Thursday, November 06, 2008

Potential Patriots

Let's play with some words, shall we?

First, "patriot." Depending on which dictionary you use, there are many variations of the definition. They are all fairly close, though-- the consensus definition being something along the lines of "one who loves and loyally or zealously supports one's own country."

Next, "revolutionary." With this one, the consensus definition is "someone wanting to bring about a sudden, radical, or complete and fundamental change in political organization; especially the overthrow or renunciation of one government or ruler and the substitution of another fundamentally different socioeconomic situation."

Finally, since it is germane to this discussion, let's take a quick look at one of President-Elect Obama's favorite words: "fundamental." As in: "we are going to fundamentally change this country." Going back to our trusty dictionary, we find fundamental defined thusly: "of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts -- belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics."

Okay, so, how are we to label someone who supports their country, what it stands for, its founding principles, and its actions domestically and around the world? Well, using the above dictionary definition, that person would be a patriot.

Following that, then, how do we label someone who supports what they think their country could possibly become, rather than what it has historically been-- and wants to fundamentally change the founding principles of the country? Again, using a dictionary definition, that person would be a revolutionary.

Now that we've defined these terms, can we move into some intellectual honesty? Can we agree that someone who loves America only for what it has the potential to become is not-- by definition-- a patriot?

Can we then further agree that someone who seeks "fundamental change" to America is not-- again, by definition-- a patriot? If we can just get that far, then maybe we can begin to get a handle on what is happening in America today.

On November 4th, millions of people voted for "change"-- that cannot be argued. Some of them, it can be reasonably assumed, actually had some ideas on what kind of change it should be. These are people who do know and understand Mr. Obama, and who want America to be something besides what it is and what it has been. These people are what I will term, for now, "potential patriots."

On the other side, there were millions more who also voted-- but these people voted for "conserving" what they see as the America of the past. Their ideas of change do not involve any fundamental shifting in how our country operates. Instead, they seek a return to the principles that America was founded upon: small government, free enterprise, and above all else, individual rights. These people are, then, "actual patriots."

If the potential patriots-- hereafter logically called "revolutionaries"-- would stop acting injured whenever an actual patriot tells them they are not patriotic, then we could openly and honestly advance the dialogue. If they would just speak the words "we don't like the old America-- we want a new one," then we might be able to get somewhere.

The facts are clear and obvious. We must get past the silly notion that a patriot can be defined as one who seeks "fundamental change" to America's principles. This is simply-- not to mention grammatically-- inaccurate.

If the revolutionaries want the actual patriots to respect them, then they must start being intellectually honest in the arena of ideas. Only by presenting both cases to the "masses" (they love that word), can we get a fair and honest hearing on what America wants to be. Only when ideologues on both sides openly and honestly state their cases can the individual person be allowed to make a real and fair judgment.

I have no doubt that a significant number of people who voted for President-Elect Obama are "actual patriots." I think that they have absolutely no idea that he has openly admitted his disdain for our Constitution. I am sure that they do not know that our newest President favors international law over American law. In fact, there are innumerable items in Mr. Obama's ideological closet that bear very little resemblance to anything those other "guys on the dollar bills" believed.

Deliberately and masterfully, the Obama campaign-- aided and abetted by the useful idiots of a willing, if often ignorant, media cartel-- concealed his true ideology, and used obfuscation as a very potent weapon in the election. As all successful leftist/fascistic movements do, they knew that reason would not fare well in a war with passion and faith-- and so they used our humanity against us by appealing to the most base emotions and desires of their chosen sheep. They were supremely successful in presenting the case for a man that nobody really seems to know. The masses of people who voted for "change" are, for the most part, completely ignorant of just what it is Barack Obama stands for. Furthermore, I am convinced that they do not have an inkling of just how much "change" is coming our way.

Sadly, most of them-- and the rest of us-- will find out soon enough.

As for the revolutionaries who knowingly voted for change: they know only too well what is coming, and they are gleefully anticipating it. Many of them have even more disdain for our founding principles than does the new President-Elect. Many of them have been openly hostile to America. In fact, some of them have openly expressed their contempt for all things American. The change that Mr. Obama is bringing is something these people have craved for decades.

So, what is a staggeringly divided nation to do? What can the actual patriots do in this electric environment of change? Well, we can try to support the new President-- always keeping a weather-eye on the change meter. We can try to give him the benefit of the doubt-- that he will actually "govern from the center," as Bill Clinton was forced to do at times. We can pray that he will come to an epiphany-- once he is surrounded by the trappings of the office and the real, tangible problems he will face-- and try to do the right thing... at least some of the time.

What happens, then, when none of that happens-- when the change crosses the line? Will it be a civil war of sorts? Or, as is usually the case, will the American electorate snap out of this daydream and vote to change things back to some semblance of American principles? That is, if it is not too late.

2010 will be the first chance for us to find out which way that wind will blow.

In the meantime, maybe the revolutionaries will come out of their closets and begin to engage us openly and honestly on the field of ideas. I, for one, welcome that opportunity and will relish it should it ever come.

I am not hopeful that it will come, though.



Anonymous Anonymous said...

Meet us openly and honestly about thier views? Don't count on it. Their party is based on kidding themselves! ex: Abortion? "If I can't see it-it isn't real!"

Plus, at least half of them--even the revolutionaries--haven't a clue what their views are. But, they--just as idiotically--never knew what America stood for to be a patriot for that either.

Thank you liberal public schooling.
(All part of their plan)

8/11/08 10:51  
Blogger kmg said...

Well said, Mr./Ms. Anonymous! I was trying to be a bit more... diplomatic-- but I know that the "meeting us openly and honestly" thing was a reach.

8/11/08 11:26  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great read, however you seem to have some semblance of hope for the future. I don't any more. For the first time in my life, and it's not a short one, I am truly afraid for my country. I blame an uneducated electorate, happy in their ignorance, and a media happy to keep them uninformed.

8/11/08 17:40  
Blogger kmg said...

You may be right. It would not be the first time in history that a populace needed a crisis to wake it up.

Time will tell...

8/11/08 22:07  
Blogger warhorse said...

Hmmm ... I suspect some of the long-term international repercussions of Obama's election will be seriously unpleasant (nuclear Iran, anyone?). That said, though, absent a genuine second American Revolution, is there really anything he and his cronies can do on the domestic front that the next election can't fix? (This is a serious question, in no way meant to be sarcastic or mocking.)

12/11/08 15:36  
Blogger kmg said...

I would like to say no, Warhorse... but I'm afraid that, in my mind, the potential exists for them to do lasting damage in the next couple of years.

Executive orders, court appointments, support for groups like ACORN... these things, and more like them, are serious threats to us even having fair elections in the future (if we even had one this time, that is).

Not to mention the creeping socialism that now seems to be sprinting, instead...

I want very much to be optimistic and say "we'll get 'em next election," but the fear is real and, I believe, well founded.

12/11/08 16:16  

Post a Comment


web counter
web counter