Liberalism

Liberalism and Education (Part One)

Commentary by John W. Ritenbaugh (1932-2023)

Liberalism, as a political philosophy, is based on the belief in progress, the essential goodness of man, and the autonomy of the individual, while standing for the protection of political and civil liberties. However, this definition falls short of the reality that modern political liberalism demonstrates in the experience of this nation. Liberalism began in Protestant churches as a theological issue long before it emerged as a significant political force in mainstream politics. It gained prominence in federal elections with Franklin Roosevelt's election in 1932, marking the beginning of major changes in American political and social life. It was not until Lyndon Baines Johnson became president after John Kennedy's assassination in 1963 that liberal social programs truly took hold, instituting significant transformations. The foundational operating theory of liberalism is that change equates to progress, often requiring the setting aside of older traditions. The liberal mindset, steeped in pride, tends to view traditions as relics of less enlightened times rather than the accumulated wisdom of generations, almost always guaranteeing social disarray. Revolutions, driven by such change, rarely improve a nation. Liberalism's belief in the essential goodness of man contrasts sharply with the reality of ongoing societal evils like war, murder, rape, adultery, and governmental corruption, raising questions about whether liberalism truly betters lives. Another key plank of liberalism, the autonomy of the individual and the protection of political and civil liberties, is seen as one of its gravest lies. The ideal of self-governance is admirable, yet under the most liberal administration in the nation's history, individual rights are being eroded faster and more extensively than ever before, often blamed on external factors like terrorism or global warming. This leads directly to each person doing what is right in their own eyes, fostering chaos. The liberalization of America, which began in Protestant churches about 100 years ago, has been nearly accomplished. It infiltrated the Democratic Party and was further spread through government schools by gradually filling university administrations and faculties with liberal-minded individuals. These graduates then carried this mindset into public leadership roles in politics, churches, and education. This slow, pervasive shift, likened to a frog in gradually heated water, has been immensely successful in reshaping societal values over decades. Woodrow Wilson, a leader of the progressive movement in the Democratic Party, exemplified this shift by stating in 1914 that the purpose of a university is to make young gentlemen as unlike their fathers as possible, a sentiment that continues to impact society a century later.

Why Liberals Love Illegals (Part Three)

Commentary by John W. Ritenbaugh (1932-2023)

The pervasive influence of liberalism in politics often manifests through strategic coalitions of block-voting minorities who consistently support liberal programs, believing that liberals are on their side. A striking example occurred in a democratic senatorial nomination primary in South Carolina, where a virtually unknown, unemployed African American candidate received over 160,000 votes, winning the nomination with more than 60% of the votes cast. This outcome, despite the candidate's lack of campaigning or public recognition, highlights the liberal tactic of leveraging blind party loyalty. Voters, unaware of the candidate's platform or qualifications, cast their ballots based solely on his association with the Democratic ticket, demonstrating a sheep-like instinct that liberals rely on to secure desired voting patterns. This incident, while a national embarrassment for the Democratic Party, underscores the liberal experience that their attracted voters have a strong tendency to vote straight Democratic, unlike those with conservative or independent mindsets who are less likely to follow a straight ticket.

Liberalism and Education (Part Two)

Commentary by John W. Ritenbaugh (1932-2023)

Liberalism has become the dominant religious, educational, and political philosophy in the United States over the past century, a shift orchestrated not by mere chance but through deliberate planning influenced by satan. This gradual spread of liberalism infiltrated university administrations and faculties through individuals deceived by satan's subtle lies, following the principle that a little leaven leavens the whole lump. Liberalism's appeal lies in its alignment with human nature's desire to break free from restraints, making it easier to accept than conservatism, which demands stricter discipline to adhere to established traditions. This ease of acceptance mirrors the way of the world, a process that initiated the first sin and persists today. Universities have played a pivotal role in this shift, with their institutions succeeding in reshaping young minds to diverge from traditional values. A 2003 survey by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture across 32 elite colleges and universities revealed a stark imbalance, with an average faculty ratio of 10 Democrats to one Republican, despite a nearly even national ratio of registered Democrats to Republicans. Specific institutions showed even greater disparities, such as Brown University with a ratio of 30 Democrats to one Republican, and several schools like Williams College and M.I.T. having no Republican faculty members at all. Administrative ratios mirrored this trend, with some universities lacking any Republican administrators, and in the Ivy League, only three Republicans held administrative positions. Many departments, including history and sociology, were devoid of Republican representation, potentially leaving students exposed solely to liberal perspectives throughout their education. This pervasive liberal bias in academia ensures that graduates, often occupying influential societal positions, continue to propagate these ideas, further entrenching liberalism. Without a significant counterforce, this liberal movement appears unstoppable, continuing to drive the nation in a direction influenced by satan's design.

Why Liberals Love Illegals (Part One)

Commentary by John W. Ritenbaugh (1932-2023)

The American Left has a long history of employing a psychological divide-and-conquer strategy in politics, a system known as millets, which originated in the Ottoman Empire and was later adapted by rulers in dictator states like Germany and Russia. This method, used extensively by Marx, Lenin, and Hitler, exploits natural suspicions and antipathies between ethnic and socioeconomic groups to maintain governmental power. The strategy involves giving preferential treatment to sizable minority groups, presenting the Left as their saviors while ignoring or denigrating others, ensuring that these groups remain divided and do not unite against the government. In American politics over the last century, this approach was first successfully applied to the Jewish community, securing their loyalty to the Democratic Party despite economic policies that might seem disadvantageous to them. Following this, labor unions were targeted with similar success, though recent elections suggest a weakening grip as union members become aware of being used. The African American minority was next, with the Democrats achieving overwhelming support, as evidenced by up to 92% voting for them in the most recent presidential election. Currently, the Democrats are positioning themselves as saviors to Mexican illegals and Palestinians, aiming to politically align these groups with other minorities for electoral gain. This coalition of minority voting blocs proved highly effective in the 2008 election, significantly enhancing Democratic power. Additionally, smaller minorities such as feminists, the homosexual civil-marriage group, and environmentalists consistently vote as a bloc for the Democrats, who skillfully manipulate psychological triggers to maintain this support.

What Is a Liberal?

Commentary by John W. Ritenbaugh (1932-2023)

The term liberal, appearing only nine times in Scripture, carries a Hebrew meaning of voluntary action, suggesting willingness and generosity. In Isaiah 32:5-8, it also describes a person as noble or honorable, akin to a prince, though it warns of a time when vile scoundrels will no longer be falsely praised as liberal or noble, but recognized for their true nature. Historically, the American Constitution embodies liberality by granting extensive liberties to minorities, allowing many immigrants to achieve stability and wealth through hard work, reflecting a generous national spirit. However, the concept of true liberalism has been distorted over time, particularly as adopted by the Democratic Party. What is now seen as liberalism often supports policies contrary to generosity, such as abortion and euthanasia, and denies care to the handicapped, including veterans. Modern liberals, often irreligious and lacking belief in absolute moral laws, view moral choices as neutral, leading to support for various controversial lifestyles and decisions without discerning good from evil. This indiscriminateness, driven by pragmatism rather than principle, results in sloppy dealings and delayed solutions, ignoring long-term consequences. An example is the persistence in promoting global warming alarmism despite scientific opposition, leading to detrimental policy decisions that threaten national well-being, far removed from the original spirit of liberality.

Liberalism, in the News Again

Commentary by John W. Ritenbaugh (1932-2023)

Liberalism, as a political philosophy, is based on the belief in progress, the essential goodness of man, and the autonomy of the individual, standing for the protection of political and civil liberties. The term liberal originally described a person born free, not into slavery, and evolved to signify being generous, open-handed, broadminded, and unbound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition. In the modern political context, liberalism is seen in the paths followed by America and Britain, where, if taken to extremes, it can lead to a loss of individual liberties and a transfer of power to a centralized, elitist form of government. Liberals often view conservatives as outdated and stuck in the past, carrying an attitude of superiority, believing they are smarter, wiser, and more deserving, almost as if they have a divine right to rule over others. This mindset was revealed in a statement by Hilary Rosen, a close advisor to President Obama, who suggested that Mrs. Romney, as a stay-at-home wife, has never worked a day in her life, showcasing a liberal perspective that drew criticism and required the President to publicly disavow the remark. Furthermore, liberalism tends to invite human nature toward open immorality, eventually reaching a point where anything goes and anything is tolerated. This pattern of thought aligns with the attitude of satan, who sought to break free from God's constraints, passing this philosophy of unrestrained freedom to others, ultimately influencing the systems and basic thought of this world to move away from the restraint of God's laws.

Liberal Lunacy (Part One)

Commentary by John W. Ritenbaugh (1932-2023)

Progressivism, often termed liberal lunacy, is marked by a relentless search for something better, never finding satisfaction in the established order. This mindset drives a departure from proven principles and standards, contributing to a national decline as God's blessings are withdrawn due to widespread moral deviation. The attempt to control the sale and distribution of guns exemplifies this lunacy, focusing on the weapon rather than the individual committing the crime, mirroring historical tactics of control used by oppressive regimes. Such policies, lacking divine guidance or common sense, are seen as devious efforts by the government to dominate rather than address the root causes of societal issues.

Liberalism

Playlist:

Filter by Categories

Loading recommendations...

Options

Related Topics