For instance, many people jump on the “wealth inequality” issue without examining the real issues behind wealth inequality, or how the federal government’s mishandling of our tax dollars contributes to it. They just blame whoever they are told to blame by people promising them stuff they don’t have to work for, which in turn, means they are also contributing to the problem they claim to care about.
Another example is gun control. I haven’t heard any cries for the need to keep guns out of the hands of criminals after a home invader shot a Tulsa man while he was home with his children. This was a clear cut example of why good people should be armed. Therefore, you hear nothing from the left.
The ideology of social change and the methods used to employ these strategies have fascinated me now for several years. It truly is like brainwashing, but in a way in which people are conditioned to accept it for themselves. (I’ll touch on that a bit more in a minute.) The greater significance of that statement rests in the fact that we live in a republic, in which the culture and structure of government can only be changed if “WE THE PEOPLE” want it to be changed. They can’t take our rights unless we “accept” that they can take them; hence, the need to get us to go along with their grand plans and social engineering schemes.
The best example that can be given is the attempts to rewrite the language of the Second Amendment in middle school text books in order to condition the minds of young people so they will be more persuadable as they grow into adulthood. Another example would be how the school system is suspending children for even thinking about a gun. They are using change strategies to scare children and change their perspective on gun ownership. Finally, the most significant example I can think of is when I personally witnessed a whole class of indoctrinated liberals give presentations in which they admitted to not knowing how racist they were until they have received their required “white privilege” education. These scenarios and others like them tend to rely on the use of the Delphi technique. Delphi typically employs methods which seek to shame others into going along with ideas which they normally wouldn’t. Two opposing sides of an issue are presented with the facilitator coaxing students into his or her predetermined solution, while techniques that ridicule any opposition to this solution are ruthlessly employed.
The real point I want to make is that I have come to the conclusion that these strategies of change are not only being employed against an unsuspecting population, but an unsuspecting government as well. I only came to this conclusion because, America, I was educated by the very people who hold radicals like Saul Alinsky in high regard. I was educated by radicals who taught their students that we should be striving to create a utopia. I swear to you I had one professor admit he was a communist and another, a socialist. I have seen these change strategies first hand folks, and that is why I can say with confidence what I am about to say. Cass Sunstein will love me for this by the way. I have come to suspect that all the policy issues we currently face all revolve around one common theme. It is a giant social experiment in which they seek to determine how to get the necessary players to accept that which they normally never would.
First it was Obamacare, and you have to admit, in the beginning we had some fierce opposition from the Republicans. Now, many of them are afraid to run on its repeal because of its controversial nature. In fact, there are Republicans who would just as soon let the law stay in place so no one will call them racist. The manner in which Chief Justice Roberts ruled on the law’s constitutionality was also very suspicious. Were they spying on him in the same manner in which they were just busted spying on the senate? Glenn Beck brought up the same question, but it was obvious from the start; Roberts was coerced into ruling in the manner he did.
Next we have the issue of amnesty. Another policy initiative which congressional Republicans vowed to prevent from happening, and now, after a couple years of being called racist, and being frustrated about how to reach out to Hispanic voters, that are essentially being fed at the trough. They are ready to cave on this issue as well. What’s next, the Second Amendment? Exactly.
While Republicans are caving on all of these policy issues, anti-gun liberals are attempting little by little to see what they can get away with by passing extreme anti-gun laws in several Democrat controlled states. They are using the same methodologies that they have employed in these other policy initiatives. The demonization of gun owners, fear campaigns, passing unread legislation in the middle of the night; (which is precisely how Obamacare was passed incidentally) and ignoring any facts that run contrary to their political objectives of gun control are all fair game. I have come to the conclusion, and if it makes me a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist then so be it, that everything revolves around gun confiscation. If the general public can be conditioned to accept Obamacare and amnesty because the “government cares,” then conditioning them to support gun confiscation for the same reason, when many millions already have an irrational fear of firearms, would, in theory, be a cinch.
Fortunately, there are some state legislatures that remember we live in a constitutional republic. States like Idaho and Georgia are passing legislation to keep the federal government away from gun owners’ rights, as should all states. The question remains, however, ; what good will it do if our children are being conditioned to hate guns? When they grow up, and if the desired impact of an anti-gun, socialist indoctrination has been achieved, then we will only have another generation ready and willing to surrender their rights. This is the politics of acceptance in a game of social change.