HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Sept. 1, 2004 Some wise man once said, "Those who don't stand for something often will fall for anything." How true! We all need to understand what our core beliefs are and make life-affecting decisions based on those core beliefs. One of the things that seems to be lacking in the Democrat Party these days is a clearly-defined set of core beliefs. I'm not talking religion here. I'm writing of a set of unshakable principles which radiate positive attitudes within and around those holding them close. These are the guiding principles that produce hope for the future and optimism what the world will look like in years hence. The Democrat Party seems, these days, to be motivated almost exclusively by negativity--by hatred, even. That's not a recipe for success in my estimation. Normally, I'd say that's a good thing--that the Democrats are setting themselves up for yet another failure. I believe that liberalism is ultimately destructive to the human psyche and that anything that thwarts its spread is good news. However, not EVERYTHING that liberals profess to believe in is bad. It was liberals, for example, that provided the first impetus towards full citizenship rights and benefits to minorities living among us. That's a GOOD thing--something that conservatives have believed all along, but, because of ennui or inertia, had not tackled (and may have tackled only reluctantly because it was such a radical change) without the push from the left. Let's give credit where credit is due. Liberals were the prime movers in the full emancipation of American blacks in the 1950's, even though their cause was warmly embraced by a relatively conservative administration at the time. But what do liberals believe in NOW? Liberals PROFESS to believe in equality and complete freedom of expression, but what they PRACTICE today is something else entirely. Good examples of this can be found in today's academia. Many of today's tenured professors are the 1960's campus radicals and their sycophants. Seeing the universities as fertile grounds to spread their philosphy (basically socialistic, if not downright communistic), and realizing that professorships paid relatively good salaries while not requiring much in the way of actual labor, some of these folks just naturally gravitated thence. It provided them with two, very valuable assets--tenure under cover of which they could spout ANY crackpot idea without fear of losing their jobs and a more or less captive audience for those ideas. I know of an English professor, for example, who was SUPPOSED to be teaching composition skills, syntax and grammar, who actually downgraded her students if their theses espoused political positions with which she disagreed. There was no one to challenge her, either, even though her grading system was NOT based on writing skills, but on the attitudes of her students, which she insisted must reflect her own left-leaning political philosophy. Her students were penalized if they espoused in their writings, pro-life positions, for example. Academic boards came up with sets of "rules" to insure their student bodies were adhering to the boards' ideas of what are "politically correct" attitudes,behaviors and even speech. One university even published pamphlets describing, in excruciating detail, all the necessary steps to correctly interpret incipient sex as "consensual." It was designed to "protect" girls from date-rape, one supposes, but it turned out being patently silly and was eventually dropped. The end result of all this has been the stifling of spirited discourse on given subjects. One isn't permitted, for example, to argue in the classroom against so- called "gay rights" for fear of "offending" gay or lesbian students. One also can't argue against abortion on demand, for the Iraq war or even against high taxation--all these subjects' left-leaning positions having been staked out by some professors and not subject to argument any longer--especially by the student body. University newspapers which publish anti-leftist editorials or even stories are subject to having entire editions stolen and destroyed so no conservative positions may be spread on campus-- often with the outright complicity and encouragement of the faculty. Another favorite site for those with leftist philosophies is journalism. Very few students enter the field without some deep-rooted sense of wanting to "make the world a better place." Why journalism attracts such people is a mystery except that maybe they think what they write or report about, if phrased "just right" could have a profound effect on how the world operates. To a degree, they're right. It was, for example, a disingenuous press corps that aided and abetted the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Communists in their successful conquest of a basically- democratic South Vietnam. By reporting only what bolstered the pre-conceived notion that the U.S. shouldn't be helping the South Vietnamese government against both insurgents and invaders from the North, the press succeeded in convincing a significant portion of the American public that it was a lost cause and should be abandoned. It worked. The national press has been decidedly left-leaning for some decades now and, thanks to the internet, talk radio and cable TV, seems to be losing its influence, something that's strangely alien to professional journalists. Dr. Thomas Sowell, the reknowned economist at the Hoover Institute at Stanford University, once described Hollywood as being excessively liberal because its denizens all live out their professional lives (and much of their social lives) in a "fact-free zone." It's been a fact of life for some decades now that Hollywood is awash with liberal tub-thumpers who seem to believe that their talent entitles them to special consideration in their political beliefs, too--that their political pronouncements should be given added weight, simply because they are "famous." It's nonsense, of course, but the press aids them in fostering that belief. But what do these people actually BELIEVE? They believe that they are correct in their beliefs and will brook no opinions to the contrary-- going so far as to do whatever they can to SILENCE any dissenting opinions--and that's about IT. They are FOR abortion on demand, against the traditional family unit, anti- religion (especially Christianity), anti- military, even anti-American at times when America does something with which they disagree, such as take steps to protect our shores despite "world opinion" to the contrary. They are basically globalists and elitists who believe that the "great unwashed" are too stupid, venal or otherwise corrupt to care for themselves and must have THEM (liberals) make all their important decisions FOR them. In short, they don't have a very high opinion of those they profess to care most about. They are excessively negative--and were, even when they held all the reins of political power in this country. They serve a useful purpose today, however. There should ALWAYS be a few, visible liberals around to remind all of us to what NOT to aspire. ------------ About the author: David A. Jared is a news junkie, semi-retired and an avid golfer who's been writing his first book, "4000 years of chopsticks" for the last 20 years. Email: Pappadave@sbcglobal.net |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
