FINDING PEACE IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE 2012 ELECTION — PART 3

Understanding The Nature Of The Enemy: Red Tape

What usually causes us the most the most worry and concern is the danger we do not understand. Fortunately for us, some do understand the threat presented by President Barack Obama and the Socialist Democratic Party he leads. In his book, Democracy in America, Alexis De Tocqueville explained the danger in the 1840’s. Here is an excerpt

I seek to trace the novel features under which despotism may appear in the world. The first thing that strikes the observation is an innumerable multitude of men all equal and alike, incessantly endeavoring to procure the petty and paltry pleasures with which they glut their lives. Each of them, living apart, is as a stranger to the fate of all the rest—his children and his private friends constitute to him the whole of mankind; as for the rest of his fellow-citizens, he is close to them, but he sees them not—he touches them, but he feels them not; he exists but in himself and for himself alone; and if his kindred still remain to him, he may be said at any rate to have lost his country. Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications, and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent, if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks on the contrary to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing. For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness: it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances—what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living? Thus it every day renders the exercise of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent; it circumscribes the will within a narrower range, and gradually robs a man of all the uses of himself. The principle of equality has prepared men for these things: it has predisposed men to endure them, and oftentimes to look on them as benefits.

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp, and fashioned them at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a net-work of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided: men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting: such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd. I have always thought that servitude of the regular, quiet, and gentle kind which I have just described, might be combined more easily than is commonly believed with some of the outward forms of freedom; and that it might even establish itself under the wing of the sovereignty of the people. Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions; they want to be led, and they wish to remain free: as they cannot destroy either one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite; they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large that holds the end of his chain. By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master, and then relapse into it again. A great many persons at the present day are quite contented with this sort of compromise between administrative despotism and the sovereignty of the people; and they think they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large. This does not satisfy me: the nature of him I am to obey signifies less to me than the fact of extorted obedience. (from here)

When will we be conquered? We will lose both our humanity and our republic when we cease to love our neighbor.

Other Views That Consider The Nature Of The Opposition

In That last quote from Matthew 12,  Keith DeHavelle contrasts the ethics of Martin Luther King with President Barack Obama.

The contrast is interesting. MLK spoke eloquently of non-violence, and sought a day in which race would no longer be a factor. Obama speaks (then and now) of violence, revenge, and tapping into the anger of black people.  Interestingly, Obama does not fight to benefit this constituency, other than to do (and heavily promote) those things that seem to pander to them without actually solving problems.

In We Must Press On, righthook38 observes the campaign tactics of the opposition. Then   points to the future.

2014 is our next goal.  We have 20 Democrat senators to unseat, and 13 Republican seats to defend.   We need to retain the House.  We have gubernatorial seats to replace and defend.  This is no time for discouragement and defeat….we still have work to do.

In Who Is John Galt?, From On High comments on what motivates Obama’s support. His post endeavors to consider the full extent of Obama’s divisiveness.

In Death By a Thousand Cults,  observes how our side’s divisions led to this electoral disaster.

Still reeling from what I anticipated to be the proper and complete repudiation of Barack, the Corrupt Incompetent, the Democrat Party and all of the failure, fecklessness and folly of all things Obama, I’m still trying to comprehend what exactly happened a little less than a week ago.

I think we’ve been victimized by….

Cults.

In Don’t Forget About ObamaCare,  reminds us that more than one shoe has yet to fall.

In Barack Obama – A Media-Created Composite of Jesus Christ, Santa Claus and Robin Hood,  offers a plan to fix things. Well, he sort of does.

On the other side of the Atlantic, AHLondon writes The Morning After:  Start of a Conervative Action Plan. It is an interesting plan that recognizes where the problem truly resides.

In Rant first, talk later.  Obama gets second term courtesy of dumb ass Progressives. bydesign001 fumes. In related posts, she fears for Israel, Obama 2012 – 2016:  Israel, fill your sandbags. (UPDATED), and she worries How Liberal Blacks Are Turning America Into A Ghetto – The Jesse Lee Peterson Show.

Need a laugh? Check out State secession petitions to withdraw from the United States by boudicabpi and the following by Bob.

———————–

This is the third post in a series.

About Citizen Tom

I am just an average citizen interested in promoting informed participation in the political process.
This entry was posted in 2012 Election, Alexis De Tocqueville, unraveling, US Blogs, VA-Blogs and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to FINDING PEACE IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE 2012 ELECTION — PART 3

  1. righthook38 says:

    Thanks for the pingback…I appreciate it!

Comments are closed.