The Left is obsolete
This is a concept I have long wanted to tackle, perhaps now is a good time to discuss it.
There's an old idea in politics, that one should read news from both the left and the right to get a full picture. The presupposition behind this notion seems to rest on an assumption of the dichotomy between the left and the right. In this case, that both sides ( at least in so far as the main stream is concerned ), enjoys an equal distance from the centre.
It makes the case the political spectrum looks like this:
In reality though? It looks more like this:
If one were to take the middle in the latter, the centre would be miles off into left territory.
Given the previous criteria, I imagine that perhaps this idea had some purpose or utility in the days gone by, though I'll admit I am too young and not nearly politically seasoned enough to state that with any strong conviction. However, upon reading the news for some time now on a daily basis, I can say with some confidence the age old idea of dabbling with both the left and the right is a concept that is now quite clearly, outdated and obsolete and depending on the political expertise of one you ask, some might say it has been for far longer than I am alluding to.
Such a suggestion however is quite a radical one, so allow me to elaborate: There is no need to ever give your time to anything the left has to offer.
Let's examine the news apparatus for a moment. Instead of thinking of the news as merely the dispensers of information, let us suppose they were story tellers, the orators of tales. In this case the promulgators of a certain world view.
The leftist world view is one of collectivism, the group triumphs over the individual.
The leftist world has a very unusual relationship with the concept of a deity. They regard the idea of religion and God as outdated and unnecessary, at least the concept of a higher power.
While they can profess this as much as they want, upon closer examination this idea does not stand up to scrutiny. Humans as a group, for some reason that I must confess I don't fully understand seem to be incapable of performing what I call " vacuum dissipation ".
Religion, the concept of a deity has been part and parcel of the human experience for as long as we know, and because of this, man seems to be unable to simply " unplug " it, create the vacuum and allow its dissipation to commence and run its course. It has to be filled with something.
In the leftist world, the vacuum is filled with the worship and deification of the state. A very dangerous precedent indeed.
No one would suggest a religious institution is immune to corruption. It is after all filled with humans, corruption is therefore always a possibility. The Church though, is not the maker of laws. The state however is, and it holds the monopoly on violence. A corrupted state is far more detrimental to the freedoms of humanity than the corruption of a religious institution.
In the Christian world view, the idea is to live a righteous life on earth, serve God and you will be rewarded in the Kingdom of Heaven. To the leftist, the idea is declare your fealty to the state lest hell reign down upon you with its boot on your neck for your defiance.
The left can claim to be atheistic and sing the values of secularism as much as they want, but the truth is plain to see in what kinds of policies they favour, what kind of power they think they state should wield. In their world, the state is elevated to the level of omnipotence.
This is why it's impossible to have a conversation with the left with regards to politics, because It's no longer simply a matter of politics. It has now morphed into religious devotion, something to defend at all cost with blind and misplaced righteous fervor. Any questions levelled at them shall be taken as an act of heresy. This is also why the right knows far more about the left than the left knows about the right. It is not seen as an act of blasphemy to keep an eye on the machinations of the left, as well as an indication the right has much stronger faith in it's intellectual fortitude to withstand exposure to the left, and it does have more than enough in its arsenal to dismantle the left into pieces calmly and with great ease.
Given all of the above, if you happen to be a news outlet that wishes to make this kind of world view the accepted norm, you're not going to speak out against the corruption of the state, you're not going to inform the readers of its incompetence. You have no interest in the creation and maintenance of a well informed, critically thinking population. This would be of great detriment to your grand design. Instead the left will pivot the blame for the current predicament and hellish problems of their own creation onto those who oppose them, all the while fomenting the tribalistic rage plaguing our current societies. If you happen to take an antithetical stance to this perception of the world, why on earth would you give your time to any of this?
Some might say you should read the left to find out what they're up to. That's an absurd suggestion. The right will definitely speak about the same issues, and unlike the left who's goal is simply to fill the readers head with propaganda and sing it's praises, the right will actually be critical of it. One does not speak to Uncle Stalin to get an objective view of the horrors of the USSR, you go to a critic who's escaped it.
If one wishes know what the left are really up to, in particular with regards to the cogs inside their movement, reading books is a much more fruitful endeavour, especially from the Old Right. Ludvig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Erik Von Keuhnelt Leddihn, John T Flynn to name a few.
One simply need look at the modern day American regime in action. It's currently occupied by the most radically left administration in its history, perhaps even besting the tyrannical FDR. Professor Victor Davis Hanson of the Hoover Institution makes the point the democrats can only come to power in times of crisis. Interestingly if you look at the entire US presidential history, only twice has a democrat succeeded another democrat: Buchanan after Pierce in 1867 and Truman after FDR in 1945. An astonishing 88 year difference.
And of course following this, they'll continue the script of " never let a good crisis go to waste ", and use it as a pretext to expand the state and make the problems infinitely worse.
One can witness this phenomenon right now in the United States. Every issue the country faces at the present time bar the coof was created after the current administration took office. Anyone who thinks this regime is going to solve those problems after creating them is going to be sorely disappointed, if only because the current regime is a shadowy amalgamation of dark money and actors outside the nations borders. The grotesque level of sheer incompetence of the president, vice president and the estranged relationship they have with the press leaves little doubt.
There is a recurring theme however, with everything a leftist regime will push for in conjunction with the continued deification of the state: Complete destruction of independence and sovereignty of the individual.
Look at the policies the regime is pushing for: Universal Pre K, free college, universal healthcare, stimulus cheques. All in the name of " helping struggling families ", while massively increasing dependency on the state as it expands its tentacles into every aspect of daily life, right down to trying to tell a private company what they can say, lest they instill ideas of which the regime disapproves of.
Which brings us to the enigmatic icon that is Donald Trump. Unbeknownst to many, what they might consider Trumps biggest weakness is to his opponents however, deep down actually their biggest threat.
Trump is unabashedly masculine. He marches to the beat of his own drummer, he doesn't take no for an answer, he doesn't know the meaning of the word quit and most importantly: He does not care what you think. True, he wants to be liked, but he knows that will come as a natural biproduct of his ultimate goal. It's not the main motivating factor, despite his massive ego.
But look at how Trump conducts himself and the language he uses. Everything is big and bold, larger than life. It's a marketing gimmick sure, but boastful and outspoken projections of strength and power is what the left absolutely detests, because they are weak, frail and pathetic. Envy of the successful is the driving heart of leftism.
If you're trying to foster a culture of submission and subservience to the state, and the figurehead of your opposition is a male like Trump, he is your ultimate arch nemesis. Trump represents the absolutely epitome of everything the leftist world view resents, even right down to his policies.
Look at what he pushed for, while he tried to put fire back into the engine of the American economic machine. He was not content on merely continuing the old neoliberal order of outsourcing manufacturing. He wanted them back in the United States. He was hell bent on securing energy independence to the American economy, and ironically managed to reduce emissions while doing so. His tax cuts boomed the economy, brought about employment figures his predecessors said could never be achieved.
The aura surrounding Trump screams " I don’t need you ". That kind of energy is powerful. It's attractive and contagious. It builds fortitude, strong will, and independence.
What the machine fears most, is the re-emergence of men. Men like Trump, men who do not apologise, men who do not bow, men who in the face of the storm are more than likely to give it the middle finger. It fears those who not only see the state as wicked, but regard it with scorn and contempt.