Nuts?

Well, its official I guess, the Democrats are nuts! While I doubt the claim would stand up in a court of law today, Dr. Lyle Rossiter, in a new book “The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness” claims, "Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded," and that "Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave." It would appear that just about the time liberals figured it was safe to come out of the closet and call themselves such in public, a psychiatrist says that liberalism is really some sort of a mental disorder! (Strangely enough I’ve had that same thought many times over the last few decades!) And while many of us have made somewhat similar statements over the years, Rossiter is a professional pshrink after all, and apparently has no known connection to political activism or "the vast right-wing conspiracy", so perhaps he does know what he’s talking about. He is a board certified psychiatrist, and who also happens to be a certified forensic psychiatrist or so I understand.

Rossiter claims the brand of liberalism displayed by the Democratic presidential nominee can only be understood as a psychological disorder. As per the good doctor, "A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do."… "A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation's citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do." He goes on to say that the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by “creating a sense of victimization”, “supporting infantile claims to entitlement and compensation”, “adds to primitive feelings of envy”, along with “rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government”. He adds; "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious." I rather liked the “spoiled, angry children” part. I’ll admit knowing quite a few Democrats that I think quite highly of… and some of them can hardly be called “liberal”, but I also remember the democratic reaction to the last couple of presidential elections, which they still claim George W. Bush “stole”.

In theory, american liberalism consists of an ideology that wants to maximize individual liberty. The theory includes things like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press. Well, “freedom of speech”, as long as the speaker is politically correct perhaps, and conservative broadcasters can be put out of business by the proposed “Fairness Doctrine” if they don’t toe the liberal line? “Freedom of Religion”… or perhaps it should be “freedom from religion”? I found out why we can't have the Ten Commandments posted in a courthouse anymore (this was intended to be a joke I believe, but if the shoe fits…) “You cannot post 'Thou Shalt Not Steal,' 'Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery,' and 'Thou Shall Not Lie' in a building full of lawyers, judges and politicians. If you do, it creates a hostile work environment.” Liberalism is also supposed to believe in the government providing such necessities as education, health care, food, and shelter. Well, we do have government welfare programs that are supposed to do just that, but if it’s all the same to the government I’d rather have a decent job. I sometimes question much of the governments education program, but I’m not an expert, so who am I to doubt the validity of rewritten history, or the value of college credit courses in basket weaving and hard rock appriciation? Freedom of the Press? Well, I am still writing… but I doubt I’ll ever be syndicated in the New York Times… Perhaps if I start praising Al Bore’s global warming theories, or begin weeping and wailing about the horrors of off-shore oil wells?

All in all, I’d say the third party Liberatarians fit the technical defination of “Liberal” far more that the democrats who claim the name, and apparently want nothing more than to rule your everyday life, and tax you to death so that they can “redistribute” your hard earned wages! (The IRS under the Democrats… “How much do you make? Send it in.”)

Wikipedia defines socialism as “... any of various economic and political concepts of state or collective (i.e. public) ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods and services, some of which have been developed into more or less highly articulated theories.” This particular piece goes on to interconnect socialism with communism and modern day liberalism. The Democrats of Harry Truman’s day, and even during John Kennedy’s era, were generally trying to improve America’s standard of living. But as the wild-eyed radical social theories of the 1960’s evolved into the democratic party we see today, things obviously changed, and not necessarily for the better. I well remember the discussions of “if only the Scientists (or the Doctors, or the Sociologists, or whomever) ran the world” that were common in the fifties and sixties. Today’s left wing liberals developed from those thoughts, and now seem to be but a step away from reinventing Marxist communism, preferring government to individual control of every aspect of our lives! Still, I’d much rather make my own mistakes!

“Liberalism” as we understand it to be today, has been around for a long time and in any number of guises. America’s founding fathers were quite liberal in their political thinking for their day and age. Strangely enough, they were firm believers in massive doses of individual liberty (and the corresponding civic responsibility), without engaging a mid-sized herd of Kings, Princes, and assorted government officials to make every decision for the great unwashed masses. The country they brought into being seems to have functioned fairly well for a couple of hundred years. Now however, we seem to have all sorts of well meaning people who want to control our every waking moment, “for our own good” of course, and they are terribly close to winning!

I’ll end with a quotation from Sir Winston Churchill who, in his long and variegated political career, was a political liberal at times, as well as staunch conservative. “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”