curious spin-off of liberal craziness is in their denial of the psychological laws that make us responsible for our own quality of life. One example is capitalism.
The natural/psychological laws that underlie free-market capitalism are in direct conflict with liberal ideology, particularly the idea that the individual must be free to achieve. Achievers put their faith in themselves, not government.
Free-market capitalism is the collective power of scientists, inventors, designers, CEOs, investors, engineers, entrepreneurs, management and sales teams, technologists, skilled craftsmen and motivated workers. Free expression of psychological excellence channeled through a smart business sense, a new invention, or a scientific discovery will make some individuals wealthy and powerful. Wealth and power may exploit natural resources. Results of excellence may be difficult to control, e.g., the automobile; nonetheless, advantages outweigh disadvantages. Thousands of people in the US die in auto accidents each year, but we don’t ban autos. Twisting natural laws to fit political agendas creates conundrums. What then do we reward? What do we condemn?
Let’s apply the above to a liberal community organizer like our previous president Barack Obama. He not only views capitalism as a financial threat to the world, he sees it as a threat to anything that permits individual excellence to flourish without government controls.
In his mind social order is established when an all-controlling government builds a humanitarian paradise where everyone happily relinquishes individuality to join in promoting universal love, equality, and fairness. Any interference is tantamount to standing for social disorder and un-American values.
A liberal’s choice to be a community organizer is unusual in America for it is symptomatic of a state of mind that views Americans as something other than what we are, i.e., helpless, exploited masses yearning for direction from a few enlightened elites. A community organizer assumes that opportunities are closed to all but the rich and powerful. We saw this distortion of reality in Obama’s determination to neutralize power of the individual (e.g., take away choices for individual healthcare insurance; blocking school choice)—except where government benefits.
The mind of the community organizer is organized around exposing and confronting imagined enemies who are seen as victimizers. Social order is perceived to be restored when society’s victims are united into a tightly-knit unit that obeys every community organizer’s demands. But first the organizer must re-shape the unit’s thinking patterns so it accepts the organizer’s words without question, and automatically resists anything to the contrary.
The organizer is protected from criticism. His followers will never criticize.
Targets of his efforts (e.g., a business, conservatives, critical thinkers, or any anti-liberal group) will; however, criticism from them is expected. In fact, criticism from his enemies is fodder for more propaganda. Deniability frees him to do whatever he wants; his fingerprints will not be on the chaos he causes. Now he can wedge himself between the powerful and the powerless without fear of reprisal to demonize the enemy his followers have already been programmed to hate.
Going to the extremes to demonize one’s fanciful inventions of opposition begs for objective analysis. Psychologically healthy people don’t demonize other people. This thinking has to be highly dysfunctional—apparently a criterion for a liberal who chooses to reorganize a community into a reconstruction born of his own imagination.
Curiously, the organizer is not a member of his group. He protects it, shields it, instructs it, provides it with resources, but does not identify with it. He prefers to stand between his group and his enemy like a wise, objective referee imbued with all the facts defending his ideology with moral righteousness. This makes him apart from, and better than, both. He is better than employers because he is righting the wrongs their employees are suffering. He is better than the employees because he can do for them what they cannot do for themselves.
In his mind, he is a good person. Therefore, whatever he does is noble, whether it actually benefits the group or not. He doesn’t have to produce anything concrete; good intentions are more than enough. He senses order in the struggle, whatever the outcome. He also senses order in his group’s suffering because he believes it is noble for The (liberal) Cause. That being said, he sees human suffering as a necessary but temporary condition that should help to magically bring forth a social paradise that finally erases all forms of human suffering.
Curiously, failure is also sensed as order. Failure proves that his enemy is a powerful, diabolical force that deserves stronger, and more sustained, condemnation. In other words, failure only motivates him to stay in the fight to call for more vitriol. Keep in mind that he is backed by people who see him as a kind of savior; “saviors” never fail, only falter for a time, or repair to a more defensive position.
Of course, any plan the liberal, community organizer envisions is the perfect plan; plans not of his vision are necessarily flawed.
His social unit views its community organizer as its last hope. A religious-like faith in him must reject aspects of reality. In other words, the people he’s trying to “save” are living in an imagined reality born of the organizer’s fantasies. Within this imagined reality, the organizer can create crises to invent new targets for his followers to despise.
President Obama spoke to us as if he was America’s superhero fighting corrupt and greedy adversaries. No one but he had the courage and determination to protect America’s helpless citizens from diabolical machinations of conservatives.
Obama’s enemy—every community organizer needs an enemy—is the wealthy.
This is disingenuous because Obama unashamedly cavorts with the wealthy, and is one of them. A common target of a community organizer is a business that promotes free enterprise. He sees it as a runaway manifestation of capitalism, and a seat of financial power not under the control of government. Therefore, it is a dangerous power controlled by an anti-government mind-set—a threat in every sense of the word.
But the community organizer senses true conservatives as his most pernicious enemy, not only because they represent the opposing, political party, he knows they are invulnerable to liberal psychology. Conservative belief in the power of the individual to strike out on his own to invent, create, sacrifice, learn, experiment, and develop one’s potential, is a belief Obama could only disparage, never challenge. Consequently, human instincts to live free must be blamed, shamed, disrespected, condemned, ridiculed, hated, pointed to as politically incorrect or un-American, and denied whenever possible.
What about President Obama’s style of governing as president? In one sense, he didn’t govern; he stood on the sidelines to throw political mud. More to the point: Governing was too risky; it made him responsible and exposed him to criticism. Actually governing documents one’s incompetence, true intentions, and pulls back the mask of the political superhero saving the poor and helpless. Compulsive campaigning temporarily removed him from presidential accountability while maintaining a good standing among his followers; it also regenerated opportunities for reenacting his previous role as community organizer, now as an all-knowing, federal referee stalwartly standing between America’s true believers and their political enemies.
How did he get away with it?
Get away with what? Who’s to know if no one exposes the above? The media won’t; they merely repeated and embellished what Obama said, and demonized anyone who dared criticize.
By standing aloof from politics, and shielded from criticism, Obama was free to shape minds of his followers, and disown mistakes and collateral damage. So removed from the rough and tumble of politics, he came off as a wise authority pontificating to dazzle followers, impress political peers, and threaten detractors.
Obama,
