Tuesday, 9 July 2013

Liberalism True Political Ideology or a Mental Disease?

True Political Ideology or a Mental Disease?

Before we can even start to answer that question we need to understand what Liberalism is. We also need to understand that there is something called “Classic” Liberalism and “Modern” Liberalism

Liberalism as a Political Movement has existed for the past four centuries starting with the Renaissance, defining itself with the French Revolution and culminating in the formation of the United States of America. A common thread throughout the last three centuries preceding our own have been that people were tired with being oppressed and with that in mind they freed themselves either through mediation, emigration and sometimes bloody revolution as was the case with the French Revolution.

The terms “Left” and “Right” has it origins just after the French Revolution when Liberals and Conservative Monarchists battled out the future of France with the liberals seated on the left of the assembly and Conservatives seated on the right. This squabbling and eventual victory of the Left lead to the installation of a megalomaniac little tyrant, with dreams of world domination called Napoleon Bonaparte’. Almost a hundred and fifty years later another little megalomaniac with dreams of world domination started his political career in the Nationalist Socialist party. His name was Adolf Hitler.

Since the USA was formed by the founding fathers to relieve themselves from the oppressing yoke of subjugation of the British Empire it stands to reason that the early arrivals of Dutch and German Protestants and French Huguenots were also acts of liberalism in that they emigrated to escape religious persecution of not only the Roman Catholic Church but also repressive governments. It then logically follows that the wonderful Boers left the Cape Province in the same liberal defiance to British subjugation in 1838 for the Great Trek only to be once more to be the victim of the British Colonial Empire 84 years later.

In the run-up to the World War 1 liberalism was what is now termed “Classic Liberalism” which did not mock the Christian religion, family values, morals, ethics and the belief in hard work but rather abhorred the idea of large intrusive and coercive Governments with everybody allowed a place in the sun.

After World War 1 “Classic” liberalism began to morph into “Modern” liberalism with the economist John Maynard Keyns at the forefront with his theory that free reigning markets are not the answer and that more Government intervention is needed in the economy. During the same time the Russian Revolution took place and Vladimir Lenin and especially Leon Trotsky saw an opportunity in “Modern” Liberalism to further the Communist cause. It is also Leon Trotsky that coined the most over-used word in the world – racist. A word that has become the ad hominem of choice for all liberals.  Leon Trotsky whose views were so extreme that his comrades in arms from the Russian Revolution murdered him

At this point I should interject Cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxism is an offshoot of Western Marxism which itself is another variation of Marxism as preached by Marx and Engels. At its core is the subversion of Western institutions like schools, universities, media, entertainment industry, family values, cultural heritage and religion - specifically Western religion that by definition is Christianity

Liberalism had by the 1960’s become infected with Socialist ideology with ever growing governments, government interference into day-to-day life and a growing entitlement class. Cultural Marxism began to subtly manifest itself in the early 1970’s but by the 1990’s it was firmly entrenched in the hearts and minds of the liberally inclined.  With this Cultural Marxist monkey on the back the next step was a logical one and one that we abhor in totality – Political Correctness. Political Correctness has its roots in the 1990’s UK liberal scene and has subsequently spread like wildfire throughout the world. Even Conservatives bow down to the might of PC or run the risk of being labeled some type of hatemonger in the form of homophobe, Islamophobe et al. Being labeled a racist, bigot or right wing extremist seems to be a damning accusation. Even being Conservative means that in the PC world you are a right wing lunatic – such is the indoctrination that Cultural Marxism and its tool, Political Correctness, has heaped upon the world

Today we see the destructive influence of Keynsian theory of economics as well as the poisonous and corrosive influence that Socialism and Cultural Marxism has had on the world. The United Kingdom can best be described as a “Nanny State” with an ever-growing entitlement culture, the USA in a state of crisis with itself and most of the Nordic countries trying to survive in a tidal wave of foreign immigrants. Islamists and African refugees are flooding the West demanding the West conform to their culture and religion and liberals stand at the front preaching Multi-culturism. The problem for liberals is that multi-culturism is not a one-way street as they so dearly proclaim from their soapboxes. When in Rome…

So it comes as no surprise that there is a backlash from the likes of the EDL, UKIP, Front Nationale, Mouvement souverainiste du Québec, the Tea Party, Australian Protectionist Party and Partij voor de Vrijheid

Liberalism used to be a valid political ideology but no more. It is now a stain upon the soul of man with Totalitarian control at its center.

So the question remains – is liberalism a mental disease? Is it purely a neurosis or is there a deep-seated mental deficiency that makes the liberally inclined want to give up control of its own destinies to be coddled, like a child, by a protective benevolent government? They certainly seem to jump at every opportunity to commit racial and cultural hara-kiri and encourage, no force, people around them to do the same.

Liberalism is not a simple neurosis although the projection of their white-guilt may lead one to think that it is. No, it is more complicated than just a white person feeling guilty about his heritage and how he got to his or her station in life through the actions of his ancestors. Liberals ignore the first rule of nature – only the strong survive and instead opt to artificially manipulate society.

Various leading psychiatrists support my point of view. Doctor Lyle A Rossiter (Jnr) MD, a veteran psychiatrist with 35 years experience and no known ties or ideologies that can even remotely be construed as Conservative or right wing. With a track record of treating 1 500 patients during his career he wrote a book in 2008 entitled “The Psychological Causes of Political Madness” in which he states:  “Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded,” …“Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.”… “A social scientist that understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do,” he says. “A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation’s citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do.”

Doctor Adam Savage, a well-known radio commentator syndicated to 350 radio stations in the USA, actually wrote a book in 2005 called “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder”. He is also the author of numerous other titles dealing with psychological disorders. He identified certain instances that support his prognosis and which have in the interim been proven correct by the Occupy movement and the hysterics of the Democrats during last year’s Presidential election in the USA.
Expecting constant praise and admiration
Being overly jealous of others’ achievements
Expecting (no demanding) that others follow ideological plans
Setting unrealistic goals
A sense of entitlement
Trouble maintaining healthy relationships
All of these symptoms seem to define an individual who is unable to express their frustration in a rational manner – like liberals do. The Mayo Clinic stated it best: “In order to make yourself feel better, you may react with rage or contempt and efforts to belittle the other person to make yourself appear better.”

In his book Doctor Savage ultimately identifies NDP as the cause of liberalism. ND whaaaat? you may well ask. NDP is an acronym for Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

Wikipedia contains the following easy to understand explanation on NDP: “Although individuals with NPD are often ambitious and capable, the inability to tolerate setbacks, disagreements or criticism, along with lack of empathy, make it difficult for such individuals to work cooperatively with others or to maintain long-term professional achievements. With narcissistic personality disorder, the individual's self-perceived fantastic grandiosity, often coupled with a hypomanic mood, is typically not commensurate with his or her real accomplishments. “.

Enter the Dunning-Kruger effect. “Dunning and Kruger noted earlier studies suggesting that ignorance of standards of performance is behind a great deal of incompetence. This pattern was seen in studies of skills as diverse as reading comprehension, operating a motor vehicle, and playing chess or tennis.
Dunning and Kruger proposed that, for a given skill, incompetent people will:
tend to overestimate their own level of skill;
fail to recognize genuine skill in others;
fail to recognize the extremity of their inadequacy;
recognize and acknowledge their own previous lack of skill, if they are exposed to training for that skill.

But that is not the end for NDP. “Psychiatrist Glen Gabbard suggested NPD could be broken down into two subtypes. He saw the "oblivious" subtype as being grandiose, arrogant, and thick-skinned and the "hypervigilant" subtype as being easily hurt, oversensitive, and ashamed. In his view, the oblivious subtype presents for admiration, envy, and appreciation of a powerful, grandiose self that is the antithesis of a weak internalized self, which hides in shame, while the hypervigilant subtype neutralizes devaluation by seeing others as unjust abusers. “

So it seems that liberalism is a mental disease and one that has taken on pandemic proportions.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.