Yeah, that is how you know your country was conquered.

@Krunoslav We faced a cultural revolution by a large segment of the population in the late sixties. The nation survived, but the seeds of destruction were sown. Now, we are faced with another attempted revolution, but this time led by people with political and financial power. That's a tough alliance to overcome. There are those of the left who try to put over the BS that the January 6 political protest was an insurrection, but the real insurrection is from these on the left out to destroy our constitutional freedoms and seize iron-fisted dictatorial control on this USA.

@GaryMysels Well the cultural revolution was inside job. It was not bunch of people who were against the establishment, but it was establishment or at least major segment of it, that wanted it that way to usher in civil rights, the parallel constitution.

The progressives which emerged in late 19th century already had all the prerequisites for all this. The new left of the 1960's is just continuation of that.

Are you factually correct, or politically correct?

“The cultural situation in America today (and indeed in all Western societies) is determined by the cultural earthquake of the nineteen-sixties, the consequences of which are very much in evidence. What began as a counter-culture only some thirty years ago has achieved dominance in elite culture and, from the bastions of the latter (in the educational system, the media, the higher reaches of the law, and key positions within government bureaucracy), has penetrated both popular culture and the corporate world. It is characterized by an amalgam of both sentiments and beliefs that cannot be easily catalogued, though terms like 'progressive,' 'emancipators or 'liberationist' serve to describe it. Intellectually, this new culture is legitimated by a number of loosely connected ideologies— leftover Marxism, feminism and other sexual identity doctrines, racial and ethnic separatism, various brands of therapeutic gospels and of environmentalism. An underlying theme is antagonism toward Western culture in general and American culture in particular. A prevailing spirit is one of intolerance and a grim orthodoxy, precisely caught in the phrase "political correctness.” ― Peter L. Berger

“Political correctness is a war on noticing.”
― Steve Sailer

Today's BLM, Antifa, Trans etc. Are just more "progress". Again fully supported by the progressives who are deeply regressive bunch of people in power. Their foot soldiers are largely useful idiots.

“[T]he useful idiots, the leftists who are idealistically believing in the beauty of the Soviet socialist or Communist or whatever system, when they get disillusioned, they become the worst enemies. That’s why my KGB instructors specifically made the point: never bother with leftists. Forget about these political prostitutes. Aim higher. [...] They serve a purpose only at the stage of destabilization of a nation. For example, your leftists in the United States: all these professors and all these beautiful civil rights defenders. They are instrumental in the process of the subversion only to destabilize a nation. When their job is completed, they are not needed any more. They know too much. Some of them, when they get disillusioned, when they see that Marxist-Leninists come to power—obviously they get offended—they think that they will come to power. That will never happen, of course. They will be lined up against the wall and shot.” ― Yuri Bezmenov

But there is a paradox this time. Because its not juts pure Marxism its the bastard child of liberalism and Marxism.

The aristocracy of victimhood
Op-ed by Auron MacIntyre
April 05, 2023

Western liberal democracies have been engaged in a narrative of political and social progress, believing themselves superior to all that came before. According to this story, the scientific revolution led to the Enlightenment, which produced new social technologies to replace the backward superstitions and traditions that once governed human relations. Armed with a more scientific and rational understanding of human affairs, these new political technologies would free those who had once been subjects of the state.

Popular sovereignty, rule of law, and constitutional government were supposed to protect the rights of the individual from the whims of capricious rulers. This ambitious project has now proven a failure, as democracies across the West seem to be, in unison, creating an aristocracy of favored groups.
In America, trans activists can storm state capitol buildings and BLM protesters can riot for weeks on end while January 6 protesters rot in jail. In Canada, transgenderists can punch their opponents in the face without penalty while police chuckle in approval. In the United Kingdom, those praying silently outside abortion clinics are arrested while Muslim grooming gangs prey on women with little to no fear of reprisal.

These nations all share a tradition of Western liberal democratic government and also seem to have simultaneously developed a social class with special privileges and the ability ignore the rule of law as long as they are punishing the political opponents of the ruling elite.

For many this feels like a radical shift in the way that Western nations are run, but in truth, this has been happening for a long time and has been formalized in U.S. law for decades. Affirmative action and disparate impact have warped the American legal system, not only allowing bias, but in many cases legally mandating it as long as that bias benefits groups that have been granted the status of victim.

Even when the practice is not formally mandated by law, it is enforced culturally by institutions like corporations and universities. Harvard is currently arguing in a Supreme Court case that it must continue to use racial bias in its admissions if it wishes to obtain a diverse student population. The university’s lawyers take for granted that labeling those groups who are elevated through racial preference as “disadvantaged” absolves the institution of any wrongdoing.

What many in the West never grasped was that the leftist concept of social progress was always destined to dismantle classically liberal constitutional government. The left is a coalition of groups who benefit from the destruction of natural hierarchies. The organic limitations inherit in family, church, community, and even biological sex are an unacceptable barrier to the leftist conception of progress.

While legal equality was originally the stated goal, when it failed to reliably produce equal outcomes, there was no way the left was simply going to shrug, assume this was the natural order of things, and go home. Many conservatives attempt to hold the left to account for the linguistic transition from equality to equity, but this is a mistake, because for progressives, these terms were always one and the same.

In order to “progress” beyond the natural social hierarchies, one must engineer society itself. If legal equality is achieved but inequality of outcome persists, then the only remaining option is to privilege some and suppress others in hopes of deriving the desired result. Legal equality must be dismantled because it failed to generate the unstated expectation: equality of outcome.

At first, people did not object to special privileges being granted to those who were characterized as disadvantaged. Most Americans are generous and kind people who would genuinely like to see others succeed and are happy to help those who have ended up on the bottom of the social pyramid. This is especially true when it comes to the civil rights movement, which many Americans saw as a noble correction of a deep wrong that had previously existed in their society. The population at large was willing to grant a form of emergency power to the movement, often ignoring the violation of legislative procedure and prior understandings of constitutional rights in order to fix a historical wrong.

Activists took notice, and it quickly became standard practice for groups who had no claim to the specific historical legacy of the civil rights movement to join themselves to its narrative. Any group that did so successfully gained access to the supra-constitutional framework and moral authority granted by the civil rights movement. As this trend continued, and more traditional understandings of religion and American identity collapsed, the civil rights narrative took their place. America became defined by its ability to discover human rights for increasingly obscure minority groups and export those rights to the rest of the world.

Instead of going to war for security interests, America and the wider West now go to war on behalf of democracy and LGBTQ rights. Anyone who opposes those rights basically opposes the new Western religion and is probably in league with both Hitler and Putin. The wrong side of history is a scary place to be.

Each of these increasingly obscure social minorities is grafted onto the civil rights narrative and given a quasi-sacred victim status that grants them access to the special privileges that lie beyond rule of law and constitutional order. Eventually society reaches a tipping point where the incentives for being an oppressed minority are greater than for being someone who is naturally elevated due to the legal equality granted under the rule of law and the constitutional order.

Couple that fact with the almost deistic elevation through victimhood, and the drive to achieve this new aristocratic status becomes overwhelming. Who would not want to be on the right side of history while getting to punch people they hate in the face?

This has brought us to a very strange place where Western regimes must continually parrot the rhetoric of freedom and constitutional rights while exercising an ever-increasing level of totalitarian state control to impose their artificial and inverted social hierarchy. Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau lecture countries like Iran or Russia about human rights violations while arresting their own political opponents, stealing the bank accounts of protesters, and jailing meme makers.

The West now values the maintenance of a totally artificial social hierarchy over its commitment to legal equality, but this feat of social engineering is by its very nature incredibly fragile. The weight of the inverted social pyramid makes it increasingly unstable, and the social engineers who erected it must search relentlessly for any remaining barriers to power that they can dismantle. Progressives hope that by securing enough power, the state will be able to preserve this artificial construct before it comes crashing down around them.

The West has a vast amount of wealth and can fight for a very long time, but those who make war on reality will always find that it ends in disaster. Maintaining an aristocracy of victimhood will inevitably cost more social capital than any civilization can produce. Let us hope that progressive hubris is brought to heel before that final bill comes due.

[theblaze.com]

Western liberal democracies were supposed to be governed by rule of law and constitutional order, but now, those claiming victimhood are being granted special privileges. I discuss the Left's push to create an aristocracy of privilege built on victimhood and why it naturally destroys legal equality.