Definition
Tyranny has been defined as “unlimited authority or
use of power, or a government, which exercises such power without any controls
or limits.” This definition applies to heads of governments or small groups of
people.
Cases in
Point
We are familiar with what tyranny by the majority
looks like.
Laws are passed without input from the minority.
Decisions are made that have a detrimental effect on the minority. Rights of
the minority are ignored or trampled on the grounds that the majority approved
it.
Two recent examples illustrate this point: one by the
Republicans (tax cuts in 2018) and one by Democrats (Obamacare 2008).
California as a one party system is another great
example. The Democrats rule the roost … Their super majority has made it easy
to pass laws that fundamentally impact the rights of the minority when it comes
to taxation and regulations. The
legislature is busy passing laws to dispense favors to its base – unions,
public employees, and illegal immigrants, and so on at the expense of the
taxpayer.
Hijacking
the Majority
We were warned over the years to pay attention to vocal
groups. Left to their devices, they will highjack a political party and jump in
front of issue parades to steer them in a particular direction.
In my estimation, Progressives
represent 30-40 percent of the Democratic Party. Conservatives represent 40-50 per cent of the Republic Party. These
minorities on the right and left have a way of hijacking their party and shape its
narrative and talking points.
Swept aside is what has been called the silent majority estimated at 55-60 of
the electorate. The fringe on both sides
of the political spectrum tends to dominate the conversation.
The Monolith
of Views
True believers inhabit the fringe on both sides. They
are not interested in dialog. They know that they are right. And they
unmercifully attack those who disagree with them using vitriol, ridicule and
intimidation.
Here is how they do it:
· By regulating
speech – what is or is not politically correct.
· By erasing or
rewriting history or symbols.
· By suggesting
conspiratorial or improper behavior by opponents.
· By blaming or
shaming the opponent into submission.
· By resorting
to violence and property destruction to make their point.
They do all this to impose their views. They do not
want to hear anything that contradicts their argument. They condemn others’
free speech as being hateful. They want
to re-write the history of the western civilization, and downplay any accomplishments
they deem ill gotten and greed motivated. They see no redeeming qualities in
the symbols and memories their opponents revere. They lay blame at the
opponents’ doorstep for all their real or imagined afflictions.
My Pet Peeve
In the heat of the battle, generalizations are used to
paint the opponent in the worst way. By demonizing the opponent, humanity is
denied, and broad brushed away. While espousing inclusion, we use racial
distinctions as wedges to divide one another. While striving for harmony many
advocate that white men be pushed aside and deemed toxic.
White men are lately lambasted for every ill or
blemish in the national tapestry of multi-culturalism. Few if any of the white
man’s redeeming qualities are espoused. They are described stereotypically as
if all white men were the same. This generalization generates rancor amongst many
white men and women who do not share similar histories.
Not all whites are WASPs (White-Anglo –Saxon-Protestant). Many
are Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim, and non-believers. Not all
whites owned slaves. Many Blacks owned slaves, by the way. Not all whites have
a history of racial discrimination. Not all whites have benefitted from
colonialism.
To paint all whites as racists, xenophobes,
misogynists, homophobes, fascists, rich or privileged is wrong! Many have also suffered
discrimination along the way. A few whites have been lynched for crimes they
did not commit. Most proudly come from humble beginnings.
We are all proud of who we are, where we came from,
and of our contribution to the nation, be it in the battlefield, the classroom,
the court house, business or the halls of Congress.
Parallel
Realities
You cannot lift your status by lowering someone
else’s. You cannot gain respect by defiling some else’s. You cannot bury
history, although you might want to rewrite it.
The silent majority avoids controversy. Its members do
not demonstrate. The silent majority does not relish destroying private
property or support estranged people on the rampage. It likes anonymity and
shies away from the limelight. It chooses order over chaos, tranquility over
warfare.
In the privacy of the voting booth, the silent
majority expresses its views. It ignores
precedents and charts an unexpected direction.
Polls do not accurately capture the opinions and views
of the majority because most people are unwilling or “afraid” to share them.
Like we have been taught, “you can fool some of the people some of the time,
but in the end you cannot fool them all the time.”
We live in parallel realities. Each reality is created
to sooth a particular audience. We all know that most men are good and come in
all colors. So why demonize the white male? What is the benefit and who is the
beneficiary?
It is time to put a stop to identity politics. They
are used to slice and dice the population for political gain. Let’s stop
playing games with diversity.
We are at a crossroad.
We must choose. On one side, there is the less traveled road to civility and
tranquility, and on the other, the popular finger-pointing
road.
Time is of the essence! Our future rests in the
balance.
