An excerpt from Richard Mgrdechian's book, revealing how liberals' strategy is to promote and exploit divisiveness.
Let's face it, when you get right down to it, all of liberalism is fueled by a singular strategy-a strategy which has been continually perfected and relentlessly executed over the past forty years. That strategy is to promote and exploit divisiveness.
Everything liberal politicians do is based on this simple principle. Tell the people that are given to hating the most, that they are the ones who are hated. Tell the people who expect the most, that they deserve more. Tell blacks to hate whites. Tell women to hate men. Tell the lazy to hate the motivated. Tell the poor that only conservatives are rich, and then be sure to tell them to hate them for it.
Class warfare, race baiting, name calling and man-hating-all with a singular goal: to get themselves in power by promoting and exploiting divisiveness. Of course, once this divisiveness turns into frenzy, these same people suddenly act as if they actually want to solve a problem that didn't even exist before they did everything they possibly could to create it.
To liberals, every issue, every situation is an opportunity to divide. History, religion, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the death of a soldier, a political debate, the hurricane which devastated New Orleans. Every tragedy exploited to divide. Every victory belittled to divide. Every incident, every word, every distorted statistic, every holiday-you name it, they will find some way to divide it.
Unfortunately, it's not just the politicians who promote and exploit divisiveness; it is the people as well. Malcontents, jealous of anyone with any sort of success, come up with any way they can to attack those who are more successful then they are. Someone is rich only because they stole something from them. Certain groups are more successful only because they took advantage of them. Work has nothing to do with it. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Planning ahead has nothing to do with it. Even luck has nothing to do with it.
And what do these kinds of people view as the solution to this imaginary injustice? Why special rights, privileges and opportunities for themselves, of course. Level the playing field. Get something for nothing. Take from the rich, the white, the male dominated, homophobic society that has already given them everything. Take what they have, what they built, what they earned-whether it be money, property, liberty or opportunity-and find some way, some justification, some cause or some guise to redistribute it to the people who have done nothing to earn it. To people who refuse to compete on merit. To people who insist on taking more out of society than what they put in to it. To people who don't give a damn that their inclusion comes only at the expense of someone else's exclusion. The strategy is simple, really-promote divisiveness and then exploit it for your own benefit.
Liberals should thank God every day for differences between people because without them, liberalism would be dead in the water. Without them, the country might have some stability. Without them, it might have a chance to survive. Without them, the problems between those who want and those who have might actually be manageable in some meaningful or productive way. But differences have given liberals the perfect opportunity to stop any rational discussion dead in its tracks. Differences have led to polarization. Differences have led to countries within a country. Differences have led to the dreaded xist-ism-monger-phobia. Differences have allowed liberals to add any of these four sounds to the end of any word they choose, virtually guaranteeing that they can get away with anything they want.
Worse yet, liberals actually have the nerve to turn around and endlessly accuse conservatives of divisiveness. To them, conservatives- who believe everyone should be held to the same standards-are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives-who believe everyone should have the same rights regardless of the guises used to justify different ones for different people-are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives-who sacrifice their time, money, careers and often their lives to defend the true meaning of freedom and liberty-are somehow divisive.
But the reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who are trying to make some contribution to our society. The reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who expect others to at least try to do the same. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something out of a society far beyond what they are willing to put back in. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something for nothing.







































Richard mentioned the dreaded; “Xist-ism-monger-phobia,” but forgot the latest one, the “ers”. The boaters, birthers and deathers,
The birthers are those tin foil hat wearing right-wingers that insist that Barack Obama should produce a birth certificate. Never mind that we all have one in a fire-proof box at home or in the safety deposit box at a bank. Never mind that we have to produce one to get a passport, a driver’s license, or to eventually draw Social Security. Just like those nasty Swift boaters in 2004 that ‘demanded’, of all the unreasonable things, to see a copy of John Kerry’s service record; these nut case conservatives are irrationally placing pressure on the current regime out of nothing more than racist jealousy.
And as if that wasn’t enough! There’s those damn deathers! Those that believe that there is convoluted legal language tucked away in the health care bill that would cause an appointed committee to utilize a ‘cost benefit calculation’ to a senior citizen’s proposed treatment! Why, everyone knows that the Obamassiah holds all seniors in such high esteem that he would never allow anything of the kind to ever happen! It doesn’t matter that the Chief-of-Staff’s brother, who is a doctor, recommends exactly such a calculation be applied: Trust us! Who are you going to believe; 50 million concerned citizens who actually took the time to read the bill, or the official flag talking points? Either be a good progressive and always wear your blinders and your earplugs, or join the ranks of the Nazi terrorists in this country who question the thought process of The One.
To be fair; most Liberals aren’t divisive demagogues they just like the cheap “empowerment” such types provide. Instead of providing anything of social value, these empowered masses simply capitalize on the fissures of social discontent and feeling more valuable by comparison. What do you get when you empower an idiot? A powerful idiot.
In the social competition for a personal sense of meaningfulness, Liberals consistently take the low ground. This is made even more convenient by the host of obsolete, 1-dimensional cliches they continually employ to demonize non-Liberals.
I look forward to reading this book, it appears to address important social tendencies that need better understanding.
The liberal, for all his handwringing about social justice and the “injustice of it all,” bases his political architecture on “covetousness.” And beneath all of this “envy of the eyes” lies the primal bitch: Dissatisfaction with the Lord of the Universe for their own particular grievance. At the root of political philosophy lies the predisposition for thankfulness towards a half of a glass of milk or a dark murmuring for the remainder of the cup. Understand these inclinations and you begin to understand the Polis and the human heart.
The big mystery is that people say they want equality, but they really don’t. They go to college and work hard to buy a bigger car, a bigger house, etc. to outdo the Joneses.
One thing that might explain the unhappiness with the status quo is what Alexis de Toqueville observed: “When inequality of conditions is the common law of society, the most marked inequalities do not strike the eye; when everything is nearly on the same level, the slightest are marked enough to hurt it. Hence the desire of equality always becomes more insatiable in proportion as equality is more complete.”
Auster put it similarly: “The more equal society becomes, the more unbearable and unjust seem the remaining differences.”
[...] This post was Twitted by IC_politics [...]