From a private post on Facebook:
Name ONE time in human history when the group fighting to ban books and censor speech were the good guys.
I’ll wait…
Update: I found the original post here.
The View From North Central Idaho
Ramblings on explosives, guns, politics, and sex by a redneck Idaho farm boy who became a software engineer living near Seattle.
That’s a good one. I’ll definitely need to repost. Any attribution, or just “anonymous?”
I went looking and found the original, public, post. See the update above.
Could you cite the author for those of us who don’t have (and will not get) Facebook accounts?
It was posted by “Vet Radio Syndicate @vrsradio · Radio Station”.
I think there is a fair to good chance they were not the authors. But that is the extent of what I know about it.
When was that? I thought I had seen it a few weeks ago, and would have guessed on one of the gun blogs.
Google shows a tweet: https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1364976630196801552 from Feb 25. That looked very familiar.
March 2 at 8:17 AM.
Decent point. Some notorious book burners and book banners, doing it by actual decree as opposed to sporadic or spontaneous reaction, are (consecutively);
The Roman Catholic Church
The Soviets (and other Marxist governments)
The Nazi Party
All modern leftists
Any casual reader should recognize that all these organizations share the same basic social doctrine, which is collectivism (central planning) under an elite clique of rulers claiming “the common good” as their justification and mandate. All systems in which individual liberty (the only kind of liberty) is systematically curtailed in favor of obedience to what amounts, in essence, to a “god-king”.
But there is another point to be made, which is not insignificant. We talk about “the good guys” as if expecting general agreement with the notion that good should be upheld and promoted while bad should be suppressed. I am here to tell you that no such general agreement exists, and that it is therefore a mistake, even a deadly mistake, to expect it.
One must therefore avoid the temptation to become confused, annoyed or frustrated when such agreement fails to manifest in public discourse.
The left is motivated by envy, jealousy and hate, and they promote those things continually. It is the mind of Cain, whose countenance fell when he observed the success of Able. In fact they sometimes cannot help but take the masks off once in a while to proudly and openly promote evil as such. Do not ever expect, or consider the notion in your plans, forecasts and arguments, that a movement so driven is ever, truly or consistently, going to promote (or tolerate) anything good. They’re often excellent pretenders, so don’t be fooled.
For example, when we say, backed up with reams of data, that unfettered access to guns saves innocent lives, they hate it, not because it is false but specifically and especially because it is true.
It is a very difficult thing to wrap one’s head around, but obviously one of our weak points is that we repeatedly fail to comprehend it. I submit to you that we are guilty of projection, just as we accuse the left of being guilty of projection, whenever we point out something that is good and expect them to embrace it as desirable and worthy of protection and promotion. Furthermore, that failure on our part is, and will remain, a significant cause of our on-going frustration.
The fallacy which says “good is preferable over evil” among the left should go into the trash right along with the “leftists are all idiots” fallacy. Both are so utterly and demonstrably false that it is a wonder to see them so prominent in the language of those (advocates of liberty) who should by now have enough discernment to know better.
Abandon those fallacies entirely, and forget them completely. Only then can one begin to comprehend the enemy alliance arrayed against us, and then to discern the nature of the strategic and tactical landscapes in which this war is so rapidly culminating.
They hate you because of what little good is in you, and because they understand the greater potential for that good (which terrifies them), and they’re smart enough to recognize that good in you, even while we, as a nation, are too dumb, too frightened, or otherwise unwilling to recognize what’s driving them.
Were we to recognize the evil intelligence that’s driving the collectivists, we’d have to recognize the good intelligence which stands in the greatest contrast, and realize that only He can save us. And hardly anyone wants THAT!
Joe McCarthy was right, but he didn’t go far enough before the communists took him down.
Your right. You’ll notice the first thing communism does is remove your ability to kill them? Using all available tools. Morals, law, media, politics, fear.
I’ve not heard one conservative anywhere that doesn’t couch his remarks toward the left with some form of non-violent qualifier.
At the same time they murder us, and plan our murder on a mass scale, openly.
McCarthy proves there’s only one way to get rid of communism.
We should take to heart that Stalin, Hitler, Moa, Che, Castro, Obama, and our last communist puppet president, Kamala, all agree in principle.
Sent this quote to some family members. I added that I find it amazing that even with such clear history, we still have to deal with people today that think this is OK. One of the replies I got give a very interesting take on this issue.
“Problem is that the Left have a lot in common with the Inquisition on the Catholic side and the CounterRemonstrants on the Protestant side. They are utterly convinced of their own righteousness and will go to any length to smite evil. They are true believers in the Hofferian tradition.
“A mass movement attracts and holds a following not because it can satisfy the desire for self advancement, but because it can satisfy the passion for self-renunciation.”
They seek to avoid the burden of self-hood which is why they submerge themselves in the mob. Fearing autonomy, they see as their enemy anyone who is confident in their independence. And they feel they must make them obey the mob and failing that, encompass their destruction. They think they are ‘post-modern’ but are actually a throwback to something older and darker, something primal and tribal in their essence. They demand obedience. Failing that, they will have blood.”