It's Not 'Unwisdom', It's Hubris -- Hubris often indicates a loss of contact with reality.

[Joe Cooper]

Here we go again. Peggy Noonan just expressed concern about �The
Unwisdom of Barack Obama.� She writes of the president:

"His essential problem is that he has very poor judgment."

When Aunt Peggy says it then attention must be paid. She's not your
ordinary racist, sexist, homophobe spouting �hate speech.� Peggy Noonan
demands respect.

Peggy goes down the list of Obama's unwisdom: Syria �red line�, �I don't
have a strategy,� ObamaCare instead of jobs and the economy, misreading
the situation of Republicans in 2009.

But what jumps out at you when you read through Peggy's list is that
Obama's unwisdom is nothing special, nothing unique to him. Obama's folly
is just liberalism's folly; he and his administration are just executing
the 30-year-old playbook of modern liberalism right back to his liberal
base, just what it wants.

But really, the liberals' problem is not unwisdom; it goes deeper than
that. It is good old Greek hubris. As Wikipedia says:

[Hubris] means extreme pride or self-confidence. When
it offends the Gods of ancient Greece, it is usually
punished... Hubris often indicates a loss of contact
with reality and an overestimation of one's own
competence, accomplishments or capabilities, especially
when the person exhibiting it is in a position of power.

Would a man that �could probably do every job on the campaign better than
the people I�ll hire to do it,� not to mention be �a better political
director than my political director� possibly have a problem with hubris?

It all started with lawyer's son Karl Marx pronouncing on capitalism as
though he knew it better than the merchants and manufacturers that
practiced it. So he set workers against employers in a class war to
destroy capitalism. After a hundred million deaths, you can see how well
that turned out.

So the Marxists turned from economic Marxism to cultural Marxism. Blow up
the middle class's hard-won social peace with identity politics and
everyone a victim.

In cultural Marxism we see the same hubris at work as with
communism/socialism. Only now liberals have graduated to
gender/ethnic/race wars after failing Class War 101.

But I've just been reading Rene Girard's Violence and the Sacred. It's
all about the basic problem of non-state societies: uncontrolled
community violence. Without a justice system, disagreements and feuds
easily escalate, and once started, the retaliatory violence easily
escalates into a chain reaction of uncontrollable violence.

So the focus of ancient religion was to prevent all-out mayhem between
warring factions through sacrifice and ritual.

It was the state with its monopoly on violence and its justice system
that put perpetual feuds between the Hatfields and the McCoys to rest,
because people came to feel that the justice system would punish
malefactors for them.

Enter liberal politics with its elevation of grievance and protest into a
holy cause. Under liberalism the highest and best purpose in life is
teach people they are victims, to create division, and then exploit the
justice system to favor certain interests over others.

What happens if liberals actually succeed in their project of division
and further politicize the justice system and the regulatory agencies?
When do ordinary Americans start to lose faith in the impartiality of the
justice system and return to the stateless culture that seeks redress of
their grievances directly?

Liberals like to complain about the divisiveness of our politics, and
they sneer at backlash from the bigots and the bitter clingers. But
backlash from the white working class began when liberals started
affirmative action, which privileges race and gender minorities over
working class whites. Liberals complained about the Christian Right that
rose out of nowhere when liberals went all-in for abortion. They started
to call defenders of traditional marriage haters when liberals went all-
in for �marriage equality� and made ordinary people into bigots.

It doesn't seem to occur to liberals that maybe these movements of
rejection are a response to the liberal corruption of the justice system
and its conversion into a tool of liberal policy.

Electioneering used to stop right after the election; but now today's
permanent campaign keeps political division going strong between
elections. Presidents used to assemble a bipartisan majority for major
legislation to avoid inflaming the losers against their program. The IRS
used to be kept pretty clear of partisan politics to keep people paying
their taxes.

But the partisan liberals in the Obama adminstration think that the rules
don't apply to them. They are blind to the dragon's teeth of division and
mistrust that their social justice politics sows in the body politic.
They honor and celebrate the �activist,� the �community organizer� and
the social justice warrior, whose proud life purpose is to �raise
consciousness� of injustice and marginalization.

No doubt Nemesis will soon correct the president's hubris, just like she
did with Narcissus.

Source: http://bit.ly/1vcVoo7
Remember in November - This election is our first referendum on amnesty.

--
"Apparently, the leading cause of hard drive failures is subpoenas.�
(Clarice Feldman)

"Never underestimate the willingness of white progressives to be offended
on behalf of people who aren�t and to impose their will on those who
didn�t ask for it." (Derek Hunter)

"If the Democrats didn�t have double standards, they wouldn�t have any
standards all." (Chuck Lehmann)

[Governor Swill]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 17:16:22 +0000 (UTC), Joe Cooper
<drag...@removeunseen.is> wrote:

>But really, the liberals' problem is not unwisdom; it goes deeper than
>that. It is good old Greek hubris.

And you believe the GOP is not also guilty of hubris?

Swill
--
Bernanke's cash flood - Take that Romney Super Pacs.
Obama has the guy who actually prints the money. --- @craig_crawford