The Pernicious Nature of Idealism

Posted: August 26, 2011 in Education

The Pernicious Nature of Idealism

Why do Liberal ideologues continue to pursue Utopian grandiosity? Despite the fact that history has shown us that the pursuit of this ideal world has ultimately concluded with genocidal outcomes at the hands of megalomaniacal demagogues such as Mussolini, Stalin, and Hitler; or simply murderous thugs like Castro, Mao, and Che, this historical reality is never accepted.

How can such a discredited ideology not only persist, but continue to blossom with each new graduating class that seemingly becomes louder and more self-righteous than the previous one, despite its irrational premise and historically disastrous record?

This is not a book, so the answer to these questions by necessity are broad, and thus requires the reader to be broad minded, as each subject broached can only be superficially examined.  It is also important to realize that I will be contrasting philosophies, not how they are actually implemented.  In my mind, both parties are equally corrupt, paying lip service to their philosophies while acting in a totally discordant manner.  This is not a commentary on policy.

In The Beginning

 The American spirit was evident in the words contained within the Declaration of Independence. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” These are words of ’self-determinism’, giving the individual a Government that allows for a persons’ own pursuits. The Constitution neither confers greater rights to the individual, nor does it in any way limit an individual so long as they are operating within the Law; which of itself, does not limit anyone’s pursuit of happiness nor success. A self determined life recognizes that the onus of responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of the individual. One has the right to pursue their dreams, but nowhere is it stated that one is entitled to their dreams. Without getting tangled up in all the theological and philosophical aspects of self-determinism, for purposes of this post I will simply define the drives behind it in its most basic terms:

Need for competence: refers to the need to experience oneself as capable and competent in controlling the external and being able to reliably predict outcomes.

Need for autonomy: refers to the need to actively participate in determining own behavior. It includes the need to experience one’s actions as result of autonomous choice without external interference.

Need for relatedness: refers to need to care for and be related to others. It includes the need to experience authentic relatedness from others and to experience satisfaction in participation and involvement with the social world. Legislated relatedness is not authentic.

Lacking or squelching the attendant responsibility of self-determinism is where socialism over-extends its basic supportive role in our society. Obviously those that are in some way handicapped deserve our assistance. Those that have been discriminated against deserve a fair chance. Yet socialism has become the forerunner to Progressive Liberalism, inasmuch that socialism exploded beyond its economically defined boundary becomes a model of equalizing humanity. In our modern reiteration of socialism, equal opportunity is translated to mean ‘everyone should be equal’. On an individual level, this  ends up having a ring of narcissism to it.

We Were all Born Dependent

Primary archaic narcissism is our state of being upon birth. There is no distinction between self and other, there is only primal ’ism’ and the need for narcissistic supplies to ameliorate a very fearful primal existence. The dispensing of these supplies assuages fears, develops the super-ego, and indoctrinates the budding human being into responsible external social behaviors in relationship to the internal ‘I’. Developmental anomalies in this process can lead to pathological Narcissism.

Simplifying narcissism, it can be said that narcissism is a defense against Emptiness as it struggles to ameliorate the anxieties between Ego (self) and Object (not-self). This severely truncates the maturation process and gives rise to all manner of psychological and social aberrations.

Progressive Liberalism shouts “I deserve”. Rather than struggling with the maturation process of defining self, it cries out from the dark womb of emptiness and ineptitude. It seeks comfort in the same manner that an infant suckles at the breast. When a person has not adequately matured within the family environment, they seek an over emphasized need from Society. Most psychological disorders can be traced to having their roots in an imbalance between Home and Society. Society is unfeeling. Society does not give narcissistic supplies to the individual. The founding doctrines of our society are meant to provide a blank blackboard that allows individuals to take the chalk and author their own personal script for their life. Society bestows upon the individuals that inhabit it the self-deterministic ‘freedom of choice’. When there are aberrations in those supplies that spring forth from the home, then an individual seeks more from Society then its intended purpose. Society is then subconsciously perceived as the Mother’s Breast, and those that remain fearful of life want to suck Society dry. The tit of society becomes the pacifier against the fear of maturation and the responsibilities inherent therein.

 Grandiosity in Leaders

To understand this narcissistic defense as it manifests, we merely have to look at the liberal world view. I think it fair to say that what liberals mainly see when they look at this country is injustice and oppression of every kind—economic, social and political. This view is steeped in negativity and evokes their emotional response. Perceiving the external as wrong, strengthens the impoverished image of ’self’ as right. It only makes sense that given this perspective, what they see requires that America be fixed, or discarded.  This perpetual external view of the world as “wrong”, strengthens the internal view of self as “right” that in turn contributes to a self-righteousness that can appear arrogant.  It follows then that if the Liberal deems oneself to be ‘the enlightened ones’, then this must exist in opposition to what is deemed to be the unenlightened ones.

This is a very dangerous ground for America when a politician thinks thusly.  Their own vision of self as “right” necessitates then the need to control, to herd the unenlightened masses down what they perceive to be the correct path.  This requires a centralized government, and participating masses. Participation can either be cajoled or coerced. History has shown what the unwilling have suffered.  The Liberal has an easy sell, which is…”why can’t we all just get along?”, summed up in a nutshell it encompasses things such as food for all, end poverty, end war,  or summarily simply called social equity.  The Liberal seeks to obtain the grandiose ideal by any means for what they deem to be the betterment of all.  It is their vision of what is good for me. The central authorities tell me what I should believe, what my moral code should be, where my money should go, etc; afterall, they are enlightened and they know best.

As said previously, the Liberals have an easy sell…”don’t you want to save Mother Earth, help the poor, end all war, have everyone get along”?  Of course we do the masses echo back!  It is irrelevant to consider reality when the grandiose sounds so noble. Reality is, we cannot ever all get along.  Period.  We are human, and you cannot legislate our human-ness out of us.  Does anyone really believe that there aren’t people that hate us, will always hate us, and will always seek our destruction?  If you think we can win the love and adoration of every nation in the world, then I would invite you to consider this:  Why is the divorce rate 52%?  Half the people in America can’t even get along with the love of their life for more than 7 years!  Lacking critical independent thought, one cannot ferret out the hypocrisy or foolishness of such a faulty grandiose premise.

Is it that a Conservative wants war, poverty, foul air, dirty water, injustice, oppression, etc?  Of course not!  No one does. In the observation of America, the Conservative sees a country that has risen to be a world leader in the shortest amount of time than any other nation in the history of man.  It is a country that has provided more wealth and more opportunity for more people than any other country in history.  It has contributed more to raising the global standards for everyone on Earth than any other nation.  In its 250 year history the United States has invented 534 different items that revolutionized the way people live.   By contrast, since the inception of France..they have contributed 34 world altering inventions, and Russia 3 (discounting 4 contributions to science that may have led to helping mankind indirectly, such as the Periodic Table of Elements, which was not a discovery of those elements, just a categorizing of them). The Conservative is not incognizant of social injustices, they just believe that by harnessing the best of man,  it will ultimately benefit all mankind.  Nor has the conservative neglected social issues, having passed as many social aid programs as the Democrats. The Conservatives have a message that is much harder to garner support for.  It puts individual freedom and economic healthiness as its first priority, feeling that these will in turn help the most amount of people in the most ways.  But selling economic theory and individual responsibility is harder to do than selling “feel good” philosophy.  Everyone can understand an emotional message, but delivering an economic message that is simplified enough for all to understand is impossible, and the message itself gets so diluted in the process that even if understood, is not very compelling. Why be self-reliant and self-sufficient when it is so easy to not have to burden the yolk of responsibility?

It is ironic to me that Conservatives are so often labeled as the elitists.  What could possibly smack of more elitism than the self-righteous notion of oneself correct, and others wrong? There is nothing that could possibly be more divisive or rife with class-distinction.  Yet, the Liberal “feels” the plight of the poor and gives them a target to vent this angst against…the rich.  Irrationality and hypocrisy follows.  The poor are not poor because the rich are rich.  Just because Bill Gates is worth billions, this does not prevent me from going out and amassing my own fortunes.  If the accumulation of wealth is such a vice, why is the desire to take it from me deemed a virtue?

Perpetuating the Species

The enlightened ones are not self-aware of their own inherent evilness, nor will they be perceived as evil if their ideologies are embraced by the masses.  In order to gain this support a massive propaganda mill needs to be created and perpetuated.  There are many ways this occurs, but I will only superficially look at one.  Again, i can’t delve into all the historical events or fill in all the gaps over the last 60 years, the reader must do their own independent investigations.  The information that follows is merely the tip of the iceberg, that is the result of years and thousands of hours of exhaustive research.

Currently, much of our U.S. policy is the outcome of agreements we have entered into with the United Nations.  To understand current politics in context of my message here, it is important that we examine a bit the guiding principles of those organizations whom we subscribe too.  In particular, we are among the signatory nations that have signed Agenda 21 and the Earth Charter, both of which are part of UNESCO and both of which are designed to perpetuate UNESCO’s mission.  What follows are excerpts from UNESCO’s mission statement. (link is to original document)

“As we have seen earlier, the unifying of traditions in a single common pool of experience, awareness, and purpose is the necessary prerequisite for further major progress in human evolution. Accordingly, although political unification in some sort of world government will be required for the definitive attainment of this stage, unification in the things of the mind is not only also necessary but can pave the way for other types of unification.  … it must also eventually include a unified common outlook and a common set of purposes. This will be the latest part of the task of unifying the world mind…”  – page 17

It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.” – 40

“There are thus two tasks for the Mass Media division of UNESCO, the one general, the other special. The special one is to enlist the press and the radio and the cinema to the fullest extent in the service of formal and adult education, of science and learning, of art and culture. The general one is to see that these agencies are used both to contribute to mutual comprehension between different nations and cultures, and also to promote the growth of a common outlook shared by all nations and cultures.” – 60

“… education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished…. Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.” – 61

“Taking the techniques of persuasion and information and true propaganda that we have learnt to apply nationally in war, and deliberately bending them to the international tasks of peace, if necessary utilising them, as Lenin envisaged, to “overcome the resistance of millions” to desirable change. Using drama to reveal reality and art as the method by which, in Sir Stephen Tallent’s words, “truth becomes impressive and living principle of action,” and aiming to produce that concerted effort which, to quote Grierson once more, needs a background of faith and a sense of destiny. This must be a mass philosophy, a mass creed, and it can never be achieved without the use of the media of mass communication. UNESCO, in the press of its detailed work, must never forget this enormous fact.” – 60

Agenda 21 suggests ways to implement policies whereas the Earth Charter is a program of education.  One only need look at the 40 chapter titles to see how the 2 dovetail into one another and see how current policy is reflecting the objectives of Agenda 21.  Current legislation underway that has its origins in Agenda 21 are highlighted in red.

Obviously, the point I am trying to make is that to garner the support of the masses requires a central organizing principle and a plan on exactly how to organize the people.  Mass media and education are two major ways to accomplish this.

At the Johannesburg Summit of 2002 the nations of the world gathered to re-affirm their commitment to Agenda 21. In a speech given at the Summit, the Director General of UNESCO continues to stress the importance of education:

“Governments recognized the critical importance of education for promoting sustainable development a decade ago at the Rio Earth Summit and in Agenda 21, the action plan agreed to by all governments at the Earth Summit. Chapter 36 of Agenda 21, on Education, Awareness and Training, states that: “Education is critical for achieving environmental and ethical awareness, values and attitudes, skills and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective public participation in decision-making.”

Following the Rio Earth Summit, UNESCO was designated as its Task Manager for Chapter 36. Since Rio, it has been the role of UNESCO to mobilise the various actors concerned with implementing Chapter 36, and to facilitate new initiatives and partnerships primarily through a wide-ranging Work Programme approved by the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development.”

Chapter 27 requires some further explanation.  An NGO is a non-government organization.  There are currently 58,000 NGO’s registered with the United Nations. NGO’s interface with Congress and the White House in policy recommendations, helping to implement policy, or serving as an interface between Government and Local Authorities.  The Tides Foundation, Media Matters, and countless other organizations are deemed to be NGO’s.   Most of them exist to “spread the word”.

Back in the days when the whole man-made global warming paradigm was being seeded into the public consciousness, President Clinton made massive changes to FACA (The Federal Advisory Committee Act) that transformed the way that NGO’s could interface with Congress and the WH, and how grants were to be awarded.  Basically, it goes something like this:  “we will hire you to provide proof the man has caused climate change, and in return for our multi-million dollar grant you must also be an advocate for our cause and support my re-election”.  Is it possible objectivity was the least of anyone’s concern?

NGO’s that have consultative status with the United Nations are called CSO’s – Civil Society Organizations.  At any given time, the Federal Government maintains a list of 1,000 NGO’s that have consultative status with Congress and the WH.  Currently, each and every one of them is a CSO from the United Nations.

Have you ever wondered how it is that the Liberals seemingly have this amazing ability to all say the exact same thing, with the exact same words, at the exact same time?  It is not as if they are Siamese Twins connected by the neuron at birth, lying around passively until enough synaptic energy is accumulated to stimulate a thought.  No, it is the fact that many of these NGO’s have “rapid response teams”.  George Soros has his fingers in about 5,000 of these NGO’s  and thru the Tides Foundation he creates what is internally called “incubator programs”.  These are short lived and situation specific reaction teams mobilized to squelch opposing thoughts or beliefs.  Unraveling the money trails of these organizations is in and of itself a task worthy of an entire research team dedicating themselves to this sole endeavor for years.  It is amazing.  But I digress….

If you may recall that prior to the threat of annihilation by eco-strangulation and climate change, the extinction of the species was going to be brought about by over-population.  UNESCO, The Rockefeller Foundation and many familiar and prominent figures were heavily invested in figuring out a humane program of eugenics.  From UNESCO:

“At the moment, it is probable that the indirect effect of civilisation is dysgenic instead of eugenic; and in any case it seems likely that the dead weight of genetic stupidity, physical weakness, mental instability, and disease-proneness, which already exist in the human species, will prove too great a burden for real progress to be achieved. Thus even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.” – 21

This was a hard sell for politicians.  It goes way beyond ‘killing granny’. Another paradigm was required in order to have a successful organizing principle:

“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” – the Club of Rome Publication, The First Global Revolution

The Club of Rome is group of world leaders, media moguls, finance moguls, and prominent activists.  Take a moment and glance over this article on the Club of Rome, it is very important to at least know who the members are, and it will give you some insight on how all these NGO’s are interlinked.  It is interesting to note that Al Gore sits on the Board of Directors along with Gro Harlem Bruntland.  Gro Harlem Bruntland was the former President of Norway.  Is it possible she had any role in helping Al Gore get his Nobel Peace Prize?  When trying to foist a particular agenda, one would certainly seem much more credulous with such credentials, wouldn’t they?   Both  AL Gore and Gro Harlem Bruntland are instrumental in bringing the notion of man- made climate change to the public.  Al Gore, Maurice Strong, and Mikhail Gorbechev authored Agenda 21.  Strong and Gorbechev authored the Earth Charter.

Idealism or Greed

After 20 years of hard-hitting indoctrination, going green is thoroughly embedded into our global society.  I am not a Scientist, so reading complex analysis to prove or disprove these theories is not something i am qualified to render a judgment upon.  To me, the question is NOT if man caused climate change –that is the distraction!  The real question for any independent critical thinker should be:  “is this being contrived for ulterior motives.”?

I think I have adequately explained how it is the masses can be narcotized to regurgitate the mantra of the day. They are the innocent and easily swayed by the altruistic rhetoric that bombards them every day in every way imaginable.  But what about our Leaders?  Are they really ‘true believers’ or is there another agenda in the hidden?

I am sure most of us remember Goldman-Sachs and their role in the debt mortgage crises.  You may not be aware of the fact that Goldman-Sachs is 10% partners, along with Al Gore, Maurice Strong, George Soros and other Club of Rome members in a company called The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX).  The list of players that comprise this organization is far-reaching as well, but they are all the usual suspects, and loosely tied into Obama also.

CCX was formed 11 years ago as a company to capitalize upon revenues to be garnered by the passage of Cap and Trade.  Remember, Cap and Trade did not really reach public awareness until about 2 years ago, but these legislators and policy makers had made provisions to profit from the passage of this bill 9 years before any of us even knew about it. Oh, and profits they do intend to make!  A spokesperson for the CCX announced that they hope to have annual revenues of $10 TRILLION.  Think of this…10 trillion dollars to be made, and not even offering a single product or service.  All this revenue is to be garnered by trading puffs of smoke required by legislation that they have control over and will mandate.

If you notice one of the chapters of Agenda 21 (partially authored by Al Gore) is entitled combating poverty.  Mr Gore has set up a company to help do so, called Generations Investment.  On his website he states they anticipate annual revenues of $13 TRILLION dollars.

Consider this:  the annual GDP of the entire world is $69 trillion.  So literally 1/3 of the entire worlds wealth is going to be transferred into and thru the hands of these 100 regular players; the same people that created the panic, created the policies to address the panic, and wrote the legislations and regulations to mandate this massive transfer of wealth.  Their idealism I find questionable.

you could never describe the color blue to a blind man..but once he opens his eyes he will never have to ask:  what is blue?


  1. joad says:

    My one concern here is that you posted a direct quote attributed to The UNESCO mandate that is actually from Bertrand Russell, the one about diet, injections and injunctions.

  2. David Chester says:

    The US Constitution is basically misleading when it begins with equality for all citizens. People are not equal but individual with some having more or less talent than others. But what we can and should be sharing is EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY. Unfortunately the history of the constitution writers shows that this greater ideal was not on their agenda. To provide the equality of opportunity, which is badly lacking today and is the cause of the gap between rich and poor, we need to share in the bountiful

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s