The Notional Dangers of the Fictional Far Right

American Thinker ^ | May 08, 2009 | Bruce Walker

[neverdem]

Arlen Specter has left the Republican Caucus and become a Democrat.  Why?  The ostensible reason was because Republicans were dominated by the far right.  DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano issued a dire warning to watch out for members of the far right in combating the nonexistent threat of "domestic terrorism."  Again, the far right is the bogeyman.  Listen to Nancy Pelosi or Barney Frank or MSNBC reporters or the New York Times.  What is the mythical danger?  It is the "far right."

Now, the far right of the liberals' imagination simply does not exist.  Those accused of representing the mythical "far right" -- historical figures like Father Coughlin or the Ku Klux Klan -- have nothing in common with American conservatism, and they never have.  Coughlin and Long, as I point out in my January 2006 book, Sinisterism: Secular Religion of the Lie, were radical socialists who were strong supporters of the Democratic Party.

Why, then, do so many rail against a "far right" that does not exist?  Those who want to make everything in life political (and run all politics themselves) must create a nebulous and indefinable "enemy."  

What then is "radical agenda" of the citizens who actually populate the right side of the conservative movement?  The following ten points would form a truly "extreme" agenda:

First, adopt a flat income tax rate in which all Americans pay the same percentage of their income as their fellow countrymen.  The rich would still pay much more than the poor, but that each would pay the same percentage of his income.

Second, end to all preferences in which a person is allowed into college or employment. 

Third, return abortion policy back to state governments.  Some states would outlaw abortion; some would legalize; some would regulate:  that is all that overturning Roe v. Wade would mean.  State legislators, not federal judges, would make laws regarding abortion.

Fourth, adopt policies toward federal spending and toward entitlements that ordinary businessmen would consider fiscally sound.  Government financing by Ponzi scheme is just as wrong as private confidence Ponzi schemes. 

Fifth, provide competition for schools and colleges and also ensure that if tax dollars are spent to educate people, that all major political points of view are treated fairly.

Sixth, have Congress pass laws that limit the jurisdiction of federal judges to intrude into every area of our lives.  Replace a society in which unelected judges govern our lives with a society in which ordinary citizens with conflicts "agree to disagree" and in which market forces resolve economic problems. 

Seventh, maintain a strong military and a robust intelligence service.  Build a nuclear defense system to keep us safe from rogue, nuclear armed madmen.  Make protecting Americans the most important job of government.

Eighth, adopt an aggressive policy to drilling for oil and mining for coal.  Limit, for awhile, the most costly environmental regulations. 

Ninth, recognize that we are overregulated.  Agree together, as our Founding Fathers once agreed, that whatever our politics, there is a limit to what government has the legal and moral power to do.  State, or perhaps restate for modern times, the limits on government inherent in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Reach a new, common understanding of what federal power cannot do and should not do.

Tenth, recognize that every attempt to create Heaven on Earth has failed.  There is a limit as to the perfectibility of the human condition, and, at some point, more intensive efforts by state or even organized pressure groups, to make us all better will, in fact, make us all worse.

Are these ten points, which would embrace nearly all of the most ambitious agenda of the so-called "far right" dangerous to anyone?  These points, by and large, embrace mutual self-restraint.  We want no one to be given state preferences.  We want schools to teach and not to advocate.  We want consent and not court orders to govern how we relate in society.

One cannot move from these ten points into Nazism.  In fact, Nazism, like all other systems that crush the conscience, is simply an incarnation of the Left. The reality is that moving "too far" in the direction of limited government fairly quickly leads to a modest, safe, tame approach to politics and government.  Which is another way of saying that it is impossible to move too far in the direction of the mythical "far right."  Why, then, all the fuss about the "far right"? 

Those who would grab huge hunks of power must always invent an enemy.  In Orwell's 1984, that enemy was Emmanuel Goldstein.  In Stalin's Russia, those enemies were Kulaks, counter-revolutionaries, and saboteurs.  In Hitler's Germany, that enemy was World Jewry.  The enemy never, really, stands for anything.  He is just a vague, unarticulated menace, and his menace itself is illogical.

Hitler, for example, campaigned against Jewish "Finance Capitalism" and Jewish "Bolshevism."  Did it matter that Jewish bankers and businessmen were the opposites of Jewish communists?  No -- that was not the point -- Nazis warned of the menace of World Jewry, a nonsensical term that tried to lump together an almost infinitely diverse collection of individuals and groups.  Why?  Nazis needed an enemy.

We conservatives are different.  Let Ben and Jerry be socialists (if they give their own money away.)  Let the gay community pursue its lifestyle (just let us have our consciences be free.) Let leftist professors say nutty things, (but keep them from running indoctrination camps of leftism.) The essence of what is called today the "far right" is simply affection for limited government, the radical concept upon which America was born.  Those who hate us are simply those who love power above all else and who will call us silly names to terrorize people into fearing us.

Bruce Walker is the author of two books:  Sinisterism: Secular Religion of the Lie, and his recently published book, The Swastika against the Cross: The Nazi War on Christianity.

[neverdem]

The Far Right's First 100 Days: Getting More Extreme by the Day

You should read what this left wingnut wrote.

[sinanju]

Very eloquent, but it’s wasted using it on Specter.

There isn’t a soul on the right or left who believes for a moment that Specter didn’t do this in a craven attempt to extend his hold on office.

The good part about this disgusting ploy is that his gleeful humiliation at the hands of his new democrat colleagues is definitely going to give pause to other RINO’s who might be thinking of switching sides. An earlier article mentioned the fact that “Jumpin’ Jim” Jeffords was so disappointed and embittered at his overnight obscurity that he didn’t bother to run for re-election. Something I had not known.

I trust Snowe and Collins have been paying attention.

[BroJoeK]

"One cannot move from these ten points into Nazism. In fact, Nazism, like all other systems that crush the conscience, is simply an incarnation of the Left.

The reality is that moving "too far" in the direction of limited government fairly quickly leads to a modest, safe, tame approach to politics and government.

Which is another way of saying that it is impossible to move too far in the direction of the mythical "far right." "

[Chances Are]

Whew!

Candidates for Lithium!

CA....

[Chances Are]

I love what this guy wrote, but we'll never see adoption of #5. They have way too much invested in creation of the New Soviet Man to change things.

In fact, in states where difficult budget decisions are being debated and argued over, the one thing they don't want to fool with is education money! No, they deem it imperative that the indoctrination continue unabated, if not accelerated.

I've implored every young person I know (or even meet and get mildly acquainted with) to raise their awareness and learn that every issue has at least 2 sides, if not more, and that by opening their minds (truly) to the Way The World Works they have the power to become that most dangerous of men - the Free Thinker.

I think the only way to get them to at least investigate the possibility is to remind/warn them that their real education will start the moment they finish school, and that the best thing they could do to pursue that “higher education” is to more or less forget everything they were taught in school, because the real-world applicability is zilch.

It's a tough row to hoe, but one that may spawn benefits if even just a few kids come around to this kind of insight.

Just my 2 cents...

CA....

[Rick_Michael]

huh...Specter, if you haven’t noticed...Rhinos have dominated the republican party for some time. Conservatives have just ran along with them, thinking we could deal with your kind. Now I’m sure there are many board memebers here that are a bit too hawkish for me, being I started off a libertarian..although I have accepted a stronger role in our security....

But to think the extreme right or conservatives (as he pussy foots around it) are responsible for the rights problems is just silly!?

Conservatives only faults lie...

In our lack of pushing conservative leadership within the GOP. They didn’t have to be pure blood conservatives, but anything but you Specter.

[Rick_Michael]

“I trust Snowe and Collins have been paying attention.”

I don’t mind rinos...as long as they know their place. I just want MORE conservative leadership from now on. Some people have a philosophy of ‘no rhinos’, and really that’s just not going to cut it. Politically, the only way we’ll have political power and real conservatism...is to allow rhinos to be at the bottom. They can help us on certain issues and stand to the side on the ones they disagree with.

[roamer_1]

Third, return abortion policy back to state governments. Some states would outlaw abortion; some would legalize; some would regulate: that is all that overturning Roe v. Wade would mean. State legislators, not federal judges, would make laws regarding abortion.

This is *NOT* correct. Folks better stop misrepresenting the Pro-Life position.

[wastoute]

Bruce is going to be one of the first arrivals at the re-education center.

Μολὼν λάβε

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

The points may be true, but the tendency of people claiming to be conservatives, including an awful lot of Freepers, who compare Obama to Hitler makes it all the problematic.

You see the clear logic of Obama is Hitler and it would have been if someone had “stopped” Hitler is quite an easy line of reasoning to draw. The advocacy of 2nd Amendment rights and massive purchases of firearms, also help to reinforce this type of thinking.

[Impy]

“Now, the far right of the liberals’ imagination simply does not exist.”

Exactly.

And the very real far-left dominates his new party.

[puroresu]

The further to the left a society goes, the more powerful the left becomes. As the left becomes more powerful, they expand the definition of “the far right” to include more and more things. That is, the sphere in which people are allowed to dissent from leftism constantly decreases.

Objectively, Specter's assertion that the GOP is increasingly on the “far right” is nonsense. Both parties are far to the left of where they were decades ago when Specter switched from the Democrats to the Republicans. The GOP he joined was, for example, 100% opposed to any “gay rights” legislation whatsoever, let alone same-sex “marriage”. In 1980, the year Reagan was elected, he ran on a platform that was 100% pro-life, and the Democrat candidate, Jimmy Carter, opposed tax funding of abortions. Bill Clinton, the next Democrat president, signed DOMA, which passed Congress with unanimous GOP support and majority Democrat support.

Both parties have moved to the left since those days. But since leftism is by nature totalitarian, it constantly constricts the spheres in which opposition to itself is permitted. So as the right declines, it finds itself more demonized than ever, pictured in the media as more of a threat than ever. In the novel 1984, the right didn't even exist anymore, but everyone ran to their TV screen daily to let loose two minutes of hate against Goldstein, the fictional right-wing opponent of the progressive government. Goldstein was ever evil, ever a threat, and only constant leftist vigilance and subservience to the state could keep him at bay.

Just look at the list of things that are accepted by our political class today that would have been unthinkable not that long ago. Same-sex "marriage". Abortion-on-demand. Open borders. Bilingualism. A commander-in-chief with a Muslim background. Open discussion of a "gay activist" Supreme Court justice. Budgets in the trillions of dollars range. Diversity training.

Fifty years ago both parties would have been horrified at all of those things. In 1980, the year Specter cites as being one in which the "far right" had not yet seized the GOP, most of those things weren't even on the radar screen. And for those that were, such as abortion-on-demand, both parties were to the right of where they are today. The Dems had a decent-sized pro-life contingent in the Senate, for example, while today there's only one pro-life Dem Senator and a second who claims to be pro-life but has a mixed record (Casey).

In 1980, Joseph Biden was pro-life, opposed to women in combat, and had never even mentioned "gay rights" issues. Al Gore held the same positions and in 1984 openly campaigned as an opponent of the gay agenda. Look at both of them now.

So the meme about the GOP becoming a "far right" party is a fiction. As the West collapses further to the left, opposition to the left will be increasingly painted as being beyond the pale. As the Democrats become more monolithically leftist, the compliant liberal media will paint the GOP as becoming more fanatically rightist, even though the GOP is actually moving to the left.

As time passes, people will be ostracized (and eventually prosecuted) for increasingly innocent comments, as we saw happen to Miss California. We live in a world where a pornographic homosexual blogger can be a judge in a mainstream beauty pageant, can inject his homosexuality into the contest, can penalize a contestant for not agreeing with him, and can call her a b---h and a c--t afterward.

Something like that would have created outrage against such a person a generation ago (imagine this happening in the Bert Parks era). Today, it led to outrage against Miss California, but the fact that the outrage against her isn't unanimous is seen as "proof" that there's a dangerous "far right" element in society that needs to be further suppressed by the state and demonized by the media.

Only when people realize what they're dealing with can they begin to fight it. Conservatives will never win again until they accept the truth about what modern liberalism is.

[Zionist Conspirator]

That's (your post #12) one of the greatest posts I've ever read at FR! Yasher koach!

As I've remarked in the past, to the Left a "dangerous radical" is someone who continues to believe what he always has and what everyone used to believe, while a "moderate" is someone who keeps changing his views to keep up with the Marxist/Hegelian teleological flow of history.

[BenLurkin]

"Right-Wing Extremists"

[puroresu]

Wow! Thanks! And your comment about a dangerous radical being someone who believes what he's always believed, and what everyone once believed, is perfect. You're exactly right, we're now governed by Cultural Marxism.

[redpoll]

>>>The points may be true, but the tendency of people claiming to be conservatives, including an awful lot of Freepers, who compare Obama to Hitler makes it all the problematic.>>>

WTF???

Just for starters, what does the “it” refer to.... the tendency of people? conservatives? an awful lot of Freepers?

And, of course, Obama is not Hitler. Hitler was a national socialist. Obama is an international socialist. A world of differences there.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Well put. Frankly the way things are now thanks to the radical leftist direction of both politics and the culture, I feel like I’m living in a PC fascist state.

[denydenydeny]

Seeking the overturning of Roe vs. Wade is not a pro-life position? Really?

[roamer_1]

Seeking the overturning of Roe vs. Wade is not a pro-life position? Really?

It is "a" Pro-Life position. It is not "THE" Pro-Life position. Life is a Constitutional matter. It does not belong in the hands of the states.