James P. writes: 

The comments in “How Socialism Affects Character” are too passive in formulation. Socialism is not something that happens via some mysterious natural process, like a hurricane or an earthquake. Evil people are doing this to us. “Socialism,” as such, is not changing our character; leftist politicians are quite deliberately trying to change human nature, partly because this serves their political interests, and partly because their beliefs are profoundly misguided.

With respect to Clark Coleman’s comment, leftists want the government to take over health care precisely because this will kill the unique spirit of America, and cause the people to look to government for solutions, and foster the European mindset. For our leftist overlords, these character changes are a positive and intended feature, not an unintended side-effect.

With respect to Lydia’s comment, again, the leftist politicians who have enacted this legislation actively want to reduce the American people to gossiping about triviality, to ignorance of their history, to blaming and envying others instead of taking action themselves.

With respect to Sheila’s comment, the leftists actively want to create an entitlement mentality (after all, they provide the entitlements in exchange for votes), and to reduce the number of people who are determined to make it on their own and are chary of government assistance and too proud to accept charity.

I am being somewhat redundant here because I think one cannot overstress the role of human agency. The Democrats – an utterly venal and evil group of people – wish to interpose the government – i.e. themselves – in every human transaction. They want to decide who gets what, regardless of the Constitution or the wishes of the American people. They could not have come as far as they have without changing human nature and conditioning people to accept it for decades. They can only “succeed” if they change human nature in enough voters that the entitled and the apathetic outnumber those who cherish freedom and individual initiative. I put “succeed” in quotes because their “success” will only mean temporary power for individual politicians. Over the long term, they will fail, because socialism has resulted in ruin, poverty, and large-scale slaughter everywhere it has been tried, and America will not escape this fate either.

Gwen writes:

I take issue with James P.’s assertion that the Democrats are “evil.” I would assert that there is about a dime’s worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans. The health care bill just passed is essentially the work put together by Republicans in the early 1990s. The Democrats and Republicans put this thing together – all the drama and theatre you see is just that – theatre.

I suppose what I would like James P. to understand is that it’s not Democrats and Republicans (as they’re the same) but a steady erosion of our Constitutional rights. It’s the government and “powers that be” against all of us – the citizens of this country. Please don’t turn this into some sort of us against them; my team against their team! That only plays perfectly into our overlords plans – divide and conquer!

Sheila C. writes: 

I must take issue with James P.’s assertion, as I read it, that our current woes are solely, or even primarily due to an organized assault by the left. I do not argue that we are not under such an assault; it has been going on since the 1920s at least. My disagreement with James is the extent to which the American people are innocent “victims” of this assault on our traditional values. My strong belief in free will and personal responsibility for personal choices has only intensified with my growing Christian faith, and I do not accept that you can be made a victim of such beliefs without your consent. These poisoned seeds fell on fertile soil: the broken, fallen human soul, inclined to take the easy way out and always blame others.

Anyone can read the history of America’s various social reformers and see, in slightly more flowery and certainly more erudite language the same ideas and values that the left promulgates today. It’s all been there, but people didn’t want to see. No one cared to be bothered. Only now, when people’s pocketbooks are seriously threatened, are some up in arms about the direction of the country – the same direction in which we have been steadily moving for decades.

 They are willing accomplices who choose to live insular lives and are only briefly roused from their slumber when the financial theft threatens their budget of wants, not needs. There is, unfortunately, ample evidence that the Democrats are correct when they assert that the public will happily accept dependency and its associated “freebies.” No one can be denied coverage based on a pre-existing condition? No penalty based on behavior or risk and our eternal children covered by parents until age 26? Great. Look at the outcry when people are charged more than $10 copay for their endless and unnecessary visits to doctors. Consider the constant drumbeat of rights and the endless whining of “unfair” when consequences are (rarely) incurred. The parents of cheerleaders caught drinking or photographing each other in scandalous poses or states of undress consider themselves Christians and insist their girls are truly good and shouldn’t, indeed mustn’t be penalized for a casual infraction of the rules. Hear the endless calls for “compassion” for those suffering from the “illnesses” of alcoholism or sexual immorality and their attendant ills. See how Mabel LeBeau finds Clark Coleman “smug” for asserting one can be an independent shopper for a doctor or medical care (those poor militaristic and patriotic rednecks, she mourns, must struggle to keep their corrupting factory jobs just to hold body and soul together). Innocent victims merely corrupted by the evil and organized left? Hardly. I repeat that we are reaping what we have sown. We were willing participants in our own victimization and only now, sensing the nearness of the whirlwind, are some blanching. They protest entirely too much.

Laura writes:

I don’t think it’s correct that the resistance to Obamacare is purely self-interested. Many middle class people, those who might truthfully get some breaks from the bill, strongly object to it and see it as a gross infringement on their freedom. They sense something basic is at stake. It’s true Americans have allowed liberalism to advance. The Republican leadership has been a huge disappointment. Yet I can’t say we deserve this disaster.  Enough people still grasp first principles to constitute a large and deeply dissatisfied constituency. There is serious resistance to this and a strong counterrevolutionary minority.

Hannon writes:

Gwen writes: “I would assert that there is about a dime’s worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans.”

I would characterize this somewhat differently. I believe there are, and have been, substantial differences between the two major parties. What transcends– and undermines– these differences most profoundly is the  evident collusion between the federal government and corporations and banks. This relationship was fomented by Alexander Hamilton and others and has been a juggernaut ever since. It extends to lower levels of government and businesses as well and is arguably at the center of our national financial universe.

We must ask ourselves why did Microsoft and GE support Obamacare? Why was there scarcely a peep from the pharmaceuticals and health insurers? A maxim I have found to be virtually fail-proof says “follow the money” when you want to know the real underlying story behind forces of change or baffling acts.

If this were a strictly fiscal consideration there might not be calls for the abolishment for the Federal Reserve Bank, the IRS and other radical propositions. The same foundational monied interests have always realized that a social engineering component is essential if the system is to remain under control and profit-making is to be parlayed to it maximum potential. This overall scheme has little to do with free trade or capitalism and it is the antithesis of liberty. It is merely one aspect of the trend of globalism that has seamlessly worked with progressivism and Socialism to destroy independent thought and action in the American citizen.

Regarding Sheila C.’s thoughts on self-victimization, this is a good response to any unilateral attack on a purported enemy, but only up to a point. What if the packet of seeds you bought said “carrots” but what came up was nightshade? To what extent should ordinary citizens expect they will always need to vigilantly monitor the doings of their elected representatives? It would be like accepting as normal the need for a chemical assay every time you bought a bottle of ketchup or a bag of coffee beans. It is asking too much, and it is the result, in part, of too lenient penalties for their transgressions against us.

We must not be disengaged from the process, including responsibilities in addition to voting. But all the vigilance we can muster is no barrier to hordes of lost and mindless liberal souls that feed the machine that James P. describes.

Please follow and like us: