Beyond Treason (Why the left is Not Patriotic and Ann Coulter is Wrong, My Title)

To the Point ^ | July 31, 2001 | Dr. Jack Wheeler

[TexasTransplant]

Reading Ann Coulter's Treason is a lot of fun. She has to be the ballsiest chick in America. Part of what makes her so cool is that you know she would love that description of her.

Aside from the sheer enjoyment of watching her rhetorically eviscerate liberals, she performs a great public service in rehabilitating Joe McCarthy and exposing the Myth of McCarthyism. "McCarthyism is one of the markers on the left's Via Dolorossa," she observes. "It is their slavery, their gulag, their potato famine. Otherwise liberals would just be geeks from Manhattan and Hollywood."

So let's go beyond all the fun and outrage and cut to the chase. Coulter is fabuloso at explaining what aid and comfort three generations of liberals and Democrats have given to any and every anti-American cause and group on the planet, but she is at a total loss to explain why.

In the final concluding chapter, "Why Do They Hate Us?" you expect an answer to the question, and all she can come up with is: Liberals think they are gods. That's it. What the hell is that? There is not even an explanation of what she could possibly mean. Do liberals believe they (actually, no metaphors) reside in a non-physical supernatural realm and have magical powers to create and manipulate laws of nature? That is what it is to be a "god." Treason can only offer gobbledygook as an attempt to explain why liberals are the way they are.

Further, America is hardly the only thing liberals are treasonous towards. Calling someone a traitor to their country doesn't explain why they are a traitor to their race, their culture, their civilization, and their species.

Writer Susan Sontag has denounced the white race as "the cancer of human history." She is white herself. A racist hatred of one's own race -- auto-racism -- has become a defining characteristic of the white liberal mind. But just exactly what has that got to do with being anti-American?

We thus need a deeper understanding of what motivates liberals that goes far beyond simply hurling epithets of treason and traitor at them.

For such understanding, we need to travel to the Amazon. Among the Yanomamo and other tribes deep in the Amazon rain forests, it is an accepted practice that when a woman gives birth, she tearfully proclaims her child to be ugly.

In a loud mortified lament that the entire tribe can hear, she asks why the gods have cursed her with such a pathetically repulsive infant. She does this in order to ward off the envious black magic of the Evil Eye, the Mal Ojo, that would be directed at her by her fellow tribespeople if they knew how happy she was with her beautiful baby. Anthropologists observe that for most primitive and traditional cultures, "every individual lives in constant fear of the magical aggression of others... there is only one explanation for unforeseen events: the envious black magic of another villager."

Envy is the source of tribal and traditional cultures' belief in Black Magic, the fear of the envious Evil Eye. Reflect for a moment on the extent to which tribespeople in a tribal, "primitive" culture suffuse their lives with superstition, witchcraft, sorcery, voodoo, "black magic," the "evil eye." The world for them is teeming with demons, spirits, ghosts and gods, all of whom are malicious and dangerous -- in a word, envious.

What Ann Coulter doesn't understand is that the liberal mind is an atavism, a regression to a primitive mentality. Liberals believe in Black Magic just as strongly as Yanomamos. What makes a liberal is his or her fear of the Evil Eye of Envy.

An American liberal's primary motivation is not to betray his country. It is to appease the envious. Liberalism is not a political ideology. It is a psychological strategy to avoid being envied. What causes someone to be a liberal is the fear of being envied. It is the fear of being envied that is the source of "liberal guilt."

This is most easily seen in the children of wealthy parents. Successful businessmen, for example, who have made it on their own normally have a respect for the effort and the economic system that makes success possible. Their children, who have not had to work for it, are easier targets for guilt-mongering by the envious. So they assume a posture of liberal compassion as an envy-deflection device: "Please don't envy me for my father's money -- look at all the liberal causes and government social programs I advocate!" Teddy Kennedy is the archetype of this phenomenon.

This is also why Hollywood is so liberal. The vast amounts of money movie stars make is so grossly disproportionate to the effort it took them to make it that they feel it is unearned. So they apologize for it. The Liberal's strategy is to apologize for his success in order to appease the envious.

The passions of Limousine or Hollywood Liberals are not traitorous. They are frenzies of masochism. The more one fears being envied, the more one is driven to masochistic self-humiliation in attempts at envy-appeasement. Traitors are folks who go over to the other side for the money or some other self-interested reason. Liberals root for the other side precisely because they believe it is against their self-interests.

What, for example, could be more idiotic and masochistic than to oppose missile defense? This opposition cannot be understood unless one dispenses with its rhetoric and rationales and realizes that these folks at their emotional core do not want their country defended. The lunacy of the "global warming" hoax cannot be comprehended other than its masochistic advocates do not want their civilization to prosper. Culture-destroying illegal immigration policies are defended by those who do not want their culture to survive.

The lethality of Liberal Envy-Appeasement is that personally-felt guilt is projected onto the various social or tribal collectives to which the liberal belongs and are a part of his self-identity. Self-loathing is transformed into a loathing for one's society or race.

White liberals become auto-racist, male liberals auto-sexist: racists towards their own race, sexists towards their own sex. Dimestore demagogues like eco-fascist environmentalists, feminazis, PETA animal rights loonies, NAMBLA pederasts, race hustlers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, all get their strength from the liberal's fear of their Evil Eyes.

As the Amazon tribeswoman who says her baby is ugly, so the white male liberal says his gender, his race, his country, his civilization, and even his entire species is ugly.

Fear of envy is very deep-seated in the human psyche. Only a youthful culture full of vigor and confidence can shrug it off, enabling that culture to flourish. The road to cultural ruin lies in the fear of envy reasserting itself from the primordial depths.

Today, America's elite universities have degenerated into fascist cesspools of envy-appeasement. America's airlines compromise passenger security by harassing people at random, rather than racially profiling Arab and other Moslem men. The entire fascist phenomenon of political correctness -- perhaps best exemplified by the New York Times editorial page -- is nothing but a massive exercise in envy-appeasement.

One of the silver linings of September 11 is that it made the American people mad enough to reject envy. They now could care less if Moslems or the French or whomever are envious of them. That rejection must be applied to the envy-panderers and envy-appeasers within America herself.

Rejecting envy is the key to America's cultural resurgence and survival. Fear of the Evil Eye is the only thing that gives the Evil Eye any power. Without fear of it, the Evil Eye is impotent. Calling folks traitors solves no problems and provides no solutions. Conservatives instead need to reach out to liberals and help them overcome their fear of envy. The Christian and American solution is to enable liberals to feel proud, rather than embarrassed, to be themselves, to be American, to be a participant in Western Civilization, and to be a human being.

© Copyright 2003, Dr. Jack Wheeler and ToThePointNews.com.

[TexasTransplant]

This article is a little old, but it is certainly not dated. This is a great companion piece to "Treason"

[Support Free Republic]

SHOW YOUR PRIDE! SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC!
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[demkicker]

Great article, and I even think Ann Coulter might agree with him!

[Cicero]

Well, yes, although he doesn't name the basic factor underlying this behavior: guilt. Liberal guilt. Liberals feel guilty in part for being rich and privileged.

But it's more than that. As Mike Jones of "Culture Wars" has pointed out, everone has a conscience. If you don't listen to it, or if you don't even remember you have one, it will start to heaping "coals of fire" on your head, as Isaiah and Paul have written. It will start torturing you until you take care of it. You can have whatever opinion you like, but your conscience is objective--put into you by God, according to traditional belief. It doesn't care if you think you have invented a new and better morality; it still follows the old traditional morality.

As St. Paul said, "The law of God is written in the heart" and even Pagans understand the difference between right and wrong, although they may not always follow it.

If you think abortion is wonderful and you kill your baby, or if you think adultery is wonderful and you betray your family and your neighbor, your conscience will make you feel guilty regardless of what you tell yourself about your new wonderful modern morality that's so much cooler than traditional morality.

So, you have a guilty conscience but you don't know why. But you still take it out on yourself and everyone around you. You don't know how to confess and repend and amend your life, so you go off the rails with all sorts of crazy compensations. "It's OK if I commit adultery as long as I support affirmative action for blacks." That kind of thing. You don't want to pay the price of repentance, so you make everyone around you do it instead.

[ctonious]

Doesn't explain everything - but I think he's hit on a main artery of liberal lunacy.

[TexasTransplant]

That was Beautiful.

[janis]

Very nicely put. I particularly like the emphasis on the conscience connection. It seems so old-timey but so true.

[LibWhacker]

I even found a name for it on phobialist.com: Zelophobia, fear of jealousy.

Good article, but I do believe liberals are evil in the same way Osama bin Laden is evil; the liberal mind can't be blamed entirely on envy or the fear of it. A couple of days ago, Ed Asner said the historical figure he most respected during his lifetime was Joseph Stalin. There's a basic, primitive evil at the root of liberalism we should not lose sight of. Take away the fear of envy, which may indeed be there, and you still have that evil.

[bandleader]

I feel(after reading this article)that I now understand the Enemies of Freedom better inasmuch as what their motivations are!However,they are still The Enemy and they must be defeated with facts,reason,and Ideals!!

[tpaine]

"This is also why Hollywood is so liberal. The vast amounts of money movie stars make is so grossly disproportionate to the effort it took them to make it that they feel it is unearned. So they apologize for it. The Liberal's strategy is to apologize for his success in order to appease the envious."

---

Is this is so why aren't corporate leaders 'liberal'? The vast amounts of money top exectives make is so grossly disproportionate to the effort it took them to make it, why don't they feel it is unearned?
Why don't they apologize for it?

Or if, -- as you say, -- the strategy is to apologize for success in order to appease conscience, where is the 'guilt' you envision in the boardroom?

[Valpal1]

Liberals fear envy, because they are consumed with envy themselves.

Read also Thomas Sowell's "Vision of the Annointed".

Liberals are spiritually and mentally immature people who childishly want to make things "fair". They are envious people who secretly believe they are morally and intellectually superior to the masses and should be in charge.

A good deal of their carp is dissembling, an attempt to appear fairer than thou, to prove they can be trusted with power.

[cyn]

bump for later read. Thanks for posting this.

[steplock]

He left out one important FACT!

If you are causing harm to your own country - YOU ARE A TRAITOR!

Not some psychobabble auto-self-hate-yo mama-crap. Just a plain old fashioned TRAITOR!

[ZeitgeistSurfer]

The "liberalism = fear of envy" is too contorted for my taste. I think a much simpler explanation is that liberalism comes from being a stunted person who never developed an adult character and sees the world just like a pained infant.

[nathanbedford]

As is often the case here in the Free Republic, the posters have seen the core truth better than the author, especially those posters who react as Christians.

First, a codicil: We have recently had some fun with this latest example of liberal lunacy"Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition," recently published in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin. The article purports:

Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include:

Fear and aggression

Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity

Uncertainty avoidance

Need for cognitive closure

Terror management

The absurdity of lettered liberals masturbating before the world while cross dressing as real scientists has not been missed in this forum. We all enjoyed the laugh. Incidently, the fact that this is ultimately subsidized by taxpayers validates the comments on this thread about the hypocracy of liberal "compassion."

Now we are embarking on a trip into the liberal psyche and we want to avoid becoming what we decry. So the codicil, we (or at least,I) offer our analysis as opinion, not fact; as religion, not science; for free, not taxpayer subsidized.

So, why have the posters gotten closer to the truth than the author?

The author's principal insight is that the left operates out of fear of envy. He inquires of Coulter what motivates liberals to do daffy things or more importantly, even treasonous things. But he doesn't like her answer:

In the final concluding chapter, "Why Do They Hate Us?" you expect an answer to the question, and all she can come up with is: Liberals think they are gods. That’s it. What the hell is that? There is not even an explanation of what she could possibly mean.

First, the author does a good job of illustrating the wrong headedness of the left:

What, for example, could be more idiotic and masochistic than to oppose missile defense? This opposition cannot be understood unless one dispenses with its rhetoric and rationales and realizes that these folks at their emotional core do not want their country defended. The lunacy of the "global warming" hoax cannot be comprehended other than that its masochistic advocates do not want their civilization to prosper. Culture-destroying illegal immigration policies are defended by those who do not want their culture to survive.

You gotta love that paragraph. It catalogues the symptoms of leftism so well. But does the author's thesis explain the left's perverseness better than Coulter's?

Coulter's explanation is straightforward:

Liberals think they are gods."

The author's next line, "What the hell is that?" betrays that he is ignorant of sublime truth of Coulter's explanation. Coulter has gone to the root of the matter: Either one submits to God or one must play god and in so doing abandon himself to every perversion, hypocracy and lie which can be confected by his imagination (or, if you prefer, the Devil's imagination.)

The posters, not the author have got it right (although the author did not get it wrong,) leftism is essentially a soul sickness. This is a core concept and reveals a much deeper wisdom. The author seizes on one of the symptoms of this soul sickness (envy, or, the fear of envy)and treats it as the untimate revelation. He might just as easilly have identified lust for power and made an equally good case.

The soul sickness is trap created when man seeks to seize the throne. There can be no two track approach, either one must submit or rebel. Leftists are in a state of ceaseless rebellion. Rebellion is another name for war and it explains why we are in such a mortal cultural war.

Consider another metaphor: The Christian summons is essentially to kill the self and surrender to God. Destroy the ego and experience freedom. But the self, the ego is essentially a paracite which, before it consumes and destroys it host, will go to any length to protect its fiefdom. Against this foe, appeals to reason are no more effective than they are against dysentery. That's why government programs to stop addictions do not work but faith based programs do.

And that is why liberals hate them so much, they instinctively realize that they attack their very raison d'etre:

They would be gods.

[TexasTransplant]

Read also Thomas Sowell's "Vision of the Annointed".

Thomas Sowell is one of my favorite reads, I just put it on my TO-DO list, Thanks

[Qwinn]

"The vast amounts of money top exectives make is so grossly disproportionate to the effort it took them to make it, why don't they feel it is unearned?"

Boy, you ate the socialist class-envy cookie in one bite, didn't you?

Have you ever actually met or known any of these people? Studies have shown they work an -average- of 60 hours a week, and those statistics don't count the tremendous amount of time most of 'em spend on cell phones dealing with emergencies, etc. They're on call 24/7.

Contrary to socialist propaganda, most of 'em work their ass off, and if they didn't their contracts wouldn't get renewed.

Now, if you want to claim that NO ONE, for ANY amount of work, deserves to make that much money, then say so. But don't try to portray them as no harder working than 6-month-out-of-the-year Hollywood dilettantes and athletes without facts to back that up.

Qwinn

[tpaine]

Is this is so why aren't corporate leaders 'liberal'? The vast amounts of money top exectives make is so grossly disproportionate to the effort it took them to make it, why don't they feel it is unearned?
Why don't they apologize for it?
Or if, -- as you say, -- the strategy is to apologize for success in order to appease conscience, where is the 'guilt' you envision in the boardroom?

Boy, you ate the socialist class-envy cookie in one bite, didn't you?

Ouinn my boy, do you always jump to such silly conclusions?

Have you ever actually met or known any of these people?

Yes, I have. Silicon vally has made many of my friends into wealthy executives. Through them, I've met more, and even built houses for them & with them as my business partners on spec projects. ..

Studies have shown they work an -average- of 60 hours a week, and those statistics don't count the tremendous amount of time most of 'em spend on cell phones dealing with emergencies, etc. They're on call 24/7. Contrary to socialist propaganda, most of 'em work their ass off, and if they didn't their contracts wouldn't get renewed.

Which proves what about the issue of making massive amounts of money, and feeling guilt about it?

Now, if you want to claim that NO ONE, for ANY amount of work, deserves to make that much money, then say so. But don't try to portray them as no harder working than 6-month-out-of-the-year Hollywood dilettantes and athletes without facts to back that up.

Who "portrayed" them thus? Get a grip..

--- For every big bucks, big company executive, there are hundreds of mid level managment in the same firm, working the same hours, making comparative beans..

I asked; ---- 'if, the strategy is to apologize for success in order to appease conscience, where is the 'guilt' envisioned in the boardroom?'

[Qwinn]

Perhaps I misunderstood what you were getting at.

I would contend that the honest corporates don't get the feelings of guilt because they -do- work for their money. That was the point I was trying to make.

As for middle management working the same hours, I can't dispute that. But I can point out the impact of the decisions middle-management makes versus the impact of the CEO's decisions... where the decisions of one can determine what the department's budget will be next year versus whether the company remains solvent and retains thousands of employees.

If a CEO accomplishes what he is hired to do without fraud, I believe he's worth every penny (and I think Grasso was very unfairly demonized). I don't think they have a thing to feel guilty about.

But CEO's that commit fraud, or fail, that drive their companies into the ground and get away richer than ever by looting the trough before it empties? Those I believe should be incarcerated - and it's obvious that guilt never entered into the picture for them in the first place.

Qwinn

[Auntie Mame]

Is this is so why aren't corporate leaders 'liberal'?

From the article:

"Successful businessmen, for example, who have made it on their own normally have a respect for the effort and the economic system that makes success possible."