If you’ve been paying even scant attention to the news in the past couple of years, you’ve no doubt heard tale of Leftist students on college campuses invading and disrupting speaking events and conferences that deal in subject matter that they deem offensive. And yet, when is the last time you’ve heard of the reverse happening: Conservative students storming a liberal program to stop it from being heard or to somehow diminish the message?
We are also seeing plenty of reports about Hollywood elites banding together to support Barack Obama’s campaign. But, not one Hollywood elite that I know of has gone behind someone like, oh, I don’t know — Tom Tancredo, for instance? Tancredo is worthy of just as much or more respect in my view than Obama, but no, he’ll be ignored by Hollywood. He’s a straight, white, Conservative male after all.
The stigma of the Liberal Media in the United States is as old as I am. No need to even discuss that anymore.
And we all know how the Democrats are scrambling to undermine the President and the troops’ mission in Iraq. “Oh, but we support the troops!” Sure you do, Dems.
Then there’s the little problem with Leftists completely ignoring things like Muslim immigration. They’d rather open the borders and not use common sense. Oh, no. We must alert the ACLU anytime anyone tries to say NO to anything, right Dems? Anarchy must rule! Sex, drugs and rock & roll, baby! Yeah!
Well, this trend of Leftists gone wild isn’t just happening on college campuses, and in Hollywood and Washington. Now it’s happening online via the many bookmarking sites available on the Blogosphere (i.e. Digg). It’s also happening at sites like YouTube, and you’ve already read something on that subject here at the Anvil this past week.
Here’s the latest that I’ve come across, and it interested me, so I figured it might interest you. From Little Green Footballs, a tale of word-policing by the Left once again:
Mob Rule at Digg
Somehow, I dont think the social bookmarking model is supposed to operate like this. The idea behind an ostensibly non-partisan site like Digg.com is that people submit links to interesting things, and other people rate the links, so that interesting stuff gets more votes and rises to the top.
But at Digg, this utopian web fantasy has turned into a system of mob rule.
Case in point, our post today about the ACLUs newest attempt to get Islamist spokesman Tariq Ramadan into the US: Digg - ACLU: US Cant Bar Terrorism Supporters.
As soon as this post was made popular (received enough votes to get listed on the front page), leftist Digg readers swarmed all over it, clicking the bury button like busy little progressive beavers. They also voted against almost every supporting comment, so that they disappeared from the list.
Theyre doing this with every LGF post that shows up at Digg now, and the swarm is almost instantaneous. If one of our posts gets to the front page, its buried within minutes.
Its a leftist totalitarian dreamworld. They simply exclude any and all points of view that violate the groupthinkand call it democracy.
The most ridiculous example is in the first LGF post that broke through the Digg hivemind, in which the first two dozen comments are hidden: Digg - Iran Uses Photoshop: Fake Pic Reveals US Terror Arms.
Heres a Digg post by someone else who sees how bad the problem has become: Digg - Dear Kevin Rose, Please Create a Who Buried This Tab.
And that post was immediately buried.
See the actual article with working links and updates here.
Now, my question is simply this: Are we witnessing the formation of a real Fascist Party in the United States? Perhaps these kids and the Left are so out of their minds that they are unaware of what their behavior actually is when defined in a dictionary or encyclopedia? That’s just no excuse, boys and girls. Squelching differing opinions is one of the hallmarks of fascism, especially when it is done by overt and covert means.
The Left better wake the hell up, because I can promise you, I will tap dance all over this subject and do my part to make a laughing stock out of the Democratic Party in the coming election cycle if this behavior continues to escalate. The Left might like to mock Conservatives and Republicans and anyone else they don’t agree with, and that’s fine. But when the mockery turns into fascism and word-policing and absolute double-standards? Well, that’s when the American people better stand up and point a finger and let the Left know that either get things reigned in or get ready for a fight.
Frankly, I don’t think it will be that much longer before we see a violent incident on the part of the Left in its efforts to further squelch differing opinions, and that’s something I won’t tolerate.
Bring it on, fascists. Between the Far Left and the Muslims, I feel like I’m watching the clock turn back to 1938 right here in the United States!
Happy Sunday.
Podcasts Archive
The leftists have never met an anti-American speaker or program that they haven’t liked. We can thank them for all the wonderful inroads that Islamania has made in the US up to this point. I just wonder when the ACLU will merge with CAIR-these two groups are like a hand in glove ready to strangle the US.
The best way to support the troops is to bring them home so no more of them die for a lost cause.
“But, not one Hollywood elite that I know of has gone behind someone like, oh, I dont know Tom Tancredo, for instance? Tancredo is worthy of just as much or more respect in my view than Obama, but no, hell be ignored by Hollywood. Hes a straight, white, Conservative male after all.”
He’s also a biggot and a racist. Not exactly the type of person that any tolerant, clear headed, American would be anxious to support. Tancredo is far to the right of even many fasicsts and any measure of support for him is tantamount to support for Hitler. Or are you also of the belief that immigrants are ruining this nation? Because if so, I can loan you the money for a plane ticket back to YOUR nation of origin (Unless of course you are a Native American… in which case yes, you have every right to demand border control after all the bullshit that you’ve dealt with in accomodating ‘immigrants’ on your land). The fact is, America was founded on the principles of immigration and tolerance. We may have forgotten that from time to time, but without understanding and tolerance at home we cannot even pretend to make the claim of being a “free nation”
Regardless, Tancredo’s time in any government position is going to be up just as soon as he comes up for elections.
[quote post=”471″]Hes also a biggot and a racist. Not exactly the type of person that any tolerant, clear headed, American would be anxious to support. Tancredo is far to the right of even many fasicsts and any measure of support for him is tantamount to support for Hitler. Or are you also of the belief that immigrants are ruining this nation?[/quote]
Apparently you’re one of those people that removes “illegal” from immigration.
So, you’re calling Tom Tancredo, an honest American of Italian descent — which means he’s had to scrape for everything he has in this country, and I should know because I’m half Italian myself — you’re outrageously claiming that he’s a “racist and bigot” because he stands up for the laws of this land and fights drug cartels and actually speaks his mind HONESTLY, unlike so many of the sycophants in Washington?
You’re so close to losing any credibility with me right now, it’s the razor’s edge and the teeter-totter has begun.
[quote post=”471″]The fact is, America was founded on the principles of immigration and tolerance.[/quote]
And obeying the Law and building a life here as neighbors, not as invaders, no matter what the excuse. My people waited in line like everyone else at NY harbor. It’s a damn shame that so many bleeding hearts would rather sell credit cards to illegals (thanks B. of America!) and fill their own coffers, instead of doing what’s just and correct for the rights of ALL Americans and not just a select few.
I AM the product of LEGAL immigation!
Tancredo also leaves the “illegal” out of immigrant. His remarks about Miami had nothing to do with legal vs. illegal. It was a blanket statement that completely ignored the fact that many (though clearly not all) of the immigrants in Miami are there legally. It was also a sign of his ignorance, since if he was referencing Cuba he should have said second world country. I also find it interesting that this “HONEST” man that campaigned heavily on the term limit platform and promised to only serve three terms is now on his fourth term as Senator. Plus, his stance on immigration is only the tip of his racism iceburg or do you also have no problem with politicians speaking in front of the confederate flag?
“And obeying the Law and building a life here as neighbors, not as invaders, no matter what the excuse… I AM the product of LEGAL immigation!”
Really? So you got permission from the Native Americans and honored and upheld the treaties that were made with the true “owners” of this land? Then you are certainly in the minority and I tip my hat to you.
Let’s face it. You “legal” immigrants were every bit the “invaders” that the illegals are. You can sugar coat it however you want, but unless you’re willing and able to somehow justify the extermination of the native americans your words, no matter how loud, will always be hollow. There are no “legal” immigrants. Everyone that has ever come to this land has done so as an invader. It’s up to each of us individually to reconcile that within the context of our own lives.
“Youre so close to losing any credibility with me right now, its the razors edge and the teeter-totter has begun.”
Mixed metaphor… bad form. For you’re part I am having a hard time deciding whether or not you are the type of person that would have been marching around in jackboots half a century ago, so I suppose we are both very close to drawing a conclusion.
@matthew.lee: I think you’re doing me a great service by providing such comments on a post titled “Is the Far Left really the New Fascist Party of America?”
You are so afraid of the truth and law and order that you will stoop to using tired tactics like discussing the morality of taking Native American territories.
Let me ask you, Mr. Self-Righteous, should the Muslims give back most of the Middle East like Iran (Persia), Iraq (once majority Christian), Turkey (esp. Constantinople) and parts of Eastern Europe? They are only there by invasion and they spoiled the futures of great nations that were in far greater abundance and with far larger works than the Native Americans ever were or had on North American soil. We could go round and round when it comes to historical assumptions of who was right or wrong in the matter of real estate annexing.
I live in the Present. I deal with the ramifications of history for that and the Future.
I happen to know Miami quite well. In fact, I was a victim of a racist attack by Cubanos the last time I was on Washington Avenue. Do not attempt to tell me about that area of the world, you will be out of your element and I will be in mine.
Your intent and overtones are transparent and I will waste little time with further replies if all you are seeking is more fictionalized dogma to paint people like Tancredo with a tar brush.
But, for the record, that Confederate Flag you brought up — it’s not the Confederate Flag — never was. You probably didn’t even know that until now.
The “Confederate Flag” you’ve seen told tale of so many times is a battle flag only and was not the standard of the Confederacy.
What that flag even has to do with this discussion, I have no idea, but since you brought it up, again a tired attempt at painting people that differ in opinions with a Leftist as some kind of KKK wannabes, I felt compelled to school you once again.
Well said, Foehammer! Having been raised in the Deep South of the United States, it’s refreshing to find someone else who recognizes the Confederate Battle Flag for what it is, rather than rabble rousing via worn out biased platitudes traitors use to feel they’ve gained a point. Too bad they’re unable to see their vacuum brained ignorance of reality.
Mounted upon the wall of my home’s entry way is a family heirloom: a Yankee Civil War rifle as well as its powder horn! [lost the saber and bayonet…]How can this be? I am a native born American who’s ancestors arrived in MA during the year 1636 from Reading, England. There has been at least one family member in my direct line who has fought for the United States in every war this Nation has been forced to participate in. Yes, I am a Daughter of the American Revolution, and it is to people such as my ancestors and other REAL and LEGAL immigrants all of us need to look up to for founding and maintaining this once Great Nation which is now being attacked from all sides by liberal left wingers, ACLU thugs, CAIR criminals, Islamic murders, self-serving DAMocRATS and other such cast off rubbish.
Let us all have sufficient common sense to live and to SEE in the PRESENT, as Foehammer so clearly does. We can do well to emulate his insights into REALITY, and if we are unable to, simply take his comments seriously and for what they are: TRUTH!!!!
“But, for the record, that Confederate Flag you brought up its not the Confederate Flag never was. You probably didnt even know that until now.”
Actually, I was referring to the Naval Jack, commonly known as the “Rebel Flag”, which was later modified to become the battle flag, which was then incorporated into the second and third Confederate national flags. Apparently you didn’t even know that until now.
Don’t attempt to impune my argument with equivocations and red herrings. The fact is that that particular banner, regardless of the name by which it is called, is an emotionally charged symbol. While it stands for pride in one’s heritage and patriotism, it has a far darker side as well, as a symbol used even today by those who would spread prejudices.
As someone with heritage that fought and died in the American Revolution and in the Civil War (for the Confederacy on my mother’s side and for the North on my father’s) I am very proud of my heritage and the patriots of my family. My grandfather, to this day, owns several items used by a member of our family during the civil war which I am sure that I will one day inherit. However, neither my grandfather (perhaps because of my grandmother) nor myself would ever publically display the Rebel Flag out of respect for those who would be offended by the negative connotations of such a symbol.
The fact is, both sides of the conflict surrounding the Rebel Flag are blind to the true and rational arguments of the other side. Only by acknowledging both sides of the symbol can you really understand the complexity of the larger issue. Only then can you decide if your need to flaunt your heritage and patriotism supercedes the needs of another to live without the shadow of past wrongs. For me, I have come to the decision that my heritage is my own, and while I may be proud of those who came before me, that it is my responsability to define myself as a person.
There is a difference between being proud of your heritage and being blind to the mistakes of the past. As Americans we should be selectively proud. We should be proud of the great things done and said by those who came before us, and proud of the positive ideals for which they stood. We should also, however, be mindful of the mistakes made by those very same people. To turn a blind eye on past injustices for the sake of “national pride” does a great prevents us from making positive changes today.
If we forget the follies of our past, if we forget the past mistreatment and injustices against africans and native americans and italians and irish and chinese and japanese, we are likely to simply fall into the same patterns today. To fall into those same mistakes of our past does a great disservice to those who came before us and did the very best with what they had.
[quote comment=”643″]
Actually, I was referring to the Naval Jack, commonly known as the “Rebel Flag”, which was later modified to become the battle flag, which was then incorporated into the second and third Confederate national flags. Apparently you didn’t even know that until now.
[/quote]
Prove that statement. I knew exactly what standard you were referring to. I also know that it was not the flag of the Confederacy, and if your claims about later incarnations have any merit, I want to know when it transpired. As far as I know, your claim in this regard is absolutely false, but I can be proven wrong and invite new information.
As for the Civil War itself, it’s incredible that the deaths and sacrifice on such an incredible scale are still not enough for some people. No persons from the South have anything to be ashamed of any longer, and I’d even go so far to say, that most of them acted with honor that has long since died in this country. You may have not believed in their cause, but it wasn’t as pigeon-holed as you would make it. The beliefs of the South went far beyond simply attempting to preserve slavery (which I adamantly oppose, of course), and this matter can not be just washed over in order to once again smear an entire section of American history with a moral brush stroke.
The original Stars and Bars was replaced by the “Stainless Banner” or “Stonewall Flag” (all white with the Battle Flag in the upper left, where the stars occupy on the Stars and Stripes) in 1863, which was in turn replaced by the “Blood Dipped” flag (same as Stainless Banner but with a broad red stripe along right side to help distinguish it from flags of truce on battlefield) in 1865.
You can find a detailed history about the flags’s various incarnation as well as fairly decent commentary on past and current in John Coski’s book “The Confederate Battle Flag: America’s Most Embattled Emblem”. It’s a pretty good reference and I think it gives a fair shake to both sides of the argument. As a side note, my grandfather has a Stainless Banner stowed away with some of his other hierlooms.
I agree with you that the Civil War was about much more than the issue of slavery. Most of all it was a matter of state sovereignty, an issue which I strongly support to this day. However, it is a sad fact that the issue which “broke the camel’s back” and forced the divide was the issue of slavery. In another time and another way the issue of state sovereignty wouldn’t have been muddied up by a matter that was strictly one of morality.
However, I recognize, and agree with, the sentiment that for most people the most significant cultural memory from that battle was the issue of slavery. Like any symbol the Rebel Flag is only as powerful as the shared memory that it represents. In this fact, it is no different, really, than the swastika: a symbol with roots in the Neolithic era and that survived as a symbol through the Greek and Roman empires, was found in Native American cultures, and is still an important symbol within the Hindu faith. However, because of its association with the Nazi party and fascism during World War II and the painful shared cultural memory of that event, that symbol is rightly considered to no longer be appropriate in public.
It is my opinion that when a particular symbol invokes a cultural memory that is painful for a great many people that it is more appropriate not to use, regardless of any positive connotations it might have personally or symbolicaly.
Anyways, I think it has been an interesting discussion.