|
[This is the text of a speech Dr. Jack Wheeler gave October 13, 2005, at
the Accuracy in Media luncheon in Washington DC. It was
taped by C-Span and was nationally broadcast at various
times over the C-Span network.
Dr. Wheeler
began the speech by holding up an actual shrunken head.]
I’d like to show you a concrete example of why liberals
cannot defend their country. This is a human shrunken head.
It was made by the man who gave it to me, Chief Tangamashi,
who adopted me into his clan of Shuara Jivaros in the Amazon
jungle of Ecuador when I was 16 years old. The Jivaros call
such a shrunken head a
tsantsa.
When an enemy is killed in battle, his head is taken via a
machete and skinned. The head skin is sewn up and hot sand
stuffed in the cavity, drawing out all the moisture and oils
until it is dried and shrunken.
For some time before this process, the head-taker has
studied his trophy’s facial features, so that as the
tsantsa
dries and becomes plastic, it can be shaped to look like its
owner when alive. This is done so that the spirit of the man
killed will recognize his home when a ceremony is held at
the head-taker’s village, the
tsantsa
placed on a pole, and the spirit called in from the forest.
The
uvisheen
or witch-doctor has the spirit enter his home
-
his head
-
then traps it inside by sewing up the lips. By trapping the
spirit inside a head shrunken in size, the spirit’s power to
do malevolent magic is equally shrunken and is
incapacitated.
The spirit, which entered through the
tsantsa’s lips can only escape
through the lips which are sewn up. Notice that the
tsantsa
is hollow, that the neck hole is open
-
but somehow it’s no fair for the spirit to escape through
the open neck.
Now, what would lead the Jivaros to engage in such a
practice as shrinking human heads? Because they believe that
all death is murder. All death that is accidental or
unexplained is for them murder by envious black magic, which
must be avenged.
The Jivaros, like most primitive and traditional cultures,
live in constant fear of the magical aggression of others.
They attribute all unfortunate events to the malicious,
envious black magic of another Jivaro. (Sounds like the
Democrats blaming everything on George Bush, right?)
In another part of the Amazon there is a tribe called the
Yanomamo. When a Yanomamo woman gives birth, she tearfully
proclaims her child to be ugly.
In a loud mortified lament that the entire tribe can hear,
she asks why the gods have cursed her with such a
pathetically repulsive infant. She does this in order to
ward off the envious black magic of the Evil Eye, the
Mal
Ojo, that would be directed at her by
her fellow tribespeople if they knew how happy she was with
her beautiful baby.
People in tribal and traditional cultures suffuse their
lives with superstition, witchcraft, sorcery, voodoo, "black
magic," the "evil eye." The world for them is teeming with
demons, spirits, ghosts and gods, all of whom are malicious
and dangerous -- in a word,
envious.
Envy is the source of tribal and traditional cultures’
belief in Black Magic, the fear of the envious Evil Eye.
The fundamental reason why certain cultures remain static
and never evolve (like present-day villages in Egypt or
India that have pretty much stayed the same for a thousand
years) is the overwhelming extent to which the entire lives
of the people within them are dominated by envy and
envy-avoidance.
Just like the culture of the Left today, which represents a
philosophy of the Stone Age. For the Left is fundamentally
characterized by a
resentment of prosperity
-- and all forms of such resentment
-
from the leftist university professor who considers himself
to be in the progressive vanguard of sophisticated
contemporary thought to the terrorist in a cave wanting to
take us all back to the Dark Ages
--
are nothing but an atavism, a regression to a primitive
tribal belief in Black Magic.
Take for example the primitive atavism of left-wing bromides
like "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer." By the
same logic, one can be healthy only at the expense of
others. That in order to be in superior health, bursting
with energy and vitality, one has to make someone else sick
or in poor health -- just like in order to be rich you have
to make others poor.
The healthy are healthy because they unjustly exploited and
ripped off the sick, spiriting away the sick’s fair share of
health with black magic. In fact, the sick are sick because
the healthy are healthy. If this is absurd, then claiming
the poor are poor because they have been exploited by the
rich is equally so.
The crux understanding of Moslem terrorism or Jihadism, for
example, is that it is a pathology of envy.
All three of the great barbarisms of modern times have been
pathologies of envy. Naziism, preaching race-envy toward
"rich exploitative Jews"; Communism preaching class-envy
toward "rich exploitative capitalists"; Jihadism preaching
culture-envy toward "rich exploitative America/Israel/the
West." In all three cases, the belief in exploitation is a
primitive belief in voodoo Black Magic.
What gives envy its enormous destructive capacity is the
fear of it, fear of the Evil Eye.
It is envy that makes a
Nazi, a Communist, or a Moslem Terrorist. It is the fear of
being envied that makes a Liberal.
This is most easily seen in the children of wealthy parents.
Successful businessmen who have made it on their own
normally have a respect for the effort and the economic
system that makes success possible. Their children, with
their unearned inheritance, are easier targets for
guilt-mongering by the envious.
So they assume a posture of liberal compassion as an
envy-deflection device: "Please don't envy me for my
father's money -- look at all the liberal causes and
government social programs I advocate!" Teddy Kennedy is the
archetype of this phenomenon.
Envy-appeasement explains why Hollywood is so liberal. The
vast amounts of money entertainment stars make is so grossly
disproportionate to the effort it took them to make it that
they feel it is unearned. So they apologize for it. The
Liberal strategy is to apologize for his success, his
country’s success, his civilization’s success, in order to
appease the envious.
Liberalism is thus not a political ideology or set of
beliefs. It is an envy-deflection device, a psychological
strategy to avoid being envied. Liberalism is the
politicalization of envy-appeasement.
One definitive characteristic of both envy and the fear of
it is masochism. Envy is not simply hatred of someone for
having something you don't -- it is the willingness to
masochistically hurt or deprive yourself as long as the
person you are envious of is also hurt or deprived. The
penultimate example is the Palestinian suicide-bomber.
Similarly, the more one fears being envied, the more one is
driven to masochistic self-humiliation in attempts at envy
appeasement.
The lethality of liberal envy-appeasement is that
personally-felt guilt is projected onto the various social
or tribal collectives to which the liberal belongs and are a
part of his self-identity. Self-loathing is transformed into
a loathing of one's society or race.
White male liberals become
auto-sexist,
sexist toward their own sex. White liberals become
auto-racist: racist toward their own
race (such as white writer Susan Sontag who denounced her
own race as "the cancer of human history").
Dime-store demagogues like eco-fascist environmentalists,
feminazis, PETA animal rights fanatics, homosexual marriage
promoters, race hustlers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton
all get their strength from the liberals' fear of their Evil
Eyes.
All the passions of the Left are frenzies of masochism.
What could be more idiotic and masochistic than to oppose
missile defense? This opposition cannot be understood unless
one dispenses with its rhetoric and rationales and realizes
that such folks at their emotional core
do not
want their country defended.
The "global warming" hoax cannot be comprehended other than
that its masochistic advocates
do not want their
civilization to prosper.
The entire Political Correctness movement is nothing but
masochistic envy-appeasement advocated by those who
do not
want their culture to survive.
The pro-abortionists’ crazed determination to prevent any
attempt to stop mothers from murdering their children by the
millions, or the equally crazed mission of the
environmentalists to prevent DDT from saving millions of
children from dying of malaria, means that they
do not
want their species to exist.
As the Amazon tribeswoman who says her baby is ugly, so the
white male liberal says his gender, his race, his country,
his civilization and even his entire species is ugly.
This is why liberals always root for those who revile
America. Liberals are incapacitated from being able to
defend America because of their primitive fear of the Evil
Eye of America’s enemies. Liberals are incapable of pride,
deep pride, in being American. Instead they feel
embarrassment.
You and I feel that pride. You and I think it is the coolest
thing in the world to be American. I’ve been to some 180
countries, and whenever and wherever someone asks me, "Where
are you from?", it is just so totally cool to answer,
"America
--
I’m an American."
Liberals are embarrassed rather than proud to be American,
they want to apologize for being American, to wallow in the
goo of moral relativism and multiculturalism, because they
have a compulsion to appease the envious.
Yet we cannot defeat Moslem terrorism unless we reject
Moslem envy. Such rejection then enables us to target the
Jihadis’ numerous Achilles Heels.
One, for example, is women’s rights. It needs to be stated
publicly by public figures for consumption in Moslem media:
We just don’t care that men having more rights than women is
sanctioned by Allah in the Koran, any more than we care that
slavery is so sanctioned. If slavery and lack of women’s
rights is sanctioned by Allah in the Koran, then too bad for
Allah.
We need to go on the moral offensive. The moral currency of
Islam is debased. Islam is infected with a moral virus that
has rendered it a morally inferior religion as it stands in
the world today. It no longer deserves our respect and if
Moslems want our respect back they must earn it by
disinfecting their religion of moral poison.
Such a moral offensive requires moral confidence. Not only
are liberals are incapable of moral confidence (with one
exception: the sacred right of a mother to murder her unborn
children), they are terrified of it, claiming it to be the
path to tyranny.
Yet moral relativism was Benito Mussolini’s rationale for
fascism:
If relativism signifies contempt for fixed categories and
those who claim to be the bearers of objective immortal
truth, then there is nothing more relativistic than Fascist
attitudes and activity. From the fact that all ideologies
are of equal value, we Fascists conclude that we have the
right to create our own ideology and to enforce it with all
the energy of which we are capable.
Moral relativism, the denial of moral truths, is the primary
rationale for fascism, yet liberals remain terrified of
moral certainty and confidence because they are so terrified
of envious Evil Eyes.
It was 20 years ago that I realized Liberal Envy-Appeasement
was why liberals couldn’t be proud to be American and had no
passion for defending Western Civilization.
Back in the 1980s, I often spoke at colleges about
anti-Soviet resistance movements in Soviet colonies such as
Nicaragua, Angola, Mozambique, and Afghanistan. Students
would invariably attempt to turn a discussion of Soviet
imperialism into an assertion of moral equivalence between
the USA and the USSR: "How can you criticize the Soviets
when we're just as bad?" I would be asked. "What about what
we did to the Indians?"
I would reply, "I haven't done anything to the Indians. What
have you done to them?"
The response was always the same. "But we stole their land!"
And I’d say, "OK -- let's give it back. And let's start with
your property. To what tribe do you want your family’s home
to go? What tribe gets your car and your stereo?"
Once I couldn't stand being heckled by a particularly loud
and petulant student leftist any longer. I lost my temper
and said to him: "Look, man, if you're into masochism, find
some chick with long black hair who's into whips and chains
and have her beat the hell out of you. Just don't take it
out on your country."
This is the request we must make to Liberal Democrats today.
Stop taking out your need for mortification upon your
country. Flagellate yourselves all you want
--
just get out of the way of those of us who are proud to be
Americans, and stop trying to prevent us from defending the
greatest political achievement in the history of humanity
--
our country, the United States of America.
Maureen Dowd's column of February 20, “Bricks and Mortars,”
contains an absolutely exquisite example of why liberals are
lost in space.
She recounts a “partially blind biology student” in
Florence, South Carolina telling a campaigning George W.
Bush that “she couldn't afford a $400 device that would let
her use a microscope.” Sneering that Bush's “solution was to
ask if anyone in the audience would pay for it,” Miss Dowd
makes a smart-aleck put-down that is her trade-mark:
“Noblesse oblige is not exactly a detailed health care
program.”
Earth to Spaceship Maureen: This woman didn't need a
“detailed health care program” from Washington; she needed
400 bucks. Bush solved her actual real individual problem
right on the spot. An audience member volunteered the money.
The woman got her microscope device.
Yet - and here is the liberal key - Maureen is upset about
it. Rather than the woman's particular problem being solved,
Maureen would have been happy if Bush had proposed some
massive government program to regulate health care instead.
The advocacy of such a program would have meant nothing to
the woman - she needed the device for her studies now.
This is of no concern to Maureen, for individual concerns
never are. Liberals only think of people in the abstract, as
groups. This is why they are only concerned with group
rights, of minorities, or women, or workers, or homosexuals,
or whatever, and look at individual human beings only as
members of various collectives.
Liberals are thus rarely advocates of individual liberty,
the rights of individuals irregardless of whatever
collective groupings in which they may participate. True
reality, for liberals, only exists in a Platonic world of
ideals and abstractions, while the existence of the concrete
individual is illusory.
So Maureen and others of her intellectual tribe will
continue to float off in bitterness and anger towards the
Asteroid Belt, while George W. provides solutions to
non-illusory flesh-and-blood Americans on earth. |