The truth is stranger than fiction in a "progressive age"

“Give me lust, baby.
Flash.
Give me malice.
Flash.
Give me detached existentialist ennui.
Flash.
Give me rampant intellectualism as a coping mechanism.
Flash.” 
― Chuck Palahniuk, Invisible Monsters

“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.” 
― Edward R. Murrow

“Whoever controls the media, controls the mind” 
― Jim Morrison

“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...

The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance” 
― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

and finally a word from someone who understood propaganda;
“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.” 
― Joseph Goebbels

We can see that controlling the dialogue is vital. It is often said that the left deliberately falsifies information in order to start a conversation that they wish to control. Take for example this excerpt from an article written by Jonah Goldberg from June 16th's New York Post, entitled, "The left only wants conversation it controls"

"Conversations! Glorious conversations! What more can you ask for? 

The other day, former CBS News darling Katie Couric was asked about the scandal swirling around her anti-gun-documentary — specifically, the fact that she deceptively edited a gun-rights group’s response to a question to make the members seem like dangerous idiots.

Couric and her producer are guilty of outright deception. But her response at the New York event was amusingly revealing.

“I can understand the objection of people who did have an issue about it,” Couric said. (The “it” here is the deliberate falsifying of the truth). “Having said that, I think we have to focus on the big issue of gun violence. It was my hope that, when I approached this topic, that this would be a conversation starter.”

Well, OK then. After all, who denies that starting conversations — or, as they often call them in academia, “dialogues” — is the highest aspiration there is?

For instance, a Central Michigan University professor claimed last year that she was punched in the face at a Toby Keith concert for being a lesbian. She later admitted she actually punched herself, but said it was worth it because she wanted to start a dialogue."

Interesting, isn't it? There are clear parallels in that article with the methods "social progressives" have used with every totalitarian regime one could possibly mention. They sacrifice truth in order to make a point that supports their false dialectic. But what if I were to tell you that I am interested in having a conversation that is only factual? I will, for the moment, forgo writing on matters of faith and deal rather with substantive facts that are provable and tangible.

Firstly, social progressives are not the only ones who are guilty of this sin. I have read many memes from conservatives, or those who purportedly believe themselves to be, that use pseudo information in an attempt to make a point. If one needs to resort to lying to defend a moral philosophy then that philosophy is woefully wanting. What I suggest may also be wanting are the wits to develop a reasoned argument.

Secondly, the traditional understanding of the left/right political divide is practically useless. It is used by banksters, multinationals, big governments and mass media (that they control) to keep us bickering amongst ourselves so that we never get wise to their real plan, namely control. There are really only those who believe that big governments, multinationals and big banks must shape our lives versus those who believe in freedom. That freedom can only be achieved under limited government. The only proven successful limits on government are ones based upon a separation of powers and laws as defined by a constitution which was designed to defend our inherent rights. In order for those constitutions to be effective they must recognize that our rights are indeed inherent to our very being and NOT awarded to us by the state. A limited system of governance must have the necessary checks and balances in place to prevent too much power from being given to any one entity since absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Thirdly, allow me to cite an example of what will happen if such limits are bypassed and/or ignored. Max Hermansen, maxblogg.blogg.no is a friend of mine. A very decent chap who is a retired Norwegian Naval Commander. He used to teach foreign students in Oslo. In his class there were many students from Muslim countries. His students discovered that Max has a homosexual son. They began to say many hateful things about Max's son, even mentioning an "honour killing". Needles to say Max told them he would not tolerate such remarks in his classroom. The students then filed a complaint. What do you think the school did? That's right, as a result Max was let go. Punishing the students for making such remarks is viewed as racist because of the students' heritage. If the law, the very rules, that govern civil society are not blind to race, creed and colour, then there can be no justice. Groups of people have no special rights, but each and every individual has every right. If the law is based upon equality and it is illegal to call for the harm of another person based upon their sexual orientation and the authorities choose to ignore the threats because of the affiliations of the people who made them, then that law is not worth the paper upon which it is written! Fortunately Max won a huge settlement. One over which the leftist media in Norway raged. The issue did not need to go before a judge either, it was settled out of court. I can only surmise that the school wished to avoid the issue going to trial for fear of negative publicity. 

I should also mention that Max had a used book store as well. It was a wonderful dusty old shop which expressed Max's bohemian nature. But what do you think happened to his shop? Can you guess? Someone, or some persons, trashed his book store and covered it with Swastikas. What the "perps" don't realize is in accusing Max of being a NAZI they were doing exactly what NAZI's did, namely preventing people from accessing books. Max was forced to close it as a result. Now this leaves a very obvious question. Who are the real fascists in this disgusting tale of politically correctness on lysergic diethylamide? This level of insanity is straight out of Alice in Wonderland. If I had not known Max personally and followed his quest for justice I would not have believed this possible. 

For those who care, Max is doing very well indeed today. He is reno'ing condos in Oslo and recouping his losses. He is now also head of Pegida in Norway, and for good reason given what he has gone through. I wish my dear friend the very best. I have posted his blog link here and invite you all to follow him. He stands for liberty in a country where government often exceeds its mandate to govern.

Lastly, there is no need to exaggerate the facts when you have the facts straight. You just can't make up stuff like Max's story. I have shared it with his permission. Thank you Max for permitting me to do so. It is an example of what happens when a nation becomes too complacent, too trusting of their elected leaders who are in fact betraying the trust the public has placed in them. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. Stay posted for more folks. I value my readers and need your input. It is time to put on our marching boots and get active in renewing liberty under law! 

Max's shop after the attack: