The Electoral Landscape in 2012 – Part 1

Rise of the Progressives

I remember having to prepare a long-range business plan for my product line in September of 1999 when I worked for the Zinsser Company. The marketing director asked all of the brand managers to project sales a decade into the future and provide a rationale for our prediction. To be sure, he knew fully well that such long-term planning is utterly meaningless, but in his wisdom made the request so he could get inside our heads and understand what and how we were thinking.

As I stared at the year 2009 on the Excel spreadsheet, I couldn’t help but be struck by how strange it looked. Imagine a conversation between a couple of the Constitutional Framers at a local tavern in Philadelphia back in 1789 in which one of them wondered what the nation would be like in 1989 and how uncomfortably strange that combination of numbers would likely have seemed.

For my entire life up to that point, the year always began with the numbers 1 and 9. In just three months time all of that would change and for the rest of my life the year would begin with 2 and 0. Twelve years later I’m damned if I can remember what manner of forecast I submitted except to say that I’m pretty sure it was totally off-base and completely inaccurate. But here’s the kicker: while the year 2009 was strange to my eyes in 1999, the year 2012 seems even stranger – and it looms only a week or so away.

I am not clairvoyant by any stretch of the imagination (although my mother was) and I don’t pretend to know with any certainty what’s going to happen tomorrow, much less in the coming 12 months. I can certainly guess – based on what is happening now and likely to happen in the proximate future – but even that guess is not so much what I believe will happen as it is the options and opportunities that will enable us to direct the course of our political destiny.

It is no exaggeration to say that our nation is on the edge of a precipice: a bare majority of the electorate voted into the office of U.S. President a Marxist committed to fundamentally transforming what was once a free market republic and nation of laws into a socialist oligarchy governed by a ruling class of Democrat Party elites supported by public sector unions and a form of crony capitalism that borders on corporate fascism. There has never in this nation’s history been a presidential administration as corrupt and blatantly criminal as that of Barack Hussein Obama, whose election was made possible by a segment of the electorate either unable or unwilling to acknowledge the myriad red flags raised by what few facts have emerged from the mists of his still largely mysterious past.

The mind boggles when contemplating the different events and their confluence that brought us to the present crisis because there are so many of them and the relationship between them an excruciatingly complex one that transpired over a period of not a few years, but many decades – going all the way back to the early 1900s. To explain it in detail would require a post the length of a book; because I have no desire to write it and you certainly have no desire to read it, I’ll give you a Reader’s Digest version.

On several occasions I have outlined what made this nation as great as it became and its people an exceptional one like none other ever seen in history: these are what I call the Four Cardinal Strengths, namely, Virtue, Self-Reliance, Education and Unity. A civilized society of laws whose people are virtuous, self-reliant, well-educated and unified in their patriotism is the only one that can ever hope to maximize liberty and prosperity and minimize tyranny and destitution.

To bring down such a nation, one would have to undermine the Cardinal Strengths, starting with virtue: if you can turn enough of the people away from God and toward the Golden Calf, virtue decays and becomes atrophied to the point that the discipline undergirding self-reliance wanes as more people turn to government to do what they must rightfully do for themselves – despite the fact that such a reality becomes possible only if wealth is forcibly redistributed.

In such an environment, it’s a question of time before the quality of education becomes compromised to the point that political agitprop supplants the core curriculum with the result that increasingly higher levels of education produce graduates who know less of what truly matters and more of what of what makes them useful idiots to do the bidding those seeking to replace the Cardinal Strengths with Licentiousness, Dependence, Ignorance and Division, for only in such an environment can they hope to assume a position of absolute power.

It all began in late 19th century, when the halls of higher academe in this country flirted with, eventually betrothed and in time wedded a form of secular humanism made possible by the influence of Marxism and Darwinism in Europe. It was seductive because it appealed to a impossibly simplistic sense of justice and equality even as it denied an undeniable truth of our existence: that human nature is immutable and can only be governed to one degree or another but never changed. In essence, it was a form of secular utopianism that replaced God with the State and unalienable rights that have their origin in Divine Law with political decrees based on the judgment of a ruling class. It was as foreign to the body politic of the United States as metallic arsenic is to the human body and those who embraced this toxic philosophy understood that, like arsenic, it would have to be introduced into civil society in low but progressive doses to achieve the desired effect.

Curiously enough, those who administered the poison called themselves… Progressives.

To be continued in Part 2.

Share
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The Electoral Landscape in 2012 – Part 1

  1. Dana Pearson says:

    Looking forward to this series. I can sense it will be good.

    Speaking of “higher academe”, the term “university” literally means “one truth”. In my view the main function of the Church is “education in the truth”. According to 1 Tim. 3 the Church of the living God is the pillar and ground of truth. Eph. 4 11,12 notes that he gave some to be Teachers for the edification of the Church. The Great Commission is: go and teach. The Church and higher academe have let us down in this regard. The family, the judiciary and government are institutions that are ill because the insititutions of the Church and higher education have lost their way long ago.

    Recently I read Engles and Marx’s “Communist Manifesto”, which would be rejected outright by most clear thinking people today. However, if the Communist Manifesto is dressed differently it can be foisted upon a populace that won’t believe the Bible but will believe almost anything else no matter how ridiculous.

    I’m guessing that you will make very clear the problems with liberal and progressive education. The only thing worse than liberalism and progressivism is conservatism and traditionalism — which the Bible also takes a pretty dim view of. Call me a bible thumper — but I have come to the belief in my middle age that God’s Word is not only a source of truth but the only source of truth.