Lie-based Protest Movements

by Jerry Richardson   12/26/14

Progressives have long been adept at hiding their real agenda behind lies, spin, and obfuscation. And by the time someone (never the fellow-traveler media) gets around to pointing out the Progressives’ deceit, the response is some variation of “Dude, that was two years ago”—truth has a very short shelf-life for Progressives.

Most of Progressives’ success comes about when they are dealing with issues that have been nationally parsed into two competing opinions.  In situation of this type, the progressive playbook is quite simple: Use their fellow-traveler (compliant) media to report-on and accentuate threats and demands; couple this with multiple articles, using bogus statistics, written by fellow-travelers in the print-media; then in conjunction, organize and send-out into the streets, the growing army of tax-payer-paid, government-welfare-dependent protestors. While doing all of this, pound away using Alinsky’s 13th rule of tactics:

Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

And what is the current progressive target?  Our nations’ police force!

Progressives have initiated and maintained a drumbeat of propaganda to peddle the outlandish lie that “cops hate black people.”

This is clearly a lie-based protest movement.

Of course, it’s not just the police; the police are being used as a proxy for all white America.  The real end-game objective is to convince as many Americans as possible that whites are overwhelming racist and hate all black people. We already have white people, especially in our dumb-and-growing-dumber universities that are falling for this bilge—research the internet for the “check your privilege” nonsense.

When all of white America is pronounced “guilty” of racism, for all time, by someone with the impeccable and utterly-impartial qualifications of an Al Sharpton, then of course, the only expiation for that collective white guilt will be massive reparations paid to all black citizens (but also including any illegal black immigrants); all managed of course by a select panel approved by that every-ready champion of Tawana Brawley type false-victims—if that happens, expect the sudden discovery of a census-error that—surprise, surprise—undercounted black citizens.

But Uh-Oh, hello! Unexpected consequences have developed in the Progressives’ rush to their latest Alinsky-performance, the lie-based movement of “cops hate black people.” Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Bill de Blasio, and Al Sharpton in all of their superior Alinskyite, progressive-elite planning-wisdom didn’t seem to anticipate, or perhaps they just didn’t care, that all the street-calls for violence might not simply be rhetoric:

“What’d we want?  Dead cops!  When do we want it? Now!”

Sure enough, Gory surprise: The should-have-been expected, unexpected consequence was the tragedy that gave the street-callers what they asked for: Two dead police officers.

But now that we are almost 5 months into the current phase of the “cops hate black people” movement; it seems that the confident users of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals have paid very little attention to Alinsky’s 7th tactical rule:

A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

Americans will give almost any espoused cause a period of time to show itself.  But once it becomes clear what the exact agenda of the espoused cause is, the American people begin to form their opinions.  This is currently happening, rapidly I believe, with the “cops hate black people” movement.  Due to the tragic assassination of two on-duty police officers, Americans are turning a large thumbs-down, I believe, on Al Sharpton’s latest pet movement.  But, don’t expect Sharpton, and all the other race-hustlers to get the message; they never do.

One of the inherent flaws of evil—and that’s what the “cops hate black people” movement is, pure evil—is that it always overextends.  The reason is that any evil people or movements are always greedy for power—a little is never enough; one conquest is never enough, one triumph is never enough.  Study any of the spectacular evil-movements in history, such as Nazism or Soviet Communism; there was never enough power, or territorial expansion, to satisfy Hitler or Stalin. There will never be enough appeasement to satisfy the race-hustlers that are promoting “cops hate black people.” 

We saw this same scenario play out in the so-called “Occupy Movement”; the American people grew sick-and-tired of rowdy, Progressive and Communist inspired mobs of protesters camping-out in urban areas; trashing and littering and causing disruption—for the tax-paying people who had to work for a living—where ever they went.  And what exactly was their purpose?  The protesters involved in the “movement” never seemed to know; of the many who were confronted with a microphone, none that I recall could explain what exactly they were about with all their trash-strewing encampments.

But the organizers knew, just like the organizers of “cops hate black people” know.  Their purpose is to disrupt society so as to draw attention to what the organizers perceive is their real goal: “social justice.”  And if you don’t know how these would-be anarchist define “social justice” be sure to research the topic enough to discover that it doesn’t mean anything close to the classical definition of “justice”:

Justice…the concept of a proper proportion between a person’s deserts (what is merited) and the good and bad things that befall or are allotted to him or her.

“Social justice” on the other hand pivots around the Marxist notion of wealth redistribution: The government takes from those who have earned and gives it to those who have not earned.  As I said, this concept bears no similarity to classical “Justice.”

Half of American voters may be too uninformed to realize that the Progressive/Democrats are buying their votes with government, taxpayer-funded handouts; but most people in America, regardless of their political affiliation, know that our police-forces, that “thin blue line” is all that stands between many people and everyday anarchy.

Are more Americans recognizing the truth about Progressivism?

The truth about Progressivism is ugly, and as long as Progressives can side-step, evade responsibility, and avoid discussing the ugly reality that they create, a large number of American people will continue to pay no attention.

But, sad and tragic as it was, the event in New York this past weekend (December 20, 2014) cannot simply be ignored and kept on the back pages of Progressive/Democrat fellow-traveler newspapers.  People are going to have to look at this ugly result of progressivism—it is in America’s face.  And the truth of that result is simply that Progressive\Democrats are perfectly willing to lie—hence lie-based protest movements—and perfectly willing for innocent, law-abiding people, even police officers, to die if it furthers the cause of their agenda. Oh sure, when one of their lie-based protest movements blows-up in their face, as just happened, they immediately pivot 180 degrees in their protest rhetoric.  Why not? Lying is an essential part of the Saul Alinsky playbook, and a necessary skill for modern Progressives.

It is equally important that people clearly realize the primary engagement-tactic for mass propaganda used by Progressives/Democrats: It is the tactic of lie-based protest movements. I borrowed this term from Heather MacDonald of City Journal:

The only good that can come out of this wrenching attack on civilization would be the delegitimation of the lie-based protest movement. Whether that will happen is uncertain. The New York Times has denounced as “inflammatory” the statement from the head of the officer’s union that there is “blood on the hands that starts on the steps of City Hall”—this from a paper that promotes the idea that police officers routinely kill blacks. The elites’ investment in black victimology is probably too great to hope for an injection of truth into the dangerously counterfactual discourse about race, crime, and policing.
The Big Lie of the Anti-Cop Left Turns Lethal

I think Heather MacDonald has understated the tremendous importance of the potential for “delegitimation of the lie-based protest movement.”

From my prospective, at this time in our nations’ life-and-death struggle to not sink into the Venusian-like political-cloud of Obama’s ubiquitous lies, “delegitimation of the lie-based protest movement” would provide a great lead-in to the possibility of a cleansing, nation-wide, return-to-truth effort to delegitimize the lies, broken promises, and half-truths of Barack Obama and his principle enablers, the fellow-traveler media and the Progressive/Democrats.

If this occurred, and that’s a big if, it would be clear evidence that the truth about Progressivism is finally beginning to be recognized.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful to hear and watch truth being spoken on American broadcast networks?  Sigh. I am a realist, so I’m not holding my breath.

©2014, Jerry Richardson


Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (3363 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Blog Post. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Lie-based Protest Movements

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    No matter what happens, the newsliars will cover for them. An article today in the national section of the Curious Journal (which now consists of material from USA Today) discussed the various 2014 protests and their possible effects. It noted that non-violent protests fare better than violent ones — and then credited the anti-police protests with “high marks”. Two major riots, various murders, and a lot of blocking of major traffic routes and bridges (which was considered a major problem when it could be blamed on Chris Christie) have been tossed into a memory hole. “What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” has been mostly ignored by the synoptic media. I suspect most uninformed voters (especially the liberals) are totally unaware of that chant at a Sharpton march.

  2. Jerry Richardson says:

    The so-called issue of “Gay-marriage” is just another of the many lie-based movements generated by the left, and they all have the same purpose, acquiring political power so as to impose socialism on America:

    The Left doesn’t care about gay rights, any more than they care about civil rights, welfare rights, minority rights, animal rights or any other “rights.” According to the Left, “the issue is never the issue; the issue is always the revolution.” The various “rights” the Left has aggressively promoted over the years are merely vehicles to advance the Left’s power.
    —-
    The Left uses “rights” agendas to wrap itself in the mantle of righteousness and seize the moral high ground, tactically putting us on the defense in the process. But they couldn’t care less about the actual issue except in its ability to facilitate their path to power.

    The agenda is never the agenda for the Left. And this is especially true for gay marriage. Homosexual marriage is a Trojan horse tactic. The true agenda is to establish the primacy of homosexual rights over the First Amendment’s guarantee of the free exercise of religion. Our nation was founded on this principle, and the gay marriage movement seeks to destroy it.
    —-
    This is a highly organized, nationwide campaign of vilification against Christians. But even Christians are not the ultimate target. If the First Amendment can be challenged this way; if a certain group’s “rights” can trump the U.S. Constitution, and if the Supreme Court can actually issue an edict making it so, then the entire Constitution has become meaningless. This is the Left’s true agenda and it always has been. This is the Cultural Marxists’ endgame. The issue is not the issue. The issue for them has always been destroying our country to impose socialism — with them in charge, of course. In order to do that they have to strip America of its culture, its traditions, and most importantly, the most important law of the land, the U.S. Constitution

    Gay Marriage is a Trojan Horse

    • Timothy Lane says:

      This seems a very accurate summary. Just as an interesting addition, I will note Emmett Tyrrell’s argument that the sole basic principle of liberalism is disturbing the peace. I think the will to power cannot be ignored, but I think he does have a point. Of course, sufficient chaos encourages a police state, which liberals think is just fine as long as they control it.

  3. Jerry Richardson says:

    Timothy,

    I will note Emmett Tyrrell’s argument that the sole basic principle of liberalism is disturbing the peace. I think the will to power cannot be ignored, but I think he does have a point.
    —Timothy Lane

    I think that’s a great two-sentence summary of the modus operandi of the Progressive/Democrat/Left.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *