Monday, December 05, 2011

Liberalism is the Devil Water of the Masses

Resuming Friday's offering: although will and imagination pave the royal road that leads straight to fallville, there is obviously nothing intrinsically morbid about these two modalities. Indeed, in their absence we couldn't be human at all, for what is a bipedal hominid without freedom of action and thought? Just a victim of circumstances, accidents, and contingencies, whether genetic or sociological, it doesn't matter.

After all, will is the vehicle of our exterior liberty, while imagination is the playground of our interior freedom, allowing us to live in the transitional space between thought and action, events and choices, existence and potential, this and that. Without imagination we could never untie the whatknot or see through the veil of its seductive mayaplicity.

No, it isn't just imagination + will that engenders demons; rather, it is an inebriated will and an intoxicated imagination that do so. As a result, they always go too far; in so doing, they release inhibitions and partake of other forces that have nothing to do with the matter at hand. They lend legitimacy to the most primitive impulses, as we vividly see in the OWS movement.

(Here again, being that Raccoon metaphysics is a full-service manual for integrated vertical living, from high to low, we are big fans of primitive impulses in their proper context. Outside its proper context, the primitive devolves to mere barbarism.)

Again, the latter is something the left does by definition; since they deny the vertical, it necessarily returns in a disguised and perverse form, which provides them with a preternatural energy that conservatives can never match on the plane of vulgar politics. The moment a conservative becomes "ecstatic" about politics, he's no longer a conservative. Intoxication certainly has its place. Just not in politics, where sobriety, skepticism, and realism should rule the day.

Obviously, young people are more prone to the varieties of psychic intoxication, so it is no surprise that Obama took two thirds of the youth vote (the vote was 50-50 for actual adults). To paraphrase someone, these children wish to give us the full benefit of their inexperience.

Nor is it any mystery that many Democrats wish to reduce the voting age to 16, since they are going to require an influx of fresh idiots to supplement their existing roster of interest groups to maintain their electoral viability. (Mr. Unity himself is planning a campaign revolving around race-baiting and ethnic pandering.)

I'm trying to imagine what the world would look like to me today if I were a 21 year old with a skull full of liberal mush.... Would I be susceptible to Obama intoxication?

Yeah, probably. My first presidential vote went to Jimmy Carter, who, for those of you below a certain age, was the Obama of his day. He too promised dramatic change, and like Obama, delivered: soaring inflation, increased unemployment, emboldened enemies, loss of respect in the world, diminished confidence at home. And yet, it didn't matter one bit. I still voted for him again in 1980, for my head was deep up the liberal feel-tank.

So was I drunk, or just ignorant? So hard to put myself back into my old Bob.... I was a pretty excitable boy, but I was also an ignoramus who knew what he knew, and that's all he knew (i.e., the cultural matrix of monolithic liberalism). Even if I had wanted to -- if my will weren't inebriated -- there was literally no way to gain access to conservative arguments unless one was a National Review subscriber.

There were a few conservative voices, but because they were so rare, one just assumed they were cranks or eccentrics. It was very much a cultural attitude, because one was basically trained to have a kind of visceral rejection of all things conservative, mainly because they tossed cold water on one's pleasant buzz; or in technical terms, harshed your mellow. I am continually amazed that so many members of my auto-hypnotized generation are still suckling on the liberal crock pipe while swaddled in the adult diapers of hopenchange....

I will continue this charmingly self-indulgent musing below, time permitting. For now, let's get back to The Devil. Or, for my detractors, let's leave this Devil to his inane memories and move on to the next topic.

unKnown Friend points out that even Marx and Engels could have avoided intoxication -- and prevented the birth of a ghastly genocidal demon -- if they had actually just considered the plight of the poor in a detached and disinterested way. But instead, they went far, far, over the line, into cloud cuckoo land, insisting that God didn't exist, that capitalism left "the poor" in a completely hopeless situation, that history obeyed scientific laws, that philosophy is just self-interest in disguise, etc.

It is the same with the Darwinists. If they would just maintain a little sobriety instead of drunkenly careening into areas in which they have nothing of importance to contribute, all would be well. But like a lubricated know-it-all at a cocktail party, they just can't stop themselves. They'll tell you everything about love, beauty, truth, God.... It's all wrong, of course, but that's the thing about being drunk -- it feels good.

I am once again reminded of Paul McCartney's first acid trip. His mind was so filled with ideas, that he had his assistant following him around, so he could dictate them to him. He remembered one particularly inspired idea, and insisted that his assistant take it down word for word, and then put it away for safe keeping. The next morning, they eagerly retrieved the scrap of paper, upon which it was written:

There are seven levels.

But it might as well have been: everything can be explained by random mutation + adaption, or the labor theory of economics, or I think therefore I am, or abortion is guaranteed by the Constitution, or two men can marry, or the audacity of hope, or dude, God is just like vicodin! None of these ideas make any sense unless the person is a senseless drunk. Sober up, and they're either banal or pernicious or both.

Of the founding featherheads of the left, UF writes that "there is no doubt that with them it was a matter of an excess -- a going beyond the limits of competence and sober and honest knowledge -- which they did not in any way doubt, having been carried away by the intoxicating impulse of radicalism."

You must understand that the radical wants to be intoxicated -- with outrage, with self-righteous anger, with smugness, with superiority, with iconoclasm, with fear (e.g., of "domestic spying," or the "theofascistic takeover of the nation"), with "injustice." Like any other drug, radicalism is addictive because of the splendidly expansive feelings it engenders. This, I think, explains why so many of my generation refuse to grow up -- because they are addicted to the feelings produced by radicalism.

For example, in no way do they want racism to be a thing of the past. For a white liberal, it gives such an intoxicating feeling of being on the side of righteousness, that it is impossible for them to let it go. For you Raccoons of color out there, you probably realize that every white liberal condescendingly imagines that he is noble Atticus Finch and that you are poor helpless Tom Robinson.

And I imagine that all the racial grievance hustlers -- if they aren't just outright sociopaths, like Al Sharpton -- imagine that white people give a great deal of thought to race, when they actually couldn't care less (at least conservatives). Personally, I'd never think about race if liberals weren't obsessed with it.

The left also doesn't want poverty to end, because this too would eliminate the cause of their righteous indignation. Otherwise they would define poverty in absolute instead of relative terms, not to mention embrace economic policies that lift people from poverty instead of confining them there. Did you know that LBJ supposedly had no intention whatsoever of erecting a permanent welfare state? Rather, the idea behind "the war on poverty" was to end it in a single generation, not create a vast system of perpetuating it. But that's the thing about Good Intentions.

Back to the card. Any form of radicalism is given force and momentum by the intoxicated desire to "change everything utterly at a single stroke. And it is this fever to *change* everything utterly at a single stroke which gave birth to the demon of class hatred, atheism, disdain for the past, and material interest being placed above all else, which is now making the rounds in the world" (MOTT).

You see how it works? The ideology legitimizes the intoxicated expression of envy, anger, class warfare, racial segregation, murder, whatever. It is what allowed Bill Ayers, for example, to want to attempt mass murder in good conscience. When one is full of that much righteous rage, what less can any decent person do? Wouldn't you have killed the leaders of the Third Reich if given the opportunity? Ayers still has no regrets, because he is still drunk. But like all drunks, he stays drunk in order to avoid the pain of regret -- regret for a wasted life spent wasted on a poisonous ideology.

Again, this is the counter-inspiration of the Devil, and it is a caricature of spiritual grace and transformation, for as one descends down into the inconscient (↓), something rises up to meet you (↑), which produces the intoxication and gives birth to a third thing.

*****

What team? Coonucks, naturally. Can't wait until they play the Devils.

28 Comments:

Blogger julie said...

Rather, the idea behind "the war on poverty" was to end it in a single generation, not create a vast system of perpetuating it.

Ah yes, the law of unintended consequences. Sipp has something up along those lines today.

Yesterday I was at Starbucks with a friend, and noticed by the register a sign soliciting donations. Commonplace, but this time the money was not to provide food or aid for the poor and unfortunate, it was to provide jobs.

I'd love to see that business model.

It's a nice idea, but if people are really interested in creating jobs, they should be thinking of ways to reduce government intrusion into legitimate businesses.

12/05/2011 09:17:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

members of my auto-hypnotized generation are still suckling on the liberal crock pipe while swaddled in the adult diapers of hopenchange

Oh, I'm getting a mental picture...

12/05/2011 09:28:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

"The paradox" -- which I don't think means what he thinks it means -- "is that the welfare state, designed to improve security and dampen social conflict, now looms as an engine for insecurity, conflict and disappointment."

12/05/2011 09:36:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah right wingers would never succumb to radicalism or mass murder. Because they've got their verticals straight, or something.

12/05/2011 10:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

McVeigh's favorite book was the Turner Diaries, which advocates the same policies as any other typical right winger such as Romney or Gingrich: "violent revolution in the United States which leads to the overthrow of the United States federal government, nuclear war, and, ultimately, to a race war leading to the extermination of all Jews and non-whites."

No, I am not intoxicated.

12/05/2011 10:28:00 AM  
Blogger mushroom said...

It is the same with the Darwinists. If they would just maintain a little sobriety instead of drunkenly careening into areas in which they have nothing of importance to contribute, all would be well.

Case in point via the oft-amusing William M. Briggs speaking of research by Andrew Newberg:

A proposed “god gene” could predispose gene carriers to transcendental experiences, while those people with a more prominent brain fold called the paracingulate sulcus might be better able to separate real events from imagination.

12/05/2011 10:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Cousin Dupree said...

You know, like other primates.

12/05/2011 10:48:00 AM  
Blogger mushroom said...

How did he find out? Mitt Romney's secret plan to wipe out the Jews and people of color has been exposed. I thought we had covered it pretty well by having Mitt pose as the liberal governor of Massachusetts while being anti-Second Amendment and Pro-Choice. The keen visionaries of the left have seen through our multi-generational deception. All is lost.

Dupree, please, ZOT away if this becomes confusing.

12/05/2011 11:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Cousin Dupree said...

We'd better get on top of this, or comrade McVeigh's efforts will have been in vain.

12/05/2011 11:13:00 AM  
Anonymous Cousin Dupree said...

This is more serious than when they broke Oswald's cover as a radical leftist, and found out that he was actually motivated by right-wing hate. Or that the so-called Palestinian Sirhan was really a Zionist.

12/05/2011 11:21:00 AM  
Blogger John Lien said...

Good article, mushroom.

Bob sez:

"...which provides them with a preternatural energy that conservatives can never match on the plane of vulgar politics."

True that. I engage in politics as an act of self preservation. Kind of like flossing my teeth.

12/05/2011 11:30:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

" The moment a conservative becomes "ecstatic" about politics, he's no longer a conservative."

Oh my, could I ever bust the comment box a few times over with first hand observations on that. Devolution is an ugly, heartbreaking transformation to observe... Like watching Mr. Hyde making his appearance.

Ugh.

12/05/2011 11:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm curious about the rules that let you disavow your terrorists and murderers, while on the left apparently Elizabeth Warren is the moral equivalent of Pol Pot. Please explain.

12/05/2011 11:39:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Elizabeth Warren is in no way the moral equivalent of Pol Pot, and, I would be surprised if any mainstream conservative would suggest that. Nor could one disavow (although one would condemn) a conservative terrorist or murderer to such an extent that such a thing exists, e.g., the rare person who murders an abortionist. (Disavowing rightwingers is a different matter, since American conservatives are liberal, not right wing, as in Europe.)

12/05/2011 11:46:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

aninnymouse said "No, I am not intoxicated."

Nyah, just buzzed driveling, "I just had one shot Ocipher... honest!"

12/05/2011 11:58:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Van, indeed...

Ayers still has no regrets, because he is still drunk.

Can you imagine if he ever decided to go cold turkey? The DTs would probably kill him.

12/05/2011 12:16:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

btw, coongrats to FL. I'm impressed; from the still shot, he looks pretty confident on those skates.

12/05/2011 12:19:00 PM  
Blogger John Lien said...

Regarding the feeling of intoxication. When I feel that kind of excitement I treat it as a warning now. When I think about those times I went with the flow of that energy I pretty much cringe.

12/05/2011 12:31:00 PM  
Blogger mushroom said...

There's always the New Wine, John.

And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit....

12/05/2011 02:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This guy accuses other people of smugness and superiority. Oh, that's rich.

12/05/2011 02:27:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

aninnymouse squeaked "This guy accuses other people of smugness and superiority."

In issues of aninnymice and men, that's just the way it is.

It's a named thing, you wouldn't understand.

Run along.

12/05/2011 02:56:00 PM  
Blogger Jim said...

Intoxication certainly has its place.

I'll drink to that.
(Sorry to beat you to the "punch" Skully, just couldn't resist).

12/05/2011 06:27:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

A semi-exasperated, and sleep deprived niggle of a thought... I hope to have time to chew on it a bit later, but to just throw it out there, there is something between these:

"Like any other drug, radicalism is addictive because of the splendidly expansive feelings it engenders. "

"Any form of radicalism is given force and momentum by the intoxicated desire to "change everything utterly at a single stroke."

, and especially this,

"Again, this is the counter-inspiration of the Devil, and it is a caricature of spiritual grace and transformation, for as one descends down into the inconscient (↓), something rises up to meet you (↑), which produces the intoxication and gives birth to a third thing."

And a mistaken bluring, blending of contexts (what do the days of creation do in Genesis, but order, separate and distinguish?), that can only be grasped or conceived in equivocation. There is a gravity here... a conceptual (and ultimately spiritual) 32 feet per second, per second plunging of thought, that if not purposefully restrained and righted by the solid grasp of some truths, habituated virtues, will send a person plummeting down.

Some people, who otherwise seem good and sound, at times you can see their unsteady perch, and as that position becomes a focal point of interest, passion, action - politics - the branch snaps, and it's look out belowwwww!!!

12/05/2011 10:12:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Heh... even me, looking at my last comment from last night am thinking "WTH?".

Probably should have let that percolate on notepad for a while longer... but there's something about holding false concepts, mistakenly paired or ill-defined ideas, especially in the area of politics, that as you add interest, passion and skin in the game, that can draw otherwise good people... down into action.

It's a different sort of thing from the leftist desire to live others lives for them... but it's not as different as I'd like it to be.

Ugh.

12/06/2011 06:38:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

To paraphrase Gandalf, "I'd take this ring out of a desire to do good, but through me it would do great evil." Lots of genuinely good people lack the wisdom to handle power in the way they imagine they could. Give them a little, and down they go...

12/06/2011 07:04:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Much obliged Mister Jim!
Somebody hadta say it and you stepped up.

It's good to know you have my back when the Skullmeister is meisterin'!

I see a promotion in yer future.

You know, I never tried devil water but I did sample some hellfire water once.

I believe the locos called it El Diablo Agua Pollo Loco or somethin' like that.
Tasted like avgas to me.

Safety tip: don't ever, never! light a ceegar around that stuff!

12/06/2011 03:51:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Oh great. Now you got Skully reminiscing again.
I hope you're happy, Jim.

12/06/2011 03:55:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Thanks for the in-sight Bob. :^)

12/06/2011 03:56:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home