The Cosmology of the Progressive Narrative (II)

Continued from Part I

Although the Brits are managing to keep the class system alive, even under the pressure of Islamization, in most countries the social cast society has given way to other divisions to keep "the struggle" going (for cosmology see Part I).

American progressives has taken the lead in this, creating unequal victim minorities based on race, culture, gender, or whatever other line of division may present itself: Divide and Conquer is the covert progressive motto ruling what is collectively refered to as "diversity". Affirmative action (or actually, reverse discrimination - which is still discrimination!) has replaced violent revolution and has become the vehicle by which power and rights are shifted from the white/male/Christian/heterosexual 'power structure' to minorities based on victimhood (any).

This post on NewsReal Blog deals with the replacement of social class division with gender identity division. The players may have changed, but the narrative is identical: the Kantian and Hegelian dialectics have been simply substituted for the Marxist and Postmodern dialectics.

That the processes by which progressivism operates is still badly understood comes to be fore in an interview that Scott Baker of Breitbart TV's the B-Cast recently had with Charles Winecoff, author of Big Hollywood article "In Defense of Obama’s Safe School Czar (Sort Of) – or I Was A Teenage ‘Lolito’".

- Caption: Harry Hay - 

Those interested (recommended watching for Americans) can acquaint themselves with the entire unsavoury controversy in Scott Baker's video "Harry Hay", but what it boils down to is this: the Obama "safe school czar" Kevin Jennings, founder of GLSEN (Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network)  has edited a textbook on the American gay movement in which a chapter is devoted to a gay activist hero, Harry Hay.

The "Harry Hay Incident" consisted in Hay being banned from the 1986 Gay Pride March in Los Angeles for expressing sympathy and support for pedophile lobby group NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association). Hay thought nothing of maligning the entire gay movement by associating it in the eyes of the world with pedosexuality.

In the interview Winecoff, who authored a book on actor Anthony Perkins, expresses his dismay why Hay would do such a thing! Then he explains that Hay saw his association with NAMBLA mainly as an opportunity to get into people's face. Hay was a cook and actually more of an incurable hippie with a life-long passion for anything that was against the status quo and the establishment, and that included a dislike for "selfrighteous", bourgeois gays with successful lives and an appreciation of capitalist society, i.e. the sell outs.

The wrath bestowed on "sell outs" - those having the audacity to break free from the bondage of their designated victim group - can be a terrible spectable to behold! Republican blacks know all about it! In the progressivist's book you stay in the ghetto ... or on the porch! See here the latest outrage! (Zo Rachel's comment: "The Liberal Slaveship").

What we have here is the postmodern version of the Marxist dialectic in action: Marx's classes substituted by minority groups. The movement may ostensibly advocate women's rights, civil rights or gay rights, but the covert, actual agenda is, that they are for anything that hurts the established order. The two may coincide for a while, but in the end minority advocacy is just a cover to conceal the broader, anti enlightenment agenda. 

We are keeping tab on instances in which this suddenly comes to the fore, with progressives making unexpected choices that may stun the world; like Nancy Pelosi here, and Barack Obama's growing laundry list here. The leading question is, which course of action hurts the white/male/Christian/heterosexual 'power structure' most?

Current investigations of the new media into Obama's radical connections reminded me of this comment in the Articles file on "The Case for Neo Communism: sabotage!" when the Netherlands were going through a massive process of radical socialization over three decades ago with Labor Prime Minister Den Uyl (1973-1977) - watching what's going on in the US today often reminds me that era and yes, we're still recovering from it:

ACORN's Cloward-Piven approach to "overloading the system" was pretty much copied all over the developed world. I know for a fact it was in the Netherlands. Some remember party activists roaming the streets with bullhorns urging people to claim their benefit as if they were vending potatoes. Generations of affected families were considered little more than fodder to the revolution. The Labor Party never admitted it or apologized for it, but it brought them perilously close to treason.

And it's an ongoing strategy in the world's inner cities: the marginalized are forever bound to revote into office those who abuse their plight - if there ever was a vicious circle, this is it. Successful people do not need Labor to look after their interests. This is why Labor always sees there's a new cohort of 'victims' to look after. 

Here's a theory how it's done in the US:

American Thinker: "Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis", by James Simpson

(...) Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable? Why? One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit. (...) >>>

Watch this segment of the Glenn Beck Show making the point that today's industry for illegal immigration is a latter day version of slavery! Ostensibly caring for the victims in question, while in actual fact promoting prolongation of their plight. In the Netherlands they keep asylum seekers in concentration camps for years on end unto the point of suicide or psychological collapse, which is then taken as an excuse to simply open the floodgates as an act of humanism.

At it for over a hundred years and still getting away with murder: such is the power of the cosmology of the progressive narrative.

Related:

- "The Dialectics"
- "Hegel's Legacy: Historical Events, not Democracy"
- "Transnational Progressivism"
- "The Dystopia of Paradise"
- "Socialist Causes Explained"

Update:

The latest on the "Safe School Czar" Kevin Jennings controversy (btw, would that be the ultimate Orwellian double speak?):

- Zomblog: "Memo to Media Matters: Kevin Jennings knew of Harry Hay’s NAMBLA connections"
- Washington Examiner: "53 House Republicans call on Obama to fire Kevin Jennings"

Cosmology and Aim of the Progressive Narrative (I)

Glenn Beck has done a great job identifying the Progressive Movement as, what is to all intents and purposes, what Carl Marx called "the vanguard": a cohort of the higher and middle classes who ostensibly declared solidarity with the proletariat and is said to labor on its behalf. Yet few commentators have been able to piece together what underlies the Progressive narrative: the constructed cosmology and the ultimate goal that propels it forward.

The narrative is based on Marx's erratic dogma which consisted in a dualistic world view, in which the middle classes solely exist by virtue of oppressing the lower classes. The plebeian struggle against this bourgeois exploitation is what creates progress and propels the world forward: the more violent and the bloodier, the better (improvement through struggle and suffering).

A conservative estimate has it that to date some 110 million souls have been sacrificed on the altars of the progressivist ideal. Notable in this regard are the contributions in Russia and Eastern Europe, China, Southeast Asia and swathes of Latin America. Few realize (Michael Moore!) that terror and mass murder are part of the theory and not a mere matter of collateral damage. 

The dualistic  mechanism for progress is rooted in Kant's and Hegel's dialectics that preceded Marxism. Hegel was a follower of Kant, Marx a follower of Hegel. This dualism foresees in veering from one extreme (thesis) to the next (antithesis), resulting in a compromise or a fusion of the two (synthesis). This process may in principle be ongoing ad infinitum and is supposed to culminate in an Utopian world government, an event almost on a par with Christ's Second Coming.

In Marxism the occurrance got an atheist character and was defined as World Socialism, as humanity reaches ethical perfection and the dictatorial structures of State are no longer required to keep it in its place - the so-called "withering of the State".

An early student of the progressive striving for the new world order in modern times is John Fonte, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute who coined the term transnational progressivism. He calls the adherents lovingly, tranzies. They live in international organizations, NGOs and the world's enlightened elite who self-identify as "global citizens". The narrative they are laboring to establish, is to render the existence of borders as 'immoral' and taboo national identity, and expressions of patriotism. 

All strands of thought underlying it are necessarily relativist. It is the only principle leading to the moral equivalence of democracies and tyrannies, of religions leading to enlightenment with those thrusting people into prehistorical enslavement, of hottentot society on a par with technically advanced, etcetera, etcetera. It is evident that nations with clear ideas about good and bad will have a hard time coming to grips with transnational progressivism.

Those already looking forward to the One World Utopia must realise that this withering of the State comes about through principles that have nothing to do with liberty, individual rights, or democratic principles. Far from it - the opposite is the case. This is a world made up by an imploded total State turned an inclusive collective, that of all human kind, meaning you are subjected to it whether you want to or not. Or - on a moral level - everybody in, nobody out and the noble aim justifies the means (or, in terms of health care reform: no choice but the public option).

With the arrival on the transnational scene of Barack Hussein Obama as the fusion President of the United States, bringing together in his person black and white, Africa and America, Christianity and Islam, this Utopian culmination may well be on the agenda much earlier than originally projected.

I am convinced that in many a Hegelian mind (which, mostly subconsciously, includes most Europeans) President Obama plays the part of the charismatic leader at the head of the UN as the ultimate government at the center of the new world order. No wonder to some he is quite literally the messiah.

Kant at least had the good sense to warn that the ideal could easily develop into the awfullest tyranny imaginable. His followers are all blinded by the light.

But at least now we understand what may have motivated the Nobel Committee when they awarded Obama the prize in honor of the inventor of dynamite as an 'encouragement', or in his own words, as "a call to action". After all, the idea behind the Peace Prize is the abolition of the standing army. We are therefore waiting with bated breath the Obama decision regarding the mission in Afghanistan: is it "the good war" that must be won, or is victory dispensible? Armies are for nations that have values to uphold: the new order holds no values, other than it's own existence for it's own sake.

Understanding that, it becomes apparent why the US needs to be pruned to size: one can see that the principles on which the United States is based, are contrary to the goal as set out by the tranzies. In this scenario a global Pax Americana of free, proud, autonomous and democratic countries has no place, just like the collective has no place for individuals and their rights.

Now we understand why freedom and democracy movements, like those in Iran, Tibet and Venezuela got tossed under the bus; and why the defense of the rule of law in Honduras is but a minor matter. The ultimate goal is so much higher than that! In the best traditions of statist collectivists the greater good is brought about by autocrats so much more efficiently than messy liberal democracies (ask the EU, who have their own struggle with the people to contend with!).

In the next instalment we'll dive into the theory and practice of the dialectics, which are rarely understood for what they are: a mechanism for the redistribution of wealth, rights and power. It's a narrative which has nestled in every pore and cavity of the Western world and few notice it's true purpose. Obama has brought together in his administration the best practitioners in this field the world has to offer.

Continued in Part II

Related:

- "The Dialectics"
- "Hegel's Legacy: Historical Events, not Democracy"
- "Transnational Progressivism"
- "The Dystopia of Paradise"
- "Socialist Causes Explained"