The leftist basis of Hilary-neocon union
The Democratic National Convention has ended in the US and the electoral campaign increased its iniquity. Donald Trump’s family are increasingly a target of the liberal media. After the New York Post released nude photos of Melania Trump from the 1990’s, was it any surprise that this would be the next step of Clinton’s campaign? What part of the private life of her contender would be targeted? At the same time, Clinton’s personal ties with leftist theoretician Saul Alinsky, are refuted as propaganda.
Hillary Clinton is now official candidate of Democratic party for the the US presidency. Her nomination was surrounded by scandals: the DNC leaks showed that the leadership of the Democratic party had chosen her a long before the primaries, they used ever method to promote Clinton over Bernie Sanders. In fact, he definitely had no chance to win from the start. With the rigged system of Super delegates the voice of people was really not important to the establishment. That was proved by Hillary’s choice for VP. Sen Tim Kaine, a well known pro-banking lobbyist, who accepted about $160,000 in gifts while governor, and lieutenant governor, of Virginia and has received heavy donations from big banks. Both Clinton and Kaine, unlike Trump or Sanders, are proponents of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and supported of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. About a half of Democrats, who voted Sanders and thus rejected big business in politics and so called “Free trade”, were deliberately ignored. In terms of international relations, the Clinton-Kaine ticket is the best example of the downfall of the US as standard-bearer of democracy and rule of law. Also it is an example of the triumph of so-called ‘cultural Marxism’ over the Old Left agenda. The issues, which unite Bernie Sanders and Clinton (immigration, gay right, abortions) became more important for Sanders than jobs of American workers and the fight against the rule of corporations and banks.
Clinton as well as her counterpart Kaine voted for every American invasion in every possible corner of the Earth. According to the experts today she is a head of “war party” in American elites. She initiated bloody Arab spring, which led to civil wars, millions of victims and emergence of ISIS. She bombed Libya and created an Islamist war zone in Africa. She and President Obama played with fire, carrying out the new post-modernist US grand strategy, based on the concept of controlled chaos of the US Diplomat Steven R. Mann. The US gave up the intentions to construct the stable orders, stable systems in the world, it is only exporting chaotic trends. While under George R. Bush it they tried to organized social and political life in occupied Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama and Clinton did not care about the countries, where they triggered the chain of destruction. Surprisingly, American chaotic foreign policy under State Secretary Clinton resembled the idea-fix of Alinsky – total destruction, creating instability, and subversion of social orders to use it in promoting his own agenda and bringing necessary change.
Some experts fear that Hillary is ready to start a nuclear war with Russia, to salvage the hegemony of the global plutocracy which she works for. Paul Craig Roberts, the US economic and political analyst told us that:
Hillary is a warmonger and she is a tool of neoconservatives who are committed to preventing Russia from rising. In fact, committed to destroy Russia. The neoconservatives, their goal is to destroy Russia, in fact destroy its independent foreign policy. It has to be a vassal state like Germany, France, and England.
Union of former leftists
The neoconservatives endorsed Clinton long ago, thus betraying the Republican Party and turning to the Democrats. Robert Kagan and William Kristol aggressively turned in defense of Clinton. It means, that if she wins, she will combine the worst warmongering trends and features of Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and George Bush Jr. administrations, uniting all interventionists elements.
Interestingly, neocons, who are in fact former Trotskyites – ultra-left, globalist, anti-Russian, anti-Traditional activists – which surfaced in the 60’s as Democrats, in the 80’s as Republicans, and today once again Democrats, supported by the former guru of leftist radicalism Saul Alinsky, the predecessor of theories of colored revolutions, who dreamed about the crushing all social norms in the US. It is well known, that the future First Lady and State Secretary wrote her master’s thesis on Alinsky, which was not made publicly available to the public, by the school, based upon a White House request under Bill Clinton’s administration.
Zealous globalism, a warmongering foreign policy and liberal domestic policy are traces inherent to Clinton influenced by Alinsky and the neocons. Is it a simple coincidence? Observing the ideas of both groups we can find a common trace: leftist philosophic foundation and ultra-liberal dogmatism. Both in fact these are interconnected. It is the same trace, against which the forefather of English conservatism Edmund Burke takes in his Reflections on the Revolution in France.. – the dominance of abstract rules and rights over concrete ones, connected to specific society with its specific history and tradition. This, he prophetically pointed out, leads to aggressive proselytism combined with militarism. His description of post-revolutionary France, sounds as it describes the modern US and the foreign policy doctrine of neoconservatives or Hillary Clinton:
“Everything is referred to the production of force; afterwards, everything is trusted to the use of it. It is military in its principle, in its maxims, in its spirit, and in all its movements. The State has dominion and conquest for its sole objects—dominion over minds by proselytism, over bodies by arms
It is not France extending a foreign empire over other nations: it is a sect aiming at universal empire, and beginning with the conquest of France…”
Quoting Paul Gottfried, we may say, that Hillary and her new allies are driven by leftist revolutionary fury, the idea of permanent revolution and change. The Francis Fukuyama rightly described this voluntarist leftist philosophy, which neglects all traditions and specifically to any social norm, praising in its place pure will and abstract dogmas:
“They …believed that history can be pushed along with the right application of power and will. Leninism was a tragedy in its Bolshevik version, and it has returned as farce when practiced by the United States…”
Thus their warmongering position is based not on rational counting of American interests, but globalist liberal dogmatism, when the US serves as only took to fulfill their ideas.
Lie for utopia
Alinsky like Lenin and Trotsky adhered to “the ends justify the means” philosophy. In his “Rules for radicals”, the famous book, where he praises Lucifer and others revolutionaries he stated: “The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war, the end justifies almost any means”. This is the basis of Hillary’s philosophy, where the moral dimension is not present as such. Remember her alliances with Islamists during the Arab Spring, the collapse in the Middle East was caused by her policy, her reaction on the killing of American citizens in Benghazi. Everything was done to bring democracy to the Middle East and liquidate authoritarian regimes, to prolong American dominance. The results are quite opposite. The Machiavellian pragmatism is a means to achieve utopian ends. Or did she lie from the beginning, and destruction was her primary goal, as it was a goal of Alinsky?
Also Alinsky’s disciples and neocons are united in the tactic of the deliberate lie, both praised by Saul Alinsky and neoconservative mentor Leo Strauss. The first taught about the necessity to lie and distort all norms to change the social order, the latter told about the “noble lie”, the necessity to deceive the people as a duty of politicians if he want to control society.
One more leftist trace, which unites the political thought of community organizer Alinsky and “conservative” Leo Strauss, is the role of statesmen and intellectuals in society. Both were convinced in the subversive nature of intellectuals. The Alinsky praised it, Strauss stressed that it should be tamed, stating that real a intellectual cannot believe in society’s myth, the common perception of religion and social norms. Thus he distorted the Platonic philosophy he pretended to carry forward. Where Plato called for a more deep understanding of Greek tradition, myths and its sacral order, Strauss established a nihilistic attitude towards tradition and called for a deliberate lie and rule by people who don’t really believe in anything except their own desires and exclusiveness. This is an exclusively leftist comprehension of nature of thought in its foundation (the critical role of thought), which is common for Strauss as well as for Alinsky and of philosophers of the Frankfurt School, who created the phenomenon of cultural Marxism.
Thus both Hillary and neocons have common philosophical basis: leftist globalism. Taking into account these philosophical similarities we may understand deeply the nature of Clinton-neoconservatives’ union as well as their misuse of the ‘noble’ lie. It is not accidental but rooted in the essence of their thought. If they cannot lie then they cannot wage wars nor promote regime change. Their ideas, style of thinking and dealing logically lead them to this end. Long ago the idea of reds coming to power in America was the worst nightmare of ordinary the US citizens. Now about a half of them are ready to vote for the people, whose political stance is based on leftist ideology.