The western liberal bedrock of America’s political philosophy places an emphasis on liberty and equality under the law. This type of equality is far removed from the Utopian, modern progressive concept of equality. The 18th century western liberals who met in the Masonic Lodges and plotted the bloody French Revolution were seeking actual justice, not “social justice.” They were overthrowing a tyrannical, nepotistic, crony aristocracy proven to be thoroughly incompetent by waging expensive, foreign wars in the New World until the state was in a financial crisis and nearly bankrupt. If that sounds familiar, it might explain the revolutionary overtones coming from the Trump camp with their calls of double standards under the law and a rigged election.
For modern progressives, equality is being conflated with freedom from ambiguous social and economic ills rather than equal rights under the law. Things like liberation theology, patriarchal conspiracy theories, white privilege, and gender normality are charges often levied against the population as a whole rather than in specific cases. Often times the mere perception of bigotry is enough to invite a social justice war, regardless of the intent of the accused. It is this incredibly bizarre, flimsy standard of defining bigotry that allows the movement to continue. Rather than attacking entire groups of people deemed as outsiders, SJW’s should be pointing at specific individuals and specific laws and policy that could be defined as prejudiced under the Constitution to be changed accordingly. To do that would ensure equality under the law, which is the true goal of western liberalism.
“5.2 Social justice seen as a substitute for the protection of human rights‘Social justice’ first appeared in United Nations texts during the second half of the 1960s. At the initiative of the Soviet Union, and with the support of developing countries, the term was used in the Declaration on Social Progress and Development, adopted in 1969.”
By dehumanizing and invalidating the beliefs of so many of the population, the only acceptable way to define justice among a people is through consensus building and the democratic process. That means that the government is now the granter of rights and what is fair, and the western liberal core concept of receiving inalienable, natural rights at birth is forgotten. This is why some particularly brainwashed SJW’s are willing to turn a blind eye to the legal double standard provided to their presidential nominee, and why President Obama, being a constitutional lawyer, has no qualms about violating it time and time again. After all, rich, white slave owners wrote those things. The entirety of this social justice ideology is based on fundamental misunderstandings of American culture and political philosophy, which is starting to become a very common theme among those in the Social Justice movement going all the way back to one of its founders, Herbert Marcuse.
The last thing the Globalists want to do is to eliminate racism and deprive themselves of one more social construct to differentiate and divide their constituencies. When people like Hillary Clinton talk about things like implicit bias, they destroy the notion that there is a set of shared values existing outside of the law and within the American people. Values such as the search for truth and justice, fighting against corruption and tyranny, protecting the weak and indefensible, and the free and open exchange of ideas and criticism of the secular government are all a part of the story of America. When the people in power are content to set aside their ethics and morality in favor of maintaining the perception of having ethics and morality, they will justify themselves with moral relativism and there will be corruption.
It is this moral relativism, and the emphasis on maintaining a good perception rather than being good, that is so painfully evident in the communications of Podesta and his colleagues. To these people, equality is just a means to their own ends, a social movement to push their agenda, and not a noble goal in and of itself. I myself am offended by these comments, and at the elitism, dehumanization, and immaturity on display here.
In an email to Hillary discussing prospective Vice Presidents to run with, Podesta organized candidates by latinos, women, white men, blacks, former military, and the very rich. Bernie Sanders was placed at the bottom of the list, in his own socialist food group.
“Cheryl, Robby, Jake, Huma, Jennifer and I also did a first cut of people to consider for VP. I have organized names in rough food groups.”
Conventional wisdom states that the most qualified, experienced person become VP, but the perception of multiculturalism takes priority.
San Bernardino Bummer
In an email referencing the San Bernardino shooting that killed 14 Americans and injured 22, Podesta laments that the shooter was a muslim and wishes he were white instead.
“Better if a guy named Sayeed Farouk was reporting that a guy named Christopher Hayes was the shooter.”
Podesta’s wishful thinking highlights how progressives are being pushed to become apologists for jihadis. Islamic extremism on 9/11 was the justification for the national security/surveillance framework spawned from legislation like the PATRIOT act. Now that this framework is in place and functioning, the goal is to turn it onto the American people by holding up domestic terrorism as a more urgent threat than ISIS and jihadis.
Bastardization of the Faith
In an email titled “Conservative Catholicism” to Podesta and Hillary’s communication director Jennifer Palmieri, the staffers mock Catholics, Catholic philosophy, Rupert Murdoch baptizing his children, and Evangelicals.
“Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups.
It’s an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.”
Palmieri, herself a proclaimed Catholic, agreed in a response to the email and characterized Evangelism as not “socially acceptable.” Palmieri later denied making the statements to the press, blaming the Russians as her voice was cracking.
In another email chain between Podesta and Palmieri, Podesta himself airs concerns over Hillary’s inability to understand or empathize with average people.
“I know she has begun to hate everyday Americans, but I think we should use it once the first time she says I’m running for president because you and everyday Americans need a champion.”
The fact that Podesta chose to use such a strong word – hate – illustrates just how badly the bubble around Washington has gotten, and how completely removed from reality and society the elite have become. In what manner would a President who hates her people rule?
The reality is that those in power view the average person as nothing more than a vote, and when the election season is over, it’s back to a “compliant and unaware citizenry.” The whole social construct which divides people by melanin levels, sexual preference, and “gender” serves to balkanize the American people. Although individual special interest groups feel united by this rhetoric, and identity politics are emboldened, the people as a whole cannot unite under this ideology, and will always be susceptible to accusations of sexism, racism, and any other “ism” that can be fabricated from a perception or a personal experience without citing any actual bigoted individuals or policies.