Doc7505
Diamond Member
- Feb 16, 2016
- 15,709
- 27,658
- 2,430
Why Are We Surprised by Biden’s Speech?
The epitome of the Democrat Party’s totalitarian instincts.
Why Are We Surprised by Biden’s Speech? | Frontpage Mag
The epitome of the Democrat Party’s totalitarian instincts.
www.frontpagemag.com
Last week’s speech by Joe Biden was the epitome of the Democrat Party’s totalitarian instincts. Even the banana-republic staging–– two Marines flanking the president, the lurid blood-red lighting, and a photo of Biden orating with raised fists––evoked the theatrics beloved by dictators. The burden of the speech was the dangerous “semi-fascism” of Donald Trump and his millions of MAGA supporters, which similarly recalled the “enemies of the state” like Jews, “deviationists,” and kulaks that typify autocratic regimes, as do the numerous “big lies” lacing Biden’s rant.
All this has been noted and deservedly criticized by commentators, some of them even on CNN. But the implications that the Dems and Biden have violated some venerable norms of “our democracy” were puzzling. For nearly 60 years the Democrats have been relentlessly moving farther to the Left and adopting its vicious “any means necessary” tactics for acquiring and keeping power. All it needed to reach a wider audience were decades of an educational system corrupted by leftist ideology.
~Snip~
This long Democrat tradition of insult and invective reached its nadir of vicious absurdity with the unprecedented hatred of Donald Trump and his supporters, abetted by corrupted federal agencies like the DOJ and FBI. Biden’s recent speech was the logical conclusion of this long practice by an increasingly left-wing Democrat Party.
Yet it would be a mistake to think that this political assault is a violation of some venerable American tradition of political decorum and norms. From its beginnings in the Revolution, the country has been riven by conflicts among the various factions created by the Colonies’ complex diversity of settlement patterns, faiths, economic interests, customs, and mores.
This diversity has created the divisiveness of America’s “factions” driven by diverse “passions and interests.” Such political behavior, as Madison wrote, is “sown in the nature of man,” a non-negotiable, permanent feature of human identity and behavior
~Snip~
This undermining of the Constitution is more serious than the alleged decline of the “civility” and “decorum” that seldom have existed in our political history. We have traveled a long way down the road to tyranny, as the current assaults on the Bill of Rights, and the encroaching power of federal agencies on civil society and personal autonomy demonstrate–– as do the bungling and willful malfeasance of the Dems’ policies that have weakened every dimension of our existence.
Commentary:
Joe Biden said the quiet part out loud. The Democrats think that they’ve achieved critical mass to spark their revolution. They’re wrong, and there’s more than 70 million voters that think the same. Watch for black shirt enforcers next.
The Progressive DSA Democrat left has been using this type of language to describe conservatives & Republicans for at least a couple of decades.
If you are a conservative and shocked at this, then you live in a conservative bubble.
I suspect Biden’s writers & advisors live in a liberal bubble, which is why they approved this message. They’ve been used to hearing this language for years, so the assumed it was normal.
The question has an answer, but it is being suppressed by our technological oligarchs. Corporations used to compete because their purpose was to make money for the shareholders. That is no longer the standard. The new standard is not the shareholder, but the STAKEHOLDER. Stakeholder capitalism is the new global model in which the entire world has an "interest" in the corporation's activities and profits. Here is an explanation that conforms with the WEF's vision:.
I would prefer to live under a government of rational and objective law. Which means a government which defends individual rights and private property rights. Religion under such a government becomes a private matter, it is not part of government, but neither does the government prohibit or interfere with a religion, unless that religion violates the rights of an individual.
