Why Leftist Ideology Fails

Excerpt:

Why isn't there a single example of a successful `People's Paradise'? How is it that the best of intentioned revolutionaries was never able to produce a single, sustainable and functional society? Why is it that societies that espouse economic equality and predicated on well meaning ideals, either secular or religious, have proved to be abject failures?

Leftists mistakenly believe that a collective `unity' of belief, thought and ideology empower a society. Their strength, they believe, are in the numbers of those who share their ideologies. Leftist believe that they have every right to design a society based on what they believe is in the best interest of that society. They also believe that an unwillingness to conform to their ideals, poses a threat, and quite possibly, a danger.

For example, those state that embrace various leftist ideologies, take a dim view of anyone or group that might demand lower taxes, or changes in the state welfare benefits. Millions of Frenchmen turned out to protest an employers right to fire them from their jobs- even if their job performance was sub par. The upcoming French election is no small measure revolves around that nation's stagnant economy and what painful changes will be needed to revive and repair that economy from the deep damage socialism has inflicted. Where the Socialist Segolene Royal and right of center candidate Nikolas Sarkoszy differ is in the method and approach to change, not on the need for change.

Leftists naturally see themselves as `progressive.' They believe their way of viewing the world is an improvement over the `old way.' The idea of hard work for greater personal gain an dsatisfaction, for example, is passe, and in their eyes, destructive, racist and representative of `colonialist' thought. Personal gain is selfish and narcissistic.

It is interesting to note how `progressives' have aligned themselves with Hollywood types- some of the most narcissistic and self centered group of people on the planet. These same Hollywood types, venerated by leftists, are also among the most removed from the real world, believing themselves to be a kind of aristocracy, entitled to material things that only they are entitled. There is much truth to the old saying. `You are known by the company you keep.' The `progressives' have made clear their attachment to the phony aristocracy of Hollywood trumps the relationship they might have with the rest of us, `the little people.'

Of course, the attachment of the left to Hollywood pales is no more than simple hypocrisy. The attachment the left has to every dysfunctional, racist and bigoted regime and leader is indicative of a far more dangerous pathology. When leftists speak of `freedom' and `progressiveness,' they do so standing on the corpses of millions, as they toast the leaders of regimes that have authored the slaughter of millions. As long as the leftist is feted and honored, the sins of the devil himself can be washed away.

It is the progressives that want to present their own versions of history, religion and ideologies- versions that only serve to endorse their views and their hypocrisies. Disagree with them and the fierce and frenzied wrath of the ideologues descends. No room for anything but group think.

In reality, the `progressives' are actually regressive. It is because of their single minded, lockstep thinking that we find ourselves in some of the messes that have engulfed us. They believe in the `my way or the highway' kind of thinking. Disagree with them and the world is coming to an end. The vitriol and visceral hatred directed of the current administration is a good example. No difference of opinion will be tolerated. Disagree and the well oiled machine of personal destruction comes out. The shameful display of that truth was evident during the confirmation hearings of Samuel Alito. It mattered little that Quran desecration story was untrue. The vitriol was released nonetheless.

Over the decades, tens, if not hundreds of millions have died because of `my way or the highway' ideologies. Disagree with the powers that be or want to be, and there are calls of, "Death to." Disagree loud enough and you are marked for death. We all got a taste of that as the cartoon riots unfolded. It was `my way or the highway' unleashed on democratic societies. It was my way or the highway in the Soviet Union, Cambodia, Vietnam and in regimes in the Middle East. Antisemitism, virtually unknown in Venezuela, has reappeared simultaneously with the advent of Hugo Chavez.

`My way or the highway' is a nothing more than a regression to a more barbaric time, when disputes, disagreements and different ideas were settled only when blood was spilled. That is a derivative of `my way or the highway.' Mankind evolved and advanced when societies came to tolerate those with different ideas and beliefs. We advanced because we allowed each of us to exercise the freedom and the opportunity to achieve whatever it was we were capable of, in any endeavor we chose. No one told us what to do, what to think or what to invent.

Source

(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.)