Progressives – needing Sheeple and are happy to look at them as such

by Skip

Sheeple: (a portmanteau of “sheep” and “people”) is a derogatory term that highlights the passive herd behavior of people easily controlled by a governing power which likens them to sheep, a herd animal that is easily led about. The term is used to describe those who voluntarily acquiesce to a suggestion without critical analysis or research in large part because the majority of others possess a similar mindset

I’m tabbing a bunch of posts about the WikiLeaks-Podesta emails and if the media wasn’t so brown nosing up Hillary’s arse and those of her progressive posse, these email might be the end of her campaign.  But they’re busy protecting her (and “Caining Trump”) so the only source of discussion of these emails is coming from the Right blogosphere.

Sheeple?  I prefer LIVs – Low Information Voters.  It is not that they are stupid but certainly do not take their civic duties highly.  Easy to prove – the “man in the street” interviews I’ve posted up in the past.  They may know the latest about pop culture but nada about their government (after all it is supposed to be about WE the People).  The problem here is that Progressives don’t believe that the citizens have a government – in their model, people are there to be ruled (not even governed, but ruled).  Emphasis mine, reformatted:

One of John Podesta’s emails released by WikiLeaks this week exposes how progressive elites seek to exploit the unwashed masses. The email features one of Podesta’s colleagues from the Center for American Progress admitting that the institutional left “conspires to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry,” ostensibly to impose their radical agenda on us without much resistance.

…In the email from March of 2016, Ivey expresses concern about the rise of “opinionated blowhard” Trump and frets because the “citizenry” seems to be awakening.

Well, we all thought the big problem for our US democracy was Citizens United/Koch Brothers big money in politics. Silly us; turns out that money isn’t all that important if you can conflate entertainment with the electoral process.

Trump masters TV, TV so-called news picks up and repeats and repeats to death this opinionated blowhard and his hairbrained ideas, free-floating discontent attaches to a seeming strongman and we’re off and running. JFK, Jr would be delighted by all this as his “George” magazine saw celebrity politics coming. The magazine struggled as it was ahead of its time but now looks prescient. George, of course, played the development pretty lightly, basically for charm and gossip, like People, but what we are dealing with now is dead serious.

How does this get handled in the general [General election -Skip]? Secretary Clinton is not an entertainer, and not a celebrity in the Trump, Kardashian mold; what can she do to offset this? I’m certain the poll-directed insiders are sure things will default to policy as soon as the conventions are over, but I think not.

Really?  Those of us who suck up this stuff like air are interest in policy – but on the Right, we abhor what she holds to – it takes her “It takes a Village” to steroidal level in which she becomes the head of the village elders – and you will do what she says.  Not a single policy value is one that our Founding Fathers would embrace – not a one.  But here, Ivey continues and drops the bombshell in an innocuous phrase:

And as I’ve mentioned, we’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking – and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.

Think about that. Ivey was actually pleased that the American public was still largely “unaware,” but expressed concern that they were no longer blindly accepting the left’s BS “messaging.” This gives you an idea of how the Democrat media complex operates. They see themselves as the gatekeepers. They want to decide which news stories reach every American household. They want to decide which values are acceptable and which ones are “backwards.” And they don’t like it at all when folks start noticing that they’re being lied to.

 

The Gatekeepers.  Just today, Obama lamented about the “Wild wild West” of today’s media (reformatted, emphasis mine):

Pittsburgh (AFP) – President Barack Obama on Thursday decried America’s “wild, wild west” media environment for allowing conspiracy theorists a broad platform and destroying a common basis for debate. Recalling past days when three television channels delivered fact-based news that most people trusted, Obama said democracy require citizens to be able to sift through lies and distortions.

A “common basis”  – back when there was only CBS, ABC, and NBC, the networks seemed to be more “neutral” and they did parrot each other and the biggies in the print media.  That’s what Obama wants – smaller number of output channels easier to coordinate.  Remember, that’s what JournoList was all about – truly a way for Lefty journalists / academics / government types to shape and message The Message.  And you don’t think its still not in force?

“We are going to have to rebuild within this wild-wild-west-of-information flow some sort of curating function that people agree to,” Obama said at an innovation conference in Pittsburgh. “There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world,” Obama added.

Remember, when he says “that we have to discard“, ask “who is this we“? Who is this curator, Kimosabe (is that cultural appropriation?  Oh goody – I’ve ticked somebody off!) – going to hire that Twitter staff that just got James O’Keefe and Glenn Reynolds suspended? Or shadowbanned GraniteGrok?  Or will be akin to that Facebook team that has been “curating” out conservative oriented news items out of peoples’ news feeds? Simply because we don’t kowtow to the Progressive groupthink?  

So, President Big Ears, tell me – how would I “agree” to a hard Lefty’s decision about what is “common”. Simply, people like me have NOTHING in common with your politics or your policies.  Simply put, anything that enlarges Government and makes it more in control of our lives makes you happy because you don’t believe we can ever be responsible for ourselves – we have to be “led” (and we’d better be happy with it).  After all, all we have to do is see how well you have weaponized our Government against us.

And then for his big bomb:

“That is hard to do, but I think it’s going to be necessary, it’s going to be possible,” he added. “The answer is obviously not censorship, but it’s creating places where people can say ‘this is reliable’ and I’m still able to argue safely about facts and what we should do about it.”

If you are saying that some news or items MUST be discarded, that is by definition, censorship. And frankly, I don’t trust him or anyone else on the Progressive side to curate for me.  In this, he proves Ivey’s email to be true – THEY wish to control the narrative that we consume.  THEY will make the decisions as to what is newsworthy or of interest – just like the Old Media back in the day (and as we it continuing today). Like any good Progressive, Obama wishes to regress back to that time when they were the Gatekeepers of what was right and wrong.

In this (and in the other emails) these top level Progressives are showing us EXACTLY how they see us progs (rather disparagingly) and how they  about how to make this world theirs instead of just leaving our Liberties alone and make those decisions for ourselves.  Instead, we much live up to their demands.

But remember, this is a private (or, er, was) email about private thoughts – not for public consumption.  Yet, why can’t they be public?  Why won’t they be honest about what they believe during the campaign instead of waiting until after the election (like the NH Democrats did here when they passed gay marriage – not a SINGLE WORD during the campaign about what they would do afterwards.

That’s why Progressives need passive people – not worrying about what their government is doing.  Podesta’s posse want people who wish to be led and not having to think about the whys and wherefors’.  They trust but don’t verify.  Or don’t bother at all either because “politics is icky” or “hey, we live in the Land of the Free”.  After all, government is supposed to be the umpire and beneath our feet.

Sadly, Progressives have cast off our American heritage and look to European socialism to be our future. Which when you look at it carefully, it is just another name / mask for the olde royalty.  With the same results for us.

(H/T: PJ Media)

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: