It is easy to hate and it is difficult to love. This is how the whole scheme of things works. All good things are difficult to achieve; and bad things are very easy to get. – Confucius
History has shown that political power gained through the marshaling of hate is usually hard to maintain, and always destructive – never constructive. The only path toward maintaining hate-based power is to identify a very large set of enemies whom hate-leaders can paint as hate-worthy, and more: threats to the peace and prosperity of the “oppressed” in-group said leaders wish to control. It is Prudent to recognize the “hate-ees” in order to defend against the hat-ers.
Despite being consistently accused by the leftist hate leaders, of employing hate themselves, most of the hated are best described as traditionalists. Let’s consider how the process has developed. One large group that is cast as hateful are those of us who believe strictly in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution it spawned. By nearly direct implication that group is nearly congruent with Christian, or Judeo-Christian belief structures. In other words, Biblical morality is at least professed by most of those who also believe in the founding principles of the United States. It’s no surprise, but tangent to our point.
Since Roe v. Wade the power of litigation and crafty parsing of words and phrases whose usage has obviously changed since the Federalist Papers were written – a special aspect of redefining words and meanings to control the argument – has well-served those who don’t believe in the moral structure and personal responsibility imposed by “free will,” also called “individual sovereignty.” Socialism fills their wants, not a constitutional republic. Unfortunately the defense of tradition now has two, new, giant weapons arrayed against it: 1) Social media; and, 2) Ignorance.
Social media allow for near-instant sharing, or spreading, of ideas… not to be confused with truth, reality and intelligence. It spreads the last three, too, but those are not dangerous to honest people. But ideas – “memes” in the current parlance – can be shared very quickly without filters of contemplation, research or understanding, a perfect condition for hatreds. One person offended can rapidly become thousands and tens of thousands: a political force for the elected dishonest to take advantage of. Social media and the handiness of cell-phones and their video cameras do great and instant damage to public discourse and the once great “free press.” Further, it has provided for the concentration of information into the hands and biases of fewer than 100 people, of whom traditionalists – conservatives – are both suspicious and skeptical. No system of individual liberty can stand for long without the free flow, and publication, of ideas. An algorithm here, an algorithm there, and pretty soon we’re talking about real mind control. The thought-police are standing by. What will happen when governors are elected (thereby) who agree with defining conservative ideas and tradition, itself, as hate speech?
Ignorance is mostly of history and of the lessons of history, although ignorance of, say, climate science is also a large part of how socialism has gained fresh currency among young people in the United States, of all places. We the people, who shucked off monarchy to establish freedom as a founding principle, are the last people on earth who should find socialism attractive; socialism is the same as monarchy, except that the party is the monarch, of which the chairman is the King. What do children growing up in the United States have to do with socialism? Ignorance: the only soil in which socialism can grow.
Socialists, inherent enemies of individualism, not only purvey ignorance of history, they live on it like parasites. They play a long game, beginning with dominance of education – their barely employable graduates are the result, and they all seem to prefer socialism over free enterprise and private property. Bereft of ways to earn enough to live like people on TV… or down the street, they find it easy to blame traditionalists for their ill fortunes and to demand recompense for attempting to follow fortunate people’s rules. “Forgive my debt,” they say, and leading (following) politicians proclaim that ‘meme’ from the rooftops. If, as tradition and (un)common sense dictate, one disagrees with that demand, one is transformed into a hater and, probably, a racist… whatever “racist” even means, any longer.
Sexual traditionalists are also accused of bigotry, hatred, homophobia and theocracy. Simply declaring support for “traditional” marriage can cause boycotts of one’s business and disavowal by political leaders and even by municipal governments, such that one’s business may not locate a branch within a jurisdiction because of “hate speech” by the owner. The facts and truths associated with said “hate speech” have no bearing, as is often the case with marshaled hatreds. It is not the truth that stirs crowds and gangs – hatred motivates in the vacuum of ignorance. By increasing ignorance, certain people fertilize the soil where hatred grows.
All in all, the Prudent observer can conclude that those on the left end of the political spectrum are more involved than are rightists, with hate and accusations of hate. Inevitably, of late, attempts to engage leftists in substantive discussions of (pick one) immigration, education, health care, energy, climate, gender, religion, any of the Bill of Rights, trade, economics, the Constitution, America, Mexico, South America, colonialism, Democrats, Republicans, Trump, Obama, housing or farming, and a few other topics, results in accusations of (pick one) White Supremacy, Nazism, Fascism, racism, homophobia, misogyny, Islamophobia, or hatred.
Those on the right, it appears, tend to laugh at much of the above, or shake their heads and lament the poor state of education that enables other Americans to believe the things professed. Conservatives and “traditionalists” are always on the defensive; leftist haters are always the attackers, and have the advantage. To what end?
And, finally, will traditionalists, defenders of the Constitution, propriety and reason, manage to hold back leftist destruction? Will we return to secure borders, for example? Will reality regain sway on college campuses? Will the federal budget ever be cut? Will “public” education be made to include appropriate American history content, reading of books, basic math and writing skills, possibly cursive writing (so that older documents may be read), and the Constitution? Will the subject and science of gender return to reality? Will honor, duty, commitment and personal responsibility return to primacy in interpersonal relationships? Will the administrative, largely hidden and secretive state apparatus be made more open and honest? Will the three branches of the federal government return to their Constitutional bounds and purviews? Will honesty be restored as the operating public and private philosophy? Will e pluribus unum regain its primacy as the true “American Dream?
