Love To Hate My Enemies
People love their enemies. More specifically, they love to hate their enemies. The will say otherwise, but they don’t really mean it. Where would the modern progressive be, without president Trump, capitalism or America? Trump’s alleged evil, reveals their righteousness. Therefore they love Trump. They need Trump. Without Trump, who would they be. They would be silenced, unless more evil can be found. And the more evil, the more righteous they become. Trump is their Satan. And God help anyone who says otherwise. They will be shouted down, beaten, and driven from society.
This is one of the more unfortunate aspects of human nature. Success can never really be success, unless failure shines as brightly. That’s the role “The Poor” often play. “The Poor” are necessary. That’s why people talk about the poor like a monolithic group, who are always poor. This is so that others may be rich in self righteousness.
The truth is most Americans are not poor, and even when they are, poverty is measured against the aggregate wealth of the of the nation as a whole. Meaning, poverty in America bares no resemblance to poverty in the rest of the world. Only in America do we commonly find the problem of obesity among the poor. Only in America do the poor have televisions, cars, and computers. But, if you look, you’ll always find the “The Poor” in America described as though they lived in Bangladesh, or Botswana, because “The Poor” need to really be poor, in order for some people to be rich in self congratulatory concern.
The only place we tend to find entrenched poverty, with unlivable crime, is where progressives have ruled and reigned unopposed for decades, trapping people in bare subsistence through welfare, which rewards women for having children, by never allowing a live-in father in the house. The statistics for children born into such circumstances are universally horrible, regardless of which country they live in. Barack Obama knows this, as does Bill Clinton, both men needed “The Poor” as a voting bloc, however. Therefore maintaining the poor, so they remain poor, is a political necessity.
Any such revelation will be met by howls of derision, “Who are you to say what we believe?”
It’s as though I said there was no hell or no eternal punishment to a deeply religious person. Which, for some, would be as bad as if I said there was no heaven, maybe worse. For some, there can be no heaven, unless there is also a hell. And that is why they love the sick and the sinner, and “The Poor,” as a reflection in a mirror, symbolizing their perceived deeper humanity .
“Where would the poor be without us?” They ask.
A better question might be; “Where would they be without the poor?” That is the truer measure of their intent. Without “The Poor” they would simply cease to exist. And
“The Poor,” as well as the rest of us, would be richer for it.
Mark Magula
This is one of the more unfortunate aspects of human nature. Success can never really be success, unless failure shines as brightly. That’s the role “The Poor” often play. “The Poor” are necessary. That’s why people talk about the poor like a monolithic group, who are always poor. This is so that others may be rich in self righteousness.
The truth is most Americans are not poor, and even when they are, poverty is measured against the aggregate wealth of the of the nation as a whole. Meaning, poverty in America bares no resemblance to poverty in the rest of the world. Only in America do we commonly find the problem of obesity among the poor. Only in America do the poor have televisions, cars, and computers. But, if you look, you’ll always find the “The Poor” in America described as though they lived in Bangladesh, or Botswana, because “The Poor” need to really be poor, in order for some people to be rich in self congratulatory concern.
The only place we tend to find entrenched poverty, with unlivable crime, is where progressives have ruled and reigned unopposed for decades, trapping people in bare subsistence through welfare, which rewards women for having children, by never allowing a live-in father in the house. The statistics for children born into such circumstances are universally horrible, regardless of which country they live in. Barack Obama knows this, as does Bill Clinton, both men needed “The Poor” as a voting bloc, however. Therefore maintaining the poor, so they remain poor, is a political necessity.
Any such revelation will be met by howls of derision, “Who are you to say what we believe?”
It’s as though I said there was no hell or no eternal punishment to a deeply religious person. Which, for some, would be as bad as if I said there was no heaven, maybe worse. For some, there can be no heaven, unless there is also a hell. And that is why they love the sick and the sinner, and “The Poor,” as a reflection in a mirror, symbolizing their perceived deeper humanity .
“Where would the poor be without us?” They ask.
A better question might be; “Where would they be without the poor?” That is the truer measure of their intent. Without “The Poor” they would simply cease to exist. And
“The Poor,” as well as the rest of us, would be richer for it.
Mark Magula
