On Privilege ( For The Cultural Marxist Warrior)

Privilege is an inherent attribute of the few in relation to the many. A majority cannot by definition be privileged. We could say, for example, that we are privileged to be American citizens in relation to the world, or privileged to be children of God in relation to all living things.

We contrive privilege by ‘creating’ divisions, then we use these divisions to create victimhood and resentment that is used as a pretense for entitlements and advantages for some and political power for others. Privilege, no? These tactics are not meant for social betterment, they are meant social control through the manipulation of people by relegating them to a grievance class of put-upon ‘victims’. Read a history book, all of the greatest atrocities were incurred at the hands of those who perceived themselves as victims. Privilege for the controllers?

Lastly, The very use of the term ‘white privilege’ is itself a form of entitlement for the user of the term as it suggests a curious need to virtue signal. This tactic ultimately creates resentment toward the one who cries ‘bovine scatology’ at another’s frivolous claims of racism and white privilege as a default response to anyone who happens to think differently. See what you did? You just privileged yourself and your superior minority view.

You may call it reasonableness. I call it contempt. Where there is contempt, malevolent ideology is sure to follow.

So, I think the best path is to work to serve and honor one another, not to agitate the Cain aspect of our nature that only serves to drive wedges between people and society to the ultimate point of atrocity.

I just wonder though, by privilege do you mean to suggest some bias toward competence? Or, do you mean you’re privileged in that you value things other than a 250 dollar pair of Nikes? Or, is it just a platitude to foster cultural marxism? Or, by privileged do you mean some esoteric code for superior?It is hard not to be inclined to believe these are the feelings behind most culture deconstructionist leftists who blather on with these various forms of newspeak. But, I will try.

An Honest Question

I just want to be clear that I don’t put my faith in any person. I put my faith in Jesus Christ alone. That said, I have come to a cold and sobering realization of the reality of cruelty in the human heart more than I think I have ever realized and it is disturbing me. American citizens are to blame, every one of us, for allowing conditions at the border to result in the atrocities that occur there. And one just has to ask themselves, why do we allow this?

We have a reality that exists in this world that evil inflicts itself into the lives of people through exploitation and manipulation of all kinds and there is no greater evil than to cause unnecessary suffering. How is it that people can be so cruel as to allow the exploitation to increase for the sake of ideological possession? And how can they use their phony virtue signaling with such malicious ease, Rachael Maddow?

It seems to me that support for the continuation and increasing the atrocity at the border by use of an emotional appeal, which is grossly exaggerated is based on either 1. Lack of awareness, 2. Opposition to border security altogether (and if that is the case, just say so). Or 3. Ideological or political possession. If it is ideological possession, then that suggests we have reached a point in our culture where there is a profound level of malevolence and viciousness in our fellow people. How do we maintain unity when this malevolence and hatred exists to such a degree?

We should never discern the motives of people by their words. We should discern the motives of people by the results of the policies they support.

I cannot understand why we cannot have simple, fast, and an open process for legal entry into this country. It is not as though we don’t have the technology. What is the purpose of creating these conditions? And, what really is the cause of the sudden outrage?

Is it not far more compassionate to save lives rather than to exploit them?

Is it not far more compassionate to rescue victimized children rather than to fabricate exaggerated claims that only serve to confuse others and increase the numbers of victimized?

Is it not far more compassionate to allow secure, quick and easy entry through one of the several consulates or border check points, than to invite people to undergo extremely unsafe treks (and they are unsafe for many reasons) to create chaos for the purpose of political exploitation?

Is it not far more compassionate to interdict the spread of illicit drugs and contraband, than to continue to allow these things to destroy people’s lives?

Is it not far more compassionate to reduce violent crime and protect citizens from the crimes that result from unexamined illegal entry?

Is it not far more compassionate to be honest with each other?

Is it not far more compassionate to not encourage migrants to endanger themselves and break the law, but to invite those who want to come here to arrive easily and safely?

Is it not far more compassionate to clothe them, feed them, shelter them and teach them rather than to pity them, manipulate them and exploit them?

The cries of totalitarianism and the Nazi analogies are evidence of the delusion. How is it totalitarian to uphold the laws created by elected representatives, but it is not totalitarian to ignore those same laws? The real lesson of the era of nazism is not that it was an atrocious historic episode with which to impugn political opponents. The lesson of that era is that THAT is what people are capable of inflicting on one another. And if we fail to grasp that fact, then we don’t understand our nature very well.

 

I am beginning to believe that people who profess sympathy and outrage actually possess a profound hatred; and I wonder if I could be wrong because I love and admire so many of you, but I certainly do believe that it is valid to ask the question: Is the outrage because they actually all of a sudden care about the exploited, or is the sudden outrage because they hate Donald Trump?

I am glad Trump has taken the action to mitigate some of the unfortunate results of border enforcement, but unless it is backed up by congressional action, it will likely not survive the courts. And it will not end the issue because legitimate family separations comprise a ver small percentage of the children in custody.

Edited with BlogPad Pro

Leftists Who Feign Love

Leftists who feign love…. ahhh so Hitleresque. So pleasant….The Leftists are loud today…but not against the vile media loudmouths…no…My favorite examples of love are those that joke about people who differ from you ideologically drowning while you are figuring out what sandwich you are going to fix while you watch…. I love that. Of course they don’t necessarily have to be your neighbor. Right? Then there is the love which relishes the chaos of children dying in the desert, or encouraging children to make the attempt to cross the border and end up being snapped up for the sex trade, then there is the love of your neighbor which allows their security and safety to be made out to be a political inconvenience. The people that oppose that view are obviously such haters, right?

Of course national sovereignty for a nation that has brought more good to the world than any is not an example of loving your neighbor. What is the best example you ask? Oh. It’s the example of the narcissistic, division minded, social controlling, totalitarian who moans about injustice in the world but releases not one speck of their materialistic greed to end the suffering in their own small circle of influence and cant even keep their own room clean, yet venture to the rest of us how to ‘save’ the planet. Those of us for open, verifiable borders, amnesty for security and simple citizenship processes ….No … We are the haters! I got it!

Loving your neighbor doesn’t mean you force others with your ideological whims. Love YOUR neighbor! Remove the speck from your OWN eye and love the person in front of you at any given moment. Don’t inflict others with your totalitarian whims. It only ends in nihilism. God didn’t do that! What gives you the right? Keep your narcissistic, social-controlling, manipulative , hatefulness to yourself. Social control and manipulation is NOT love. It is ideological possession and a psychological disorder. Pick up the biggest thing you can find and YOU carry it. I’ll do the same. Thank you.

Faith in World Views

Francis Shaffer has observed in his book ‘The God Who Is There’ that every dualistic worldview​ leads to a form of mysticism and that adherence to these worldviews requires one to hold ideas that their own worldview cannot possibly​ explain. This leads ultimately to an irony in that these believers normally uphold themselves as leaders of rationality, but accept a form of faith in mysticism that is driven by their suppression of facts and reality that contradict their worldview​.

T minus 8 Days to Transplant

Source: T minus 8 Days to Transplant

Left Admits It Is Assisted by an Uniformed Electorate (their base)

Comment on article: “How to Suppress the Vote”

http://sojo.net/magazine/2014/11/how-suppress-vote

Article suggests voting is just too hard and that standards for voters are just too rigorous. I know what you are saying: What standards? Well, as the Leftists say: “Vote early and vote often.”

It should not surprise us that the Left’s purposes are served by an uninformed, easily manipulated electorate.

My response:

No matter how hard it is to vote, it will never be any harder than fixing oneself breakfast or engaging in various other forms of responsible behavior. The point of John Adams idea is not the particular requirements one must possess, but that the electorate must be maintained to a standard which supports the integrity of the electoral process and a constitutional republic. This could include any number of things – maybe a High School diploma perhaps, or 2 years of employment / service – whatever. Imagine if 12 year olds were allowed to vote. You would then have every leftist-materialist pol vying by promising drivers licenses to 12 year olds, and every 12 year old would vote for them. This would be destructive policy caused by an unwise, ill-educated and un-informed electorate. We see this in real practice in progressive cities which have elected themselves almost out of existence ( see Detroit). WE see it in real practice in news articles which gin up irrationality such as: so-and-so wants to ban contraception. But then maybe the media might be forced to write about real issues rather than pretend ones when the decision makers are sober-minded.

Truth and integrity are not left-wing values. That does not mean they lack integrity or are dishonest, just that it is not a motivating force in their decision-making process generally. I say it would be good to have truth, honor, and integrity in our electoral process. The claims that voter ID laws are flawed may be valid, but they certainly would lead to more confidence and I doubt seriously they are overly challenging. The lack of them does, on the other hand, leave the door open to fraud. Perhaps leftists just know people will not vote unless every action to register them and get them to the polls is done for them. This, of course, would help materialist-leftists because they would also likely be ignorant voters who could be easily manipulated. HOW IS THAT good for a representative republic? It’s not. It is, however, good for the social controlling bullies.

By the way, Sojourners, if you have to insert a word in front of the word ‘justice’, like “social’, it might lead some to believe the intent of this site is something other than justice.

Narcissism Sucks In the Age of Stupidity!

Blaise Pascal in his Pensées:

“All men seek happiness. This is without exception. Whatever different means they employ, they all tend to this end. The cause of some going to war, and of others avoiding it, is the same desire in both, attended with different views. The will never takes the least step but to this object. This is the motive of every action of every man, even of those who hang themselves.”

One man’s pursuit of happiness is another man’s road to serfdom.

It would seem to me that the pursuit happiness and it’s Materialistic cousin…fame as an end in and of itself is an idol and a destructive influence.

Beware of the control freaks in society.

WTH Have we done?

The pictures coming out of Iraq are some of the most disturbing, nauseating images I have ever seen and beyond anything I could have previously imagined. What our leaders have done on our own border by encouraging desperate families for political purposes, removing troops from Iraq prematurely for political purposes, engaging in intentional divisions and mockery domestically for political purposes, fattening up the coffers of Hamas, which they have used to build tunnels, procure weapons, and ultimately kill Israelis is a nightmarish reality.
But that’s ok, we all got our i-phones, right?
I can’t help but think that we may have just become the most evil country on the planet because of our own narcissism, ignorance, and apathy.

NYT Book Review: ‘The Righteous Mind,’ by Jonathan Haidt

False appeals to emotion to win arguments?

Obviously this tactic would be a dishonest and fallacious appeal to emotion. Deliberative judgement is best achieved when sound reason is applied. Intuition, moral or otherwise, is not necessarily grounded in facts or truth ( see Roe v Wade, AGW ). So, it doesn’t surprise me that a leftist would devise a tactic to circumvent facts and attempt to minimize their impact on issues. Of course reason defends what we believe, whether it is based in moral intuition or factual evidence, but that should not discount the process of logic and reasoning, nor should it invoke the need for intentional fallacious tactics.
A subjective moral intuition is just a fancy term for “feelings” and is more in line with ethics rather than objective reality or moral truths. I also do not see the idea of “moral intuition” as valid in any sense as it relates to moral issues. They would not even hold up in a court of law, but I guess this will be how arguments are made in the age of unreason.

Here’s what we should agree to do in my humble opinion: Let’s appeal to each other’s values. Let’s deal truthfully, with bold clarity, respect, and empathy. Let’s not be concerned about changing people’s minds. Let us concern ourselves with clarity on each other’s stance. Let’s be tolerant.

Thoughts On Compassion vs Empathy

One has to wonder to what degree compassion can be developed. Does wisdom follow compassion or does compassion follow wisdom? I would contend it is more a matter of perspective and gratitude in one’s own condition, which ultimately starts by the increase of wisdom, rather than the will. I suppose it can be nurtured, but I guess I am skeptical of the idea that compassion can be developed. I also believe there is a distinction between empathy and compassion. Empathy is more a result of bad awareness and compassion is a result of exceptional awareness. I think we can see the fruits of this in modern society, where the results of the “great society programs”, which are born out of empathy have led to disaster. Compassion is more focused on the ‘teach a man to fish’ prospect. Empathy does not lead to a better society, it is ultimately selfish. Compassion on the other hand, which again is born out of wisdom, is selfless.

Furthermore, compassion is completely incompatible with bigotry and the desire for social control and is in actuality quite the opposite, for it requires indifference to the circumstance while the focus of empathy is placed in some self-centered ideal.