I wrote the post below on June 28th, but I refrained from posting it until the July 4th holiday was over. The article
"An Aristocracy of Incompetence" was the subject of my post, and was
published in
The American Thinker on June 24th. Below is my critique/review of the article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is an article at
The American Thinker titled:
"An Aristocracy of Incompetence" by Keith Reiler, who euphemistically writes:
[T]oday's liberal aristocracy has embraced intention-cloaked incompetence as a respectable explanation for each failure, avoiding accountability and substantially lowering the bar for quality public service.
But Reiler ups his ante when the "intention-cloaked incompetence" by President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the recently disgraced Anthony Weiner are revealed to be ideologically tainted . He ends up calling Nancy Pelosi a liar because the "incompetency" label, which may have some truth to it, doesn't work on its own.
He says similar things about Obama's evasion of reality and his joke about
"shovel ready" projects. The billions wasted that Obama references may be in part due to incompetence, but a good part of the problem occurred because liberals like Obama and his administration think that their method, a type of expansive Robin Hood equalizing project, is what would solve the problems of the economy.
Liberals may be incompetent (to some degree, but that is simply a technical criticism and incompetence can be corrected), but they don't make bad decisions because they're incompetent, rather because they're following an ideology. Ideology can be corrected (i.e. changed), but it is often as deep-seated as religious belief and often needs a dramatic conversion to change it.
So, I think Reiler underestimates, and scorns, his liberal subjects. That is probably the most common, and the most lethal, mistake that conservatives make when analyzing liberal behavior. They think it is stupidity (which they translate as incompetence) that feeds the recurring theme of liberal policy failures. And for that, liberals are to be scorned. But the leading liberal elite, which determines liberal thought and behavior, behaves the way it does because it believe in its message of equality for all. It believes in the ideology. Of course, the smart(est) liberals realize that equality is not for everyone, and they run to the hills and live in their elitist gilded cages to escape mundane equality. But, they are also ultimately delusional that all these failures will somehow correct themselves over time because the belief (the ideology) is good and correct. In building this utopia, liberals are as likely to destroy themselves as everyone else, and gilded cages are no safeguard. Still, the smartest of the liberals must understand this, but dare not contemplate it in the privacy of their honest thoughts.
Once conservatives realize this, then they will understand that it is a war that has been waged by liberals. More precisely, this is a civilizational war, right to the last gottesdammerung, with the intention of undoing our thousands of years of history and culture, and replacing it with a world organized around equality.
The lessons of modern history, especially the failed socialist and communist experiments, and even those planted by Nazis and Fascists, haven't made a dent in liberal perception and understanding of reality. And one wonders how even the more practical liberals simply don't look around and realize that based on this premise of equality, the world is disintegrating under its own edifices. So, the more destruction there is, the more gilded gates and fascistic jackboots liberals implement, without batting a hypocritical eyelid, in order to protect their exclusive edens.
And like Miss Havisham in Charles Dickens's novel
Great Expectations, who sits in her dust-coated room in bitter reminder of her jilted wedding day, liberals will sit and behind
their crumbling edifices, numb and actionless, when their great experiment fails.
