MATTHEW BOOSE: The left won’t let America prosper

  
Via:  donald-trump-fan1  •  5 months ago  •  52 comments

MATTHEW BOOSE: The left won’t let America prosper
The left’s platitudinous “unity” and morality are defined by exclusion of the very things that make America united and moral: a coherent cultural heritage, a virtuous bedrock, and a sovereign polity.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


At his State of the Union, Trump attempted to strike a conciliatory tone and appeal to the Democrats to work with him to make the country great again.

But the talk about cooperation proved to be purely rhetorical when Trump turned to the border crisis, eliciting boos from the Democrats. When he condemned late-term abortion, they responded with stony silence as Republicans erupted into applause.

Trump’s speech, like his governance, was contradictory and divided. In his State of the Union, as with his administration, he was working with a split purpose: to push back against, and also unify the country with, a leftist faction seeking to undermine the nation.

National unity and virtue can’t emanate from a president alone. They need to be ingrained within a solid social and political foundation, a foundation that the left is working to destroy.

The intersectional left seeks the opposite of unity. With open borders, they reject national sovereignty for a borderless marketplace. With cultural and moral relativism, they dissolve the social ties that make a strong and prosperous society possible.

The left envisions a society that is totally “open” — to outsiders and outside cultures, but also to transgression and subversion of the social fabric within. The result of these ideas is not a country, but barbarism.

The left’s platitudinous “unity” and morality are defined by exclusion of the very things that make America united and moral: a coherent cultural heritage, a virtuous bedrock, and a sovereign polity.

For the left, “the people” is not a national demos but an unstable political alliance of identity-based factions. This coalition is not internally comprehensible. Its sole unifying thread is a shared set of enemies: whites, men, Christianity, and the nation itself.

The left’s intersectional politics replaces peace and social trust with restless political war and resentment. There can be no unity on the left where “bigoted” Christian schools, and prohibitions on abortion, exist. The oppressors are not invited to share in the left’s coalition without ample demonstrations of guilt and shame.

When the left accuses Trump of being divisive and immoral, they are looking for capitulation to their ideas of unity and morality. To the left, unifying the country means putting it last. Morality means recognizing the necessity of late-term abortion and the evils of America and Christianity.

Rather than unity and stability, the left values difference and incoherence. Their ideal polity is one which they (and only they) belong to an “inclusive,” mutually unintelligible, multicultural hodge-podge with no identity, borders, values, or culture.

To the left, the things that make America great — like sovereignty, history, and a common heritage — are exclusionary and therefore immoral. If these things are illegitimate, then what is left to hold the country together?

The left isn’t interested in this question. For the left, society is not tied together by a thick set of bonds, but an idea, a heady individual universalism. Rather than a delicate thing to be sustained, society is a playground where individuals, freed from obligations, should pursue their desire with minimal concern for consequences.

The left’s immoral “morality” subordinates all things to the goal of liberating individuals from social ties. Infanticide would seem pretty black-and-white, but for the left, it’s a shrug-worthy sacrifice for the higher goal of autonomy. With infanticide, the left’s theology of personal liberation reaches a grim new stage. Even the creation of life must be subjected to restless individualism.

To the left, “community” is a political term rather than a social one. It does not describe the social fabric, but solidarity among the marginalized in a political war against “oppression.” To the extent that the left emphasizes collectivity, it is for the purpose of political action to secure privileges for individuals within their preferred groups.

Moreover, to the left, a “community” is a political faction representing an identity group, not an organic, delicate thing to be cherished and sustained by virtuous stewardship. Society is a hodge-podge of these “communities” — the LGBT “community,” the immigrant “community” — seeking their political advantage, with a greater or lesser degree of cooperation against the “oppressors.”

Seeking to liberate the “marginalized” from forms of hierarchy, the left erases traditions, institutions, and cultures that impose limits on individual self-expression, and in doing so ends up with such strange alliances as intersectional feminist Muslims, at once “traditional” in appearance while militating against their own culture.

As the left fractures society into competing identity groups, their project of liberation dissolves deeper social and cultural ties that might otherwise sustain society. Morals are oppressive, so infanticide is no big deal. Values that encourage responsible behavior are more stuffy remnants of bourgeois “white supremacy.”

Arbitrary barriers to movement need to be demolished. Borders aren’t real. There is no reason to deny entry to anyone seeking opportunity in America, which is really a marketplace to seek one’s fortune and desire, nothing more, nothing less. Culture, to the extent that there is any, exists as a set of secondhand commodities on the market. Standards of conduct are likewise acquired second-hand from consumer culture.

The left’s support of open borders, hostility to culture and tradition, and restless individualism come together in a thin “society” which is really a borderless market of fungible labor with little meaning, purpose, unity, or identity. In this “society,” what matters most is mobility, desire, and convenience.

To handle the resulting social anomie, the left looks to more mindless consumption and hedonic “liberation” as a narcotic. The left understands that numbing the population with drugs and entertainment will be necessary to keep the peace in the deracinated world they want to create.

If society is just a big marketplace of people enjoying themselves, then the left finds nothing wrong with this “solution.” For the left, the biggest sin is to judge or expect anything of people anyway. If there are no standards, then sustaining society isn’t a problem in the first place. Let the market take care of it.

It’s unreasonable to expect any president to unite a country with an enemy that seeks that nation’s demise. Abraham Lincoln did it, but it took a war. Even at the height of the Civil War, North and South shared a Christian heritage.

For a time, America had enough shared values and social trust to make a certain level of division possible without tearing the nation apart. That is no longer the case. How much longer can things hold together against a faction that seeks to unravel them?




Matthew Boose


Matthew Boose is a staff writer for Conservative Institute. He has a Bachelor's degree from Stony Brook University and has contributed to The Daily Caller and The Stony Brook Press. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Find text within the comments Find 
 
XXJefferson#51
1  seeder  XXJefferson#51    5 months ago

Here’s a preemptive strike at those who love this:

right081.png?resize=600%2C67&ssl=1https://i2.wp.com/mediabiasfactcheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/right081.png?resize=300%2C34&ssl=1 300w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" >RIGHT BIAS

Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: HIGH

Notes: According to their mission statement “The Conservative Institute exists to provide a platform for well-reasoned, well-written, and well-distributed articles and columns defending conservative values.”

In review, the Conservative Institute is a website that publishes news with a right wing/conservative bias in story selection as almost all articles favor the right. There is minimal use of loaded language in headlines and articles such as: Democrat mayor of Nashville resigns after guilty plea. The Conservative Institute sources all their information to credible media sources that are generally high for factual reporting. A factual search reveals that they have never failed a fact check. Overall, we rate the Conservative Institute Right Biased based on story selection that favors the right and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing. (D. Van Zandt 3/8/2018)

Source: https://www.conservativeinstitute.org

 
 
 
bbl-1
1.1  bbl-1  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    5 months ago

Hey.  Is this 'thing' from Iowa or St. Petersburg?

Where is the disclaimer?

 
 
 
devangelical
1.2  devangelical  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    5 months ago
Even at the height of the Civil War, North and South shared a Christian heritage.

With one side claiming a biblical right to own humans, and the other taking the side of the Constitution.

I look forward to participating in the next round of determining the future status of those that think their cult like version of xtianity takes precedence over the secular by design US Constitution. I've long advocated putting some teeth in the 1st amendment to deal with the religiously challenged when they attempt to promote their unamerican religious ideology off of church or their own property. Religious based hate speech that contradicts the Constitution should be confronted and subdued immediately, and with extreme prejudice.

 
 
 
epistte
1.2.1  epistte  replied to  devangelical @1.2    5 months ago
I look forward to participating in the next round of determining the future status of those that think their cult like version of xtianity takes precedence over the secular by design US Constitution. I've long advocated putting some teeth in the 1st amendment to deal with the religiously challenged when they attempt to promote their unamerican religious ideology off of church or their own property. Religious based hate speech that contradicts the Constitution should be confronted and subdued immediately, and with extreme prejudice.

I wish that I could vote this up more than once. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
1.2.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  devangelical @1.2    5 months ago
What is extreme prejudice definition?
terminate-with-extreme-prejudice. Verb. (euphemistic, US) To murder; to assassinate. The government ordered the spies to be terminated with extreme prejudice: they did not want them to expose what they knew in a public trial.
 
 
 
devangelical
1.2.3  devangelical  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1.2.2    5 months ago

the word terminate doesn't appear in my comment. nice try.

 
 
 
Ender
2  Ender    5 months ago

I don't care what fact check says, this opinion piece is a lie.

Also the sign up at the bottom sounds like promotion.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Ender @2    5 months ago

It has to be there for for each site they rate for MBFC to be on one or more internet platforms.  They explained it and I don’t remember if it was Chrome or Fire Fox or someone else.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Ender @2    5 months ago

The unique thing about reading/writing an opinion is that an opinion that is different than yours or mine is not a lie.  It is time we all acquire the emotional maturity to civilly discuss in a spirit of comity even opinion that is 180 degrees the opposite of our own that goes against everything we individually or collectively hold dear.  Is that too much to ask?  

 
 
 
Ender
2.2.1  Ender  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2    5 months ago

An opinion can't be a lie? Odd way of thinking.

My opinion is you should sell me your house for five bucks. That is what it is worth.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.2.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Ender @2.2.1    5 months ago

An opinion is not a lie unless the one expressing it knows it to be false and says it anyway.  The opinions in the seeded article are fully believed by both the author, the source,  and myself to be true. You are free to disagree with any or all he said.  That does not make him or me a liar.    On the other hand we all know that no functional home in Ca is worth only $5.00. So no comparison. 

 
 
 
Ender
2.2.3  Ender  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2.2    5 months ago

Not knowing it is a lie is not an excuse. It is still a lie.

Just having a belief in the lie does not make it factual.

 
 
 
bbl-1
2.2.4  bbl-1  replied to  Ender @2.2.3    5 months ago

Pulleezzee.  We're in the realm of 'alternative facts'.  Get with the program or invest in Trump U.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.2.5  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Ender @2.2.3    5 months ago

A lie according to who?  I believe to to be truth and the opposition to it a lie.  Whose truth is correct?  Who sits in judgement and decides? Certainly not either of us.  I stand by my 100% belief in the words written in the seeded article and to me they are truth.  

 
 
 
epistte
2.2.6  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2.5    5 months ago
A lie according to who?  I believe to to be truth and the opposition to it a lie.  Whose truth is correct?  Who sits in judgement and decides? Certainly not either of us.  I stand by my 100% belief in the words written in the seeded article and to me they are truth.  

Believing as lie doesn't mean that it is not a lie. It just means that you cannot tell truth from fiction or you want to ignore facts in favor or a belief. 

 
 
 
epistte
2.2.7  epistte  replied to  bbl-1 @2.2.4    5 months ago
Pulleezzee.  We're in the realm of 'alternative facts'.  Get with the program or invest in Trump U.

Some people (unnamed) have gone beyond alternate facts and embraced an alternate reality.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.2.8  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @2.2.6    5 months ago

And if I say the reverse toward you from the opposite perspective what does that make you and what you believe in?  

 
 
 
epistte
2.2.9  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2.8    5 months ago
And if I say the reverse toward you from the opposite perspective what does that make you and what you believe in?  

When have people ever tried to legislate atheism or Humanism?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.2.10  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @2.2.9    5 months ago

Russia, China, N. Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, E.Germany, others, etc.  

 
 
 
epistte
2.2.11  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.2.10    5 months ago
Russia, China, N. Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, E.Germany, others, etc.  

Don't be obtuse, because the US Constitution obviously doesn't apply in those countries.  When in the US have people tried to legislate atheism or Humanism?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.2.12  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Ender @2.2.1    5 months ago

I loved what President Trump said in his speech tonight about fact checkers.  He said that of all the liars in the msm, Fact Checkers are the biggest liars of all and as usual, he’s exactly right.  

 
 
 
lady in black
3  lady in black    5 months ago

And the right wants to install Christian Sharia.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  lady in black @3    5 months ago

Actually we don’t.  That has never been a part of the conservative agenda on behalf of America.  Our goal is a pluralistic tolerant rule of law society where comity and civility is the norm in our constitutional Republic.  

 
 
 
lady in black
3.1.1  lady in black  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1    5 months ago

Yes you do, let's see...you want to discriminate against gay people, you want to tell women what to do with an unplanned pregnancy, you want to tell people when they can have sex and they can't have it just for fun....need I go on.  You want to shove your religion down the throats of people that don't believe in your God or any God.  You want to make laws based on your religion and that your religion is the only "true" religion.  

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.2  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1    5 months ago
Actually we don’t.  That has never been a part of the conservative agenda on behalf of America.  Our goal is a pluralistic tolerant rule of law society where comity and civility is the norm in our constitutional Republic.  

Except for women, non-whites, non-conservative Christians and LGBT people.

 
 
 
BeastOfTheEast
3.1.3  BeastOfTheEast  replied to  lady in black @3.1.1    5 months ago

what a crock of shit

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.4  epistte  replied to  BeastOfTheEast @3.1.3    5 months ago
what a crock of shit

I dare you to prove her wrong.

Conservative Christians oppose equal rights for non-Christian religions, for women to have an abortion and for equal rights for LGBT, among many others and you use your conservative religious beliefs as a reason for those policy stances.  They also seek to inject their particular religious beliefs into public schools as well as to allow civil servants to use their religious beliefs as a way to deny others the same rights that they enjoy. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.1.5  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @3.1.4    5 months ago

That actually is a clear misrepresentation of what it is that we believe in.  

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.6  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.5    5 months ago
That actually is a clear misrepresentation of what it is that we believe in.  

You can believe what you want but your words and actions are proof otherwise. It is a fact that you have sought to and you continue to seek to legislate your conservative religious beliefs for others to obey, despite the Establishment Clause that creates a strict separation of church and state. 

Others who believe differently have the very same constitutional rights to believe, live and worship as they wish, so you cannot legislate your religious views  and trample theirs, despite what you may believe or the population percentage of conservative Christians such as yourself

 
 
 
lady in black
3.1.7  lady in black  replied to  BeastOfTheEast @3.1.3    5 months ago

No it is not a crock of shit.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.1.8  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  lady in black @3.1.7    5 months ago

Actually, it is.  

 
 
 
lady in black
3.1.9  lady in black  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.8    5 months ago

Yes I know it's not a crock of shit

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.10  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.8    5 months ago
Actually, it is.

Are you saying that you do not seek to try to weaken/overturn the Obergfell and Windsor SCOTUS decisions about LGBT marriage?  I know for a fact that you want to overturn Roe v. Wade as well as Engel v. Vitale that banned school prayer as well as weakening the strict separation of church and state.  Christian conservatives oppose equal religious and secular rights for Muslims and atheists, among other religions.

Conservatives oppose the enforcement of voting protections such as the 1965 Voting Rights Act because they protect the rights of people who do not tend to vote Republican/conservative. 

It is obvious that you oppose the public accommodation protections of the 1964 Civil Rights Act because they prevent religious conservatives from citing their bigoted religious beliefs to deny equal service to others in public businesses.  

 
 
 
Galen Marvin Ross
3.1.11  Galen Marvin Ross  replied to  BeastOfTheEast @3.1.3    5 months ago
what a crock of shit

Actually, it's true, here is an example of Christian Sharia at work in our prison system.

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/muslim-denied-presence-of-imam-at-his-execution-in-alabama-66729

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
3.1.12  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.5    5 months ago
That actually is a clear misrepresentation of what it is that we believe in.

"deny others the same rights that they enjoy."

I take it you were supporting the right of the Islamic group to build a Mosque a block from ground zero? You fought for gay Americans right to marry? You support the right of a Muslim public school teacher to give the students an art project that involves learning a story from the Koran just like other Christian teachers do art projects about the three wise men or a Christmas tree project? Right? Or you'd be perfectly fine with a high school football coach pulling out prayer rugs before the game and having the players join him in facing Mecca and praying to Allah, right?

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
5  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    5 months ago

This seed contains many partisan generalizations. Don't waste your time flagging replies that generalize.

Sincerely the people's fish

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
5.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @5    5 months ago

That is the nature of political opinion/editorial articles regardless of the side they are written for or in opposition to. That is the nature of opinion vs hard news. Anti conservative and anti Trump opinions do exactly the same in reverse.  

 
 
 
BeastOfTheEast
5.2  BeastOfTheEast  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @5    5 months ago
This seed contains many partisan generalizations. Don't waste your time flagging replies that generalize.

In that case, the left wants to install atheism as the state religion

 
 
 
Ender
5.2.1  Ender  replied to  BeastOfTheEast @5.2    5 months ago

At first I wanted the state religion to be Buddhism. But then I wanted to be able to kill flies and cockroaches.

 
 
 
Split Personality
5.2.2  Split Personality  replied to  Ender @5.2.1    5 months ago

 Ah, Buddhism,  I got tired of apologizing to wooden furniture and the grass and insect pests...

 
 
 
bbl-1
5.2.4  bbl-1  replied to  Ender @5.2.1    5 months ago

Nope.  The state religion is Ivanka & Melania in a duo on the pole.

 
 
 
epistte
5.2.5  epistte  replied to  BeastOfTheEast @5.2    5 months ago
In that case, the left wants to install atheism as the state religion

It's a shame that you cannot prove that claim.

Where have your religious right to believe and worship ever been curtailed?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
5.2.6  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @5.2.5    5 months ago

By those who would coerce certain Christian believers into participation one way or another in ceremonies that are an abomination to God and anathema to their beliefs.  They curtail people from the free exercise there of of their religious beliefs in their day to day lives.  

 
 
 
epistte
5.2.7  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @5.2.6    5 months ago
By those who would coerce certain Christian believers into participation one way or another in ceremonies that are an abomination to God and anathema to their beliefs.  They curtail people from the free exercise there of of their religious beliefs in their day to day lives.  

They are not being coerced in any way and their approval is neither sought or wanted. A business is not religious and your customers don't care about your religious beliefs because they are not germane to baking cakes, arranging flowers or taking pictures, among other secular skills.  These business owners knew of these rules when they got their business license, so they cannot now claim that their religious rights are  reason to discriminate against others who believe differently.

These owners have the very same rights to believe and worship as they choose, even if they desire to close their business during the day to do so. What they cannot do is to try to weaponize their beliefs to defend discrimination.

I have asked you many times when Jesus told his followers to discriminate and you have yet to respond to this question, obviously because Jesus told his followers to treat others as they would want to be treated, and this idea eliminates the concept of discrimination, which is inherently unequal.  Why do you claim to be a Christian and yet you continually ignore one of the core teachings of Jesus?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
6  seeder  XXJefferson#51    5 months ago

“Trump’s speech, like his governance, was contradictory and divided. In his State of the Union, as with his administration, he was working with a split purpose: to push back against, and also unify the country with, a leftist faction seeking to undermine the nation.

National unity and virtue can’t emanate from a president alone. They need to be ingrained within a solid social and political foundation, a foundation that the left is working to destroy.

The intersectional left seeks the opposite of unity. With open borders, they reject national sovereignty for a borderless marketplace. With cultural and moral relativism, they dissolve the social ties that make a strong and prosperous society possible.”

 
 
 
Steve Ott
7  Steve Ott    5 months ago

So which is it dude? Is life getting better or is it not?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
7.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Steve Ott @7    5 months ago

Economically yes, morally no.

 
 
 
epistte
7.1.1  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @7.1    5 months ago
Economically yes, morally no.

What exactly have you been forced to do that defiled your moral beliefs?

 
 
 
epistte
7.1.2  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @7.1    5 months ago
Economically yes, morally no.

Bueller..................bueller...................bueller.........................

 
 
 
Steve Ott
7.1.3  Steve Ott  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @7.1    5 months ago

And I showed on his other article how economically life is not getting better. If wages are stagnant, life is not better because there is no way to ever get ahead. The only economic growth is in the 1% of earners.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
7.1.4  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Steve Ott @7.1.3    5 months ago

Since Trump became president, average wages have been increasing enough above inflation to begin to make a difference in people’s lives that objective observers clearly see.  Combined with lower taxes and bonuses people are finally beginning to get ahead instead of just treading water.  

 
 
 
epistte
7.1.5  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @7.1.4    5 months ago
Since Trump became president, average wages have been increasing enough above inflation to begin to make a difference in people’s lives that objective observers clearly see.  Combined with lower taxes and bonuses people are finally beginning to get ahead instead of just treading water.  

 The facts disagree with you.

But despite the strong labor market, wage growth has lagged economists’ expectations. In fact, despite some ups and downs over the past several decades, today’s real average wage (that is, the wage after accounting for inflation) has about the same purchasing power it did 40 years ago. And what wage gains there have been have mostly flowed to the highest-paid tier of workers.
 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online



Ed-NavDoc
Freefaller
cjcold
GregTx


57 visitors