Quickies: Tying It All Together

     Now and then, a succession of articles will come my way that exposes Leftist economics as a highly odoriferous whole:

• First, there’s this citation of a Bernie Sanders statement;
• Second, please view this brief video;
• Third, take note of this analysis;

     As a coda of sorts, view this brief video about an egregious abuse of power.

     The Left’s attitude is founded on the hatred of individual rights, with particular emphasis on private property rights and all that goes along with them. Such rights stand in the way of addressing “social problems” with the power of the State. Sanders hates private charities because they’re private. He strives to condemn charity per se, but is a bit too bashful to pull it off. So he falls back on the old canard of “government responsibility for social programs.” However, that “responsibility” has no inherent limit; thus, as William Voegeli demonstrates, the Left will recognize no limits to the State.

     Jonah Goldberg’s comments on the “rectification of names” (Confucius) cuts to the heart of the babbling, self-aggrandizing crap today styled as “political rhetoric:”

     The disconnect between names and the named becomes most pronounced in totalitarian societies where words become weapons of the State. When language ceases to be a tool for labeling reality and higher truths and becomes one for upholding the agenda of a regime, the society rots and invites revolt. Try as they might, tyrants rarely have much success at persuading miserable people they are happy or hungry people they are full. As a result, regimes feel required to tighten their grip on society even more. Use of the wrong word — or the right word the wrong way — becomes ever more damning evidence of disloyalty or treason. And you know what? The tyrants are right: It is disloyalty and treason to an evil regime to accurately tell the truth.

     And so it is with the innumerable conditions left-liberals yearn to have labeled “social problems.”

     Finally, consider the video about the South Carolina councilman who didn’t want to endure questions from the citizenry. People were near to calling things by their right names. Truth might have been about to happen. He had to prevent that at all costs. The invocation of police power was essential.

     Note in closing that the typical left-liberal doesn't feel personally responsible for “solving” any of the “social problems” he rants about. He bases his conviction of moral superiority on the way he votes and nothing else. It's a neat way to claim credit for “good intentions” while distancing himself from actual labor and (of course) from any responsibility for the consequences.