Tip Jar

2/11/2018

The media's love affair with dictators (Part Two)


(Part One)
It is difficult for people who believe in a nation founded on the principle of individual liberty and an antipathy towards government intrusions into citizen's lives to grasp the media's love affair with dictatorships. 

There is however a very simple explanation for it and it is rooted in the "progressive" philosophy of governance which has been at its core from the beginning. A philosophy that is well ingrained in the media complex of the Western world.

 From the Center For American Progress (emphasis added)
Progressives argued that rigid adherence to past versions of limited government had to be discarded in order to promote genuine liberty and opportunity for people at a time of concentrated economic power. Progressives challenged excessive individualism in social thought and politics, promoted an alternative to laissez-faire economics, and replaced constitutional formalism with a more responsive legal order that expanded American democracy and superseded the economic status quo with a stronger national framework of regulations and social reforms.
Without getting to far astray from the subject at hand, to put it bluntly the "progressive movement" has not progressed with the times. Although many of their concerns were valid at the inception of the Progressive Era, actual real world progress has passed them by.

Corporations, as an example, are now far more responsive to both their customers and employees than in the distant past. Market forces were as much responsible for that change as any efforts brought forth by the Progressive Movement.

Note however that the Progressive philosophy as outlined above by CFAP requires that an outlook of limited government be replaced by a more monolithic, centralized and controlling governmental structure.

The great divide comes when certain malcontents do not want to be controlled by a government dictating their life's journey.

Throughout progressive literature is an inordinate reliance on the term "common good." The common good is a necessary principle to maintain a functioning society. But the common good should be determined by common sense not by the dictates of a privileged minority. A self selected few who set themselves up as the arbiters of what is societies "common good".

Go back to what I have highlighted about what progressives goals are from their own words:

  limited government ha(s) to be discarded, challenge excessive individualism in social thought and politics, supersede the economic status quo with a stronger national framework of regulations and social reforms. 

What they are saying and have been saying for generations is that American society  based on limited government must be replaced. Replaced by a governance that seeks more control over society. Control where restrictions on individual freedom of thought and political beliefs is justified.  To do so use a NATIONAL framework of regulations (not necessarily laws) to bring about their desired economic and social  reforms.

That is so far removed from the ideals as expressed by our founding as to be abhorrent. This is dictatorship, perhaps a dictatorship in the hands of a elite corps of regulators and like minded technocrats and politicians, but a dictatorship none the less. A form of government  as opposed to individual freedom as any despot would hope to control.

In fact what is described by progressives in their own words is far closer to fascism than democracy. Control over the economy and society by a central power. The Hunger Games made real.

Consider the outcry of the media over Trump's attacks on it as an institution. They claim some moral and constitutional high ground that neither the Constitution or common sense provides them.

Where is it written or even believed that any institution is free from being criticized? Only those with a penchant towards totalitarianism believe that they are "above" scrutiny and criticism.

The vast media complex which so desperately attempts to dictate what we hear and know is no better than censors. A cabal of like minded individuals seeking to hold onto control of their power. The power to inform or more often than not, to not inform, the public. The public they self righteously claim to serve.

"All the news that is fit to print" is a motto that takes on new meaning with the advent of the progressive media propaganda machine. We will tell you what you need to hear.

When you believe that power should be wheeled by a centralized few, an elite few, then it is easy to see how they could admire those who wheel such power.

It is really rather simple. If your primary political philosophy is based upon the belief in a monolithic central government, then dictators are closer to your core beliefs than any concept of individual freedom and true democratic ideals where the people rule.

We the People is just a quaint idea to be morphed into a "common good" talking point in order to placate the less enlightened masses.

This arrogant mindset is ingrained into the media of the left, the majority, which would rather impress their peers than truly inform their consumers.

The sad truth is, in order to truly inform the public, they would be in danger of informing themselves.

To truly understand the American experience for the greatness that it is, is to set themselves apart from the cocoon of "enlightenment" that they have created for themselves.

It is far easier to see and admire the false glory of a despot than the true glory of a free society. Built not on the some bastardized "common good" but on individual freedom.

No comments:

Post a Comment