Liberal Progressive Thought

Liberal progressive governors and mayors are bewildered by the “in plain sight” substantive. They muddled in the midst of what is empirically apparent. Like a deer frozen by the oncoming light, these politicians, despite the present rioting and looting crises, prefer to favor the lawless actions of rioters (they call them protesters). While begrudgingly and ineffectively deploying police forces to ostensibly protect life and property.

It is discernibly obvious, Blue State leadership cannot lead and refuse to follow.

In this age of perpetuating news coverage calculatedly or unintentionally, media of every determined perspective stoke the embers, and fuel the impending chaos. By repeatably imaging the destruction of yesterday and rerunning the knee to neck murder violent behavior is proportionately readdressed and regenerated.

The videoed killing of George Floyd evidenced in the reoccurring present exemplar the very worst of apathetic behavior. However, the act was wickedly foul because  the torture evolving to the death of George could have been stopped. Instead of concentrating on i-phone filming for nine minutes this person could have responded to George’s plea of help: “I can’t breathe,” instead onlookers including the attending officers of the the law looked on instead of saving this man’s life.

The inability of onlookers to act they simply gawked and helplessly gaped for nine minutes. The struggling victim asks for relieve nonetheless the onlookers took no action. These observers would not step forward to save a life. This inability to act is (for me) startlingly shocking. It is as if the onlookers were seated in the Coliseum of 1st century Rome viewing the killing of gladiators, slaves, riffraff, and lions.

We all want to believe that human life is precious, but when opportunities emerge to validate that premise all too often, we fade and retrograde into our shell of wantoned indifference.

This year there is a presidential election. I do believe that Blue State’s inaction on the present craziness and the coronavirus lock down revolves around the political calculations of attaining a political advantage. I also think that if the Republicans are not victorious, the constitutional state of affairs will bend a knee to progressive socialism. If that possibility becomes a reality we better start teaching Mandarin and agree to submit to the interest of the collective.

Within the Land of the Free

The result of compromise is a policy of half-measures and partial acceptance; therefore, the inclinations of the Red should never compromise with the ideological proclivity of the Blue. Assertions between persons of one political philosophy to the other evidence the hopelessness of the Red or the Blue to find an actionable cause to cede any relief to the other.

Ideological divisiveness within a community is not unusual; indeed, such differences are common. Disagreements, no matter the argument, is divided into a three-part division—one part for, one part against, and one part disinterested. Within today’s Red versus Blue controversy, the intensity of aggravation betwixt those for whatever and those against whichever defines a continuum of belligerency.

Citizenry disinterest in the workings of government is the coup de grâce of a democratic republic. Indifference begets statutorily compliant corruption. The wastefulness of tax revenue. The legislation of legal ambiguity, an ever-expanding bureaucracy, all of which necessitates the creation of a multi-trillion dollar black money economy.

Liberal progressives may have read John Locke’s Natural Laws and Natural Rights, Baron de Montesquieu’s novel concept of separation of powers, and after Lord Acton’s insightful statement: “All power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” They just don’t believe that these writings or the U.S. Constitution take precedence over the collective enticements of socialism.

The thesis to the progressive/socialist electoral success is to promise each voter fiscal surety, wide-ranging benefits, and free stuff. Why not! Since Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, this formula has elected progressives from both political parties. Then there was Donald Trump. New game, new rules, and different players.

The adjustment has been difficult for the anti-Trump persuaders. But now, out of nowhere, this coronavirus and its subsequent effect have created an opportunity for mischief. So those on the Blue team, thinking that the economies’ recovery might serve the interest of Trump are doing their very best to stop, hold back, and or divert the reopening of our economy.

Such is the state of affairs in the land of the free, home of the brave.

Power to Governments

Before the ink dried on the constitution of 1789 by means wittingly and unwittingly, wholly legal, extralegal, conniving manipulation, deceitful ambiguity, or blatant widespread disinterest, all implemented by fraudulent inducement the republic as envisioned by Franklin, replenished by Lincoln, and managed by Coolidge no longer exist.

“Of the people, for the people, by the people,” has perished from this earth. But then, when citizens employ trust instead of askance, how else could this purely experimental idea of governing have evolved?

The inherent power of every branch of the federal, the state, county, city, compared to the power of the individual citizen, is convincingly immense. Who knew that the governments could shut down one’s means of livelihood and keep it shut until some arbitrary goal attained? That the citizen cannot evaluate personal or collective jeopardy, take acceptable precautions, and via the determination of self-reliance assume prescribed risk as inherent to living.

A woke itinerary, wonk experts, and at all levels, a coercive executive branch has replaced the merits of individualism, self-reliance, and personal liberty.

There is a dichotomy of behavior that is puzzling. An American will volunteer to risk life in some foreign destination but refuse to vote for representation. This same citizen has since 1789 freely sometimes enthusiastically traded personal liberty and freedom for the ruse of government’s promise of cradle to grave guarantees.

Within a democratic republic, the operating qualifications intrinsic to efficient governance rests entirely on a citizen’s engagement. Therefore, service to one’s government does not automate heroism. The ordinary obligation of serving one’s community or nation does not merit panegyric glorification. Such patronizing lowers the bar of exceptionalism as well as veracity.

Power for the sake of attaining power is boundless; it is a potent elixir that begets the need for more never less. Government grows in contrast liberty diminishes; stop feeding the beast.

A Progressive’s View

The “lock-down” of the U.S. economy was too late, and the opening of the marketplace is too early. I know this as a fact because, with confidence, I can, on Monday, name the winner of Sunday’s game. It follows, therefore, that I, along with other contrarians and hypocrites, can, freely (meaning with no penalty) comment on Trump’s mistakes. As astute politicians of longstanding experience, we, as with our leaders Pelosi and Schumer, do not offer counter-proposals, nor do we suggest or advise.

I have numerous allies and confederates that will never accept the apparent reality that Donald J. Trump is the ‘legitimate’ President of the United States. Therefore, as a citizen, a graduate of Harvard and Yale, an officer of the court, a member of the millionaires club, a lifelong liberal progressive, and personal friend of former President Obama, it’s evident that I and my compatriots’, in general, know what’s best.

The goal is to defeat Trump. The “how” is not bound by laws statutory or moral. To save the nation from another four years of Trump may require the employment of means extralegal even illegal. Did not patriots dump English tea into the bay? Was that not an unlawful act? As with the Bostonian patriots of 1773, the deed as an expression of recourse served its purpose.

We Democrats must win (in the next election) congress and the White House, compared to the importance of the win the how is of theoretical concern. The concentration for voter turnout in Florida, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, is half the battle. The critical premise is that we progressives understand the will of the people better than the people. Such our understanding of what the people really requires automates the justification of any action that rids the country of Trump. How we win is unimportant.

Therefore, since egalitarian principles, socioeconomic, and ethnic righteousness guide our actions, we progressives are above the chaos created by the present order.

Remember, the objective is to eliminate Trump as a viable candidate for 2020. Consequently, there can be no violation of any law in the unseating of Trump. The god of progressivism wills it.

The Tragedy Of In The Public Interest

Outside and from within, prompted by self-enrichment, egocentric behavior, or one’s ideological beliefs. Powers divergent to the intent and spirit of the U.S. Constitution (since the founding of the republic) have influenced, often negatively, this government’s lawmaking prudence, judicial righteousness, and utter disregard for the meaningfulness of procedural due process.

Crises: War, civil unrest, natural disasters, the lack of life-sustaining essentials opportune the government a reason to limit one’s liberty. The government always errors on the more; never-the-less, the present crisis is no exception to precedence.

Generated fear cloaks over underlining veracity; it shrouds and denies the rationale in favor of unwarranted panic. Once anxiety replaces empirical evidence and rational deduction-mayhem ensues. The perfect example of such happenings is this country’s present hyperbolic countermeasures. The nation’s citizenry cannot remain quarantined, product and services must trade, this virus is deadly; however, statistically, the infected to cure ratio, except for specific geographic areas, is endurable.

The fight to confront and eliminate the virus is the mission. The administration, the media, and medical professionals have declared: “this is war.” In all wars, measures desperate or ordinary have integral risk. While striving to protect the most vulnerable, we Americans must accept the realities of warfare, despite all mitigating efforts a number of Americans will die. War and death run in the same circles. I say, (and I’m seventy-five years old and vulnerable) submit new protocols, and open-up sensibly, the marketplace before multi-millions of Americans loose their jobs, critical industries crumble, and national security is jeopardized.

Diversity, Woke, Silly

For many liberal progressives, the decisiveness of their political perspective does not require empirical verification, logic, reason, or rationality. However, it does require the obedient acceptance and steadfast adherence to the socioeconomic-political philosophy of Eugene Debs, Saul Alinsky, and Bernie Sanders. Today’s progressives dismiss counter-thoughts as the pejorative discourse of racist, fanatical, right-wing extremism unworthy of contention or consideration. Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known by his alias Lenin would gleefully agree

For these Democrats, by means, legal, extralegal, or amoral, the defeat of Trump necessitates gloves off Machiavellian tactics. For those who populate the political left, the-how-of-it is subordinate to the result. The FBI, CIA, and the D.O.J, by their actions, evidenced such illicit behavior before and during the recent presidential election.

Contrarianism, its beliefs, and practices (for Democrats) aid and assist the circumstantial that directly feeds into a progressive’s sense of “woke.” Detrimentally, the dogma of “Woke,” coupled with their “Theory of Diversity,” ignores one’s normative understanding of objective cognition; while favoring, often unwittingly, Norman Mailer’s factoid over the apparent truth.

Nonetheless, “woke” imposed insertion into the country’s everyday dialogue has decidedly, and I believe, negatively influenced the societal behavior of this nation. The appliance of “woke” into human discourse examples silliness run amok.

Contemporaries home and abroad, including the delusional media, invoke and justify the “woke” narrative as inventively modern. However, intellectual sobriety obliges that one should reject such a narrative as a fanciful obtuse of meaninglessness.

Vexed by conflicting possibilities, variations of “the good, the bad, and the ugly” assort, evolve, and reconfigure into episodes of never-ending issues and concerns. Inevitably, however, the problems of significance fade, the best reconciles with the worst, the offense assuages, and in time the vexing of conflicting probabilities reappear demanding immediate attention and a determinative solution.

Trump To-and-Fro

Trump instigates, a kinetic of opinions dominate. The opposed to Trump mob converge, alert the media, then they scurrilously hyper exaggerate the particular to their advantage, within minutes the Trump acolytes counter, pundits display their bias, Democratic leadership considers impeachment, then everyone returns at the ready to their ideological zone.

This action, the to-and-fro of it are exhausting; nonetheless, relief remains, steadfastly, on the other side of the moon.

The normality of rational and reasonable has failed. Contesting seems everlasting. Possibly, this divisive stubbornness is the true meaning of a democracy that ignores the republic’s constitution: common sense, the distinctive American virtue of yesteryear. Has evolved, wherein today, the sense of the common incorporated with the Democratic Party is a mix of discombobulated leadership promising vague possibilities challenged with indeterminate endings. However, one must not discount the power within the party of the disquiet fastidious contrarians mingled within those that as a matter of course, bilaterally oppose any and every.

The haunting response of Benjamin Franklin when asked, “a republic if you can keep it.” It is a foreboding one cannot dismiss. But then “the beat goes on,” surely, one can realize as with the example of the Tower of Babel human software is a flawed defective operating with no active service warranty. Although software upgrades are integral, the updates often do not satisfy the operational concern.

This novella of the politically discontented (the Democratic Party) is a focused continuum of dysfunctional analysis, a display of a false interpretive overwhelming good sense, an exemplar of a political party passionately practicing the alchemist’s folly: the striving to align the world and its affairs as one wishes it instead of accepting and dealing with the reality of worldly affairs.

Since 1787 the question remains, can this republic govern within the four corners of the constitution?