“Quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat“
My favorite living historian Victor Davis Hanson has a brilliant post on the rot that infects the West:
Sanctuary cities illustrate how progressive doctrine can by itself nullify the rule of law. In the new West, breaking statutes is backed or ignored by the state if it is branded with race, class, or gender advocacy. By that I mean that if a solitary U.S. citizen seeks to leave and then reenter America without a passport, he will likely be either arrested or turned back, whereas if an illegal alien manages to cross our border, he is unlikely to be sent back as long as he has claims on victimhood of the type that are sanctioned by the Western liberal state. Do we really enjoy free speech in the West any more? If you think we do, try to use vocabulary that is precise and not pejorative, but does not serve the current engine of social advocacy — terms such as “Islamic terrorist,” “illegal alien,” or “transvestite.” I doubt that a writer for a major newspaper or a politician could use those terms, which were common currency just four or five years ago, without incurring, privately or publicly, the sort of censure that we might associate with the thought police of the former Soviet Union.
“Might makes right” sums up the left. Obama, and this pope, are perfect exemplars. There is no objective standard to their moral code. It is just their ability to enforce their beliefs that makes them “right”.
“Quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat“
.
“Whom God wishes to destroy, He first makes insane.”
.
Destruction is imminent for insanity is overwhelming.
Whom Gods Destroy:
.
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Whom_Gods_Destroy_(episode)
The alt-right (with uncharacteristic precision and creativity) have coined a term for what he describes: “anarcho-tyranny”.
Like a stopped clock, Al Gore recently got right one thing. People are more stupid, see presidential election results 2008 ands 2012. He blamed global warming. I blame public schools and the post-modern academy that traded the truth for the asinine, liberal narrative. For them, truth is that which advances the agenda.
.
They start with the premise, say, income inequality was a major aspect of the Roman Republic, and “prove” it by agitated appeals to emotion (not fact or logic), calumnies, distortions, exaggerations, fabrications, false equivalences, fantasies, misdirections, non sequiturs, omissions (ignore it), projections of 21st century amorality, repetitions, spins, unsupported conclusions.
Probably not the best example since income inequality was a major aspect of the Roman Republic. Social and economic inequality is the rule and not the exception for almost all of human history.
But yes, foot-stomping is the preferred method of argument amongst liberals.