[Previously on From Extreme To Extreme: Liberals oppose gun ownership and the Second Amendment (and rightfully so, to a degree, but only to a degree) while exercising — get a load of this! — a foreign policy that is founded on unrestrained gun-toting.]
Let me repeat that. Liberals, noble sounding as they are, preach against the atrocity of unregulated gun ownership while at the same time exercising an interventionist foreign policy that relies on wanton arms-wielding, shooting their way through the international stage, enforcing their country’s will by way of arms, all while strongly opposing gun ownership on the local, national level.
Read that again, please. Again! No, you’re not misreading it. The above position is what it sounds like; a blatant, itching contradiction, yet very real, the silver-tongued, future-oriented do-gooders among us posing as doves devoted to peace, advocating a life with no guns while they shoot the world to pieces in the name of respect and prosperity. Wielding the largest military budget in the world. Refusing to disarm, not while other countries are still armed — oh, boy! this is rich! — and might do them harm.
If you find the above analysis very simplistic, worry not, we will bring this topic up again soon, over and over again, examining it from many angles until we have it covered.
Until everyone gets it.
This applies not just to America but also to liberals in powerful states around the world. The gun issue may be unique to America, at least in terms of countries not experiencing all-out war on home soil, but the ‘liberal’ movements of the world, noble-posing and progressive as they like to regard themselves, are without doubt super-quick on the trigger/counterattack when dealing with issues they don’t like.
Just like conservatives.
Sad but true. Different reasons and premises, same overwhelming force. Same prejudice when dealing with the opposition.
It’s not the force that is the problem. One needs force to battle crime, or whatever poses a threat to order and civilization. It’s the definition of a crime, the ease with which something is dubbed criminal, ungodly, unacceptable, worthy of forceful intervention. That’s the problem: the standards used to define it . . . the double standards applied to condemn it while defending other, equally unacceptable options.
The conservatives, for example, with their pro-life obsession pitched alongside a callous, murderous approach to foreigners, refugees, or dissenters. It doesn’t make sense. Hypocrisy abound.
Or liberals, with their respect for all points of view, their staunch defense of feminism and minority rights except when dealing with the misogynist and homophobic aspects of Islam on the whole, as observed in the (theocratic and oppressive) states that practise it / represent it. Then all arguments are off, out of bounds, because multiculturalism.
This kind of double standards. From both sides. Such blatant, disgraceful hypocrisy. Not just in America but around the world, liberals and conservatives dance to the tune of their own nonsense, to each their own.
But, as fate would have it, right now we are dealing with the worst of the conservatives and their power-grabbing opportunistic minions in the USA, the UK, Poland, Russia, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, perhaps France in a few months. They’re the ones currently abusing authority, and how, meaning they’re our most pressing issue.
All eyes on the Trump administration. All eyes on its mendacious operatives and their dirty tricks. Trip them up, halt their stampede, or steer them over the cliff. Put an end to the chaos. Send a clear message across the world: Woe betide all leaders who take their authority for granted, who abuse the mandate granted them via lawful election. Who thwart the very notion of an open, free-thinking, sustainable culture by way of napalm and brimstone to counter the lecture-and-fire policies of their predecessors. Using whip and empty promises to outdo the honeyed empty promises of their critics.
Who take common sense lightly, dancing to the tunes of bankrupt ideologies at the expense of good old functionality and sustainability. At the expense of long-term vision.
At the expense of common sense.
At the expense of a viable future, all in the name of obsolete thinking and alternative facts.
When the marauding circus is halted, Trump ousted and his administration history, attention! — all eyes on whoever fills in the gap, making sure he/she and all given supporters aren’t more of the same old hypocritical high-flying bullshit that is partly responsible for the shitty state of affairs we’re in, out of which emerged the kleptocratic Grant Turd known as Trump and his Bannon-Priebus-Conway-Flynn-Kushner sidespray.
As a wise man once said, he who don’t study history is very sucky individual who deserve hot steam iron in the face. Same for she who do same.
Trump and his regime will fall. They have no respect for history, or the bigger picture, so a steam iron treatment it will be for them. The question is, will it be the same for a bunch of ordinary people, both supporters and opponents, who might be tempted to take the predictable road to perdition as things unfold?
It’s up to each and every individual to choose a sounder path, even as things break down. Being tough doesn’t mean being cruel or righteous. It simply means being positioned firmly, at a solid angle, playing the game to the end.
From your invariably unimpressed Spin Doctor,
Eyes open, mind sharp.