Reading that title, one should be thinking, at least, of North Korea. China, as well. Those of us who are older remember the Berlin Wall and the East German army and the Western Allies decades long standoff with thumbs ready to put their Safeties to off. I also think of the Stasi, keeping tabs on everyone and everything with vast files. China is now automating all of that with their “social gamification” of its subjects with rewarding “good behavior” and severally punishing those holding “wrongthink” ideas. We see what Progressives are doing to Conservatives as a much milder version but the purpose is clear: silencing of dissent. It is Mussolini’s phrase all over again (e.g., those that do not learn their history are doomed to repeat it).
So, over at Treehugger (er, where else? They are such a rich gold mine of what is incipient socialism under the guise of environmentalism where almost all of their “remedies” to the Eco-Apocalypse-that-never-happens requires the Force of Government. This time, the topic is “US meat eaters need to cut back on beef by nearly half“. And of course, the instant thought was “and who is going to make me?” and “to have this happen, there is only one road to follow”. You all here know what that is.
Well, like all “good intentioned” (the example for this post, good intentions), there is a rather militant vegan whose solution to everything is VEGAN. Well, because VEGAN! And he can’t understand why everyone doesn’t think like him – yep, a circular problem for this “do-gooder”. So while I suggest taking a read of the post and the the comments to see what you either are or will be up against (for them, it IS a religion and like the Borg, you WILL be assimilated), here’s a couple of snippets about this mindset. Again, he’s arguing that everyone should wake up and get rid of all meat eating. No questioning The Decision, no cheating around the margins, no choice.
Matt: A preferred eating pattern is a whole foods plant based diet to be clear. Not simply a no-meat junk food diet.
Actually, I’m a problem solver. Look at the world biggest problems and figure out the most efficient and effective solutions.
Funny, I’ve never seen his name in solving the world’s big problems as of yet. Yet, it is people like him, as they begin to aggregate, will be the problem and not just meat-eating. So I start the process of taking issue with the outlook:
granitegrok
“Actually, I’m a problem solver”
Unless there are those of that disagree that what you call a problem really isn’t. Then you’re just preaching to the wrong choir.
Attacking their basic premise is always a good starting point. Otherwise, you allow them to hold the high ground and you’re always fighting under their rules and in their bubble – you’ll lose. And no, eating animal protein is not a problem, not in my eyes. It’s also a case, just like the political Left that can only see American Society through the lens of racism or victimization, they can’t adapt easily when you bring up a more immediate and more terrifying problem. Like here
Matt: Global levels of beef consumption isn’t a problem?
My answer was to go to the heart of the solution of the entire post like I said above – the eco-socialist want to solve what they believe to be an environmental problem. However, that almost always means that only “collective” action can solve that issue. They do understand that people like me will refuse to play their game and will refuse to participate on our own accord EVEN if each and every study says that “WE” must do this or “WE” must stop doing that.
They hate that idea – how DARE we dissent at their sacrificial altar of “Safety over Freedom”. For the sake of the “common good”, our knees must bow to the statue of King Nebuchadnezzar or be thrown into the fiery furnace (no cold drinks allowed – you know, like going through TSA security at airports). So, I tried to point it out and tried the tactic that “good intentions” can be just be as bad as guns and bullets:
granitegrok:
What is a more immediate problem is totalitarian governments who believe their people ARE the problem and must be controlled (and by force if need be – or just because that’s what they are). Included in that are those that, under the guise of “social engineering”, pushed by people like Geoff Gosson (comment below) who proclaim “We do know better. We’re sorry.” but aren’t sorry.
Totalitarian govt is not just one where police and soldiers overwatch with guns – included are those that have no problem in deciding that your behavior must be change, subtly with legislation or regulations, to fit social norms expressed and pushed by a few. It doesn’t take long for a “free” people to become unfree under this kind of regime – even if under the guise of “it’s good for you” or “it’s for the common good”. Especially that latter phrase. If you study history, much evil has been committeed under that rhetorical umbrella.
Like I’ve already said, govt should be neutral to peoples’ choices and not be in the business to force changes simply because some choices are not “PC” enough.
And with that, the topmost comment by Matt was deleted (by Matt? by the Moderator)? and I’ll never know how he responded. If it was deleted by Matt, then I know he couldn’t keep the debate going.
