Our Collectivist Government

One of the primary differences - perhaps the defining difference - between the progressive Left and the truly conservative Right (forget "Republican" - that party is not conservative) is that the progressive believe society, the collective group of citizens, is more important than any one individual. So, if you wish to "improve" society and that means some particular individual must give up the hard-earned fruits of his labor, his property, that is fine and just. If an individual has to suffer the loss of his freedoms, his rights, in order to benefit society, that is how it should be.

The true conservative, on the other hand, believes - knows for an inarguable fact - that the rights of the individual supersede the desires or even needs of society, of the collective. Simply because there are people who would benefit from the use of his hard-earned - or even un-earned, inherited money or property - does not mean that he should be so abused. Taken to an extreme, simply because it would benefit society at large to do so does not make it right to enslave an individual, figuratively or literally.

Because the Left cannot see this, it is often impossible to come to any agreement with them. I have a lovely cousin married to a very caring and compassionate husband, a registered nurse who is an excellent husband and father, but who is a Marxist. I know that he would deny being a Marxist, but he does believe in the tenet, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." He simply doesn't understand that this was promulgated by Old Karl himself, or if he does know it, probably thinks that the old guy got at least one thing right. He is currently working hard to improve working conditions for his fellow employees at the hospital for which he works, as a union organizer and steward. A noble intent tied to Marxist thoughts and behaviors, collectivist values. He has actually spoken the old saw about "If you have two coats, and your neighbor has none, give him one of yours."

Unfortunately, he is also of the mindset that this should mean if someone else - not him personally - has two coats, that person should be forced to relinquish one of his. That, simply because it would benefit the needy (whoever gets to define "needy"), it is all right to take from one man to give to another. He has lost sight of the fact that the Bible and other religious and philosophical writings were meant to encourage charity, not theft by taxation, regulation, or governmental decree. To the collectivist, charity means taking from the productive to give to the non-productive, taking from those who earned - or were given by their loved ones - their property and handing it out to those who are either unable to earn it or choose not to earn it. What we conservatives know as the FSA: Free Shit Army.

Funny, isn't it, that most of the time, most liberals/progressives are more than willing to give your money to the "needy" but unwilling to give their own, even to the extent of avoiding taxes. I'm no fan of Romney, but he has given over 15% of his income to charity, while Obama has given about 1% (and that charity was probably a non-profit school for rappers who specialize in muslim poetry). In spite of the fact that almost every expense of Obama's is paid for by us (and therefore has no need to spend any of his own money), the taxpayers of this country. By the productive, such as Romney. Not by the FSA - who all vote for Obama. Conservatives routinely give more to charity than the progressives.

Further, as my older sister likes to point out from time-to-time, it was the Right in the form of Republicans, believe it or not - who rammed through civil rights for minorities. The Democrats - especially Southern Democrats, unfortunately, as most Southerners I know are pretty warm and giving people - were the ones who fought to deny equal rights to the blacks. And in this case, we are not simply speaking of a distaste for the Federal government telling the States what to do, we are talking about bigoted old Southern Democrats who tried their damndest to make sure blacks did not get to have the same rights as whites. Try to make most black folks understand that fact, or admit it if they are informed enough to know it to be true, and you'll understand the meaning of "futile".

Just as true muslims, true followers of Islam, will never coexist with infidels, so will no true member of the collectivist Left ever be willing to coexist with someone who believes - as the people who founded this country did - that the rights of the individual are not subject to infringement by society simply because it would benefit said society. That is why the Left is so insistent upon calling our country a "democracy" - an ideology that our Founders were convinced would be the ruin of our country. They established a Constitutional Republic, a form of government which respected and protected the rights of the individual against the desires of the collective, the larger group. So, for many, many years now, the Left has been pounding into young minds in school, and through mass media, that our country is a democracy, where the majority rules - even if it runs rough-shod over someone's rights.

The Right, on the other hand, is willing to coexist with the Left - if they would simply leave us alone. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others." We would not obstruct the Left's actions insofar as they would not damage our rights, but the Left is not so generous. They expect that we should be subject to their wishes even where it harms us.

We on the right have to understand that, like a true, orthodox muslim, those on the Left who truly believe in "the greater good" are incapable of coming to an understanding with us. They are incapable of allowing us the freedom to live as we wish. They believe we must be forced, by law or by the might of the government, to do what they believe is the best for the collectivist group, for "our country". "Our country" as defined by the Left, of course. The Left wants a Universal Caliphate just as the muslims do, however, their Caliphate would be run not by imams but by the elite. People like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Charles Schumer. People like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Lisa Murkowski, Olympia Snow. People like Barack Hussein Obama, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano.

Sad to say, there is going to be a fight. I hope you are ready for it.