The View From 1776

Accelerating Decline

America’s Retreat Becomes a Fiasco in Russia as Well as Egypt

In the theology of liberal-progressivism-socialism, human society is inevitably evolving toward a single world government ruled by an academic elite.  This is the most likely explanation for Obama’s cringing approach to the rest of the world and his disparagement from time to time of our nation and its history.  This idyllic world of the future is envisioned by liberal-progressives as one of peace and social justice (i.e., regulated equality of consumption).

This is merely today’s version of Karl Marx’s expectation that workers would rise up and destroy capitalist owners and managers in a bloody revolution.  Presumably the fiery furnace of revolution would transform human nature, bring a society ruled by socialist workers, and allow government eventually to wither away.  Thereafter, everyone would give his best efforts to society and expect only what he needed.  Lions would lie down with the lambs.

The barbaric core of Marx’s vision, and that of Obama and his fellow liberal-progressives, is the necessity for intellectuals to make and impose the rules to create this fancied idyllic society. 

Anarchist Mikhail Bakunin, opposing Marxian collectivism in 1872, accurately foretold what life was to be under socialism:

“The government will not content itself with administering and governing the masses politically, as all governments do today.  It will administer the masses economically, concentrating in the hands of the State the production and division of wealth, the cultivation of land…All that will demand the reign of scientific intelligence, the most aristocratic, despotic, arrogant, and elitist of all regimes.  There will be a new class, a new hierarchy…the world will be divided into a minority ruling in the name of knowledge, and an immense ignorant majority.  And then, woe unto the mass of ignorant ones!”

Lenin’s Bolshevik cohort demonstrated that while some intellectuals might actually have noble aspirations, so-called social democracy in practice emerged from the business end of a gun barrel.  Lenin and Stalin liquidated tens of millions of Russian citizens deemed enemies of the revolution.

Obama, with his massive outpouring of executive orders and regulatory bureau edicts designed to thwart Congress and the judicial branch, is moving, albeit from a distance, along the same path.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 08/10 at 05:51 PM
  1. Good for Bakunin. Like myself, he recognized "intellectuals" as the negative influence on society that they have proven to be.

    But why on this post, the seemingly unrelated title: "America's Retreat Becomes a Fiasco in Russia and Egypt." ??
    Posted by bill greene  on  08/13  at  06:41 PM
  2. I looked up Bakunin, and noted that, like most political theorists, you can cherry pick his writings, since they digress into so many conflicting and contradictory positions. However, the Brewton post gives us a brilliant quote correctly predicting the failure of the socialist USSR centralized government. (Sadly, it did take 110 years of genocide and gulags, and Reagan, Walesa, the Pope, and Thatcher, to end the nightmare.)

    But Bakunin also wrote a lot about the horrors of religion, and thus supported the godless rule of communism, the very foundation that Marx and Stalin relied on for their secular authority.

    Bakunin actually had it backwards, arguing that a belief in a GOD made people slaves under His rule. What Bakunin missed is that by placing GOD at the top, people no longer had to worship secular leaders. Kings were thus placed by Christianity as secondary leaders, and the citizens could give first allegiance to God's exaltation of every individual life, displacing the ancient "God-given" mantle usurped by Kings and Emperors from time immemorial. This religious belief, most fervently held by the Puritans, provided the impetus over 500 years in England for more democratic rule and the growth of a common law protecting indidual rights. Bakunin should have loved this undermining of Kings and Czars! But he was an intellectual--too smart to need a God above--his own reason could steer him perfectly!

    In 1842 Bakunin wrote an essay showing his inclination to "intellectual" abstractions: In the essay "Bakunin debated Hegel's emphasis on the positive in the dialectical process, asserting instead that the negative is the creative driving force of dialectics. The ending line of this essay is one of his most quoted phrases, "The desire for destruction is, at the same time, a creative desire too."

    This is an example of why intellectual philosophers are both undecipherable and dangerous! It's not clear whether he approved of this idea or not, or how it could be applied to real time politics. But it is clear, applied both to the USSR and Obama's America today, that abstract thinkers in their zeal for creative progress, like to tear things down, to destroy what exists, to make something into what they believe would be better. Unfortunately, their grand designs are defective, and they end up destroying the best there is.

    There are times when destroying things is necessary to make progress. But the decision must be based on where you stand. Let's look at major league baseball. The team at the bottom probably needas total makeover-fire almost everyone and bring in a new coach and players. But if you're dealing with the Red Sox, say, when they have just won the World Series, with a team batting average of .330, it would be foolish to clean house, just because you wanted an average of .360

    Posted by bill greene  on  08/13  at  07:24 PM
  3. Bill:

    Regarding your first comment / question, I should have made the connection more explicit.

    The linked article about Obama's foreign policy notes its fecklessness and seeming lack of focus and direction. To which, I wrote:

    "In the theology of liberal-progressivism-socialism, human society is inevitably evolving toward a single world government ruled by an academic elite.  This is the most likely explanation for Obama’s cringing approach to the rest of the world and his disparagement from time to time of our nation and its history."
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  08/14  at  11:21 PM
  4. Somehow it is comforting to find that The View still exists, huffing and puffing about liberals.

    As a conservative entity one would think that The View would be resolved to letting the world evolve naturally and be as it is. But here it is arguing for American intervention in order to make the world in its own image. It too seems to like having things both ways.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  08/15  at  05:14 AM
  5. Re our foreign policy, these posts, including David Airth's, and the linked article do indicate that it isn't only Obama who hasn't a clue. The Republicans share a failure to know when to be involved and when to remain disengaged. McCain and Graham are among the loose canons on the Right who will advocate wholesale intervention and/or condemn same, depending on whatever whim moves them.

    The more I see of America's history the more I like the Monroe Doctrine and George Washington's admonition to stay out of foreign entanglements. It is one thing to retain respectful relations with long-standing allied nations such as England, and quite another to go in and bomb sovereign nations, or assassinate their citizens.

    I believe America would be financially and militarily stronger and less hated if we had never sent troops abroad. We should stand for individual human rights, open and free economies, and a protective and empowering rule of law. But we should present those values without forcing them on anyone; but by demonstrating their extraordinary efficacy by our own example.

    Such a policy could include the permanent closure of any and all foreign embassies deemed unsafe; the elimination of every form of financial and military aid; a contribution to the UN limited to every other nation's contribution; formal support of the Heritage Foundation's "Annual Index of Economic Freedom," and perhaps cut the number of State Department personnel in half! In short, the best foreign policy is to pay attention at home that we are strong and united and that we remain number one in financial and military might. TR said it all--talk softly but carry a big stick.
    Posted by bill greene  on  08/15  at  09:20 AM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.