Do you think liberalism is self destructive?
Why does liberalism exhibit self-destructive behavior?
past week, I was having a conversation with my friend Bruce. He is a
staunch conservative, as am I, so predictably the subject of politics
was raised. More specifically, we talked about the seemingly bizarre
behavior that has been demonstrated by progressive liberals. This
behavior been going on for decades, and now it seems as if it is
reaching a crescendo as Obama begins his campaign for 2012. Then I
suggested to Bruce that liberalism is for all intents and purposes
self-destructive. Why? Because it appears as if progressives are on
the wrong side of every issue that would sustain their longevity. Here
are a few examples -
- Liberals would like to see a declining
US population through any means necessary, so it’s no surprise that they
are likely to advocate for abortion on demand. It’s also no surprise
that White House science czar John Holdren proposed forced sterilization
using methods as frightening as spiking the public water supply. This
was documented in his 1973 book “Human Ecology: Problems and
Solutions”. So while the rest of the world’s population is increasing,
progressives would like to see American’s population decrease. And less
population means less progressives.
- The Obama
administration, including Atty. Gen. Eric Holder’s Justice Department,
refuses to confront or even acknowledge radical Islam’s jihad against
the United States. In fact, Holder could not even bring himself to use
the term “radical Islam” during Senate subcommittee hearings last year.
Predictably, this administration wanted to close Guantánamo Bay and try
terrorists under legal system designed for Americans. And, of course,
Obama was slow to address the massacre at Fort Hood. All these actions
illustrate that any aggressive behavior exhibited by radical Muslims
desiring a caliphate has been downplayed by the White House. So I
wonder if liberalism would survive under institutionalized sharia law
- Similarly, the National Organization
for Women has been stone silent regarding the treatment of females
under sharia law. Again, I doubt that NOW would survive under a Muslim
dominated culture. Yet NOW voices no objections.
clear that Obama has weakened our military during his presidency. The
giveaways to Russia contained in the new START treaty are testament to
our declining nuclear capability. If nations hostile to US interests
eventually gain a strategic nuclear advantage under this plan, it’s not
beyond reason to believe that the United States could be attacked.
Sometimes the unthinkable is precisely that, “unthinkable”, because of
the nuclear deterrent muscle flexed by the United States. Reducing the
influence of that deterrent means increasing the risk to American
lives. And those Americans targeted would include liberals, wouldn’t
- The liberal Congress last year refused to
pass a budget while Obama increased our spending by another $4
trillion. And progressive radicals such as Francis Fox Piven have
dedicated their careers to destroying the US economy by advocating for
increased entitlements intended to crash the financial system. Compound
that with liberals, such as George Soros, who openly call for a “new
world order” that would replace the need for US leadership and
influence. So it begs the question; what would happen to American
liberal politics if America no longer existed as we know it? Would
liberals be free to express themselves under an authoritarian central
socialist/communist government? Probably not.
have been responsible for draconian environmental laws which have made
our country unacceptably dependent upon foreign oil. As a result, we
purchase energy from nations who are openly hostile to US interests.
This also has a destructive influence on our foreign policy, since we
must walk a fine line between supporting freedom in the world and
appeasing dictatorial regimes that happen to be placed upon geologically
rich oil reserves. Sorry, but most of the liberals I know consume just
as much energy, if not more, than their conservative counterparts. No,
foreign oil dependence does not seem to be in the best interests of an
indulgent liberal lifestyle. Particularly in Hollywood.
in the final analysis, it makes you wonder how liberalism can survive
if its ultimate objectives are reached. Unless, of course, the real
objective is to extinguish itself. Ironic, isn’t it?
See Votes by State
News & Politics