Tag Archives: leftist rage

Leftist Priorities & Selective Outrage

Posted by on March 8, 2012 No comments

The causes that are highlighted by our Left-dominated media and made the target of outraged denunciations and agitation by Leftists generally today are remarkable for their selectivity. There seems at first to be no rhyme or reason in what a Leftist will express outrage about.

For instance, Leftists in most of the developed world constantly agonize about the “harsh” treatment that their governments mete out to illegal immigrants, no matter how lenient such treatment actually is. One gets the impression that only complete abandonment of border controls would satisfy Leftists.

The Australian government, for instance, has had great success in deterring illegal immigrants by sending most of them straight to special prisons when they arrive. So Australian Leftists long mounted huge demonstrations against this policy even though the policy had huge support in the Australian community generally, even though the illegals concerned were treated humanely and even though the illegals were probably better housed and fed in their special prisons than they ever were in their homelands. There was also great agony expressed about the “damage” this policy will do to Australia’s international reputation and “experts” were wheeled out to condemn the conditions under which the illegals are housed.

One would think, therefore, that if humane imprisonment of lawbreakers evokes such outrage, mass murder of innocents would induce utter paroxysms of Leftist agitation. And there are plenty of examples of mass murder going on all the time in the world: The incessant massacres of Muslims in India by Hindu fundamentalists and the constant massacres of Christians in the Sudan by Muslim fundamentalists, for instance. So what do we hear from Leftists about these really grave examples of human suffering? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Why? Why are Leftists so amazingly selective in their outrage? Why the hypocritical concern about minor examples of human suffering while they ignore really major examples of human suffering? The answer is obvious.

Leftists are not concerned about human suffering at all. What they seek is to star in a drama where they can play David to someone else’s Goliath.

As with globalization, they want to oppose the consensus. They want to demonstrate in favour of unpopular causes, not causes that would be greeted by the population at large as worthy but too routine or distant to bother about. They are only “compasssionate” about causes that will give them the maximum ego-boost, causes that they believe will enable them to promote their fantasy view of themselves as as kinder and wiser and more caring than the population at large.

Selective Tree hugger Outrage

And if the targets that the Left choose for their outrage seem arbitrary and inconsistent, the selectivity of their “Green” allies is even more amazing. In Australia, for instance, Greenpeace has mounted a sustained campaign to shut down Australia’s only refinery for producing motor fuel from shale. They run around in their beloved rubber boats doing all sorts of obstructive things and intimidate any company that tries to supply motorists using the refinery’s product. Australia’s conservative government has had to introduce special concessionary regulations to keep the refinery company afloat, so severe has been the ECO-Whacko pressure on it.

The King of the mentally challenged leftists Given the constant ECO-Whacko scares about how we are likely to run out of petroleum products in double quick time if we do not mend our evil ways, one might naively expect that they would rejoice at a beginning being made on unlocking the vast reserves of hydrocarbons locked up in shale. Shale is ubiquitous and could potentially supply all our needs for petroleum products for at least hundreds of years. That ECO-Whackos do exactly the opposite and attack shale usage makes clear how much they really hate ordinary people. ECO-Whacko extremists WANT people to be hurt by resource shortages so they frantically oppose anything that will make more resources available.

They justify their attacks on the shale refinery by claiming that is a heavy polluter — which it apparently was to some degree in its startup stages — but now that its pollution levels have been reduced to levels normal for the oil industry the Greenie extremists are in no way mollified.

And the pollution produced in Australia by this one refinery is of course absolutely minuscule compared to sources of atmospheric pollution elsewhere in the world. The now well-known “Asian brown cloud”, for instance, is studiously ignored by Greenies — even though it is a considerable threat to the respiratory health of more than a billion (Yes. Billion, not million) people. This brown haze that constantly lies over India and its neighbours seems mainly to be produced by the Indian practice of using wood fires to cremate their dead and cow dung to fuel cooking fires. It is produced, in fact, by exactly the sort of traditional “sustainable” low-technology village lifestyle that the Greenies are constantly advocating for us all.

The sad fact for Greenies, of course, is that village Indians will only be able to move to less polluting practices as they modernize and move to the more efficient and clean-burning forms of cooking and combustion that are common in the developed world. But spending time advocating that Indians do more to modernize would not at all assuage the hunger for drama and self-advertisement that seems to motivate Greenie activists. They have the same motivations as Leftists so it no wonder that there are so many Red/Green alliances.

The bottom line is simple.  ECO-Whacko are selective terrorists.  just ask the FBI.

Human Debris…

Posted by on November 3, 2011 No comments

I was just sitting here watching the OWS parasites destroy private property, and rant, scream, whine, and blame everyone but themselves for their own situation. Fueled by the brainwashing of Marxist professors, Paid by Extortionists (unions) to participate in the fake “Movement”, they are identical to the drug crazed imbeciles that we all had to suffer through in the 60s… well, here we go again. Human Debris, abusing their civil rights… Again… and Again… ..Vomit

The cornerstone of their leftist ideology is the misconceived notion that wealth is finite.  that if someone is wealthy, then someone else must be poor because the wealthy person took their wealth from the poor people.

This is an abject fantasy.  Wealth is created.  not appropriated.  If I make Widgets, and you make Gizmos, and we decide to trade, we are BOTH enriched.  because we both saw what the other had as more valuable than what we had made ourselves. Hence the bargain. neither of us “Took” anything from the other.  together, we BOTH became richer…. Wealth was “Created” not “Taken”

If we hire people to make our Widgets and Gizmos, we pay them.  they trade their time and/or skill for money.  that is THEIR bargain.  they have become enriched through their pay, and the business owner has become enriched by taking HIS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, and combining it with the labor that he PAID FOR, to create HIS WIDGETS AND GIZMOS.  he is not EVIL for doing this.  He has created the opportunity for people with No Intellectual property worth anything, to earn a portion of the value of HIS intellectual property through work.  He also contributes his Widgets and Gizmos to the marketplace, where another layer of value contributes to the whole.

Everyone has this opportunity. every worker, every American. The fact that they choose not to try, or were so irresponsible that they paid no attention in school, or that they are just too lazy is not the fault of the wealth creator… its their own fault. It’s not the “system’s fault”, or the fault of Capitalism. Its THEIR FAULT. PERIOD. and they have none to blame but themselves.

These people are TOO LAZY or too STUPID to make or create anything.  They just want to take the “wealth” that others have created for themselves. In the case in America where they want the government to do this for them, they are called Democrats.  Which is code for any number of recycled/failed Marxist derivatives like Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Nazism, etc etc. Add a parasitic government to the free market system, allow these miscreants to vote for the “Hog Slopper” of their choice, and it becomes even harder for the responsible people in society to create jobs and wealth.

This is what has happened in America.  The turning point will be 2012.  If the democrats are ejected from our senate and house, and we eject Obama, we may be able to restore our republic to its former status, change a few amendments to our constitution to prevent it in the future, and repair the damage done over the past 80 years of Pseudo Marxist/Socialist/Communist/Fascist Democrat policies that got us into this mess in the first place.  If not,  You had better have made a good plan as to where to go… because America will have become overridden by the mindless hogs, looking to slop at the government trough, at ANY cost (As long is THEY aren’t the ones paying for it).  all on your dime… if you have any left following their ‘Tax everyone except US’ policy torn directly from the pages of Marxist Manifestos…  and they’ll have the power to take every last dime you have managed to protect… and they will. count on it.

 

Globalization

Posted by on July 17, 2011 No comments

A Violent leftist mob at an anti-America, pro-marxist rally

Censorship is however obviously not a dramatic enough pursuit for many Leftists so they have turned to such unlikely targets as globalization and the World Trade Organization as foci for their ire. That anti-globalization is a psychologically easy step from Leftism is explained in The Economist — which concludes that the anti-globalization protestors of today are the direct intellectual heirs of Karl Marx. Excerpt:

“Anti-globalism has been aptly described as a secular religion. So is Marxism: a creed complete with prophet, sacred texts and the promise of a heaven shrouded in mystery. Marx was not a scientist, as he claimed. He founded a faith. The economic and political systems he inspired are dead or dying. But his religion is a broad church, and lives on.”

The sole aim of the World Trade Organization is to increase co-operation and interdependence between nations and thus reduce barriers to the free movement of goods and people between nations, so one might naively have thought that the advocates of “all men are equal” would approve of it. That modern-day Leftists in the economically successful “Western” democracies oppose the WTO and other summit organizations with broadly similar aims (such as the Davos World Economic Forum) is, then, an index of how desperate they have become for something to protest about in the post-Soviet world.

Globalization as a general concept too is a rather surprising target for the Left — given that the United Nations was once a great icon and hope of Leftists in the economically successful “Western” democracies and given that Leftists once prided themselves on being internationalists: “Workers of the world unite”, the Comintern (Communist International) and the “international brigades” of Leftist volunteers who fought Generalissimo Franco in the Spain of the 1930s, for instance. And as Fonte (2002) points out at some length, Leftists today are very keen at using transnational organizations to achieve their aims where it suits them — particularly if such organizations give them the prospect of achieving things that cannot be achieved through the ballot box.

And there are some remnants of support for globalization on the Left. Australian philosopher Peter Singer is something of a hero on the loony Left but he seems to have had an attack of good sense recently and come out IN FAVOUR OF globalization — on the undoubtedly true grounds that it will reduce global poverty. This article by Gregg Easterbrook (apparently a moderate Leftist) reviews Singer’s book and even makes the point that, as globalization has been progressing, global inequalities in income have been DECLINING. Excerpt:

Singer discusses the work of three Norwegian researchers who have applied buying-power indices to international income statistics, and found that from 1970 to 1997, as globalization was reaching around the world, international inequality steadily declined

It must be so sad for Leftists to hear even from their own that, under wicked old capitalism, the poor are getting richer, not poorer.

Globalization has of course been doing its work of spreading prosperity throughout the world for well over a century (at least since the repeal of the corn laws in 1846 by British Conservative Prime Minister Robert Peel) but only recently do Leftists seem to have discovered its “evils”. Prince Albert, 19th century humanitarian and consort of Britain’s Queen Victoria, was one of the most prominent early advocates of globalization — precisely because of its effects in reducing poverty. So the Leftist opponents of globalization would appear to have been missing the big game for a long time!

If Leftists were sincere in their advocacy of the interests of the poor, they would in fact be urging MORE globalization. The biggest single remaining barrier to globalization in the world today is agricultural protectionism — preventing farm products being imported by way of tariffs, subsidies and other barriers. Such protectionism is practiced principally by rich countries (Japan, the USA and the European Union) and hurts most the poor countries of the world who rely principally on primary production and exports for their livelihood. One of the few ways poor countries could get richer is by producing and selling primary products to us but it is the LACK of globalization in agriculture which prevents them from doing so. But when did we hear Leftists arguing for more globalization? That they do not shows the hypocrisy of their claim to care about the poor.

And even without globalized agricultural trade, the degree of globalization we have had has been highly beneficial to the poorer countries. As it says here:: “Evidence supplied by the World Bank and United Nations strongly suggests that multinational corporations are a key factor in the large improvement in welfare that has occurred in developing countries over the last forty years….” And, as a result the people of the third world are big fans of globalisation. Now why would that be? Simple. Because they know from experience that it makes them better off, not worse off — contrary to what the lying Leftists of the West say.

It also shows something of Leftist motivation that their opposition to free trade generally puts them in league with big business and conservative farmers — groups that they would normally anathematize. Obviously, being protestors matters more to Leftists than whom or what the protest is in aid of.