over time became more organized and complex.  However, regardless of the government and rulers, two things provided a basis for a general commonality of European culture, Christianity and the preservation of many Roman institutions themselves.  What we call “The West” can be (or once was) defined as Roman and Christian.  Specifically, America was further fine-tuned as English and Protestant.

Considering our scale of human freedom at the beginning, all humans of all ages can find themselves between the two extremes of total human freedom and total government control.  The ability of governments to intensify control over the actions, and now the very thoughts of their subjects, has greatly increased due largely to tremendous advancements in the psychological sciences and technology, as well as the abandonment of the societal institutions and philosophies that fed and encouraged human freedoms.

What we think of as human freedom, guaranteed or actually safeguarded by government itself, is a very new concept.  The vast majority of humans throughout history lived their lives essentially by the whims of their political leaders.  The power of kings or similar was limited only by their own sense of goodness and morality and fear of possible rebellion and overthrow.  Only in the West did a system of law come into being that guaranteed personal liberty, that constrained those that govern for the benefit of the governed.   Government was constrained by law from trampling on the rights of the governed, these rights given by God.  We hear often, “we’re a nation of laws, not men”.  That was true, but rare, and we cast that aside at our peril.

In our modern times, three major events occurred that defines human relationship with government.  Our American revolution and our subsequent formation of a constitutional republic.  The French revolution that was short lived and did not itself lead directly to a permanent government incorporating the tenets of that revolution, lives on in the hearts of our modern day western liberals. Lastly, the rise of communist and fascist totalitarianism.

The consequences of the French Revolution best epitomizes the “Total Personal Freedom” end of the scale, communism best epitomizes the “Total Government Control” opposite end of the scale, with our American Constitutional Republic epitomizing the perfect location on the scale.  We witness that both ends of the scale are destructive to true personal liberty and to life itself.  While the idea of “total personal freedom” actually brings bondage and destruction may seem totally contradictory we will see that it does exactly that.

The French Revolution was a revolt against traditional authority.  Its primary targets were feudalism, the monarchy, the legal system it provided and the Church which provided the glue that held society together.  While there may have been many legitimate reasons that prompted the revolution, its practical effect led to anarchy as the revolutionists butchered those of the old guard in power, one faction replaced another as they attempted to replace these systems with those that elevated man and his “reasoning” over those higher institutions.  It was a rejection of previously viewed absolute truth to be replaced with what has been called “autonomous” man.  We often hear and use the term secular humanism or Humanism.  The contradictory message was that man was to be free, but only free as he best conformed to the image of the State.

The French Revolutionists adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in 1789.  While in many ways a remarkable document with many influential and positive aspects, there were certain things it advocated that liberals today have almost exclusively latched onto.  “Social distinctions can be founded only on the common good” (Article I).  Liberals run with this philosophy in advancing the notion that all outcomes should be equal (for everybody else, not them).  This sort of nonsense gives rise to such notions of not teaching children that there are winners and losers but rather everyone is a “winner” and everyone gets a trophy, redistribute wealth from those that work and innovate to give to those who won’t, etc.  From each according to his abilities, to each according to his need.  “Income inequality”, “the one percent” they cry.

“The goal of any political association is the conservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man. These rights are liberty, property, safety and resistance against oppression” (Article II).  Now some of this is good and there was an original good intent.  However, just as liberals pervert our constitution, there is something in this article that has grabbed the liberals’ attention, the right to Property.  In America, our citizens were not promised property, we have to earn it, to buy it, then our property rights are supposed to be protected.  Liberals, wanting these “positive” rights maintain that property is a right and that government should give property to its citizens, i.e. government housing, Obama phones, EBT cards, in other words it is government that is obligated to provide food, clothing and shelter to the citizens. 

“The principle of any sovereignty resides essentially in the Nation. No body, no individual can exert authority which does not emanate expressly from it (Article III).  Its original intent here was to defang or destroy the feudal system of Lords and Serfs, liberals have now embraced and advanced the idea that all power in America must reside in the Federal Government.  Our Republican system would see the individual states as having their own sphere of authority, as contrasted against the 18 enumerated powers as intended by the authors of our constitution that would limit the power of the federal government.  Thus our liberals have worked tirelessly to construct an all-powerful central government to ensure that none of our states can exert authority which does not “emanate expressly from it” (the federal government) and in the process strips all of the power from the people.

The French Revolutionists were what we would call today, Secular Humanists.  Modern day western liberals are Secular Humanists.  The French saw no higher authority than the state itself as does our liberals, whereas our founders considered God himself to be the highest authority.

Wikipedia defines Secular Humanism as

The philosophy or life stance of secular humanism (alternatively known by some adherents as Humanism, specifically with a capital H to distinguish it from other forms of humanism) embraces human reason, ethics, and philosophical naturalism while specifically rejecting religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and superstition as the basis of morality and decision making.

Secular humanism posits that human beings are capable of being ethical and moral without religion or a god. It does not, however, assume that humans are either inherently evil or innately good, nor does it present humans as being superior to nature. Rather, the humanist life stance emphasizes the unique responsibility facing humanity and the ethical consequences of human decisions. Fundamental to the concept of secular humanism is the strongly held viewpoint that ideology—be it religious or political—must be thoroughly examined by each individual and not simply accepted or rejected on faith. Along with this, an essential part of secular humanism is a continually adapting search for truth, primarily through science and philosophy 

We should immediately see the dangers of secularism or Humanism as it clearly rejects the Biblical God and His scriptures as the source of ultimate truth embraced by western civilization throughout its history.  Humanism can trace its roots to ancient Greek philosophers, but generally exploded onto the European scene as the “Enlightenment”.  The Stanford (University) Encyclopedia of Philosophy thus defines the Enlightenment generally as

The Enlightenment is the period in the history of western thought and culture, stretching roughly from the mid-decades of the seventeenth century through the eighteenth century, characterized by dramatic revolutions in science, philosophy, society and politics; these revolutions swept away the medieval world-view and ushered in our modern western world. Enlightenment thought culminates historically in the political upheaval of the French Revolution, in which the traditional hierarchical political and social orders (the French monarchy, the privileges of the French nobility, the political power and authority of the Catholic Church) were violently destroyed and replaced by a political and social order informed by the Enlightenment ideals of freedom and equality for all, founded, ostensibly, upon principles of human reason. 

The Enlightenment had two wings, the Scottish wing inspired our founding fathers to value the individual over the government and understood the importance of religion while mainland European philosophers advanced the notion of the state over the individual.  Many of the latter were comprised of deists at best and atheists at worst.  The French revolutionists, inspired by Rousseau and similar, sought to destroy organized religion.  It viewed Christianity as the enemy of the state, that the state must set all standards of conduct and behavior that the people must conform to.  Later, Marxism and Fascism would follow the bread crumbs left by these godless philosophies and carry the degradation of humanity and societies to the lower levels we have witnessed over the past century.

Regarding the French revolutionists’ assault on Christianity, from Wikipedia on the subject we read,

During the Reign of Terror, extreme efforts of de-Christianization ensued, including the imprisonment and massacre of priests and destruction of churches and religious images throughout France. An effort was made to replace the Catholic Church altogether, with civic festivals replacing religious ones. The establishment of the Cult of Reason was the final step of radical de-Christianization.  

These events led to a widespread disillusionment with the Revolution and to counter-rebellions across France. Locals often resisted de-Christianization by attacking revolutionary agents and hiding members of the clergy who were being hunted. Eventually, Robespierre and the Committee of Public Safety were forced to denounce the campaign, replacing the Cult of Reason with the deist but still non-Christian Cult of the Supreme Being 

The Concordat of 1801 between Napoleon and the Church ended the de-Christianization period and established the rules for a relationship between the Catholic Church and the French State that lasted until it was abrogated by the Third Republic via the separation of church and state on 11 December 1905. The persecution of the Church led to a counter-revolution known as the Revolt in the Vendée.

The great lie of liberalism, socialism and communism is that those that hawk it capture followers by promising them that they are free to do as they wish.  They promise “power to the people” when it truth it drains all power from the people.  They say, in essence, you can do anything you want to do, just leave the governing to us, the enlightened elite, we have your back.  How does Total Personal Freedom or Autonomy actually harm a person and how does it lead to bondage?

There must be some sort of “norm” in any society.  If “the people” do not establish a “norm”, then ultimately government will by force, establish it.  Our culture war has two sides, two America’s occupying the same space.  One side is traditional America, established on Judeo-Christian faith, ethics and principles.  The other side, Liberals, deny our founding principles simply as a tactic, for the benefit of the souls they seek to enlist on their side.  History is history and despite the modern revisions and scrubbing, our Christian roots are undeniable. Their norm is not a norm, but a large collection of “norms”.  Liberalism keeps grinding the population into smaller and smaller groups, each with a “norm” as they shatter the large homogenous structure that was once traditional America by advancing multi-culturalism and relativism.

The larger of these groups are easy to see, the racial minorities, especially the blacks and hispanics.  They can be convinced the deck is stacked against them.  They can be convinced that everything that springs from the dominant traditional culture is steeped in “racism” and “hatred”.  To them, we can add the silly women who have become convinced there is a war on women, homosexuals and other deviants who have been encouraged to claim to be “normal”.  We can add the youth, products of the liberal education system that has for the past half century at least been undermining the traditions of our nation.  We can add the atheists and agnostics who militantly reject Christianity and the “norm” it had formed and maintained in the culture.  Science and virtually all institutions, the media, the arts, big entertainment and of course, the education system, that shape opinion have been swept into this godless group.

Do the elite white liberals live near black or hispanic communities?  Of course not, they live in white suburbs if not gated communities.  Do the blacks and hispanics live harmoniously in common communities?  Of course not, “their” territories are controlled by their gangs who war against one another.  There is only one glue that holds this coalition together and focuses it, its outright hatred for the traditional culture.

There is a reason why where every major city controlled by LSDs (nearly all of them) is filled with violence, failing schools, illiteracy, deteriorated buildings and factories that once housed bustling businesses for the middle class workers, crime, rape, despair and no hope.  Detroit reached “Detroit” status and our other major cities are going as fast as they can to catch up.  The result isn’t freedom, at least not in any beneficial or rational sense, the denizens of these LSD wastelands are little more than programmed zombies marching to the tunes played by their LSD overlords.

Their “freedom” doesn’t allow them to be all they can be, doesn’t facilitate life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but forces them to live purposeless lives, making no positive contribution to the larger society, life is dark and brutal and most of their own citizens live in fear as they are preyed upon by their very children.  These groups find their “freedom” through the heavy hand of government as all other institutions that safeguard freedom and advance the culture has been shattered.

Of course there are exceptions, millions of exceptions, but in a nation of hundreds of millions, the LSDs don’t care about the exceptions, they care about the majorities of the groups that make up their coalition.  They care about the 95 percent of blacks who voted for Obama, the 70 percent of hispanics and muslims, the 86 percent of homosexuals, the 56 percent of women and even the 44 percent of girly-men who act as if they’re afraid of their own shadows or perhaps suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

It is impossible for these groups who comprise the current democrat party to ever live in peace, they will never create their utopia.  There is only so much room at the trough.  Democrats gain by instilling hatred of traditional America (whites) and confusion.  Sexual deviants are at least confused (actually depraved), girly men are confused and many women are confused. Girly men and man-hating confused women belong almost exclusively to the democrat party. They appear to be comfortable there because that party helps create their grievances and provides “solutions” through legislation and rogue leftist judges.

It’s all part of the democrat coalition which I list as –

1) Homosexuals (valuable for money, Hollywood influence, destroying Christianity)

2) Muslims (Valuable for destroy Christianity)

3) Women (Valuable for their large numbers of silly man-hating women)

4) Blacks (perfect stoolies for instilling “white guilt” in gullible whites. Also their violent tendencies get to keep gun control on the front burner as well as our tax dollars flowing as bribe money)

5) Asians (Vote 75 percent democrat, don’t know why, but democrats are milking them for votes while they can)

6) Union drones (their thug leaders are part of the world-wide socialist movement)

7) Hispanics (Don’t know why here either, but most vote democrat so democrats pretend like they care about them)

8) girly white men. (deluded and tortured souls, possibly suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, afraid of their own shadows)

9)  Environmental wackos (deluded socialists/Marxists intent on destroying capitalism or actual worshippers of Gaia who favor nature and world over humanity itself.)

The democrat party is led by its “intelligentsia” – their politicians and members of their media, entertainment and the education (propaganda) mills, all who view themselves as the enlightened elite.  If conservative patriotic Americans of all stripes and colors ceased to exist, how could this coalition possibly maintain peace and order?  Most normal people are repulsed by the various sexual deviancies, blacks and muslims hate just about everybody else, Hispanics are more interested in protecting their family members who have come here illegally or protecting themselves if they are here illegally from deportation.  Union and non-union never get along because unionized workers get more pay and benefits for less expended effort than their counterparts.

Radicalized women are fighting for their “rights” they actually “won” years ago.  Females now make up 57 percent of all college students and depending on which study you read, women control anywhere from 60 to 75 percent of the nation’s wealth!  Women are responsible for 83 percent of all consumer purchases.  The silly element of women in America, reliable man-hating democrats “defend” themselves in a “war on women” that simply does not exist.  In truth, republicans should fight back with their own “war on men” mantra.

Remove the hatred of America ginned up by democrats and this coalition will fall apart, all seeking their own place at the table and the table is only so big.  Do away with productive America, do away with our reliable energy and manufacturing industries and the high paying jobs they provide and who is going to keep the slop flowing into the democrat hog trough?  Once the wealth of America has been totally commandeered to advance the liberal agenda, will those that “have” really want to keep providing for the “have nots”?

Every study reveals that liberals are stingy with their own wealth while conservatives are much more prone to altruism and charity.  Bill Clinton donates his used underwear for a tax write-off while true conservatives give their time, money and resources to truly help the down trodden.  Liberals want to do it with our money, our tax dollars to prove their “compassion”, conservatives do with their own resources and have desire to steal them from somebody else.

Liberals engage in “divide and conquer”.  Identify differences then start gouging, start fanning the flames of envy and covetousness.  Obama is a master at flame fanning.  Last November in Malaysia he, as he is wont to do, blasted America.  Dave Boyer of the Washington Times reported on November 20th that

“President Obama discussed America’s faults Friday with young Asian leaders, saying the U.S. suffers from “pitfalls” such as income inequality, a political system controlled by the wealthy and political parties divided along racial lines…

“Speaking at a town-hall event in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Mr. Obama said…”I really hope that all of you are fighting against the kinds of attitudes where you organize political parties or you organize interest groups just around ethnic or racial or tribal lines, because when you start doing that, it’s very easy for people to start thinking that whoever is not part of my group is somehow less than me.  And once that mindset comes in, that’s how violence happens.  That’s how discrimination happens.  And Societies that are divided ethnically and racially are almost never successful over the long term.”

Obama should know, he’s an expert at dividing people as he’s set race relations back a generation.  Income inequality is always going to exist in any society, especially in a capitalist society where ability and achievement are rewarded.  The democrat party is organized around ethnic, racial, religious and sexual lines and he and the democrat party have inculcated views in their plantation members that those outside their cult are “somehow less than” them.  Violence does happen as we’ve witnessed over the past year in places like Ferguson, Baltimore and several college campuses.  Of violence in America, virtually none can be blamed on the conservative camp.

The liberal path will always end with total Government control.   Government will drain the nation of its capital resources, will penalize or even criminalize the producers.  Those that have been rewarded for their work and talents will be portrayed as the enemy and as Obama says, “we must punish our enemies”.  As liberals keep draining America of its vast storehouse of wealth it will become more and more desperate.  It will devalue the currency, cause inflation to keep their various groups bought off and satisfied.

Government grows by promising more and more people that it will use the force of law to curtain the freedom of others.  It promises the indolent it will tax those willing to work to give them a handout.  It promises sexual deviants that it will force the greater society to accept their behavior as normal.  It promises minorities and women that it will restrict the opportunities of whites and males to open up positions they are not prepared for.  It promises alien invaders that they will make the nation’s indigenous citizens accept and accommodate them.  It promises certain groups that they will not be prosecuted for crimes while prosecuting their enemies who committed no crimes.

What indications are there that we well down this path?  Our colleges and universities today have a virtual lock down on free speech.  Conservative speech is not tolerated, there is no diversity of opinion, no free exchange of ideas.  This final stage of education (propaganda) is near totally corrupted.  The only way for a rational young person to survive if he or she has traditional American values is to keep their head down, keep quiet and play the game.

Democrats over the past couple of decades use the legal system to punish their ideological enemies as we’ve seen them take out Tom Delay, Scooter Libby, Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and currently an attempt to take former Texas governor Rick Perry.  We’ve witnessed the IRS prevent conservative groups from organizing.  The activities of the partisan hack Lois Learner now going down the old memory hole.  Government certainly isn’t the solution, it isn’t simply the problem, it is now much more than that, it is the enemy of America.

When liberals are finished with this de-construction of America all that will be left will be angry groups who will turn on each other out of desperation.  Their envy and hatred of the prevailing culture will be replaced with envy and hatred of their competing groups, of each other.  All of the old cultural norms will be gone, there will be no guidance or light to show the way back.  Government will be all there is, and the liberal siren song of total personal freedom will be replaced with total government control over every aspect of life.

Was Obama really a “Law Professor”?

“A former constitutional law professor”, so Obama and his sycophants claim.  Obama was not a professor, but a lecturer.  What did he really teach?  While there’s any number of sources to understand Obama’s “teaching” record, the following from Doug Ross’s blog is as good as any –

“Is the President’s resume accurate when it comes to his career and qualifications? I can corroborate that Obama’s “teaching career” at Chicago was, to put it kindly, a sham.

I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about “Barry.” Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn’t even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn’t have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.

The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement).

Consider this:

1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a “lawyer”. He surrendered his license back in 2008 possibly to escape charges that he “fibbed” on his bar application.

2. Michelle Obama “voluntarily surrendered” her law license in 1993.

3. So, we have the President and First Lady – who don’t actually have licenses to practice law. Facts.

4. A senior lecturer is one thing. A fully ranked law professor is another. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, “Obama did NOT ‘hold the title’ of a University of Chicago law school professor”. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law professor at the University of Chicago.

5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March, 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “served as a professor” in the law school, but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008.

6. “He did not hold the title of professor of law,” said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law.

7. The former Constitutional senior lecturer cited the U.S. Constitution recently during his State of the Union Address. Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.” ( End quote)

As with just about everything else with Obama, he is an empty suit, stewed in hatred of America his entire life.  Its no wonder he governs that way, he is incapable of any other forms of thinking.  He is a creation of his radical upbringing and his exposure to radical academia.  His past has been carefully concealed and recreated to present him as the “one we’ve been waiting for” to a gullible and dumbed down electorate.