Sunday, June 28, 2009

Note To Readers on Format Change

Read more!

I recently added the "Read More" feature to this blog. The changes do not apply to former postings, but in future you will see a lead paragraph or so and then be able to jump to the full article if you choose. That should tidy up the main page a bit.

Suicide by Government: The Obama-Kavorkian Connection

Read more!

Most readers will remember that Dr. Jack Kavorkian came to public notice because he was overtly engaged in the medical specialty of euthanasia. His clients, who were terminally ill and/or in constant, unbearable pain, engaged him to hasten their demise in a quick and humane manner. The courts ruled that his activity was illegal and ordered him to desist. He did not, and he was consequently imprisoned.

Mr. Obama and his party are similarly engaged, but with multiple “clients” – the American polity. Similarly, the plurality of that polity has entered a contract with government to assist them in the matter of assisted suicide. This analogy is sound but limited. When we broaden our examination we find notable differences between Dr. Kavorkian and the Obama government.
First, the polity is reasonably healthy and without severe pain. Second, the manner of death will be neither humane nor quick. Third, and most importantly, there is the matter of informed consent. Dr. Kavorkian, to his great credit, was careful in the extreme to ensure that those under his care (and their families) were perfectly informed regarding alternatives to suicide, and what could be expected in the final moments if they opted for death. And finally, the government will not be subject to prosecution.

We have proceeded from analogy to metaphor. Now, let us consider facts.
Security – economic, political and existential – has and continues to be aggressively undermined. We begin with economic security. The conceit of piety rather than the care of probity drives policies that are certain to weaken or destroy the economy. The wanton spending and printing money in the name of a litany of Utopian purposes seizes money from those who have earned it and distributes it among those who are content to live on government largesse in lieu of honest labor. Under current economic policy America is destined to become a third-world nation – Obamastan, if you like. Despite the stated intention of narrowing the gap between rich and poor, that gap will remain. But it will now be between a ruling bureaucratic aristocracy, on the one hand, and everyone else on the other. Worse than the loss of wealth will be the continuing and accelerating usurpation on personal liberty. Once liberty is surrendered the state will become totalitarian and ultimately murderous. (1)

In the matter of defense diplomatic and military decisions are being taken that make America appear weak in the eyes of our enemies. A posture of appeasement invites challenge from other nations on fronts military, political and economic. The most immediate threat, Islam (2), seems to have escaped this administration's notice; or, perhaps, they seek the comfort of denial. In either case failure to confront aggression in the Middle East serves only to encourage it. (3)

Voting for the services of Dr. Obama seems to have been unwise.

(1) The reader may ask if I am not taking an eschatological view of the world. I would reply that one has only to glance over his shoulder at recent history to note the appalling number of deaths in totalitarian (esp. Socialist/Communist) states. Excluding Nazi Germany, a million times 149.

(2) I use 'Islam' rather than the PC circumlocutions such as, 'Islamist', 'Militant Islam', etc. Diana West has a good article on the matter of corrupted language and the assertion of the right to free speech.

(3) It is vital that we recognize that Islam, in particular, is the natural and enduring enemy of liberty and democratic forms of government that flow from it and – ideally – support it. Where Islam does not threaten violence, it is corrosive to representative government (as we see clearly in Western Europe and increasingly in America).

Friday, June 19, 2009

Strange Affinities (updated 7/16/2009)

Read more!

Persons or groups of persons sometimes ally themselves with others who have historically mistreated them. I have two examples in mind -- the Jewry's affinity for liberalism and the blacks' for Islam. I have been puzzled and perplexed for a long time as to why so many Jews ally themselves with the left. In the 20th Century (and perhaps before) it is the left that has visited the very worst devastation upon them. And it is ironic that Jews have been prominent in the early stages of evil and totalitarian regimes, i.e., Soviet and German styles of fascism. Those very regimes, once they achieved power, systematically set about purging, killing and imprisoning Jews.
As to the blacks and Islam, I'll treat with that subject in a later posting.

For readers interested in the question posed I recommend three interesting articles. The first, European Left Is More Dangerous for Jews than the European Right, by Soeren Kern at Brussels Journal points to the fact that European Jews a militantly anti-right, while it is the left who are virulently anti-Semitic. To all appearances there is some form of cognitive dissonance --denial -- at work; a failure to recognize the world as it is.
The next two articles were posted at Gates of Vienna.
The second article, Road Rage: Ode to Madness for Politically Incorrect Russian-Jewish Choir, by Lev Lakritz is a lighthearted lament. A Soviet emigre in the 70's, newly-arrived in America, recognizes that the left is his enemy, but drops his guard against liberalism. The result is that -- over the years -- public schools and university have indoctrinated his children in ways similar to those used by the Soviets in earlier generations. Mr. Lakritz' article is entertaining and instructive, but a number of readers took him to task for implied elitism and glib generalizations. The comments may be as instructive as the article.
The last article, Critique of the Culture of Kevin MacDonald, by Takuan Seiyo is more scholarly, and it covers just about all the ground regarding the Jewry's attraction to the left. When you've read it some questions may remain, but you'll know the ground.

Two links added to update this post: See Abraham M. Miller, PJM, and this by Lauri B Regan at American Thinker on Alan Dershowitz.