On the same Belmont Club thread that prompted my post of yesterday, a fan of Ayn Rand opined less than gratefully about those we commemorate on Memorial Day.
"For some, this 'sacrifice' is no sacrifice at all, if it means preserving what they most value in life."That struck me as a bit too much like:
It compelled me to write down this explanation that I've long had stewing about Ayn Rand's philosophy, Objectivism. Even she gave fair warning that it may not be all that pleasing for the common man.
In my comment I support the claim
What Marx provided the Leftists, Rand provided the Statists: a nifty false flag behind which they hide their true intentions from the gullible.In fact Rand's philosophy aids Statists to both hide their true intentions with talk of freedom's blessings while at the same time legitimizing their gains over our liberties. Here's is what got my Spidey-sense tingling:
So what first alerted me to the deceitful side of Rand? The actions and words of her most lauded acolyte, Alan Greenspan.(Comments inspired me to write more on this.)
When Greenspan said “who in their right mind would buy a 4.5% fixed mortgage when a 3.75% variable is available?” I knew he either was intentionally deceitful, or someone had something terrible they used — and he succumbed — to get Greenspan to abandon those who trusted him. Like Rand did Willers.
2. The Problem with Conservatism.
The label Conservative is a conflicted banner under which to fight tyranny. The reason should be obvious. In a word: Inertia. Last week's outrageous collectivist demand has become today's status quo. Conservatives, as a whole, feel comfortable with the status quo. "Wake me when they really do something."
We got to today's status quo because "Progressives" understood that conservatives will not fight a simple request in light of far more unsettling demands.
"What's a penny to you? A nickel? A quarter?They know that there are plenty in the conservative community who may be relied upon to relinquish a little ground just so long nobody lets the boat be rocked too violently (as the radicals, the Progressives' ally, threaten). And especially if it is only another conservative who has to pay. How much evil advances this way?
What's incremental? LOL You slippery-slopers make me laugh."
Ironic isn't it? The lines attributed to the godfather of conservative philosophy, Edmund Burke, states the paradox we face simply:
A chief problem of conservatives is that we tend not to want to move unless forced to do so. When the Progressives of the nineteenth century started labeling their adversaries as reactionaries, they weren’t far off. It still takes a palpable threat to get us off the dime. Please: find some way to demonstrate how I’m wrong about this.
3. Bookends to the Age of Reason:
I have often thought of Blaise Pascal (d 1662) and Clive Staples Lewis (d 1963) as these bookends.
When Pascal developed the mode of satire with which he undermined the scoundrels who used the Counter Reformation for their own elevation to power, he helped tumble the old order. Reason and rationality were used to great effect in The Provincial Letters and the public grew fond of it. By the time of Thomas Paine. it showed commoners to be the equal of kings in standing before the Lord, and ushered in the era that proved that human advancement would be the better for it.
But by the time of Lewis, the Fabians had brought England to the brink, and the postmodern era was about to embark shortly after the end of WW II. My favorite of his writings, perhaps because they were dry and to the point even as he needed to say what he did discretely, was The Abolition of Man. Simply contemplating that title, I pray you can see why I call him the other bookend to the Age of Reason.
A man's most effective weapon is his brain. "Progressives" have long aimed to gain control, and indeed have gained control of education. How well do you read and figure? How well does the up and coming generation? The trend is telling.