SUBSCRIBE:
Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2018/11. Is its parent directory writable by the server?

The Moonbat Principle: Dilbert on Meth

by
Posted on November 16 2010 1:00 pm
Be Sociable, Share!
Print This Post Print This Post

What can we call leftist demagogue and propaganda film-maker Michael Moore, but the Kevin Trudeau of the pop cultural Left.  Moore’s recent interview with Larry King on Nov. 13 is cause to reflect on the fundamental nature of contemporary leftism, and the trail of human damage (and carnage) its ideas have left in its wake over the last century, which it still, despite both the utter theoretical and practical failures of virtually all of its major ideas, programs, and initiatives, continues to insist are the key to a “better world” and the fulfillment of our human potential. 

In just one segment, Moore ladles out a book’s worth of counterfactual, ahistorical, and intellectually vacuous assertions of the kind that only consistent patrons of Free Speech TV or the defunct Air America Radio could conceivably be acclimated to.

We might call Leftism, especially in its Hollywoodized, pop cultural form as epitomized by Moore, following a popular book published in 1997 by Scott Adams called The Dilbert Principle, a kind of Dilbert Weltanschauung, in which the cultural Left consistently elevates the least intellectually competent among them to positions of intellectual prominence.  This principle works, as readers of Frontpagemag.com will understand, in academia as well as within the entertainment world.

In one short interview segment, Moore demonstrates our principle in a textbook manner en masse, moving from one subject to another and demonstrating, in each case, that the pop leftist scale of intellectual incompetence is set at zero. There is no respect for intellectual competence, and hence, no attempt made to pay at least some tribute to such a concept.

For example, Moore implies, apparently unwittingly, given conservative concerns, something that many conservatives have been pointing out since well before Obama was elected, that once free health care becomes a “right,” it will be impossible to go back to a private sector, free market system.  He follows this with a claim that if “the wealthy” were to pay their “fair share” of taxes “like they used to,” we could solve many of our country’s economic problems. (Moore claims here that “for most of our adult lives” the wealthy paid “much more” in taxes until recently, apparently utterly ignorant of the actual empirical data regarding how much the “rich” pay in taxes and the degree to which it has expanded dramatically while both he and Larry King have been alive).

Moore also believes that putting “a lot of money” into “public works” has something to do with wealth creation, and that “the Wall Street people,” who he claims have made out like bandits since Obama was elected, are so greedy they are willing to throw the pro-capitalist President Obama under the bus lest they be forced to pay the same rates of social security taxes as middle class people (according to Moore, if everybody who makes over $100,000 a year paid the same Social Security tax rates as those making $40,000 a year,  Social Security would be solvent out to 2075.)

What seems then, to be the problem?  Capitalist greed, of course.  It was the “corporations, the banks and Wall street” who “have taken their jobs and sent them elsewhere” and who are now “taking their homes.”  Nowhere is decades of government monetary policy, the effects of expropriationary tax rates, trade protectionism, draconian (and to a great degree, scientifically untenable) environmental regulations, out of control unionism, and the use of the housing mortgage industry as a venue of social engineering mentioned as important to our present woes.

Its doubtless no accident that both Michael Moore and Bill Maher have simultaneously hit upon very much the same explanation for the massive Republican victory on Nov. 3: the Left actually won and Obama should move forward without flinching with a “progressive” program of social transformation.

Odd, you say?  Counterintuitive?  Illogical?  Well…yes, all of those.

We should not forget, however, that leftism is a philosophy of adolescent wish fantasy. From the French Revolution to the present time, the Left has never let facts, logical argument, or the bounds, conditions, and limitations of the mortal human sphere limit their theoretical fantasies of just what constitutes a “better world.” or, for that matter, what steps they have always been willing to take in applying those theories to real governance.

Be Sociable, Share!
2 Responses leave one →

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Copyright 2018 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry