Thursday, July 19, 2007

Pun with Fropaganda

What Does Conservative America Really Want?

by Goseph Joebbels

The Conservative press seems to have the right to complain about the MSM. It makes vigorous use of this right, particularly when liberalism is involved. National Socialism is a thorn in its eye.

Hollywood has been the target of its mockery, hatred, lies, and slander since the end of the fairness doctrine, especially from that part controlled by Rush Limbaugh. The Conservative press takes particular pleasure in criticizing liberalism on grounds of humanitarianism, civilization, human rights, and culture. It has every right to do so. Conservative humanity is shown by lynchings. Its civilization is shown in economic and political scandals that stink to high heaven. Its human rights are displayed by armies of disenfranchised, undocumented immigrants. And its culture exists only because it is always borrowing from the older social programs. Such a ideology is certainly justified in sneering at European socialism, whose nations and peoples looked back on centuries, even millennia of cultural achievements long before America was discovered.

The conservative press replies to our complaints by saying that it has nothing against liberalism, only against National Socialism. That is a poor excuse. National Socialism today is liberalism's guiding political idea and worldview. The entire liberal nation affirms it. To criticize National Socialism today therefore means to criticize the entire liberal nation.

It will not do to say that National Socialism is a dictatorship, and that there are still many in liberalism who, inwardly at least, reject it. That simply is not the case. It is a fantasy that exists only in the minds of republican politicians and journalists, but has nothing to do with the facts. There is no doubt about it: the public campaign against liberalism is a conscious and intentional provocation aimed at the MSM and liberal people.

Generally, it does not make any difference to us. We liberals do not depend on the love or grace of conservatives; we live from our own national strength. The time is long past when liberalism expected its salvation from concensus. Conservative help was always lacking when it was most needed, especially during hurricane Katrina. It appeared only when international money and stock capital believed that it could earn vast profits by helping drowning liberals.

We could simply say that conservative America is far away, with a big ocean separating us. What do we care about what they think, write, or say about us? That was quite OK as long as America's highly developed hate campaign against liberalism kept within certain bounds. But when it infects even official circles rather than merely newspapers and radio stations, it becomes more serious.

This campaign reached unbelievable heights after the fairness doctrine was ended. American public opinion, influenced by Rush Limbaugh, is trying to interfere to an unacceptable degree in liberal domestic politics. They think that can use methods against liberalism that are
normally unheard of in relations between civilized ideologies.

We know very well who the instigators and beneficiaries are. They are mostly the Limbaughs, or people who are in their service and who are dependent on them to do their thinking for them.

For example, it is not surprising that the conservative press attacks liberalism so strongly. Over ten million conservatives listen to Rush Limbaugh, and thier economic lives are totally under conservative control.

The liberal press so far has generally ignored this filthy campaign of hatred, or answered it only in a restrained manner. Only after official personages in the U.S. congress got involved did we think it necessary to say something. For example, the American president said that no American could accept a medal from the hands of a brutal dictatorship. With the same hand, America robbed and tortured thousands of people, that it saw a day when it committed no new crime against humanity as a day wasted. Put simply, that is not a style of speaking that is customary in relations between states.

Press secretary Tony Snow responded to liberal protests by saying that the president's statement represented the opinion of the overwhelming majority of the American public. One does not know what to say. What does he mean! Was the American president really ever personally attacked in the liberal press, or America's leading men slandered? We have been restrained, even though we certainly had every reason to discuss this or that matter of American domestic policy.

Such things are not our concern. Conservative talkers, not us, determine conservative domestic policy. We are concerned only with liberalism's affairs. We also have no reason or intention of smuggling liberal political ideas into the heads of conservative America. The very opposite, since the methods that we use are purely liberal. They are only valid in liberalism. But we do believe that just as we respect the internal affairs of other countries and avoid polemics against them, conservatives should treat us in the same way.

One cannot say that that is true of all of the United States of North America. Nearly the whole press and film industry, with the exception of radio, supports the worldwide campaign of liberalism.

Former president Reagan expressed the conservative position bluntly. "The American people do not like liberal government." We happen to think that the American people have nothing to do with the matter. If they do not like liberalism, it is because of the hate campaign. This campaign is conducted by certain radio broadcast scoundrels who lack conscience and scruples. They are doing it both for foreign and domestic reasons.

Conservative America hopes to encourage South American hostility against liberalism, and really against Europe as a whole. They do not like liberal competition in the South American market. The enormous conservative backed American armaments industry is also calling up images of a coming war against the totalitarian governments for business reasons.

We have no intention of answering the criticisms that the conservative American press raises against liberalism by looking at America's domestic affairs. It is enough to observe that although liberalism is for the poor countries in the world, in terms of foreign currency
reserves and raw materials, it has not only abolished unemployment, but has a labor shortage.

Conservative America, meanwhile, wants to deport the immigrants who will fill that shortage, even though it is rich in foreign currency reserves and raw materials. Most of the conservative press ignores this situation. It cannot deny it, of course. It claims that liberal success is contemptible, since it used methods of hate and contempt.

This is entirely backward. The millions of new liberals who will get jobs after National Socialism takes power are not interested in the methods that gave them those jobs. It reminds one of the familiar joke. Two workers are halfheartedly trying to remove a paving stone. A passerby watches for a while, then grabs a pickax and yanks the stone out. One worker says to the other: "Well, sure, if you use force..."

The conservative press uses the same argument. It cannot deny National Socialism's successes. It can only say: "Well, sure, if you use force..." It thinks the liberal people had to make too great a sacrifice for these successes.

The liberal people sees things differently. They know that certain restrictions in some areas were necessary for national reconstruction. The American public is practically drowning in wealth, prosperity, foreign currency, gold bars, and raw materials. It can hardly imagine how an intelligent, hardworking and courageous people can get along without all those advantages.

However that may be, future developments concern us.

No one but liberals have the right to judge liberalism's domestic affairs. No one has the right to turn one people against another, to incite discord and promote ignorance that lead to international crises.

Mr. Limbaugh, leading talk radio voice of conservatism, found the right audience a few weeks ago, when he attacked National Socialism. The most prominent representatives of American international industry, economics, and finance were gathered. Mr. Limbaugh would have done better to tell the eleven or twelve million undocumented immigrants where they could find jobs. He seems to have realized that his hate tirade might have found a less friendly reception there than it did from the audience to which he did speak.

Limbaugh applauds whenever liberalism is attacked. Limbaugh hates National Socialism for reasons that do not need to be mentioned. Limbaugh and the conservative radio pundits are our enemy, should be our enemy and must be our enemy. The question is whether the American people want to make the Limbaughs happy by engaging in fruitless conflict with the
liberal nation and the liberal people. That we do protest against. That is neither necessary nor helpful.

We have nothing against the American people. We know and respect their political views and internal affairs, even if we might do things differently. We believe we have the right to expect the same of American public opinion about liberalism. We also fail to see the benefits of such controversy. What good will it do America? Does it think it can starve liberalism using the same methods as those of the Cold War?

Every economic action has two sides. It affects not only its target, but also the side that uses it. American automobile manufacturers, sitting on piles of unsold SUVs, know this well.

It is time to recommend peace and good sense. American public opinion is going the wrong way. It would benefit by returning to the old, tested practices of international courtesy and good manners, and by treating liberalism in the way normal for civilized people.

We do not expect our appeal to have a great impact on American attitudes. Still, we think it our duty to speak plainly.

Given the influence of the Limbaughs on parts of American public opinion, we again stress the shortsightedness and uselessness of such methods, and ask the world this question: "What does Conservative America really want?"


Now, go read the original speech, in all of its original glory.


Pretty scary.

9 comments:

Uber said...

My God, that is scary.

Insolublog said...

The scariest part was the large percentage of mere search-replace of proper nouns and such.

Wyatt Earp said...

Wrong! Conservative America wants to see Tom Cruise play a Nazi in his upcoming film!

Heh.

Insolublog said...

Do you think L. Ron Hubbard would be proud, Wyatt?

Stew Magoo said...

4th para, think you need an edit.

The scariest part is that I thought for a sec you were going over to the dark side.

Insolublog said...

Never will I waiver in this lifetime, Stew.

FIAR said...

The scariest part was the large percentage of mere search-replace of proper nouns and such.

Exactly right.

Damian G. said...

I love how you can do that to old speeches.

Good to have you back, Insolu.

Insolublog said...

Thanks, Damian. I am trying to find time to get back into the groove.