Connect with us

Culture and Religion

The silver lining to the censorship of the socialist left

Published

on

The silver lining to the censorship of the socialist left

The purpose here is not to rehash some of the great articles from Don McCullen, Irina Tsukerman and Ray Fava presented on here on the state of the Conservative cause, but to point out some the hidden positive aspects of moves to censorship by the nation’s Socialist-Left. While the country is in dire straits to the point of recent events being reminiscent of the events leading up to the civil war in the states, there are some aspects as mentioned that we should consider in a positive light.

1. Censorship by the Socialist-Left indicates we have the better ideas.

‘Leftists wants Conservatives to be quiet and Conservatives want Leftists to keep talking.’

Often times, this is the sentiment expressed by the Conservative-Right on the issue of censorship. In general terms the Conservative-Right is imbued in the precepts of individual rights and limited government, and the Socialist-Left in the precepts of collective rights and unlimited government. This means that Socialist-Left places a priority on controlling all aspects of one’s daily existence, while those on the Conservative-Right eschew this control.

This mindset carries over to the issue of the marketplace of ideas as expressed above. To be blunt about it, we on the Conservative-Right can afford to have a free discussion of ideas because ours are superior, while the Socialist-Left cannot because their ideas suck.

Even they admit it to be the case in their literature:

When you can help it, don’t say conservative. As the polls above demonstrate, conservative is no insult. The word and the concept are both quite popular. This is because, while conservative policies are awful, Americans overwhelmingly support stereotyped conservative principles—small government, low taxes, free markets, strong defense, traditional families. It is very clever framing. Who favors a bigger government than we need? Who wants to pay more taxes? Who can oppose freedom, an effective military, or families?

So when one has inferior ideas as is the Socialist-Left, there are only two choices: Change those ideas or suppress the other side. They certainly can’t change their horrid ideas to that of freedom and liberty – that would make them Conservative and truly liberal [We’ll talk about that next..] So their only choice is to censor our ideas in competition with theirs since ours will always come out on top.

2. Censorship by the Socialist-Left means they cannot possibly lay claim to being Liberal or ‘Progressive’.

Consider one aspect of the how the Oxford English dictionary defines the word Liberal:

1Willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas:
1.1Favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms
1.2(In a political context) favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform

That hardly sound like folks that are running around suppressing speech now does it? Keep in mind that deception is a key aspect of the Left’s Socialist national agenda, and this begins with how the label themselves. The Socialist-Left’s obsession with shutting down debate is clearly averse to that label. As is their other deceptive label ‘Progressive’ given their ancient ideas and adherence to aspects of the past such as the present topic of censorship.

Mind you, many a Conservatives blithely interchanges the words Leftist and Liberal without a contrary thought. This means we on the Conservative-Right need to enforce some discipline in our discourse to win, but that is an issue for another day.

3. Censorship by the Socialist-Left also indicates they are the true fascists.

Yes, when the Socialist-Left plays their little label games, this is one of their favourite exploits. It’s either out of ignorance that they show the same characteristics that they project on others or a deliberate deception on their part. The fact is fascism is a phenomena of the Left, but true to form they incessantly muddy the waters with such schemes. Actions speak louder than words, and nothing speaks at a higher volume than having the same tactics and characteristics of those whose main priority was to suppress competing thoughts and agendas.

4. Their censorship proclivities is a good (rhetorical) weapon to use against them.

There are certain disciplines of the martial arts that teach that it’s always a good idea to use an opponent’s advantage against them. Leftists excel in the hurling of childish insults on social media, it is one of the primary reasons it is considered to be a sewer. This is the heckler’s veto in spades, the purpose of which is to drive the Liberty minded of the Conservative-Right away from such places so the nation’s Socialist-Left ‘wins’ by default. An easy way to take this advantage away from them is to ignore such childish tactics aside from pointing out that it shows their lack of intellectual capabilities. That illustrates this while disabling one of their weapon of choice. It also gives them no place to go since one can hardly climb up from the gutter and try an intellectual argument from then on.

It should go without saying that the nation’s Socialist-Left has an immense advantage in dominating the culture, media and Government indoctrination system (Public schools). Reminding people of this fact have several effects. One, it tears at the heart of the Socialist-Left’s fairness and equality arguments. Ask them if it’s fair that they dominate in these areas and stand back for a flood of self rationalization. They preach ‘diversity’ and ‘fairness’ but only for certain groups and areas of life. The bottom line is that this exposes their rank duplicity on their part, they call for a level playing field, but for them this means an overwhelming advantage on their part.

They can perhaps mount the ‘objective’ journalist argument, but as of late, this is a laughable assertion and one only need to cite a recent example of the extreme bias in the Media.  It also demolishes the Socialist-Left’s contention of incessantly being the ‘victim’ – the Cry Bully theorem. They can hardly complain of being disadvantaged when they hold all the cards.

5. And most importantly: Censorship by the Socialist-Left means they are on the losing side.

Nothing says losing more than screaming louder to stop everyone else from speaking. We on the Conservative-Right have no qualms over a fair debate on a level playing field. The comparisons of the various political philosophies will always see our emerge victorious because our ideas are superior.  Consider that we have no need to make excuses for the past or present circumstances of the free-market.

Contrast this with the Socialist-Left and the steady decline of their base ideology. They were at the top of their game during the heyday of the Soviet Union, where outbreaks of liberty in Eastern Europe were crushed under the tracks of T-55’s along with many a freedom fighter. It’s all been downhill from there, supposedly there is an ‘inevitability to Socialism’, but that myth died when the Berlin wall came crashing down.

The 500-year-old ideas of collectivism are dying out to the benefit to free-people everywhere, and the weakness of this ideology is becoming clear to everyone. To quote ‘Data’ a character in the Star Trek, the Next Generation: “Do you consider your position so weak that it cannot withstand debate?”

Such is the case with today’s Socialist-Left, trying to hang on for dear life censoring competing ideas that put it to shame. It’s actions are against liberty and Liberalism for that matter put the lie to one the Socialist-Left’s favorite false labels.

Differential equations teaches us that one can use the initial conditions of the present to extrapolate events in the near term balanced with the knowledge of the past. The interaction of technological advances and the march of history is fascinating. History can inform those willing to listen as to what will happen in the future because the laws of human natural are as immutable as the elegant equations of Newtonian physics.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Video: What is a Classical Liberal?

Published

on

By

A short video making the point that the Left is no longer Liberal, having traded individualism for collectivism.

In one of their first animated video shorts, the Rubin Report discusses the vitally important topic of just who is a Classical Liberal.

OUR FIRST ANIMATED VIDEO! What is a Classical Liberal?

Liberalism has been confused with Leftism or progressivism, which is actually has nothing to do with classical Liberalism. Sadly the Left is no longer Liberal at all for it has traded individualism for collectivism.

The Rubin Report
Published on Jul 10, 2018

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

$.02: When is it OK to quit church?

Published

on

Chris Sonsken of South Hills Church and founder Church BOOM penned a piece on Fox News that caught my attention on Twitter. It was a good column. Read the article here. The article addressed a Pew Research finding as to why people change churches. There finding as shown by Sonsken are:

  • Sermon quality
  • Welcoming environment/people
  • Style of worship
  • Location

Sonsken does a great job in arguing that there are biblically sound reasons for leaving a church and finding a new one.

1. It’s OK to leave if God calls us to leave.

2. It’s OK to leave for family and marriage.

3. It’s OK to leave a church if you have moved too far away to conveniently drive to your church.

4.  It’s OK to leave if you cannot follow the church’s leadership.

5.  It’s OK to leave if heresy is being preached.

Sonsken even mentions that unethical practices like abuse are reasons to leave, though not the norm for the majority of church swapping.

The reasons Sonsken gave are no cause for disagreement, and I’m sure his book Quit Church probably better articulates them.

Where I want to add my two sense on the matter is that I disagree with his assessment sermon quality is not a biblical reason for changing churches. The supposition that sermon quality is inherently a result of the person treating church like an object of consumption, as Sonsken suggests is not true. I believe sermon quality is an umbrella term for several reasons for not liking a Sunday message.

Too often people leave a church because of disagreement, not getting their way, or because the sermons are no longer deep enough. Often when we dig into the reason the sermons are not deep enough, it ultimately goes back to the person being offended or not having their faulty theologies endorsed from the pulpit. The same pastor who was previously deep enough becomes shallow once there is an offense. It’s incredibly difficult to hear from God in a sermon when we are offended by the person delivering the sermon.

This is true in many cases. A sin that is personal gets preached on and the offended party leaves. I don’t deny this to be the case. But I believe we should look deeper into the current trends of worship and focus on the mission of the church.

18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Matthew 28:18-21 ESV

The church is to preach the gospel, but people accepting Jesus as their Lord and Savior is only part of the mission. The Church is tasked with making disciples. The church is meant to teach. Not every follower is at the same level in their spiritual maturity or theological depth. Some churches, larger churches in particular dumb down the bible. In public education, this would be seen as lowering the bar. In church this practice could hold back believers in their growth. Small groups are a way to supplement this, and every church should employ bible study as a means to grow discipleship.

Many churches now are focused on metrics. This can lead to theologically watered down sermons and worship. Why risk offending that person who may leave with a sermon? But if a church is more focused on using a Sunday message to give a motivational speech using an out of context passage, what does it matter if they are doctrinally sound (in their written beliefs)?

There are a lot of heretical churches in America. We have issues like gay marriage to separate the sheep from the goats. But what about the sheep that suck? If a church has the right doctrine but is more focused on metrics than the power of the Holy Spirit, their head is in the wrong place. So it is biblically sound to change churches so that your head to remains in the right place.

That is not treating church like a consumer product. That is treating church like one’s means to grow spiritually, better recognizing the mission of the Great Commission.

That is my $.02 on the matter. I hope I added some meaningful word to this topic.


This post was originally publishd on Startup Christ. Startup Christ is a website for business and theology articles and columns.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Video: So, You Think You’re Tolerant?

Published

on

By

Leftists like to fancy themselves as being tolerant and Liberal, but they fall way short in both qualities.

Leftists will tell you that they are the most tolerant people who have ever lived, they will also scream at you for being a racist, xenophobic troglodyte if you happen to mention that you’re a conservative. They are supposedly ‘Liberal’, being in favour of Liberty while demanding it’s polar opposite – socialism.

Yes, if there is one constant in the universe, its that Leftists cannot be honest about who they truly are. This is what we love about our wonderful opponents on the nation’s socialist Left, for they are nothing like another group that went by the same nomenclature who also screamed at people in the streets with the motto: Common Good Before Individual Good. [Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz]

But let’s not talk about the epithets they project on their enemies, let’s talk about how they get along with everyone who just happens to agree with everything they say. A new PragerU video featuring Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report looked at who is really tolerant. He is a true Liberal that discovered that it is actually the Pro-Liberty Right that is more tolerant, go figure.

Dave Rubin
Jul 9, 2018
Are you tolerant? You probably think so. But who is tolerant in America today? Is it those on the left, or those on the right? In this video, Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report analyzes this question and shares his experience.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.