In his 2000 essay, "The Origins of Political Correctness," Bill Lind wrote:
"We call it political correctness,The name originated something as a joke, literally in a comic strip, and we tend to think of it as only half serious. In fact, it's deadly serious. It's the great disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of millions of people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world. It is the disease of ideology. PC is not funny. PC is deadly serious.
"If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out which it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back, not to the 1860's and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are obvious."
Seventy years after Nazi Germany's fall, people throughout the world still wonder why the German people so readily followed Adolph Hitler. What was Nazism? Populism plus Terror? Ascendancy of the right? Triumph of a demagogue? Or, was it simply a scared, frustrated people following someone who seemingly connected with them?
Historians generally agree that a flawed treaty of Versailles provided the seeds that ultimately lead to World War Two. Those who lived through post WWI Germany recounted runaway inflation, decadence previously considered unimaginable in a relatively conservative country and a nagging fear of Bolshevism. Limited economic opportunity completed the circle.
Hitler was a master positionist. He had no use for political correctness and correctly equated it to Marxism. He then combined the mystique of Nationalism with the rabble rousing appeal of Socialism and presto: "National Socialism."
National Socialism was essentially basic benefits, such as healthcare, retirement and unemployment insurance for all citizens, except the Jews. At the same time, it promoted the need for a strong national defense against all who threatened Germany. This was naturally welcomed by Germany's military hierarchy. The overall rhetoric promoted Germany's greatness and how the German people had been compromised by previous leadership.
Hitler identified the Jews as both "the Capitalists and the Communists who sought to destroy the German people." For those who have waded through Mein Kampf, it's all there! Most disturbing are some of the parallels drawn by G. Edward Griffin in his book, "the Creature from Jekyll Island."
These Jewish bankers, previously off the radar, thanks to political correctness, were fingered in a way never imagined. In many ways the initial stages of the "outside Wall Street" movement several years ago were eerily reminiscent of those tumultuous days in 1920's Germany. Trump has painfully reminded the country that while must suffered through the financial meltdown, a tiny fragment benefited greatly.
To compare Donald Trump to Adolph Hitler is both unfair and inaccurate. Trump is no Nazi. Nor does he harbor secret dreams of "Pan Americanism." Or, does he hate one individual group of people. What he has done however, is to identify political correctness as a cancer within America. And in doing so, revealed growing disparities that continue to mount in the country. His strong, albeit obnoxious voice has not gone unheard.
Much of this frustration stems from general disgust of our career politicians. As recent days have illustrated, the political class has misread the electorate. So has the mainstream media. It is, as if, there has been a wall that has separated them from those in the streets, attempting to live in this country.
This was how Hitler initially succeeded. He identified with the man in the street. Most career politicians have lost touch with the man in the street. Donald Trump may have found him.
Trump is talking about issues that mean something to "Joe Six-Pack." Eleven million illegal aliens in the country, many of whom are drawing benefits? The endless outsourcing of American jobs? A horrible trade deal that would siphon still more American jobs away from our shores. And finally, a real threat from Islam.
Opposition to all is seen as politically incorrect by establishment politicians and their media henchmen. In Trump's view, they are most relevant.
"Making America great again" are not empty words. Translated it amounts to Nationalism over Globalism. Trump concludes correctly that the United States is strong enough to go it alone. And, in doing so, our country will prosper. Then, as opposed to placating unreliable, undeserving nations, we will resume our place as the "example." In short, the needs of Americans first. While some abroad may not like us, all will respect us.
By changing the tax code and relaxing some of the more cumbersome regulations, more companies will want to do business here. For those still not convinced, there are other measures, such as protective tariffs. While this may prove unpopular with Wall Street, Main Street will see it as nothing short of a Godsend.
By fully developing our energy resources, we will create good paying jobs here at home. Not to mention enhance our overall national security. True, such a position won't win a lot of points with Tom Steyer and his pals. But we're talking about the needs of middle class America! Not wealthy hedge fund managers!
A strong military? I think the majority favors such, including nearly all Republicans. But Trump may be thinking on a scale never conceived. "Peace through strength" worked for Reagan. Why not now?
Trump is talking about a single payer health insurance system. Whoops! Doesn't this sound something akin to Obamacare? Maybe. But, he is going one step further: free health insurance for all." That certainly doesn't jive with contemporary Republican ideology.
Could this actually be done?
Yes. But, we must first initiate what would be the ultimate in "political incorrectness." In short, bid Cultural Marxism adieu!
We must reduce the size, scope and cost of the federal government. Under the present laws, this is impossible. Forget the career politicians. They are bought and paid for!The American people need to make a decision. Electing Donald Trump would be telling our political class, "your credibility is zero."
All posturing aside, could Trump's vision work? Absolutely; if the 14th, 16th and 17th amendments are repealed. And they should be! If you are not familiar with these amendments, it might be worthwhile to spend some time reviewing them. Politicians understand all three. Their worst fear comes from an America without them!
Herein lies the problem! Most of our career politicians do not want to reduce the size, scope and cost of the federal government. It comes down to weaning them from Socialism, which is no easy task. As former Idaho Congressman, Curtis Bowers coined, "Socialism amounts to big government."
In Trump's view, there would be money for a solvent social security system, a strong national defense and healthcare benefits for all American citizens; if no money were utilized for those living illegally in the country. And, if more revenue was gained from an increased number of Americans working here at home. This is what he means when he says, "without borders we don't have a country."
The Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Lindsey Graham Neo-Cons are horrified with such ideology.They represent a strain that can be traced back to Leon Trotsky. While the original Marxist paradigm has been modified, essentially making a place for the privileged few, the overall orientation remains.
With the exception of Ted Cruz, Trump appears to be the only candidate in the Republican field placing Nationalism ahead of Globalism. True, correct implementation will be difficult. We will need to "unlearn" ideas that have become ingrained in society over the decades. This may be beyond many, if not most of our career politicians.
It comes down to determining the individual orientation. Adolph Hitler saw opportunity in selling the politics of fear and resentment to a frustrated, downtrodden society. He used fear of Marxism and resentment of the Jewish people as his primary motivators.
Trump's position on Islam is quite different. It equates with "looking out for American interests first." Even if it contradicts political correctness.
The rest is common sense. Are we nationalists? Or, are we globalists? It appears that our career politicians have answered that for us.
Trump is saying, "not so fast!"