The radical left

It pains me to hear politicians and others with a public platform and some kind of exclusive agenda speak about equality and inclusion as though they were saving the world from something toxic.  The notion that “You too can be like me if you try “ is for me not compelling. For one thing there are too many artists from Matisse and Mozart to Frank Lloyd Wright who once offended popular culture and who are now considered classics that I hardly feel moved to adopt current themes as entirely persuasive.

A more provocative rendition of so-called conservatism is that the radical left dilutes or poisons the proper way of doing things. When I recall the image of conservatives marching in hoods or with torches and guns while denigrating other races or religions, it is hardly survives as an intellectual or charitable pursuit.  Instead it is a vulgar manifestation of shallowness and brutality. These are people who need to stand on others to make themselves taller.

Unless the left is willing to accommodate the right, neither is better than the other.  It otherwise then descends to nothing but a cat fight for territory and control. This is not the world I choose to live in, eternally isolated from others by anger and hatred. By contrast I have found it to be universally true that we all benefit by the improvement of communication between ourselves and others.  And as often it transpires that the raw elements of character stem from distorted thinking. Both sides of the fence can benefit from enlargement and cooperation.

Though the passage to wholesomeness and understanding is at times taxing, it frequently benefits those of both sides of the discourse.  It is equally apparent to me that the only advantage of preserving the hate is to fire the campaign of them who seek to translate differences as a stimulation of votes. The undeniable truth is that there are those whose sole ambition is power; and they will do or say whatever it takes at whatever expense to grasp it.

It is a mistake of logic to discard a perspective of the world based only upon the conniving selfishness of one man or woman and their sycophantic minions. These so-called leaders are little more than mechanical obstructionists governed by a single plot completely unrelated to popular government. Politicizing a woman’s right to control her own body through the paradigm of a lascivious president and an erstwhile drunken frat boy is not what I’d call the application of good logic especially when the promotion comes from those whose goal is control and greed.

The simple fact is that everyone has a gay uncle; and Archie Bunker had a heart. Some people go to church; others do not. Capitalism stimulates growth; and social welfare is beneficial. In short what is the preoccupation with making everyone the same? Many of us already find life challenging enough without having to add superfluous and mercenary quarrels to society.