This is a page from
the official, non-commercial, and nonprofit web site of “Mark Andrew Dwyer” whose only goal
is educating and informing.
Although all material contained or referenced on this page is
copyrighted either by “Mark
Andrew Dwyer” or by other parties (all pictures are from the
Internet and are copyrighted by third parties), it is being offered here solely as an educational tool to increase
understanding of global economics and social justice issues for 'fair use' of
copyrighted material as provided in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
Please, send your
comments to readerswrite@yahoo.com. (See also readers’ comments after
the article.)
By “Mark Andrew Dwyer”
August 8, 2009
I was really appalled by the furry with which the "Liberal" establishment, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), reacted to Rush Limbaugh's comparison of "Liberalism" to Nazism. Not that I was surprised, though. The "Liberals" mastered the art of projection defined as a tendency of projecting one's usually sinister intentions on others.
After
years of "Liberal" claims that "white right-wing extremists" (which
term includes about everyone of white complexion that may be
characterized as a "conservative" or "not Liberal") and Nazis are birds
of feather, it was only a matter of time when the "Liberals" would denounce
their opponents (in particular, Rush Limbaugh) for playing the Nazi card. And it did happen now.
But the
implied symmetry ends right here, as the Nazis were a pathological
offspring of non-Marxian socialism (see references [1] and [2]), with which
"Liberals", particularly the "progressive" ones, flirt increasingly,
while the conservatives seem rather vehemently opposed to any form of
socialism.
Let's see.
The main, albeit untold, objective
of "Liberalism" is to stop social evolution in tracks by helping the
least fit (which term includes such categories as: the least intelligent, the least talented, the least rational,
the least productive, the least responsible, the least civil, etc.) to survive and multiply while
preventing the most fit (an antonym of least fit)
from succeeding, and discouraging them, however implicitly, by means of state-mandated
socio-demographic policies, from having kids that tend to inherit
their parents' fitness.
And it shows.
The world's once most
advanced U.S. economy is slowly but steadily deteriorating as the size
of Democratic constituency, which includes the misfits, the losers, and
the social parasites (that learned how to parasitize on generous
government handouts intended to support the misfits and the losers),
both domestic and imported, is growing. Working together under the "Liberal" leadership, stupid or
asocial as they are, they will sink it (the economy) completely and wreck the American society that depends on it,
blaming the "white right-wing extremists" for the failure.
Meanwhile,
the proportion of young Americans that are likely to succeed on their own
(and provide for those who are not), for instance, teenagers who are
talented enough to pursue college education in sciences and
engineering, is decreasing, as is the American innovation, productivity, and competitiveness.
"But what does it have to do with the Nazis?" one may ask.
Well,
the Nazis were very much like the "Liberals" and embraced similar
socialistic agenda (see [1], footnote 1), except that they (the Nazis)
were claiming to help, as opposed to derail, the evolution by
eliminating those that they declared as the misfits, the losers, and
the social parasites.
But
the truth is that they (the Nazis) were actually derailing it, too, by
systemically murdering cognitive elites of the nations that they
invaded, as well as big part of their own, never mind their sweeping
misdeclarations of political and military opponents and minorities as the misfits, the
losers, and the social parasites.
This, and the level of
brutality (or a lack thereof) in implementation of the "correct"
ideology, were about all that differentiated the "Liberalism" from the
Nazism.
In the simplest terms, the Nazism was a brutally
implemented non-Marxian socialism + nominal eugenics (state-mandated elimination of
the declared "least fit") while the "Liberalism" is a relatively mild
(so far) form of non-Marxian (so far) socialism + actual dysgenics (state-mandated selective support
for the actually least fit at the expense and to the detriment of the most fit and their progeny).
Contrast
this with the Conservatives (collectively referred to by the "Liberals" as "the Right") who, first of all, denounce socialism (be it Marxian or otherwise) and,
second of all, prefer to leave the elimination and selection to the nature, acts of God (for
instance, they oppose abortion), free market capitalism, and
fair competition.
So, when you look at the facts, the two allegedly
opposing ideologies, the "Liberalism" and the Nazism, did have quite a
bit in common.
And we haven't seen everything that the "Liberals" will do to us, yet.
[1] The Left's Arrogance
By Mark Andrew Dwyer
http://www.oocities.org/readerswrite/commentaries/Lefts_arrogance.htm
[2] Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning
By Jonathan Goldberg
http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841
Send yours to readerswrite@yahoo.com. [top]
Past
commentary (July 22, 2009) YET ANOTHER REASON WHY OBAMA NATIONALIZED HEALTH CARE WON'T WORK