A couple of weeks ago, in response to yet another question intended to sucker Donald Trump into an answer that the media could turn into more “proof” that he’s a fascist, racist, bigot, homophobe, Islamophobe, sexist … (yawn) … DT once again uttered the obvious, which is a surefire way to bring out the low-information boo birds.
The question was about what he thought would happen if the GOP establishment tried to bring about a brokered convention in Cleveland this summer, to which he responded, “I think you’d have riots.”
“What’s the big deal,” you ask? The big deal is that when Trump says just about anything, the media and their radical-left partners in crime immediately jump on his answer, purposely misinterpret it, rephrase it to fit into their agenda, and worse.
First of all, Trump never said he was calling for riots. Second, he never said, or even implied, that he condoned riots. Third, he never said he was talking about violent riots.
The truth be known, when DT said “I think you’d have riots,” I believe he was, in fact, really trying to tiptoe in an effort to appease his wife and daughter, both of whom have urged him to act “more presidential.” (Like Nixon? Carter? Clinton? Obama?) Believe me, I, and probably millions of other folks like me, are much more explicit about what we believe will happen if Trump is denied the nomination even if he has a clear majority of delegates.
While I am a lifelong advocate of nonviolence and would love to see Cleveland find a way to escape violence during the Republican Convention in July, the overwhelming odds are that there will be rioting — major rioting — and that it will, indeed, be violent. In fact, it would not surprise me if not only were there many serious injuries resulting from any such riots, there could very well be a few deaths. Let’s hope it doesn’t happen, but given that the tactic of choice for the radical left has long been violence, it’s going to be very difficult to prevent.
Unfortunately, any violence will be blamed on Donald Trump, because the radical left does not condone free speech unless such speech is in alignment with its beliefs. That includes tens of millions of Americans who agree with Trump’s views. The truth, of course, is that the people who will be solely responsible for any violence will be those who actually engage in violent behavior.
Whether it’s MoveOn.org, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, or any of the other iterations of communist revolutionaries, they all believe in the fundamentals of the radical left, the most important of which are:
- Lying (e.g., “Hands up, don’t shoot,” just about everything about Benghazi, and “If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it.”).
- Violence (e.g., Baltimore, Ferguson, and the frequent assassinations of police officers).
- Cheating (e.g., massive election fraud, Supreme Court legislation, and illegal executive orders).
- Projection, which is the art of accusing your perceived enemies of being guilty of the very things you yourself are guilty of (e.g., lying, violence, and cheating). Saul Alinsky perfected this clever strategy, taught it to millions of misguided young adults, mostly through his book Rules for Radicals, and proved beyond doubt that it could be made to work.
So it’s not surprising that, with few exceptions, the vast majority of violent protests are organized and carried out by radical-left groups. Though the left loves to employ projection to promote concern over “rightwing extremist groups,” the reality is that violence committed by so-called right-wing extremists is almost non-existent. (A Timothy McVeigh event occurs perhaps once every twenty-five years or so, and even McVeigh was just a mentally disturbed lone wolf.)
The idea of using violence to achieve one’s ends goes all the way back to Marx and Engels, and their belief was brought to life in 1917 by Vladimir Lenin and his sidekick, Leon Trotsky, when they ignited the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.
It’s not a coincidence that every communist revolution in history has been a dismal failure and has destroyed the lives (often through murder) of hundreds of millions of people — from Cuba to the old Soviet Union, from the Eastern European bloc countries to North Korea, from Vietnam to Mao’s China.
In modern times, Barack Obama has carried the mantle of the radical left (a.k.a. “liberal fascism”) by mesmerizing millions of “useful idiots.” Though he was purportedly a strong advocate of violent overthrow of the government during his college days at Occidental College, along the way he decided to adopt the stealth approach to revolution. He even wrote in his own book that when he worked for a newsletter publishing company, he felt like “a spy behind enemy lines.”
To his credit, Obama has been a master at putting the fundamentals of the radical left into practice. Using the Alinsky playbook as his guide, he lies, stirs up violence, cheats, and projects own actions onto his enemies with impunity. And while it’s easy to write off his 2012 reelection to Mitt Romney’s cowardice, lack of principle, and incompetence, the fact is that there are millions of people who actually like what Obama has done to America.
So the question is, if communism does not make people better off (other than the elite who have a monopoly on the use of force), why do millions of folks continue to support radical-left leaders? The short answer is ENVY — pure, unadulterated envy.
It may be hard for the average individual to grasp, but the communist true believer has a childish, simplistic view of the world: There are people who are privileged at the same time that others are poor and suffering, and that’s just not fair. In fact, to the radical leftist, it’s downright evil. That’s right, wealth and success are evil, and the only solution to these perceived evils is that those whom they arbitrarily perceive to be privileged (which, in real-life terms, consists primarily of the middle class) must be punished.
The envy and hatred of the radical left knows no bounds. Its goal is not so much to redistribute wealth as to destroy it. In other words, the focus of liberal fascists is to punish those who, in their view, have “more than they need.”
That’s why so-called conservatives who constantly preach about the importance of compromising with the radical left are naïve, ignorant, and/or unprincipled. In the real world, there is no compromising with members of the radical left, because their goal is to destroy freedom, including and especially free speech and free markets.
The only real solution to the problem is the total destruction of far-left ideology. I’ve said for decades that any group that advocates violating human rights and calls for the enslavement of law-abiding citizens — such as the Communist Party USA — should be outlawed.
No, I do not believe that this view in any way conflicts with my fundamental civil libertarian beliefs. Libertarians believe in freedom for all; communism believes in no freedom for anyone. It’s all about the impossible-to-define “social justice” and the impossible-to-define “common good.”
That said, this coming July, look for the rioting in Cleveland to make the 1968 Chicago riots outside the Democratic National Convention look like a social gathering of nuns by comparison. Worse, the expected rioting and violence in Cleveland will continue unabated in the United States and European countries far beyond the Republican Convention.
People like to joke about Uncle Bernie, but we should never forget that Sanders brought out of the woodwork millions of people who actually want a communist revolution. And, at the same time, Donald Trump has inspired millions of people to join a liberty revolution. Even Mary Poppins would have a difficult time believing there can be a compromise between these two diametrically opposed ideologies.
Short of a violent revolution, the only other way to end the conflict between those who advocate tyranny and those who advocate liberty is a two-state solution. And that would be messy, if not impossible, because it would involve, by necessity, millions of people being uprooted and moved to another state.
So, while I don’t know exactly how it’s all going to play out over the next four or five decades, I can say with a fair degree of certainty that the long-anticipated insurrection is rapidly approaching. Either the radical-left insurrectionists will win and finish the job of fundamentally transforming the United States of America, or liberty-minded counterrevolutionaries will push aside the establishment enablers, crush the radical-left insurrectionists, and restore order to America.
Either way, it won’t be pretty, but you and I may not be around to witness the worst of it. In the meantime, if you love your children, teach them what is happening, what is about to happen, and what has caused us to get to this point. Lacking such understanding, they will be vulnerable to the doublespeak rhetoric of the radical left, because liberty is always dependent upon a moral and knowledgeable populace.