I really want my readers to take in the title of today's post. Considering the words and the order in which they fall, it seems like nonsense. Considering the dictionary definition of 'conservative' one must ask how conservatism can be said to be advancing. And likewise considering the dictionary definition of' progressive' one must ask how progressives could possibly want to take us back to any dark past, especially an ancient one.
And yet the title does in fact express part of my world-view. Thus it is logically necessary in my mind that some of these words not actually mean what we so commonly think they do. I see it as a twisting of the English language even more sinister and nefarious than George Orwell imagined in his work 1984. For you see academics and journalists have turned words upside down and backwards in their meanings without any need to be coerced by either governments or wealthy private interests.
Those who champion individual liberty are called conservatives, except in cases where it is convenient to the language twisters to call them libertarians. True conservatives are always called conservatives but the libertarians are either libertarians, conservatives, or extreme conservatives depending on who the twisters are speaking to. They calculate the reaction they want from a particular audience and pick the term that serves their ends.
And their ends, what are those? They are self-labeled 'progressives' who's actual ends only relate to progress if one agrees with their ideologically warped vision of a better future. They want a powerful and very centralized government capable of imposing their vision of a "better" future on entire nations of people.
It's not enough to educate people about environmental issues and then allow people to make up their own minds about what to do. No, they're goals require unswerving obedience. Their solutions must be carried out and adhered to by all of us. And if anyone questions their 'solutions' or their analyses of the problems, that person must be marginalized, their reputation must be diminished, and if necessary their history must be re-written.
This also works in reverse for them chronologically. What's the latest popular line on ancient Egypt? The pyramids weren't built by slaves but volunteers? And I ask, in a nation where the head of state is god everything ultimately either belongs to him or the priests, who is not a slave?
The next time a scholarly person suggests to you that ancient Egypt was not a nation of slaves, try saying this to them.
"So ancient Egypt was one of the first great libertarian societies?"
And then when they explain themselves, press them further on this assertion that the typical ancient Egyptian was not a slave.
"So if the pharaoh ordered the typical ancient Egyptian to do his bidding, that Egyptian was free to refuse without significant consequence? If not, then how were they not slaves?"
I hope at this point the reason I mention ancient Egypt within an argument against the current expression of 'progressivism' is at least beginning to become clear. The slave status of the ancient Egyptians who built the pyramids has not changed because of advances in archaeological discovery and analyses. It is our definition of slavery that has changed.
Progressives cannot carry out their plans to move us "forward" if we consider the idea of a powerful central government ordering and planning our lives to be slavery.
So this post's title is perhaps optimistic, "Conservatism Advances Against Progressives Bent On Resurrecting A Dark And Ancient Past". The "conservatism" I speak of there is actually libertarianism, and I hope for the day to be able to hear pundits speak of that which has come be called conservatism advancing with greater and greater power to make government the people's slave instead of the other way around. That has been the positive trajectory of history, not the visions of the progressives.
The dark and ancient past is surprisingly obvious for those who know how and where to look. As Orwellian a twist of language as it is, the people who call themselves progressives seek to return us to the hyper-centralized social structures of dark and ancient empires. Structure where governments not only rule their people but direct their lives.
It could even be said that the evil empire wasn't the Soviet Union, though saying so was close to the truth. The evil empire is an ancient entity that has persisted through time in the darkened hearts of anyone who would seek their own visions for our futures and not allow us to opt out.
And yet the title does in fact express part of my world-view. Thus it is logically necessary in my mind that some of these words not actually mean what we so commonly think they do. I see it as a twisting of the English language even more sinister and nefarious than George Orwell imagined in his work 1984. For you see academics and journalists have turned words upside down and backwards in their meanings without any need to be coerced by either governments or wealthy private interests.
Those who champion individual liberty are called conservatives, except in cases where it is convenient to the language twisters to call them libertarians. True conservatives are always called conservatives but the libertarians are either libertarians, conservatives, or extreme conservatives depending on who the twisters are speaking to. They calculate the reaction they want from a particular audience and pick the term that serves their ends.
And their ends, what are those? They are self-labeled 'progressives' who's actual ends only relate to progress if one agrees with their ideologically warped vision of a better future. They want a powerful and very centralized government capable of imposing their vision of a "better" future on entire nations of people.
It's not enough to educate people about environmental issues and then allow people to make up their own minds about what to do. No, they're goals require unswerving obedience. Their solutions must be carried out and adhered to by all of us. And if anyone questions their 'solutions' or their analyses of the problems, that person must be marginalized, their reputation must be diminished, and if necessary their history must be re-written.
This also works in reverse for them chronologically. What's the latest popular line on ancient Egypt? The pyramids weren't built by slaves but volunteers? And I ask, in a nation where the head of state is god everything ultimately either belongs to him or the priests, who is not a slave?
The next time a scholarly person suggests to you that ancient Egypt was not a nation of slaves, try saying this to them.
"So ancient Egypt was one of the first great libertarian societies?"
And then when they explain themselves, press them further on this assertion that the typical ancient Egyptian was not a slave.
"So if the pharaoh ordered the typical ancient Egyptian to do his bidding, that Egyptian was free to refuse without significant consequence? If not, then how were they not slaves?"
I hope at this point the reason I mention ancient Egypt within an argument against the current expression of 'progressivism' is at least beginning to become clear. The slave status of the ancient Egyptians who built the pyramids has not changed because of advances in archaeological discovery and analyses. It is our definition of slavery that has changed.
Progressives cannot carry out their plans to move us "forward" if we consider the idea of a powerful central government ordering and planning our lives to be slavery.
So this post's title is perhaps optimistic, "Conservatism Advances Against Progressives Bent On Resurrecting A Dark And Ancient Past". The "conservatism" I speak of there is actually libertarianism, and I hope for the day to be able to hear pundits speak of that which has come be called conservatism advancing with greater and greater power to make government the people's slave instead of the other way around. That has been the positive trajectory of history, not the visions of the progressives.
The dark and ancient past is surprisingly obvious for those who know how and where to look. As Orwellian a twist of language as it is, the people who call themselves progressives seek to return us to the hyper-centralized social structures of dark and ancient empires. Structure where governments not only rule their people but direct their lives.
It could even be said that the evil empire wasn't the Soviet Union, though saying so was close to the truth. The evil empire is an ancient entity that has persisted through time in the darkened hearts of anyone who would seek their own visions for our futures and not allow us to opt out.
No comments:
Post a Comment