Belief in materialistic determinism, the secularist philosophical basis of liberal-progressive-socialism, fosters collectivistic tyranny. Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are following a well-worn trail leading inevitably in that direction.
Judeo-Christian morality, arising from spiritual religious struggles to understand the Will of God for individuals within society, is the opposite of liberal-progressive-socialistic determinism. The one deals with individual responsibility. The other deals with economic, cultural, and racial classes, presuming the right to impose its will upon them.
Judeo-Christian morality is the historical substance of Western civilization, dominant from the time of Roman Emperor Constantine in the 4th century AD.
Judeo-Christianity’s essential aspect is recognition that every individual must answer to God for his actions, that every individual must strive always to do the right thing in dealing with his fellows. Its political culmination was the English Glorious Revolution of 1689 that established the unwritten constitutional principle that even the monarch is subject to the higher law of God’s morality, that infringing upon individuals’ inherent personal liberties is grounds for forfeiture of his rulership. Upon that foundation was our own Constitution based a century later.
Judeo-Christianity was unchallenged until the advent of scientistic, i.e., unscientific, socialism irrupting in the 1789 French Revolution, which introduced the Reign of Terror as an instrument of state political tyranny and culminated in Napoleon’s military conquest of Continental Europe. Subsequent manifestations were the revolutions of 1830 and 1848, followed by the Bolshevik ascendency in Russia’s 1917 communist revolution and Hitler’s National Socialism in 1933.
Anarchist Mikhail Bakunin in 1872 described what life was to be under Karl Marx’s so-called scientific socialism, the progenitor of today’s liberal-progressivism espoused by the Democrat/Socialist Party:
“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!”
Nancy Pelosi paraphrased this outlook when ram-rodding Obamacare through Congress. Asked about the constitutionality of its provisions, she said that a Democrat/Socialist Party majority in Congress could legislate anything it wanted, apparently without regard to constitutional precedent or overwhelming public disagreement. She also opined that the voters are too ignorant to know what is best for them, that they would come to like Obamacare after having been yoked with it a sufficient time.
I wrote in Ethics, Religion, and the Führer Principle:
Our present-day liberal-socialist welfare state embodies irreconcilable contradictions. Liberals proclaim their faith in “every vote must count” democracy, yet endeavor to impose, often harshly, their arbitrary rules of social conduct on a restive and rebellious nation. When the majority of the people will not support a legislative initiative, liberal-socialist Federal courts impose it by fiat, and liberal-socialists in the Senate make it their business to prevent the naming of judges who won’t go along with the game.
Socialism’s goal of equal property distribution necessitates confiscating property from people who are above average income and property ownership. Liberals’ goal of destroying all vestiges of personal morality and giving unrestrained license to hedonism necessitates continually discovering hitherto unknown constitutional “rights.”
Mobilizing the voters for this requires a strong, charismatic Führer, a spell-binding orator like Adolph Hitler or Franklin Roosevelt who can make clearly unconstitutional action sound like motherhood and apple pie.
Liberal-progressives clearly believed they had found their new Führer in Barack Obama, who was to continue where FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society had left off with imposition of full-blown socialistic materialism.
A particularly horrific example of liberal-progressive materialism and its presumption that biological materialism trumps morality is the Darwinian eugenics movement of the 19th and 20th centuries. Darwinians of that era expressly denied morality, instead viewing political and social life as a struggle for survival of the fittest.
Read American Eugenics on the Eve of Nazi Expansion: The Darwin Connection See also Eugenics: Darwin Prescribed; Hitler Implemented and Darwinian Evolution: the Foundation of Liberal-Socialism.
Eugenicists, and today’s supporters of unrestrained abortion, believe collectivist tyranny to reshape the human population is inherent in liberal-progressive materialism. Obama and his supporters believe, overtly or implicitly, that the socialistic welfare state is so evidently a necessity to social harmony and progress that imposing it by legislative force and judicial fiat is justified.
Back to summary...
