About six-years ago, during one of my occasional inter-marital periods, I found myself at a nice restaurant in LA, enjoying what I hoped would be a pleasant dinner and the beginning of an even more enjoyable evening. My hosts for the evening were two very attractive female, doctorally-qualified Social Science professors, and the husband of the one I was meeting for the first time, who was a partner in a law or accounting or consulting firm. I don’t have a clear memory of the gentleman, since I usually don’t remember other men, and that night the two woman professors were far more interesting. My date for the evening was a beautiful woman with whom I had shared a bad case of “the hots” since my senior year in college, and my plan for the present, also shared I think, was to make up for lost time. As the evening began, the conversation moved to political topics, and I immediately sensed I was in deep trouble.
I had expected both the professors to be Liberal/Progressives, since my own 25-years as an academic had taught me that most academics are Lib/Progs, and female Social Scientists are among the most rabid. I played it cool, hoping the meal and the wine would offer an opportunity to shift the conversation to topics less likely to piss-off my companion, and I offered up what I thought would be a safe topic, recounting a recent study by the US Department of Labor that had documented the incredible movement between and among economic and social classes in American society. Sounds safe, doesn’t it? But by the time I had outlined the DOL study’s findings that economic movement across quintiles in America remains the most flexible and dynamic in the world, both women attacked me as if I had said Barack Obama was not the new Messiah. I listened to an appalling series of vapid arguments about methodology and how I must have misread the results, before I offered to email them copies of the study and began trying to shift the topic to the Dodgers or the weather or the wine. I later sent them both copies of the study, with the same conclusions I had discussed, but never heard another word on the topic from either professor. The reality I had presented conflicted sharply with the ideologically constructed Liberal/Progressive illusion that my friends used to determine what “facts” could be entertained in their conscious minds.
Paranoia, schizophrenia, and various other mental disorders distort the individual’s ability to perceive the external, sensory-based reality accurately and often bring about a blurring of the line between internally experienced “delusions” and external stimuli. Julian Jaynes, who I met and heard speak, but never actually studied with at Princeton in the late seventies, developed an interesting theory in his research and in a popular treatment, THE ORIGIN OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE BREAKDOWN OF THE BICAMERAL MIND. Jaynes speculated that the “voice of God” which was “heard” in any number of religions during Bronze Age civilizations, represented the emergence of human “self-consciousness” or consciousness, in which the human brain developed for the first time an awareness of itself as separate from its environment. The holy men, and some holy women, heard the “Voice of God” inside their brains, but Jaynes speculated that those heavenly voices were actually the two hemispheres of the brain beginning to “communicate” for the first time. While Jaynes’ theory has some problems that I won’t try to outline here, it does provide a possible answer as to why the “Divine Voices” went silent as the brain became more effectively integrated and most humans with normal brain functions ceased to “hear” other voices “inside” their heads. Of course, Jaynes’ theory also provides a possible explanation for some symptoms of schizophrenia and other forms of paranoid delusions, since people suffering from those maladies could have brains that are not fully integrated, hence the difficulty they experience in attempting to integrate sensory-based and purely cognitive data.
So what the heck does all this have to do with our generally politically and economically oriented discussions on RNL? One of the lesser known beliefs of Liberal/Progressivism and other forms of Collectivism (especially Marxism) is that reality does not actually exist as an objectively experienced set of “facts”, but rather “reality” is actually a series of subjectively experienced individual visions. Hence, my reality is different than “your” reality and so on and so on. In the absence of any objective reality, the reason why we non-believers cannot comprehend the shared “reality” of Collectivism is that we suffer from “false consciousness”, an affliction first discussed by the monsters who led the French Revolution and developed at length by Friedrich Engels. As implemented in the Communist Soviet Union, this doctrine led to the standard treatment for “counter-revolutionaries” to be long term confinement in barbaric Soviet “mental facilities”. Several of my old Chinese friends were classified as “Intellectuals” during Mao’s “Cultural Revolution” and were sentenced to hard labor and “reeducation in the peasant virtues”, essentially a similar treatment to the Soviet approach.
Our Dear Leader’s “educational” cadres have been quietly taking a similar approach to correcting the “false consciousness” of America’s children on issues like race. According to the “new history,” America, the only nation in history where a dominant race, White Europeans, fought a civil war in order to free a then-subservient race, African Americans, is now somehow the Great Satan. The consciousness correcting campaign in our nation’s government schools has extended to the marginalization of our Founders, who created the freest civilization in the world’s history, and of our free enterprise capitalistic economic system, which has produced the highest standard of living in a large nation thus far in human history. The reason why Lib/Progs have sought and achieved effective control of our nation’s public schools, while seeking to eliminate or control private schools and to eliminate “home schooling,” is that our Collectivist fellow citizens are playing out a long-term, multi-generational strategy in which the false consciousness of we traditional individualistic Americans will be “corrected” by undermining our beliefs and America’s founding principles through “reeducation” of our children and grandchildren. If you doubt this strategy has been underway for some time, take a look at your children’s or grandchildren’s textbooks and you will be appalled.
We are potentially one generation away from a time when those of us embracing the values of individual freedom and liberty, property rights, freedom of religion, speech, thought, association, assembly and free enterprise capitalism could find ourselves classified as delusional, paranoid or schizophrenic and subject to reeducation and/or “treatment” in government psychiatric facilities. It has happened before in China, Russia, Cambodia, Viet Nam and numerous other Collectivist nations. It is my view that our Liberal/Progressive friends are the ones suffering from distortions of reality, which clearly does exist, since they find it impossible to acknowledge the failure of everything they set out to achieve. Charles Murray, Thomas Sowell, Richard Epstein and Friedrich Hayek present a clear picture of the past crimes against humanity perpetrated by Collectivist regimes (Hayek, especially THE ROAD TO SERFDOM) and what has been happening silently in America for the last two generations (Murray, Sowell & Epstein). This is scary stuff, and if you remember the words Our Dear Leader spoke on the night of his first term election in 2008, Mr. Obama told the Faithful, “On this night, change has come to America.” We now know what he meant and it has been frightening to watch as it unfold.. CDE