- WND - http://www.wnd.com -
Socialism vs. closet socialism – can we do better?
Posted By Alan Keyes On 04/26/2012 @ 7:41 pm In Commentary,Opinion | No Comments
“La Commedia è finita!” So says the cuckold in the tragic Italian opera. The farce is ended. But for conservatives betrayed by the GOP’s crypto-socialist elite, the final act of the tragedy has just begun.
With his contrived “sweep” of the northeastern GOP primaries this week, we are supposed to believe that Mitt Romney has earned the status of “presumptive nominee” the elite faction’s propagandists have ascribed to him for the past several weeks. In fact he has all along been the nominee of the presumptuous elitists in control of the GOP. As I predicted, and as any fool should have expected, his mannequin opponents have dropped away on cue. Like all good window dressing, they were meant to attract people to the GOP storefront, giving the impression of a nice variety of goods on sale inside. But true to the bait-and-switch politics that now characterizes the GOP, only the elitists’ party line was in fact available all along.
Over the course of the past several years, I have written a slew of articles here and on my blog about the twin-party sham that leaves America’s voters with no choice that does not advance the socialist ideology now prevalent among America’s self-worshiping elites. (I have collected a number of these articles in the series “Without Representation,” available at my blog.)
Discussing the GOP fiasco in New York’s 23rd Congressional District back in 2009, I pointed out that, as part of the GOP’s assigned task in this electoral sham “every opportunity must be used to insert ‘moderates’ [i.e., closet socialists] into positions of influence who (like the control rods in a nuclear reactor) will absorb and channel conservative political energy to produce a controlled reaction that results in sustained political power for the … elite. The label ‘moderate’ … doesn’t refer to candidates’ political views. … It refers to their political effect.”
Because of this strategic purpose, the GOP’s crypto-socialist party bosses see states and districts that are politically “safe” because of their strongly conservative electorate as opportunities to promote and ensconce crypto-socialist politicians (i.e., those who talk right at election time, but walk left once elected.) Right now they are counting on the fact that Obama’s offensive push for socialism has roused America’s conservative instincts enough to turn the whole nation into such a “safe” district. They are purposely using this opportunity to advance a proven crypto-socialist (Mitt Romney) toward the presidency.
If there were any respect left for the American founders’ view that politics is about representation, this situation could lead to a process that at the very least offers people a choice that reflects their surging conservative instincts. But, true to the arrogant elitism that now predominates amongst their class, the GOP party bosses think they know better than the people. So they contrive a political scenario that deploys just enough rhetoric to exploit the GOP’s now largely undeserved conservative cachet while reliably producing a nominee who in fact stymies any real return to conservative principles and policies.
Though in this respect they are being played for fools, many conservative Americans have refused to accept the role. They have taken no particular interest in the GOP charade, as emphatically low voter turnouts make clear. Scared witless by the openly socialist Obama bogeyman, some of these conservative voters will flee, eyes wide with panic, toward the crypto-socialist the GOP offers to replace him. Seeing no way out, others will the once again buy into the thoroughly specious notion that resigning the nation’s liberty to a crypto-socialist from the GOP at least buys some time. (They see some difference between slow-but-sure death from sugarcoated poison and the quicker exit of a blunt-force trauma to the head.) Still others are inclined to withdraw from what they know to be a mockery of choice and liberty; to let come what may, unsullied by complicity in the self-evident choice of evils that casts away their nation’s soul and better destiny.
I think it will be tragic for America if conservatives give in to any of these disheartened temptations. There is a course of action that hopefully may thwart the arrogant elitists who presumptuously denominate as worthless the currency of America’s constitutional freedom. It is the way George Washington assumed in his farewell address when he warned that exclusive reliance upon parties would lead to the dominance of faction, which is to say politics based on combinations of individuals and interests who help themselves to power by sacrificing the common good of all.
This course of action will require courageous initiative, a quality once synonymous with what America’s founders call the genius of the American people. It is the key manifestation of the spirit of enterprise (entrepreneurship) that is, even now, supposed to distinguish the economic life of the nation. In a nutshell this means that if existing companies aren’t producing what Americans need or want, they don’t settle for what they can get. They take the initiative to procure or produce what suits them better.
Neither of the so-called “major” parties cares to offer what is needed to preserve our constitutional self-government. So we get a choice between open socialism (Obama) and closet socialism (Romney). But not content with this obdurate failure, they seek to steal away our ability to do what we could do better for ourselves, without their interfering domination. This meddlesome, domineering spirit is the chief characteristic of the socialist mentality. It has one aim, and that is power. When it comes to government policy, people who call themselves conservative generally reject socialism precisely on account of this. They reject being herded toward dependency and helplessness. They know that it means subjection; serfdom; slavery.
Why is it, then, that these same people will accept in the conduct of politics what they reject as the goal of political life? They are willing to remain helplessly dependent on pre-fabricated outcomes that do not represent their true preferences; outcomes that an arrogant socialist and crypto-socialist elite prescribes, manipulates and imposes. Why do this, instead of doing in politics what Americans are renowned for doing in every other walk of life? They make it their business to make good things better. They reject the bad things others make it their business to offer, despite the claim that no better things are possible. Whatever the difficulty, they never lose faith in their own capacity to find a better way.
Such were the Americans who built the nation from improbable beginnings to improbable greatness. Such are the Americans I will be thinking of this week on my blog, as I outline a specific strategy for a real (i.e., not GOP) conservative victory in the November election. It makes use of the opportunity for political entrepreneurship offered by the Constitution’s truly representative process for electing the president of the United States (as opposed to the deceitfully populist overlay the elite faction propagandists have substituted for it). Now that the GOP send-up of a nominating process has reached its pre-determined destination, perhaps conservatives honest and courageous enough to reject the elite faction’s mockery of representative government will be willing to think about what they can do to restore the real thing. If you are among them, take the time to check out what I will have to say at Loyal to Liberty in the next few days.
Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com
URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/socialism-vs-closet-socialism-can-we-do-better/
© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.