The Democrat Modus Operandi

The Democrat Modus Operandi

When Democrats or leftists in general begin to lose, their solution is never to come up with better arguments to persuade more people to their way of thinking. If the voters aren’t buying what they are selling, they will simply import a new electorate by ceaselessly advocating for unrestricted third world immigration. And if Congressional Republicans oppose whatever they have a mind to do, well, just rewrite the Constitution.

The proposed amendment, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Tom Udall, would give Congress broad power to shape campaign finance laws. It would effectively overturn the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. FEC and 2014 ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC, which struck down laws restricting when corporations and unions can spend money on elections, and how much individuals can donate to candidates in a two-year period.

One has to note the contradiction of their whole absurd argument. While insisting that “the American people” don’t want to see the negative attack ads funded by the evil Koch Brothers (as if Democratic campaigns don’t run negative ads), they are also so worried about the effect that the ads might have that they want to establish a regime of censorship to stop them. But can’t have it both ways. You can’t claim that the people are so virtuous that they reject negative political advertising as a concept while pushing for its elimination on the grounds that negative advertising poisons political discourse. “The American people know this is wrong”, says comedian Al Franken. Well if they know, then there’s nothing to worry about. They won’t be swayed.

What I also find amazing is the sheer presumption of these people. Says the socialist Bernie Sanders:

“If you understand what they stand for, and that is to end, do away with social security, do away with medicare, do away with medicaid do away with the concept of the minimum wage, do away with the environmental protection agency — that is the struggle. They have an agenda.”

So establishing all of this stuff – social security, medicare, etc. – was not part of an agenda. These things existed from time immemorial, with no political struggle whatsoever playing a role in their existence. Democrats do not have an agenda, no, they simply embody and pursue pure political reason untainted by the slightest whiff of ideology or bias, defending this purity from the “agendas” of the corrupt from without.

Sanders is right. We do have an agenda. We can morally and intellectually justify our rejection of each and every one of these supposedly unchangeable dogmas. We can morally and intellectually deconstruct and destroy the entire post-war “liberal consensus” in ways that this sad old coot couldn’t begin to understand. This is the age of the Internet: the age of free information, of decentralization, of a new-found independence and creativity for people with the intelligence and gumption to make something of it. Even the sappy millennial generation with its left-wing PC orthodoxy has given up on the centralized bureaucratic welfare regulatory state. Sanders, Franken, Warren and the rest are not progressive at all; to the contrary, they’re the geriatric scions of a decaying order that stands in the way of true (i.e. not PC) economic and social progress.

I mean, I’m glad they opposed the banker bailouts – so did the Tea Party, so do all libertarians. So it is sad that we can’t all agree upon the true remedy to the domination of central banks. It is a shame they see more government and more regulations as the answer, when it is really freedom and competition that these institutions fear more than anything else.

Ferguson: What’s At Stake

Ferguson: What’s At Stake

Since Ferguson, MO is all the news and all the rage, my first post may as well cover it. I will assume that you are familiar with the contours of the case: a white police office shot a black man, though in the media the deceased Michael Brown is always referred to as “an unarmed black teenager.” I could refer to him as a “hulking 300 lb. 18 year-old adult who may have been charging directly at a police officer after assaulting him once already”, but that would be equally biased.

The mob in action is truly an appalling spectacle. The riots and protests in Ferguson are not identical; the former is criminal behavior, the latter is constitutionally-protected activity. But they are similar, in that both are based upon the premise that the foundations of the American legal system are completely irrelevant. The presumption of innocence was the first casualty of the outrage. Officer Wilson was guilty. One might say “guilty before being proven innocent” in a reversal of our cherished dictum, but that presumes there would be any sort of effort to discern whether or not he was guilty or innocent. Just “guilty” will do, as due process is always another casualty of the mob. We may at least presume, though, that the officer’s ultimate fate would be decided speedily.

Americans have the right to express their disdain for the most basic rights of individuals in a civilized republic. But we also have just cause to be concerned by such a widespread movement. The American press has the right to cover the protests and riots in any lawful way it chooses. But we also have just cause to be infuriated with the leftist media, which has almost literally fanned the flames in Ferguson. People who know better cynically manipulate the emotions of black mobs, dutifully repeating, amplifying and in some cases inventing fallacy after fallacy to increase their own power and prestige: they used to be called demagogues. Academics and activists crawl out of the woodwork before even a scintilla of hard evidence is acquired to reinforce their narratives about white privilege and systemic racism. And when Darren Wilson is exonerated, as I believe he will be, the result will be the same as it was with George Zimmerman, the Duke lacrosse team, and the countless other instances in which the narrative has collapsed: utter silence, until the next one. The militarization of the police is troubling and a topic I intend to discuss in future posts, but order must be restored, lives and property protected, and violent crimes punished.

Let anyone who wondered why America’s founders rejected pure democracy and insisted upon a nation of laws and not of men, wonder no longer.