Ideology and American Government

Any set of ideas can now be labelled an "ideology," allegedly granting it legitimacy, protection, and license to proceed unhindered in its quest to normalize whatever bizarre, barbaric, or perverse norms and behaviors it embraces. After all, if anyone claims those norms to comprise those which their faith sustains as superior, society is not supposed to question them.

Those norms suddenly become above reproach, beyond the scope even of law to abridge, despite clearly violating laws and principles of decent behavior and abusing people and rights. What is this, ultimately, if not a measure of the progress our society has made on the road to utter insanity and self-destruction?

To which ideologies or which norms does the above refer? In particular, there are now two ideologies that have become popular in America, both of which are characterized by anticonstitutional aspects, abusiveness, and norms that are unlawful in America: communism and Islam.

Lots of people tend to use the terms "socialist" and "liberal" and "progressive" rather than "communist," a trend that apparently means to avoid embracing that which America's Federal Code prohibits. Perhaps those euphemisms were initially introduced in order to avoid prosecution. But Lenin said, and the reader can be sure, "Communism is the goal of Socialism."

It is a great shame that the extreme abuses practiced by communist regimes throughout the last century are not more widely discussed in America's public schools, colleges, and universities. What is an education that hides the facts from students? But anyone who reads Alexander Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago and Armando Valladares' Against All Hope cannot fail to gain an appreciation of the abominations routinely practiced by Communists, some of whom have referred to themselves as socialists.

For some decades, a push has been under way to have the vacuities of socialism accepted as superior to American standards of governance. Our current stable of Democratic presidential candidates campaign on promises to do what Marx and Lenin would applaud. But much of what they suggest is anticonstitutional, unlawful, and insane.

One example: They want to prohibit practically all kinds of modern firearms, disarming the population of America. History has shown over the last century that such efforts by totalitarian governments have repeatedly resulted in genocides of many millions of defenseless civilians.

Then we have Islam, an ideology mistakenly identified by the uninformed as a religion. While Islam certainly has a religious element, it is actually a complete culture comprised of religious, legal, governmental, and military elements, the most outspoken proponents of which make no secret of the published agenda of forcing their ideology on the entire world. Organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, whose affiliates operate freely within the United States, have published their agenda of the destruction of America, with the objective of transforming America into a branch of the worldwide Islamic caliphate.

Throughout America, adherents to Islam infiltrate America's government and other institutions, seeking to normalize aspects of Sharia, which is Islamic law that is derived mainly from the Qur'an and other sacred Islamic texts. Unfortunately, and although it is commonly denied by all kinds of people, the majority of the acts called for under Sharia do not conform to American law.

Sharia authorizes its adherents to commit a plethora of antisocial acts against non-Muslims, and even against Muslim women. The sacred texts of Islam encourage Muslims to persecute, terrorize, behead, crucify, immolate, stone, rape, enslave, and mutilate non-Muslims. Wife beating, polygamy, child marriage, sexual slavery, and female genital mutilation are norms that Muslims hope to normalize in America, teaching Sharia to their own children, and also to America's schoolchildren in public schools. Denials are routine, but the facts are what they are.

But despite this shift toward insanity, morality matters. Laws in pursuance of the Constitution were established to promote peace, safety, and prosperity in the republic; to preserve the rule of law; and to protect rights. And certain areas of law clearly prohibit and call for the punishment of acts that result in abuse of people and rights, as well as prohibiting certain ideologies about which it is known that they oppose the freedom and rights which the republic exists to defend, which the Constitution clarifies so eloquently in the Preamble and in the Bill of Rights.

Why then do so many public officials and candidates appear to be supporting principles that call for violations of rights and of constitutional law designed to protect them? And why do we tolerate those officials who operate outside the law in opposition to our rights, to constitutional law, and to the oath to support and defend the Constitution?

Why are they not vigorously opposed, since the norms they promote violate rights, laws, and the purposes for which the republic exists?

The problem has extended beyond the public square and the issue of whether anyone has a right to express an opinion. The problem is now characterized as a struggle to eliminate freedom in America, and to impose fascistic tyranny, barbaric norms of behavior, and all that opposes rule of law and defense of rights.

Books have been written about these issues. Here the issues are merely touched on briefly. The point is that America cannot coexist with those who mean to destroy it, even if they happen to be domestic enemies. Rule of law must be enforced. Insanity must not be entertained.

Any set of ideas can now be labelled an "ideology," allegedly granting it legitimacy, protection, and license to proceed unhindered in its quest to normalize whatever bizarre, barbaric, or perverse norms and behaviors it embraces. After all, if anyone claims those norms to comprise those which their faith sustains as superior, society is not supposed to question them.

Those norms suddenly become above reproach, beyond the scope even of law to abridge, despite clearly violating laws and principles of decent behavior and abusing people and rights. What is this, ultimately, if not a measure of the progress our society has made on the road to utter insanity and self-destruction?

To which ideologies or which norms does the above refer? In particular, there are now two ideologies that have become popular in America, both of which are characterized by anticonstitutional aspects, abusiveness, and norms that are unlawful in America: communism and Islam.

Lots of people tend to use the terms "socialist" and "liberal" and "progressive" rather than "communist," a trend that apparently means to avoid embracing that which America's Federal Code prohibits. Perhaps those euphemisms were initially introduced in order to avoid prosecution. But Lenin said, and the reader can be sure, "Communism is the goal of Socialism."

It is a great shame that the extreme abuses practiced by communist regimes throughout the last century are not more widely discussed in America's public schools, colleges, and universities. What is an education that hides the facts from students? But anyone who reads Alexander Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago and Armando Valladares' Against All Hope cannot fail to gain an appreciation of the abominations routinely practiced by Communists, some of whom have referred to themselves as socialists.

For some decades, a push has been under way to have the vacuities of socialism accepted as superior to American standards of governance. Our current stable of Democratic presidential candidates campaign on promises to do what Marx and Lenin would applaud. But much of what they suggest is anticonstitutional, unlawful, and insane.

One example: They want to prohibit practically all kinds of modern firearms, disarming the population of America. History has shown over the last century that such efforts by totalitarian governments have repeatedly resulted in genocides of many millions of defenseless civilians.

Then we have Islam, an ideology mistakenly identified by the uninformed as a religion. While Islam certainly has a religious element, it is actually a complete culture comprised of religious, legal, governmental, and military elements, the most outspoken proponents of which make no secret of the published agenda of forcing their ideology on the entire world. Organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, whose affiliates operate freely within the United States, have published their agenda of the destruction of America, with the objective of transforming America into a branch of the worldwide Islamic caliphate.

Throughout America, adherents to Islam infiltrate America's government and other institutions, seeking to normalize aspects of Sharia, which is Islamic law that is derived mainly from the Qur'an and other sacred Islamic texts. Unfortunately, and although it is commonly denied by all kinds of people, the majority of the acts called for under Sharia do not conform to American law.

Sharia authorizes its adherents to commit a plethora of antisocial acts against non-Muslims, and even against Muslim women. The sacred texts of Islam encourage Muslims to persecute, terrorize, behead, crucify, immolate, stone, rape, enslave, and mutilate non-Muslims. Wife beating, polygamy, child marriage, sexual slavery, and female genital mutilation are norms that Muslims hope to normalize in America, teaching Sharia to their own children, and also to America's schoolchildren in public schools. Denials are routine, but the facts are what they are.

But despite this shift toward insanity, morality matters. Laws in pursuance of the Constitution were established to promote peace, safety, and prosperity in the republic; to preserve the rule of law; and to protect rights. And certain areas of law clearly prohibit and call for the punishment of acts that result in abuse of people and rights, as well as prohibiting certain ideologies about which it is known that they oppose the freedom and rights which the republic exists to defend, which the Constitution clarifies so eloquently in the Preamble and in the Bill of Rights.

Why then do so many public officials and candidates appear to be supporting principles that call for violations of rights and of constitutional law designed to protect them? And why do we tolerate those officials who operate outside the law in opposition to our rights, to constitutional law, and to the oath to support and defend the Constitution?

Why are they not vigorously opposed, since the norms they promote violate rights, laws, and the purposes for which the republic exists?

The problem has extended beyond the public square and the issue of whether anyone has a right to express an opinion. The problem is now characterized as a struggle to eliminate freedom in America, and to impose fascistic tyranny, barbaric norms of behavior, and all that opposes rule of law and defense of rights.

Books have been written about these issues. Here the issues are merely touched on briefly. The point is that America cannot coexist with those who mean to destroy it, even if they happen to be domestic enemies. Rule of law must be enforced. Insanity must not be entertained.