When ever faced with something I don’t understand, I generally try and dig down to the bottom of it. When I was younger and I tried to understand how a television worked, so I took one apart. It didn’t make my parents too happy but “hey” it was for the science. When I was interested in auto mechanics, I dismantled a motor in order to see how it worked. Reading about it wasn’t good enough. I needed to dismantle it myself to put my hand on it. It was the method of dismantling that gave me the most insight. It was this method that I used to understand modern American Liberalism.
American Liberalism used to make sense to me because I could justify anything in the guise of tolerance, diversity, equality, and fairness. I wanted to be fair. I wanted to feel intelligent. I wished to be considered an intellectual. It was these aspects of acceptance of anything as simply an affirmation of the platitude of “who I am to judge”. It was this platitude that allowed me to not stand for anything and to stand for everything. With this stance, anything was acceptable. How great was that!? With the “who am I to judge” came “who are you to judge me?” it affirmed my feelings of wishing to be unique and not a part of the establishment.
This rebellion was reflected in my clothes, my hair, and my attitude. I was attracted to miscreants like me. We were rebels fighting the status quo. It was a revolution. F*** you was the motto. I was 18 and without a care in the world because I was going to define who I was. I realized that my parents were stupid and so was the rest of the world. It was this attitude that carried me into my twenties. I enjoyed my friends that shared my views. We would talk about the idiots of the establishment while drinking or other forms of mind altering toxins in order to get the inside scoop of what reality really was. We hated commercials. We hated corporations. We hated religion. We hated America. That wasn’t reality. We were reality. Sadly we didn’t know we were drifting further and further from it.
It wasn’t till years later that read “The 5000 Year Leap” that I understood how wrong we were. It wasn’t till I listened to Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan that I realized how great our American system was. It wasn’t until they turned me on to the founders that created this great country that I understood how unique we are in the long history of tyranny. Locke taught me that I was unique not Nietzsche. Adam Smith taught me that people can’t control other people with their desires not Freud. It was Thomas Jefferson that taught me that we were all created equal and not guaranteed equal things as Marx did. It was this transition in my life that allowed me to understand that standing up for something despite my imperfections was important and it was destructive to simply be tolerant for tolerance sake.
I then found the need to understand what it was that attracted me to Liberalism. I saw liberalism and Progressivism as diametrically opposed to American idealism and what has made America great. Liberalism was a disease… at least that’s what I thought. You see liberals believe that nothing bad is a choice but rather it is a disease. I was simply caught in the liberal frame of mind again. When I finally realized that Liberals are liberals first… all came to light.
I grew up Catholic and understood that despite my intuition, I was Catholic first. I could not venture too far from my Catholic upbringing for it would uproot me from my founding. It would confuse me. When I broke free of those foundations to become a liberal, I felt liberated and free. It was all great. Little did I know, I would be touting a new set of rules, principles, and attributes. With Liberalism came a new set of “sins”. There were certain things that I could not say. I couldn’t judge people based on my own beliefs. Anyone that judged others was racist, prejudice, intolerant, homophobic, xenophobic, etc. It was through my transition that realized that I was enslaved by false truths for the fear of hurting someone’s feelings or my biggest fear which was the fear of not being accepted.
So I began to dismantle Liberalism and Progressivism. The common thread that weaved its way through the liberal mind set was that Liberalism came before anything else. Despite empirical evidence of any kind, tolerance came first. Absurdity was accepted as long as tolerance was present. The more I debated people about my views the more apparent it became. The responses from liberals to empirical data became absurd with flashing lights. I just didn’t understand why. It frustrated me. No matter how much proof I gave for my argument, they always had to discredit it with the same idiocy. I was a bigot, racist, homophobe, xenophobe that thought women needed to go back in the kitchen, shut up and have babies. It infuriated me. Then I found it. It all began to make sense.
Progressivism
When doing research for my book, “The Machine: The Progression of Secular Socialism” I stumbled upon more then just the simple emergence of socialism and communism in America. I found the origins of modern liberalism. I say modern liberalism because liberalism used to be more on the lines of Anti-Federalism. Thomas Jefferson was actually more attuned to true classical liberalism then someone like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. When I researched the League of Nations, Woodrow Wilson, The Fabian Socialists, The Frankfurt Marxists, and John Dewey, I discover Secular Humanism. It was the common thread that I was looking for.
You see the Fabian Socialists and the Frankfurt Marxists were looking for a method to make everyone uniform. For people to not go to war against each other, they needed to agree with each other. They needed to be equal. After the horrors of WWI and WWII, there was a mass movement to try and prevent war. On a macro level, the only way to get nations to get along was to connect them and make them dependent on each other. Why would you attack someone that you were dependent on? It was the theory of mutual assured destruction. It would later become a military strategy. On a micro level, the only way to get individuals to get along was to connect them and make them unified as a collective – Communism.
Communists realized that the tactics of Stalin were not effective. After his murderous reign, Communists all around the world saw that there needed to be another way to communalize individuals. It couldn’t be through direct force. They couldn’t even use the word Communist or Communism because the word was attached to millions of deaths world wide. The use of force had to be converted into subservience and the willingness of the citizenry to become simple gears that made society work. Instead of killing the dissident, ridicule and polarization would take its place. Instead of gulags and re-education camps, propaganda and public schools needed to be used. It was the birth of Progressivism and political correctness.
This movement was led by foreigners like Nakita Khrushchev, Antonio Gramsci, Georg Lukacs, and others. The American movement was led by people like Eric Fromm, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkeimer, Franz Neumann, Karl Wittfogel, Herbert Marcuse, John Dewey, Walter Lippman, Roy Woods, Raymond Bragg, Saul Alinsky, and all of their protégés who are too many to mention.
The idea of remaking America was born from this Progressive revolution. Science offered ways to engineer society. The idea of Eugenics was championed by Madison Grant, Harry H. Laughlin, Irving Fisher, Henry Fairfield Osborn, Henry Crampton., and Margaret Sanger. Much of this movement was to try and eliminate not only human imperfections but imperfect races of people that were they believed incapable of contributing to the utopia they desired. Harry Laughlin and Margaret Sanger could be ranked as two of the biggest advocates of sterilization of Blacks and Jews in the American Eugenics movement. The idea of Eugenics was simply the solution of having to kill the indigent. You could simply prevent them from being.
This was pure elitism. It explained the idea of liberals that they know better or that the liberals in power know better then the subservient liberal followers. This idea of molding the society and engineering its perfection was paramount in all that I read. These pseudo-intellectuals were trying to create a perfect society. How noble!? Once I realized this, I could then see the connection to Darwinism and Atheism. Intellectuals saw that man was simply evolved animals and had all the attributes of animals. They simply needed to point out the branches of the human species that needed to be stopped from procreating. This was no different then the views of Hitler. He just happened to be a tad bit more vocal about it and a tad bit more violent.
The Progressive movement was simply a movement driven by the lust of man to create utopia or heaven on earth. It was their Eden they were looking for. They weren’t satisfied with the idea of a supreme being because the elitist intellectuals preceding them deemed God or a god to not exist. There were no absolute truths in their mind. Truth was simply dependent on the interpretation or person’s experience and feelings. “Who are you to judge a black man if you are not black?” It was this disconnect from the absolute or the lack of acceptance of an absolute truth that unmoored society from morals and ethics. It was the end justifies the means that took its place. It was about revolution. Revolting against old norms and the evolution of truth is what “progressed” society. That was the core to Progressivism.
Secular Humanism
Secular Humanism was simply the vehicle of Progressivism. In order for a society to be progressive, it needed to be taught. Secular Humanism consisted of all the mechanisms to plunge society into the Marxist Utopia. These mechanisms were the truths determined by the elites in the movement. It was no different a design then Plato’s perfect society, Hobbes’ Leviathan, Moore’s Utopia, or Marx and Engles’ Communist Workers’ Paradise. It became the new religion. It was a religion based on men not on gods. This would be the foundation of world-wide collectivism. Once all people became humanists, the world would be united. We could all then work together as a collective all traveling through time in the same direction. We would be united as workers in a workers paradise building a tower to a heaven on earth.
Secular Humanism was simply a new label to Cultural Marxism. In order to for people to be a collective individual rights needed to be denied and property rights needed to be removed. It all started to make sense to me once I realized this. Secular Humanism, Progressivism, and Liberalism were all Cultural Marxism aimed at progressing society into the Communist Utopia that Marx and Engels desired. As Americans, we have become immune to the dysfunction of socialism because it has been progressing so gradually. We often contribute it to the old fashioned. We saw our parents as old fashioned. This is the realization of the decay and entropy of American morals, ethics, and ideals. As the entitlement state grows and the culture of Americans become more infused with class warfare and political correctness, society steadily progresses toward the unachievable goal of heaven on earth that the engineers of Secular Humanism have designed. Instead we are plunged into darkness, despair and decay.
Is there any wonder why the American society and the world for that matter is so dysfunctional? Is there any wonder why society has become so polarized politically? If two people have completely different destinations for the country, is it safe to say they will never agree and become enemies? Americans used to travel in the same direction towards their goal of prosperity and freedom. It is the simple explanations from Adam Smith and John Locke that emphasize the necessity of the protection of the individual that iterate the impossibility of perfection in humanity and the communal utopia desired by Anti-American liberalism.
You see, Liberals are Liberals first. There are Liberals that are Christians. Christians oppose abortion. Do you know any Christian Liberals that oppose abortion? Not just for themselves but for anyone. It goes back to absolutes. The liberal law is that abortion should be available for everyone despite its apparent disconnects from natural law and the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence. Liberals make up their own absolutes. If you sin against their absolute, there is no tolerance for you. They have simply replaced Christianity, Judaism, or Islam for their universal Liberal religion. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Secular Humanism are all religions set out to better society. Secular Humanism is the only one that denies that it is a religion. Secular Humanism is the only one that doesn’t accept the supreme absolute of a creator. Instead it spouses the desires and wills of what man wants to deem moral and ethical. With that said, we know that man can justify any sin. After all, Hitler, Mao, and Stalin justified the imprisonment, torture and brutal death of millions of people in the name of their idea of heaven on Earth.
Despite what the Secular Humanists decide or preach, we are all individuals. We all look different. We are all shapes and sizes. The efforts of the left to make us all the same of a super-society of perfect individuals will never occur. We will never be eradicated from the natural aspects of our individual self interests or desires. The society that makes man-made laws to support the absolutes of man instead of protecting the individual with the natural laws of nature in mind swiftly turns down the path of the ultimate man made absolute that has been responsible for the slaughter of millions of innocent individuals who desired to simply be themselves – totalitarianism.
