An Immoral Monopoly, Part II

by Sam Huntington

"As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and complete narcissistic moron."

—H.L. Mencken, July 26, 1920

What has evolved in place of American politics today is simply noise pollution, but there is a method to this madness. It is to wear down political opposition and I fear such a ploy could be working. The news media is so biased toward their adoring messiah that fewer Americans even want to hear about what is going on in the world. This reinforces the general lack of understanding among high school and college graduates. Social media technology helps to keep us occupied and focused on ourselves. In time, people tire of the inane chatter, the lies, false accusations, incredible denials, and ultimately, they toss up their hands in disgust. When this happens, as eventually it must, the Marxists will have cemented their second revolution of consequence.

How is this even possible?

When there is only one kind of citizen, there is no marketplace of ideas. We have almost arrived at this juncture today. As a society, we have allowed others to focus all of us more on racial diversity than on nurturing a diversity of ideas. I must ask again, what purpose does this serve and to whose advantage?

I have another observation: Americans today seem incapable of original thought. Our high school and college graduates know less about our world than their parents, which when you think about it, is quite astonishing. High school graduates possess few worthwhile skills. They are fodder for the minimum wage. Colleges and universities require many applicants to enroll in remedial courses as a condition of acceptance. Yet, even in these august centers of higher education, students demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of issues. In a recent street poll on the campus of Ohio State University, one of seven students knew about what happened in Benghazi. Yet, there also seems to be widespread acceptance of Marxist principles because of the methodologies used presenting these ideas to students incapable of thinking for themselves. Two examples of this are the United Nation’s Agenda 21, and the so-called Sustainability Project.

In the United States today, there is no group of people with less intellectual freedom than those who self-identify as politically progressive. It is a self-imposed restriction on our God-given right of the freedom of association. By the way, this word progressive is a euphemism for communist.

Among those on the left, it is a sacrilege to acknowledge that the ideas or notions proposed by anyone who is not a Marxist has any value. It is easy to test this hypothesis: try to have a conversation with anyone on the left about race, homosexual lifestyle, or Islam. It is not long before the so-called progressive begins tossing around disrespectful epithets. Accusing someone of hate speech is so far the easiest way to silence an opponent. The content of our thoughts no long matter when they stand in direct contravention to Marxist ideology.

What happens to the left leaning individual who dares to consider an honestly offered opinion, contrary to the Marxist worldview? The brainwashing continues through ostracism by his or her peers. No one wants separation from his or her colleagues, and so speech is stifled, thinking asphyxiated. It is far easier to go along to get along —and geniuses that we are, hardly anyone realizes the scope of this sacrifice.

Proof of what I have written above exists in the archives of this blog, and at other journals. Observe how the left reacts to anyone who dares to quote a conservative economist, or Ronald Reagan, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, or Star Parker. Mockery ensues, name-calling, profanity … and this is not how to maintain a free society. The American people are being led by the nose to achieve a society in which there is only one acceptable idea, and it is a foreign one. These circumstances bring us to this one conclusion: Marxists are not looking for a free society. They are in a quest to achieve an immoral monopoly in a land that was once a bastion of free ideas.