The Progressive’s Echo Chamber

“The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions.”    - Leonardo da Vinci

As much of an understatement it is, the Progressives in the US were caught off-guard by the election of Donald J Trump to the presidency. The subsequent fallout from the left has taken me off-guard, much to my amusement.

In previous articles, I discussed the lack of tolerance on the left, the hypocrisy of the left, and how this election should restore confidence in the system. Today, I want to discuss why the left has had such a disproportionate response to the results of the election.

In a society where everyone gets a trophy, where little “Timmy’s” wrong answer on a test isn’t marked wrong, where ‘safe spaces’ are demanded, people simply do not listen to opinions that challenge their own. If you have an opinion that differs, you are shouted down, insulted, made out to be a rube, or even physically attacked. Where is the civility in that? Where is the ‘genuine conversation’ the left demands?

No. What has happened here is that the Progressives began to listen to liberal parrots who repeat words that landed softly on the ears. No challenge. No risk. No need to know “why” you believe something. In enjoying the music of hearing their own thoughts repeated back to them they made a devastating mistake: they assumed everyone thought as they did.

Remember back when Hillary began to float her picks for the cabinet? Sure, why not she was going to win anyway. How about the fireworks that were planned, but scrubbed at the last minute? Or even go back to Romney who stated the greatest geopolitical foe to the US was Russia? Romney was excoriated for his comments – they said he was stuck in the 80’s and that he wasn’t ready.

The problem is the dainty snowflakes who refuse to entertain an opinion that differs from their own is that they never consider they may be wrong.

The Hypocrisy of the American Progressive

The interesting thing about civilization is that it necessarily requires civility.

-       ZenDarb

I generally consider myself to be open-minded. In a recent team meeting with my workgroup I asked the question: “What political persuasion do you think I have?” I was shocked by the answers the group offered.

“Definitely a Hillary supporter”

“You like Trump!”

“I know you are a Democrat”

“I think you lean Libertarian”

There was even one person who “knew” how I leaned politically, but switched their guess after the discussion to “Pro-Hillary.”

I didn’t answer the question for them, I just continued to leave the group confused and began to think about the implications of the impromptu discussion. My immediate thought was, ‘I cannot believe they do not know where I stand!’ However, upon further reflection, I think I know what caused their inability to put a jersey on my back:

I genuinely listen to other points of view with respect.

Now, to be sure, I hold strong opinions about certain topics. The holding of strong opinions does not prevent me from considering others’ thoughts as, loathe as I am to admit it, I do not know everything. I think it is the open-mindedness and unwillingness to condemn the other person that enables me to have frank and deep discussions with others regarding sensitive topics like race, religion and politics.

In today’s political conversation, it takes a nano-second for a devolution into name calling. This does nothing but force the ‘opponents’ to dig trenches and refuse to listen. There is an appalling lack of civility in the discussion of ideas.

I am more concerned about the Truth than I am about being right. Others are free to be wrong, I am free to be wrong, however the Truth is what remains regardless of anyone's acceptance of it. As I look out into the political discussion as it exists today and try to objectively consider it, the lack of civility largely comes from one side of the spectrum: The American Progressive.

Now, one would have to be an idiot to say the rightward side of the political spectrum shows no signs of incivility. However, the lion’s share belongs to the left. Here is how a typical discussion flows between the right and left:

-       Left: THIS is how things should be!

-       Right: NO, THIS is how things should be!

-       Left: I can’t believe what Right just said!

-       Right: But it’s true…

-       Left: There you go, Right wants to kill children!

-       Right: It has nothing to do with children…

-       Left: That proves it, Right is racist!

-       Right: What has this got to do with racism?

-       Left: This is disgusting! Not only does Right want to kill children and disenfranchise minorities, but he is stupid as well!

In a short time, the actual topic is no longer discussed as the accusations fly and people are “de-friended.” Civil discussions just do not happen, and it is largely because of the Progressive.

I do not blame the sincerity of the Progressive. I believe that they sincerely believe in their views. The problem is their views oftentimes do not withstand facts. When the facts are presented, rather than re-evaluate their view the discussion is directed toward ad hominem comments.

Wherein lies the hypocrisy then?

It is this: for all their talk about freedom, for all their clamor for equality, for all their demand for tolerance, the American Progressive doesn’t practice what they preach. These ideals are reserved only for those who agree with them. The rate at which discussions turn to name calling has accelerated, it is because the average American Progressive is a hypocrite.

Any Color You Want...

Part 2 of the Election Reflection... (part 1)

“Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black.”

-       Henry Ford

Henry Ford revolutionized industry by being the first to apply a division of labor to the production of the automobile. Known as the assembly line, its goal was the quick and efficient production of a vehicle so that costs (and ultimately price) could be driven down to sell more of them. Part of the process involved a ‘quick-drying’ paint which was being used in the process, and it was only available in black.

So, in a sense, the customer was given any option they wanted in color – as long as the choice was black.

As I write, the election of Donald J Trump is one week in the rear-view mirror. This, the second part of the Election Reflection series, post will deal with the topic of tolerance in America.

tol·er·ance

/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/

noun

the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.

In the first GOP debate, the first question delivered to the crowded platform was,

“Is there anyone on stage, and can I see hands, who is unwilling tonight to pledge your support to the eventual nominee of the Republican party and pledge to not run an independent campaign against that person.”

Being the sole candidate responding, DJT raised his hand as boos rained down from the crowd. The moderators were “aghast” and even re-phrased the question as if The Donald had left his dunce cap off stage.

Exhibit A

Gotcha!

For days, the media lapped up and vomited out their indignation over DJT’s refusal to blanket accept the results of the nomination. Most of the candidates expressed ‘deep, heart-felt’ concern over DJT not being able to support the eventual GOP nomination, contrasting him against their own stalwart integrity and commitment to the GOP. In the following days, DJT eventually signed the pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee regardless of who it was – as ALL the other candidates had done.

In what was supposed to paint DJT in the corner, the following candidates could not honor their pledge when the tables were turned upon them: John Kasich, Jeb Bush, Lindsey Graham. Apparently the goose has different tastes than the gander.

Exhibit B

How Dare You! 

During the presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and DJT, the moderators (again) wanted to paint the GOP candidate into a corner by asking if the candidates will accept the election results. Now bear in mind, this is B.E. (Before Election) when the whole world just knew The Donald had about the same chance to be elected as a WV tooth has remaining in place. The obvious implication was: “Poor little, stupid Donald, will you embrace the inevitable Hillary win?”

When DJT refused to give a definitive answer, the world went apoplectic! Why, how dare this person unworthy to stand on the platform refuse the will of the American people and put our dear democracy in jeopardy! We have democratic elections and we transfer power peaceably – now DJT has put all of this at risk!

Fast forward to November 8, 2016 and the following days and what do we see? We see the monolithic group who disparaged Trump’s answer doing the EXACT thing they accused him of! See Exhibit C.

Hillary Clinton is now joining Jill Stein in orchestrating recounts in states where DJT won insurmountably. The B.E. HRC and the A.E. HRC are two entirely different people. Before Election Hillary called DJT’s comments truly “horrifying” and a “direct threat to democracy.” Hillary 2.0 (A.E.) apparently has summoned her inner Trump and is now doing the very thing Trump was excoriated for saying. Hypocrite.

Exhibit C

#NotMyPresident

Seriously? The bald-faced hypocrisy of the American Progressive knows no boundary. Did anyone see anything close to this type of a response from the American Right when they lost the election to Barak Obama? Do you think you would see this type of response had Hillary Clinton won?

The American Progressives chided and derided DJT when he refused to state he would accept the results of the election, and yet, when the results were not to their liking they are throwing a temper tantrum! Who now is putting our democracy in jeopardy? Who now is threatening the peaceful transfer of power. Just as in most things, the American Progressive gives the greater heft to what is said rather than what is actually done.

There can be only one.

For all their talk of tolerance, the truth is, the American Progressive can only tolerate one view – theirs. Henry Ford would be proud.