the modern liberal and the oppressive tyrant--twin sons of different mothers
http://acuf.org/issues/issue79/070203pol.asp
This is an excellent column from the American Conservative Union Foundation by Thomas E. Brewton. Mr. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets. His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776 [http://www.thomasbrewton.com/]
As you may or may not know, there is quite a leftist movement afoot that is attempting to convince America that Christian conservatives are fascists who want to "take over" America. According to the liberal talking points, America was founded as a secular nation, with "freedom from religion" mandated by our deist Founding Fathers. The secular progressive mythology goes on to say that "A group of religious utopians, with the sympathy and support of tens of millions of Americans, are slowly dismantling democratic institutions to establish a religious tyranny, the springboard to an American fascism" (Chris Hedges, American Fascists). Quite the radical statement, isn't it? We Christian conservatives are being accused of attempting to use the Christian Church as a vehicle to "hijack" the federal government, in order to create a state ruled by the church. I'll speak directly to that accusation momentarily, but first, I want to focus on the Brewton article.
Mr. Brewton makes the same point that I have been harping on, which is that it is the secular progressive (the modern liberal) who seeks to use their "religion" (secular humanism) to seize control of the government. In other words, the answer to my oft-repeated question, "Who's the fascist?" is "the modern liberal."
Mr Brewton begins his article by discussing how cozy secular progressive standard bearers like Jimmy Carter and Christopher Dodd are with murderous despots who oppress their own people. (Note: I used the term "secular progressive" to describe Jimmy Carter on purpose. I'm done with referring to him as a Christian. He openly questions the authenticity of the Bible, he doesn't believe in the Christian concept of sin, and he denies the truth of the Holy Trinity. There are a lot of things you can call a man like that, but "Christian" isn't one of them.)
He then goes on to explain why the modern liberal is so in love with the modern fascist. Read the following paragraphs from Mr. Brewton's article:
Beginning in the late 19th century, Progressive politicians and academics became dissatisfied with the state of American society and looked longingly toward the giant strides of Bismarck's German Empire in education, chemistry, physics, and medicine. Progressives attributed Germany's rapid progress both to its strong leadership by Bismarck, and to the dominance of the German Socialist party, which was the largest and most influential in Europe.
Progressivism in this country was an amalgam of socialistic doctrine transplanted from Europe and a widespread confidence in the science and engineering that had transformed the United States after the Civil War into the world's largest and fastest growing economy. In politics, Progressives were preoccupied with structural reforms, ranging from secret ballot in elections, to citizens' referenda on tax and policy matters. They also believed that businesses and government ought to be run by professional managers.
Progressivism was an odd combination of this faith in civil and social engineers as the experts competent to run government, coupled with a misreading of the French Revolution as an upwelling of democracy achieved by eradicating existing government, religion, and social customs. These elements were, and remain, incompatible. To the extent that government is ceded to liberal social engineers who aim to regulate all aspects of citizens' economic choices, it moves inexorably along the road to tyranny.
Progressivism's rationalization of this contradiction has been that the role of the masses, empowered via the ballot box, is to elect expert social engineers. Then governing is to be left to the state planners, who know better than the ordinary citizen what is good for him.
Thus we find Messrs. Carter and Dodd sympathetically inclined toward socialistic leaders ratified by the mechanics of the ballot box by voters who have no historical tradition of a society of laws, but only of government by men who dictate the law.
I have always said that we the people have nothing to fear from Christian conservatives, and everything to fear from secular progressives. It is the liberal who believes in ignoring the constitutional dictates of federalism, in order to create an omnipotent Mommy and Daddy central government that controls every aspect of our lives. It is the modern progressive who believes that the founding principles of "separation of powers" and "checks and balances" must be replaced with a system that places an unelected, imperial judiciary in charge of the other parts of government. The modern liberal is the person who believes that the central government, under the control of like minded "social engineers," has a responsibility to confiscate our money and our property in order to continually redistribute wealth in ways that they see fit. It is the secular progressive who reads the Constitution as being protective of a "right" to murder inconvenient life, and who interprets the Constitution as prohibiting public expressions of Christian faith.
When America was founded, Congress passed a law (the Northwest Ordinance) that mandated religious instruction in the schools. Why? The reason can be found in a direct quote from John Adams:
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Do you see why the secular progressive is so openly hostile and hateful towards Christianity in general, and Christian conservatives specifically? A moral and religious people would never consent to gay marriage, no-fault divorce, or abortion on demand. A conservative government is a smaller government with strictly limited powers as outlined in the Constitution. The modern liberal is all about ever-increasing power, vested in a centralized progressive government manned by like-minded liberals who know better than the ordinary citizen what is good for him. Ask yourself a very important question. Who would you rather have sitting in the "driver's seat" in our constitutional republic?
This is an excellent column from the American Conservative Union Foundation by Thomas E. Brewton. Mr. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets. His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776 [http://www.thomasbrewton.com/]
As you may or may not know, there is quite a leftist movement afoot that is attempting to convince America that Christian conservatives are fascists who want to "take over" America. According to the liberal talking points, America was founded as a secular nation, with "freedom from religion" mandated by our deist Founding Fathers. The secular progressive mythology goes on to say that "A group of religious utopians, with the sympathy and support of tens of millions of Americans, are slowly dismantling democratic institutions to establish a religious tyranny, the springboard to an American fascism" (Chris Hedges, American Fascists). Quite the radical statement, isn't it? We Christian conservatives are being accused of attempting to use the Christian Church as a vehicle to "hijack" the federal government, in order to create a state ruled by the church. I'll speak directly to that accusation momentarily, but first, I want to focus on the Brewton article.
Mr. Brewton makes the same point that I have been harping on, which is that it is the secular progressive (the modern liberal) who seeks to use their "religion" (secular humanism) to seize control of the government. In other words, the answer to my oft-repeated question, "Who's the fascist?" is "the modern liberal."
Mr Brewton begins his article by discussing how cozy secular progressive standard bearers like Jimmy Carter and Christopher Dodd are with murderous despots who oppress their own people. (Note: I used the term "secular progressive" to describe Jimmy Carter on purpose. I'm done with referring to him as a Christian. He openly questions the authenticity of the Bible, he doesn't believe in the Christian concept of sin, and he denies the truth of the Holy Trinity. There are a lot of things you can call a man like that, but "Christian" isn't one of them.)
He then goes on to explain why the modern liberal is so in love with the modern fascist. Read the following paragraphs from Mr. Brewton's article:
Beginning in the late 19th century, Progressive politicians and academics became dissatisfied with the state of American society and looked longingly toward the giant strides of Bismarck's German Empire in education, chemistry, physics, and medicine. Progressives attributed Germany's rapid progress both to its strong leadership by Bismarck, and to the dominance of the German Socialist party, which was the largest and most influential in Europe.
Progressivism in this country was an amalgam of socialistic doctrine transplanted from Europe and a widespread confidence in the science and engineering that had transformed the United States after the Civil War into the world's largest and fastest growing economy. In politics, Progressives were preoccupied with structural reforms, ranging from secret ballot in elections, to citizens' referenda on tax and policy matters. They also believed that businesses and government ought to be run by professional managers.
Progressivism was an odd combination of this faith in civil and social engineers as the experts competent to run government, coupled with a misreading of the French Revolution as an upwelling of democracy achieved by eradicating existing government, religion, and social customs. These elements were, and remain, incompatible. To the extent that government is ceded to liberal social engineers who aim to regulate all aspects of citizens' economic choices, it moves inexorably along the road to tyranny.
Progressivism's rationalization of this contradiction has been that the role of the masses, empowered via the ballot box, is to elect expert social engineers. Then governing is to be left to the state planners, who know better than the ordinary citizen what is good for him.
Thus we find Messrs. Carter and Dodd sympathetically inclined toward socialistic leaders ratified by the mechanics of the ballot box by voters who have no historical tradition of a society of laws, but only of government by men who dictate the law.
I have always said that we the people have nothing to fear from Christian conservatives, and everything to fear from secular progressives. It is the liberal who believes in ignoring the constitutional dictates of federalism, in order to create an omnipotent Mommy and Daddy central government that controls every aspect of our lives. It is the modern progressive who believes that the founding principles of "separation of powers" and "checks and balances" must be replaced with a system that places an unelected, imperial judiciary in charge of the other parts of government. The modern liberal is the person who believes that the central government, under the control of like minded "social engineers," has a responsibility to confiscate our money and our property in order to continually redistribute wealth in ways that they see fit. It is the secular progressive who reads the Constitution as being protective of a "right" to murder inconvenient life, and who interprets the Constitution as prohibiting public expressions of Christian faith.
When America was founded, Congress passed a law (the Northwest Ordinance) that mandated religious instruction in the schools. Why? The reason can be found in a direct quote from John Adams:
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Do you see why the secular progressive is so openly hostile and hateful towards Christianity in general, and Christian conservatives specifically? A moral and religious people would never consent to gay marriage, no-fault divorce, or abortion on demand. A conservative government is a smaller government with strictly limited powers as outlined in the Constitution. The modern liberal is all about ever-increasing power, vested in a centralized progressive government manned by like-minded liberals who know better than the ordinary citizen what is good for him. Ask yourself a very important question. Who would you rather have sitting in the "driver's seat" in our constitutional republic?
posted by hondo at 10:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home