Creative Destruction

Recently a buddy and I were chatting about the recent protests and how all the leftists are complaining that the right wingers never complained when Bush was in office and how the anti-war movement is pretty much dead now that Obama is in office.

It’s certainly true that there are principled people who railed against Bush when it was his turn to destroy the country and there are principled people who continue to agitate against the war now that Obama is in office, in general, I will grant that people are very partisan and are blinded to their loyalties.

This works in the government’s favor.

The whole division into two teams, the red team, the blue team. The left and the right, the dems and the repubs, it’s all a big sham. Not that there aren’t two teams. There are two teams. The key thing to realize though is that Bush and Obama are on the same team. They are NOT on YOUR team.

The two teams are not the left and the right, but the government and the people. The government is not on your side. The government is our ENEMY. The government is “everywhere and always” your enemy. It doesn’t matter if the republics or the democrats control it. It’s your enemy. It always has been, it always will be.

If you dispute this, consider that Obama’s “science czar” is a proponent of mass forced abortions and involuntary sterilization:

Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.

It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.

Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.

via ‘Science Czar’ John P. Holdren’s disturbing beliefs about America, capitalism and humanity.

You might think that the scene in D9 where the evil UN bureaucrat is smiling at the thought of “aborting” a bunch of alien babies with a flamethrower is kind of funny, but your government is being run by THE EXACT SAME SORT OF PEOPLE. They will abort babies if they are the wrong color. These people are “progressives.” It is simply another word for evil. If you don’t think that progressive == evil, just look up Margaret Sanger and eugenics.

They claim that people who don’t support Obama’s health care plan are racists. I think they are doing that so that the word racist doesn’t mean anything. Then when I say that you are a racist because you plan to kill all the black babies, that statement will have no meaning anymore.

UPDATE: Some random reading has led me to discover that people have defended Holdren by saying he was just describing other people’s views. I have been reviewing the full-size scans of pages of his book over at zombietime and it is plainly clear that while he may be describing other people’s views, he is also endorsing them. Here is a choice quote from page 786, clearly speaking in the author’s voice, describing the author’s views:

The third approach to population limitation is that of involuntary fertility control. Several coercive proposals deserve discussion, mainly because some countries may ultimately have to resort to them… [emphasis added]

Note that he says, “some countries may have to resort to them”. He does not say “some countries may resort to them” which is a statement without any moral baggage. By adding the phrase “have to” it is clear that he is saying that under certain circumstances, forced sterilization is the only available option. Evil should never be an option.

Another statement from the same page:

severely repressive economics measures…should be considered only if milder measures fail completely

He’s not claiming that severely repressive measures are the first option, but he is certainly claiming that they are an option, if maybe the last one.