Connect with us

Conservatism

The Ludwig von Mises quote that exposes the rank hypocrisy of the Socialist-Left

Published

on

The Ludwig von Mises quote that exposes the rank hypocrisy of the Socialist-Left

We look at how a quote from Ludwig von Mises perfectly summarises the Left’s hypocritical nature.

“The champions of socialism call themselves progressives, but they recommend a system which is characterized by rigid observance of routine and by a resistance to every kind of improvement.

They call themselves liberals, but they are intent upon abolishing liberty.

They call themselves democrats, but they yearn for dictatorship.

They call themselves revolutionaries, but they want to make the government omnipotent.

They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden, but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office. Every man but one a subordinate clerk in a bureau. What an alluring utopia! What a noble cause to fight!”

Ludwig von Mises

The quote from Ludwig von Mises perfectly epitomizes the duplicity of the Socialist-Left. These are people who are incapable of being honest about their fraudulent base ideology of socialism. Using a number of deceptive labels that mean the opposite of their true nature. They have only recently dropped the mask as being gun confiscators and socialists, but now they are desperately searching the floor trying to put it back on before anyone notices. Their exploitation of the word Liberal while they work overtime to destroy Liberty is the most prominent of them all. However the rest of them aside from Socialist-Left also peg the deception meter.

Two of the most infuriating tactics of the Socialist-Left: Word deception and Projection

Word deceptions and projections are two of the most infuriating aspects of dealing with our comrades on the nation’s Socialist-Left. Their tried and true tactic is to use certain words or pejorative to at a minimum set the debate favourable to them or simply ‘win’ the argument with one word or phrase.

The parody video ‘How to debate right wingers(satire)’ illustrated this quite nicely. Showing the all too common tactic of the Left accusing anyone who disagrees with them as being ‘Racist’, ‘sexist’, ‘Transphobic’, ‘Homophobic’ or any one of the plethora of one word retorts or short phrases with the singular purpose of discrediting the opposition while shutting down debate.

The second all too common tactic of the nation’s Socialist-Left is to accuse others of what they are doing-in spades. The projection tactic is meant to knock back the opposition into a defensive posture that also suppresses an open and honest debate of the issues. This is also coupled with their aggressive use of setting the terms of the debate favourable to them.

A prime example of Leftist projection

One prime example is a new publication making reference to an online ‘civil war’ replete with Leftist tropes on repealing the 2nd amendment and questioning whether or not we should have rich people while others are starving. With one of the Leftist review making the absurd presumption that the Pro-Liberty Right is somehow dividing the nation, denying science, and most infuriatingly, destroying civil liberties.

Does it have to be mentioned that it’s the pro-Liberty Right that is in favour of the scientific method or even acknowledging that there are only two genders? Or that it’s the Socialist-Left that is pitting certain groups against each other in their victimhood Olympics.

To claim that it’s the Pro-Liberty Right guilty of these actions would almost be the pinnacle of projection. Except that even those tropes are topped with the assertion that we’re trying to destroy Civil Liberties a claim that is mind-boggling in it’s scope. That is the point of such tactics, an offensive [in more ways than one] attack that sets the opposition into an immediate defensive posture.

The false claim that the Pro-Liberty Right is trying to destroy civil liberties

This is the kind of projective attack by the Socialist-Left that is breathtaking in sheer insolence given its recent actions. Aside from a few RINOs such Marko Rubio (R-FL) or Lindsey Graham (R-SC) working to destroy due process, helping along a bill to encourage Gun Confiscation SWATing [aka Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) or "red flag laws”] on March 26th. It is primarily the Socialist-Left working overtime to destroy the common sense human and civil Right of self-defense, due process, free-speech and a host of other civil Liberties.

The Socialist-Left attacks against free-speech

These are but a few examples meant to illustrate the point, with Leftist assaults against free speech being the most egregious. After all, we have people on the Socialist-Left claiming that they are ‘Liberal’ while going after Liberty whenever they can on Twitter or YouTube. Banning certain personalities for unspecified offenses while ignoring far more damming examples from the Socialist-Left. But listen to someone on the Left, somehow those of us on the Pro-Liberty right are the culprits in this case.

The Socialist-Left attacks against the right of self-defense

Aside from the above examples, it’s been the nation’s Socialist-Left that has been conducting a full frontal assault on this basic human and civil right. With national and local efforts that simply renew their efforts after each incremental restriction on freedom. Everything from trying to carry out government control of private property to the wholesale banning and confiscation of almost every firearm. Not to mention a new effort by the Liberty grabber Left to repeal the second amendment.

Time was, the Socialist-Left would deny their final solution to the Liberty problem or get what they could with the occurrence of a ‘serious crisis’. These days, they push through freedom restricting legislation and the come around again to see what else they can get. In the meantime, they maintain the fiction that they don’t really want to ban and confiscate guns while making demands to ban and confiscate guns.

The ultimate in Leftist assaults on civil Liberties with Gun confiscation SWATing

These could rightfully hold the record [<[for now at least]or violating the most human and civil Liberties in one fell swoop. It should be understood that these violate the 2nd, but they also infringe on the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th amendments. Then there is the issue that 1st is also on the chopping block since speech on the subject of firearms could deem on to be dangerous. The Left has already bandied about the idea that gun owners are ‘terrorists’, what’s to stop them from deeming every gun owner as dangerous, requiring a ‘dynamic entry’ with a SWAT team in the middle of the night?

The Takeaway

If the Socialist-Left had a practical system instead of a fraudulent ideology, they would have no need for deception and projection. They could have simply announced what they were and lived with the electoral consequences. But then again, if their collectivist system actually worked, they would have no need to impose it by force and deprive the people of their commonsense human and Civil Liberties.

The fraud of socialism has been a failure for over 400 years, thus it can only be foisted on a people by at first deception and then later by force. That is why they cannot abide the precepts of Liberty and honesty.

Advertisement

0

Conservatism

Dr Wen was pushed out of Planned Parenthood because she’s not a wartime leader

Published

on

Dr Wen was pushed out of Planned Parenthood because shes not a wartime leader

Some leaders are meant to bring people together. Others are made to get from one point in an organization’s development to the next stage. On occasion, an organization needs to go to war, and that’s what Planned Parenthood believes it needs to do right now. Their former president, Dr. Leana Wen, believes she is a combination of the first two types of leader – bringing people together and transitioning Planned Parenthood. She believes this is why she was pushed out the door by the board.

They want to go to war and Wen is not a wartime leader.

This may sound like a bad thing for pro-life organizations as their top nemesis is clearly positioning to be more of a political organization willing to play dirty and force the issue of abortion on as many people as possible. But an astute examination of the way things are today reveals one truth: America is polarized, so it’s better to go to fight ideology versus ideology rather than attack an organization trying to build bridges.

It may have been difficult for Wen to truly coax moderate pro-lifers, liberty-minded ant-government folks, and people on the fence on the abortion issue, but she was laying the groundwork for such things. This is why I’m glad to see her go. I know the threat of a proper radical progressive who hates pro-lifers to the core is worrisome to some, including our top pro-life writer. But the writing is on the wall: war is on. Planned Parenthood is looking for a battle-hardened fighter to shame people in Alabama, scare people in Georgia, and celebrate progressives in New York. They want someone who will push the feminine healthcare aspect of Planned Parenthood to the backburner and focus solely on advancing pro-abortion laws and planting more abortion clinics around the country.

We’re not just fighting for the lives of preborn babies, though that is plenty of incentive to fight. But we’re also fighting for the soul of the nation. For the pro-life, conservative, and Judeo-Christian worldviews to regain prominence in America, it’s important that we stake our claim to unambiguous differences between our beliefs and their’s. Some will tell me we need more unity, but the only unity that’s possible in today’s polarized society is if the left gets their way and enough on the right accept it. The left will not accept our perspectives. Therefore, we must force the issue. We must get into an ideological war. Most importantly, we need to put our truths up against their best lies.

The best lies they tell are that abortion is a right, pre-born babies aren’t people, and killing the “lump of cells” in the mother is somehow considered healthcare.

In an article posted today by the NY Times, Wen explains why she was ousted and gives hints about the direction Planned Parenthood wants to go without her:

With high-quality, affordable health care out of reach for so many, Planned Parenthood has a duty to maximize its reach. I began efforts to increase care for women before, during and after pregnancies, and to enhance critically-needed services like mental health and addiction treatment.

But the team that I brought in, experts in public health and health policy, faced daily internal opposition from those who saw my goalsas mission creep. There was even more criticism as we worked to change the perception that Planned Parenthood was just a progressive political entity to show that it was first and foremost a mainstream health care organization.

Perhaps the greatest area of tension was over our work to be inclusive of those with nuanced views about abortion. I reached out to people who wrestle with abortion’s moral complexities, but who will speak out against government interference in personal medical decisions. I engaged those who identify as being pro-life, but who support safe, legal abortion access because they don’t want women to die from back-alley abortions. I even worked with people who oppose abortion but support Planned Parenthood because of the preventive services we provide — we share the desire to reduce the need for abortion through sex education and birth control.

The Planned Parenthood of the near future is one that doesn’t worry about reproductive health or the safety of babies. They simply want more abortions. There’s an evil at the heart of the organization that is actually darker than we’ve seen in the past, if that can be imagined. We need to fight this darkness, and Wen was in the way trying to make Planned Parenthood inclusive and acceptable. That went against their new goal. They want the issue forced.

Our truths are able to shine brightest when the opposition is at its darkest. A kindler, gentler, inclusive agenda isn’t as dark as Planned Parenthood’s desired goal of advancing as many abortions as possible. I’m glad to see Wen removed.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Beauty queen Kathy Zhu was robbed because she’s a conservative

Published

on

Beauty queen Kathy Zhu was robbed because shes a conservative

It’s okay to be “woke” if you’re participating in Miss World America. Several contestants have expressed radical political, cultural, and religious views that would be considered offensive to many conservatives, including support for dismemberment of preborn children, anti-law-enforcement sentiments, and one instance of clear racism against Caucasians. But it was the outspoken conservative beauty queen, Kathy Zhu, who was stripped of her title and forced to disassociate herself from the competition immediately.

She posted her conversation with Miss World America Michigan state director Laurie DeJack as well as the email correspondence with the organization regarding her ousting:

Some news outlets are reporting the ousting had to do with her controversial response to being asked to “try a hijab” in 2018, but the text messages do not reflect that. It could have been cited during a phone conversation, which apparently happened in the midst of the text conversation.

But the directly attributed reason was a Tweet in which Zhu addressed an unknown person or group who was apparently complaining about African-American deaths. In response, she noted that black-on-black violence is the most prevalent circumstance in African-American homicides.

She worded it a bit differently:

“Did you know the majority of black deaths are caused by other blacks? Fix problems within your own community first before blaming others.”

Zhu quote-Tweeted a post sent to Vice President Pence:

Yes, her post was controversial. Was it racist? No, not in context. As she noted in her letter to the pageant, she was referring to statistical facts. Is that grounds for removal? Perhaps it is… as long as they’re being consistent. But Zhu isn’t the only contestant posting very controversial statements on social media. As of now, there seems to be no others who have indicated they were removed for similar reasons even though some have social media posts that should be considered even worse relative to the rules of decorum set forth by the pageant. Of course, the posts that should be considered worse than Zhu’s are generally progressive.

It’s a shame that Zhu had her title and future participation banned, but she has an opportunity to highlight the anti-conservative bias in such organizations. She may not be competing, but she can be even more influential now within the conservative movement than she was before. She’s currently studying political science. Maybe that will translate into a life in politics.

If Miss World America were fair, they’d strip crowns from several of the contestants over their controversial social media posts. But they won’t. They located the lone controversial conservative in the group. They’ll only remove MAGA deplorable Kathy Zhu.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

The Suicide Squad wins the Twitter war but loses anywhere else

Published

on

The Suicide Squad wins the Twitter war but loses anywhere else

We can argue about whether Trump’s tweets were strategic or narcissistic. The result is the same: Trump provoked four Congresswomen into revealing their hatred for America. In doing so they took to Twitter to declare that President Trump is a racist. The Suicide Squad and their legions trended anti-Trump hashtags on Twitter for days. On the surface it appears that it was a bad weekend for Trump.

On the Twittersphere, Trump’s week is off to a bad start. The Suicide Squad has won the Twitter front, yet lost everywhere else. When CNN asked Republican women about the issue, they vehemently defended Trump’s statements. Earlier this week, they held a longwinded press conference that amounted to nothing more than a long campaign commercial for Trump 2020.

Echo Chambers

The media continuously overestimates American involvement on Twitter because the media is on Twitter and Twitter is where the news happens because the media is on Twitter. If that sounds circular, it’s because that’s how the media works. Polls show that Americans do not care about the Mueller Report, yet Twitter would have you think otherwise. The media wants you to believe that Twitter is an organic social platform, and popular stories, hashtags, conversation are the result of the merit of the stories. But Jack Dorsey is not neutral, saying so himself. Twitter Moments is the hand selected stories by Twitter for its users and the “For You” section of trends is certainly manipulated. So how significant is Twitter, really? Not that much. Let’s consider the words of MarketWatch’s Brett Arends:

According to the company’s own public filings, only about 20% of the U.S. population even uses Twitter. And less than half of those go on it regularly.

And as everyone knows, only a tiny percentage of those dominate the “conversation.”

To listen to Twitter two years ago, after the far-right demonstration in Charlottesville, you’d think everyone wanted Confederate statues knocked down. Actually, there wasn’t even strong support for that among African-Americans. A few months ago, you’d have assumed absolutely everyone wanted Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam to resign over the “black face” affair: Actually, even most black Virginians didn’t. Today you’d think everyone calls illegal immigrants “undocumented workers,” and wants them to have free, universal health care. Really?

So while most Americans are uninformed as to what Trump actually said, not having a Twitter account, the media will spin a poll by USA Today/ Ipsos to show that majority of Americans think that Trump’s tweets were racist. Here are their findings in their own words:

Trump’s controversial tweets open a wider discussion about racism versus patriotism. Two-thirds (65%) agree that telling minority Americans to “go back to where they came from” is racist. However, there is a 40-percentage point difference between Democrats and Republicans on this (85% of Democrats agree vs. 45% of Republicans). Similarly, the vast majority of Republicans (70%) believe that people who call others “racist” usually do so in bad faith, whereas just 31% of Democrats believe the same

Americans come together on the idea that it is patriotic to point out where America falls short and try to do better. Almost three-quarters agree (72%), with majority support even across party lines (80% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans).

Generically, telling someone to “go back” to their own country is likely racist, but applying these results to Trump’s tweets is devoid of context rendering the poll meaningless. Ilhan Omar is fundamentally anti-American and Trump questioning why she bothers staying is completely not racist within context. A poll asking generic questions with an assumed premise as to what Trump’s tweet was is misleading, and quite frankly, the results are underwhelming for the Socialist narrative even with overwhelming bias in the poll. The New York Post in carrying this false assumption about the poll said noted these findings:

But 70 percent of respondents say “people who usually call others ‘racist’ usually do so in bad faith,” while 31 percent of Democrats say so.

Going back to the CNN video we see women asked with the context known or presented whether they think that what Trump said was racist and they pushed back on the assumption of racism. The most powerful part of that video was the CNN lady defining racism assuming Trump’s words even remotely came close to surpassing the definition she read. She got wrecked.

Final Thoughts

The Trump campaign and, in the far bigger picture, the Conservative movement will undoubtedly win this issue in the real world. The challenge is communicating the context. Conservatives should continue fighting their ideas on Twitter, but our main focus should be on other platforms, including and especially the real world. As long as the Socialists think they are winning in their own echo chambers, they will continue losing in the real world.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending