Saturday, May 24, 2008

Whoops! The Mask of Liberalism Slipped

Maxine Waters is now in the motivational territory of Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot, Mao and any other petty dictator that I've missed, including your wife, husband, boss or children if they slap you around. They love forcing people. They love having the invincible upper hand. They live for it and become it as the sin qua non of dominance. Thank God she didn't have a gun right there, although I would have loved seeing a more graphic demonstration of this principle lest anyone missed it.

Isn't Maxine a sweet thing? That, my friend, is the face of evil. Take a good look. Whenever there is no shortage of the natural resource, oil, and the oilmen want nothing more than to produce it for the use of people; and you have a government which has regulated its production out of existence and then blames it on the oilman, you are seeing an injustice so huge that it is incomprehensible by its sheer defiance of reality. Maxine has found the ultimate way of not being responsible and thereby loses access to her humanity, namely her hold on reality. That is known by another name - monster.

In that moment, she was the killer in "No Country for Old Men" except she was not as cold and ruthless. NOT YET. She was, though, the Caesar who loved seeing the gladiators eaten by the lion. The source of this is one thing - hatred for the aspirations, achievements and knowledge of reality of individual human beings. (I would bet she likes the collective words: people, American people, humanity, the public.) And don't fool yourself by thinking that she was that only in that moment. For Maxine, this is a basic premise. (Ditto Hillary: "I am going to take those profits", i.e., I am going to enslave you to my will, justified, of course, by the "public good.")

Atlas Shrugged dramatizes what the government counts on as their policies remove creativity and motivation (all individual) from American life: "You will think of something, Mr. Rearden." In other words, we won't let you create but, of course, we know you will. The Government didn't have the last word in the novel and since Rand showed the world the lie their pretensions rely on, they don't have it now. In the novel, the businessmen withdrew their creativity, their productivity and their spreading their ability to know reality. They shrugged.

If you notice, the CEO of Shell said, in so many words, "The Government's policies are harming the American people." This is a great thing to say because it neutralizes the politicians where they live. They justify their anti-man use of force by the "good they are doing for the American people."

Although the businessman made progress here, it is not the final moral mountain to climb to secure our and his freedom. The justification that what you do is "good for people or contributes to people" is not the point. Why? Because human life does not fundamentally depend on this fact. What it does depend on is your knowledge of reality and your ability to produce the values on which your life depends. People find other people of enormous value for all kinds of reasons, so that is not the issue nor the problem. Essentially man's mind must be free from the forced interference of other men. Why? Because an individual's mind does not work by force. No one can force a man to think. Force, when it comes to creation of values is impotent which is why Maxine Waters would be immensely laughable if it weren't for the fact that a seriously increasing number of people agree with her.

"I ORDER you to create a symphony! If you don't, I will fine you or throw you in prison. If you make me look bad before the public, I may kill you!" This sounds frightfully like that institution we gave up once - at the end of the Civil War.


Kulero said...

Indeed, Ms. Waters shows the true colors of the Democrats' creed. Good post, Principlex, but there is one thing with which I disagree: the lumping of "your wife, husband, boss or children if they slap you around" in with "any other petty dictator." There is an essential distinction which is crucial.

Abusers lack any backing of law and are subject to legal punishment when discovered. Their upper hand is therefore not invincible. The petty dictators (like Ms. Waters if she gets her way) slap us around using the law and with the (apparent) moral sanction that goes with the law. We must never blur this distinction.

That aside, thank you for bringing to light the evil socialistic tendencies of Ms. Waters and her ilk.

principlex said...

Thanks for your post. I agree with you completely.

In retrospect, what I was attempting to do was bring "home" the abstraction of government force to daily life. I experienced Ms. Waters as someone next to me treating me that way. In other words, I take the manner in which she is disrespecting the the oil industry CEOs the same as I would if she were in my house talking to me that way. Needless to say, she would have to go!

One thing I didn't think of at the time, although my anger was strong enough, is that since she is threatening the initiation of force the oil CEOs should have called in security to take her away, They would have every right to respond in kind, would they not?

Kulero said...

That last is a GREAT point. "Security! Congresswoman Waters just threatened before all these witnesses to steal our property unless we bend to her will. Arrest her for extortion!"

I like your imagery, but amended as follows. Not only is she in your house disrespecting you, a group of armed police stand behind her with guns drawn on you, and your house is surrounded by SWAT. !-)