PART I: “I’m Tired of American Tyranny; Let’s All Become Communist Chinese!”
There has been something fundamentally wrong with the American people for years. And perhaps it is this fundamental wrongness that has led a great deal of the American people to support a person who says he is tired of the American police state even as he advocates communist China as a place of freedom.
|Image from Wikimedia Commons|
And while on the one hand I believe that Edward Snowden should be prosecuted for breaking the law, I also believe that the American people have so thoroughly embraced immorality that perhaps I don’t care if he gets away with what he did. Perhaps this is just the latest step of an immoral American people embracing their own destruction and I should stay out of it.
Maybe I’m wrong, maybe I’m not. I’ll expand on this in later parts but for now I will address the PRISM leak from the standpoint that there is still hope for this once great nation. And from this standpoint, I will challenge those who are not full leftists on thinking about their support for Snowden and what he did.
Rand Paul is among those who are outraged over a program (of which we don’t know the full details) that was leaked by a leftist with an agenda. (And make no mistake about it, libertarians are stealth leftists).
And Paul and others are outraged enough about PRISM to throw around words like “treason,” “unconstitutional,” “tyranny,” and “revolution.”
At the same time, Rand Paul wants to let illegal aliens stay in the U.S. (CNSNews.com Headline: “Rand Paul to Illegals: ‘We Will Find a Place for You;’ Envisions 12 Million ‘New Taxpayers’”) And again, he is not alone in this thinking.
And since we are using words such as “treason,” “unconstitutional,” “tyranny,” and “revolution” with regards to PRISM, let us also use such blunts words for everything else.
In truth, the term “illegal alien” does not accurately describe those who have illicitly entered the nation. “Illegal aliens” must now be called what they truly are: invaders and occupiers of the U.S., largely from Mexico. Thus, Mexico is waging a war on the U.S. And so “illegal aliens” should now be identified as an “enemy invading force.”
And with this established, the public needs to answer why it is outraged over PRISM—a program of which it doesn’t know the full details and which may or may not have violated rights—while at the same time it is not expressing an equivalent amount outrage over the invasion, occupation, and takeover of the U.S. by an enemy invading force which is doing so in the open before everyone’s eyes and with the complete approval and assistance of the government, our officials, talking heads, and nearly every other public figure—all in direct violation of the Constitution which is supposed to protect me from having my nation surrendered to an enemy.
The failure in logic is astounding and disgusting.
Even worse, there are other examples of brazen lawlessness being done in the open for which the public lacks an equivalent level of outrage.
Don’t get me wrong. If people want to be outraged over PRISM, that’s fine. But rules and logic need to be applied evenly and to everyone.
So where is the outrage over abortion? It doesn’t get any more unconstitutional than to deny someone his right to life. People should be up in arms—literally—over the slaughter of millions of babies.
“But not everyone agrees with your definition of abortion being murder,” you say. And herein is the problem. The self-righteous who believe things such as PRISM being proof of tyranny (or that killing people in war is murder and a war crime) deny that abortion is murder (or they say that it is merely a differing political belief of the so-called honorable opposition).
I reject their premise. In fact, I reject every premise they set. I don’t have anything in common with more and more people each day.
But, again, let’s forget about such immorality for now and go with the idea that PRISM is tyranny. People still might want to rethink declaring solidarity with Snowden and the leftists behind him. Like I mentioned early on, there is something fundamentally wrong with saying, “I’m tired of tyranny in America! Let’s all become communist Chinese!”?
(Then again, perhaps we are beyond the point of talking people out of this. After all, we already have communism in America, so why not take the next step and surrender to the communist Chinese?)
I’m not alone in thinking it odd that those who are right-of-being-a-full-leftist are praising Snowden.
Daniel Greenfield spoke directly to the issue when he wrote, “You Can’t Outleft the Left,” at FrontPage Magazine.
Communism was finally defeated by adopting its program. The national battle against a Russian Communist empire was won while the domestic struggle against the left was lost. . . .
The liberal Republican prescription is still to Outleft the left, adopting some of its more popular ideas and social policies in a more sensible fashion. And they have never understood that the strategy, even when it succeeds in the short term, is doomed. You don’t win by making your enemy stronger. The left understands that. That is why it’s [sic] strategies once in power involve deepening and expanding its institutional power while destroying those of the right. . . .
Allying with the far left against the left on national security can be as tempting for some libertarians as bending on social welfare and amnesty is for some liberal Republicans. But it’s equally a dead end. . . .
A conservative case on any issue does not rely on the likes of Glenn Greenwald for support. If what we truly fear is the tyranny of the left, then what possible good can come from empowering the far left?
That’s not allying with Stalin against Hitler, it’s allying with Stalin against the Socialists.”And Diana West hints at something similar throughout American Betrayal (St. Martin’s Press, 2013). But she goes further than Greenfield as she documents how even siding with Stalin (a leftist regime) against Hitler during World War II may not have been as good for the U.S. as we have been led to believe.
Here is one example as she writes on how Hollywood and the publishing industry willingly engaged in censoring anything negative about communism in order to help the World War II alliance with the Soviet Union (emphasis mine):
Did these appalling acts of censorship serve the “greater good”—namely, the wartime alliance with USSR to defeat Hitler? That’s the consensus, but I reject it. Why? The effect, intended by all too many, was to harness the evil of Hitler to deny the evil of Stalin. In the end, it was a big, fat load of this “greater good” argument that strengthened and perpetuated a greater evil—the USSR, the true victor of World War II due in large part to the successful campaign in the West to whitewash Communist crime and to coddle Communist criminals (91).So is allying with leftists against PRISM really a good idea or does it in the long-term advance the leftist agenda?
But if you’re still not convinced that allying with leftists is a bad idea, ask yourself some questions. How many times has the Department of Defense (of which the NSA is a part) been shrunk and grown? (And has “growth” ever actually been growth or just a slight uptick that reversed previous reduction but never returned the size to previous levels?)
And then how many other government agencies have ever been shrunk (much less eliminated)? And how many other government agencies is it normal to talk about reducing and cutting manpower as is regularly done with the Department of Defense? (Side note: If using the term “illegal alien” is demeaning, and if petitioning for smaller government is “demonizing” federal workers, why is it acceptable to talk about U.S. troops using language such as this?)
It appears that shrinking the DOD while always expanding the rest of the government—particularly the welfare state—is now a given for all, left and right. And this has always been what the communists have wanted.
Again, Diana West somewhat touches on this in American Betrayal.
As Dunn explains it, the convergence theory “held that Soviet Russia and the United States were on convergent paths, where the United States was moving from laissez-faire capitalism to welfare state socialism and the Soviet Union was evolving from totalitarianism to social democracy”. . . .
That is, there’s no “convergence” if only one side is doing all the converging; that’s capitulation—and, going forward, appeasement (192).The Soviet Union doesn’t exist today but communist China does. What has happened to China over the past two decades with regards to the above quote? And what has happened to the U.S. with regards to the same quote?
And why are The Socialist Worker and CPUSA supporting Edward Snowden?
So do those who are right-of-left really want to throw their support behind Snowden and his leftist backers? Is the PRISM leak a place where we all can find “common ground” or is something more going on? (Furthermore, will those who are demanding the U.S. government open up the IC to public scrutiny also going to demand the same of the rest of the government?)
I said it before and I’ll say it again, there is a lot of stuff that needs declassified and brought into the open. But what Snowden did is illegal. And the communist and leftist support of him is particularly troubling. Do people who are right-of-left really want to hitch their wagons to him? I don’t know. But if they do and thus agree with the left that law no longer matters, then you will realize why I titled this series the way I did.
Next Up: The importance of viewing the left as an enemy and how destroying the NSA could empower the true surveillance state.