“Won’t look like rain. Won’t look like snow.
Won’t look like fog. That’s all we know.
We just can’t tell you any more.
We’ve never made oobleck before.”
— Dr. Suess, Bartholomew and the Oobleck
Sean Malone begins a predictably tendentious essay, Arguing with Republicans, with a claim I see, read, or hear all the time when people explain why they actually spend time arguing with the colonized minds of the Left. He cites the irritating situation of
“For the last few years, it seems like all I’ve done is debate with leftists, liberals and progressives who’s poor grasp of economics and annoying tendency to support style over substance has turned a good many of them into socialist weasels.”
Weasels they are and weasels they shall be. But they shall only be Socialists while they have a Capitalist system to support their Socialism. Once the Capitalist system can no longer support Socialism all socialists will turn into Communists. Instantly. It will be as if they were only wearing a Socialist skin suit.
These boilerplate leftist claims of ‘economic ignorance’ and ‘style over substance’ are as constant as disclaimers in drug ads. But they are either false or ignorant or both. Grown-up and fully functional LeftLibProgs know economics very well indeed, and never mistake style over substance. If this is actually Sean’s experience he’s 1) shoveling seaweed against the tide, and 2) spending too much time debating with LeftLibProg children.
It’s common for LeftLibProgs to say, in passing and without much feeling, that all their proposed hopeful changes to the economic system of the United States and the developed world is “for the greater good.” But it is not and it never has been that way. It is and it always was “for their greater good.” They also know to the deepest diseased marrow in their bones that their proposals lead to a weakened and, they hope, destroyed America. This is also touted as being “for the greater good,” but again it is always and only “for their greater good.”
I’ve read, known, lived with, talked with and to LeftLibProgs since I was an undergraduate at UC Berkeley. That phase of my ignorant youth included a whole raft of demented Young Socialists, Latter-Day Wobblies, du Bois Clubs, and seedy Communists right down to the execrable Bettina Aptheker, demented daughter of high-ranking American communists and first cousins Fay Philippa Aptheker and Herbert Aptheker.
Bettina, never an attractive person in body or soul, was a classic LeftLibProg of the era, and she knew her economics down to the last jot and tittle and penny. It was just that her sense of economics all aimed, as LeftLibProg economics always does, to the stealth re-concentration of wealth, the destruction of the USA, and the rise of “The Party.” In this way, even though she is now sunk into the obscurity she so richly deserves, she’s still a poster child for the oobleck of Iron Lung Economics of LeftLibProgism. She’s still selling her scarlet oobleck today because, when it comes to LiftLibProgs, “Once the needle goes in, it never comes out.”
The justification for the destruction of capitalist systems and the United States for Bettina was never “for the greater good,” although she was articulate enough to spin this straw into gold for the kids that listened to her. Instead, it was always for the good of “The Party” which, at that time, included her family pretty much in the way that Saddam Hussain’s economic plan for the future of Iraq centered on his family. LeftLibProgism was then, as it is now, just a gangster’s riff. It always has been anywhere it has been implemented.
Whenever the objection is made that LeftLibProgism has failed everywhere it has been tried, the response is always that it just wasn’t tried on a large enough scale. This is the argument that the cure for bad pop music is to just make it louder. The implied endgame is that only when the entire world is remade in the LeftLibProg model, “world without end always,” will the promised utopia arrive. Hence the wrecking ball of LeftLibProg economics must be swung against the pillars of civilization until the whole structure comes tumbling in upon itself. With help from the scions of greed at the far end of maxi-capitalism this vision currently has a whisper of a hope of actually happening.
This is why the leftprogs here and abroad are so increasingly violent and strident in their demands. Theirs is an economics not based on a rising capitalist tide lifting all boats, but one based on the ancient dictum of Lenin: Who-Whom?
Lenin, with his knack for hortatory pungency, reduced the past and future alike to two pronouns and a question mark: “Who—whom?” No verb was necessary. It meant who would prevail over whom? And the question was largely rhetorical, implying that the answer was never in doubt. Lenin and those who followed him would prevail over “them,” whoever they were. — Communism: The Specter and the Struggle
The LeftLibProgs are not clueless about their economics. They know exactly what Iron Lung Economics do to societies. They wreck them all, every single one, while funneling all wealth to the members of “The Party.” You know, the ones driving their limos in their special lane in the middle of the road; the ones on the private plane far, far overhead that never experience the proctological moment at the airport’s security checkpoint.
Neither are these power-mad insects really about “style over substance.” They are about using the “style over substance” on their chestless and thoughtless acolytes to bring “The Party” into power, and to keep “The Party” in power. Kids and adult-adolescents may think it’s about “The Family of Man” and “the greater good,” but it’s really always and eternally about “Who-Whom?” The leadership of the LeftLibProgs knows their Iron Lung Economics right down to the last pile of ash in the ovens of Auschwitz and the last shattered skull in the muck of The Killing Fields. You’re next.