American Puritanism and Modern Liberal Morality

A very interesting post from www.badeagle.com about libralism and Puritanism. This follows this post about white women in the U.S. This follows this post about some of the music that was poplular during 2011. This follows THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to chosing good movies to watch yourself.

American Puritanism and Modern Liberal Morality


by David Yeagley



The International Monetary Fund has prophecied the fall of America. China will rule by 2016, five years from now. America will finally become the failed third world country liberals have always wanted. The elite will remain elite, in unparalleled wealth, but the American population will have been “equalized,” or, deeply downgraded. The white oedipal liberal Communists will have won the war of values.



America is indeed suffering a collision of values. It is not a natural process. It is the stupendous effort of America’s traitorous enemies. It is agonizing. The country’s Puritan history is facing the challenge of change, and it feels terribly wrong to all true Americans. Modern “liberal” values seem immoral in comparison to the original values of the nation. Must the contrast be so violent? Is there any middle ground?





Nathaniel Hawthorne (1804-1864)



The Puritan way involved a self-discipline that is incomprehensible to most modern Americans–so enslaved to self-indulgent, push-button pleasures and permanent entitlements. Yet, the Puritan way was fast disappearing even in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s day (1804-1864). He tried to depict the writhings of that contrast in The Scarlet Letter (1850), and in nearly all his other works, novel or short story. Change from the Purtian moral way meant living a new, immoral way. For those pained by such “progress,” the only solace was a vague, torturous ambiguity, or a sustained, conscious uncertainty, for which disposition Hawthorne as well as Herman Melville and other early 19th century authors were so famous. They groped for a middle ground as the adolescent society progressed from childhood clarity to the delusions of adulthood. They ended up “romanticizing” morality as some quaint notion of the past, “when times were better.”



Personal responsibility, the fundamental social moral of the Puritan–the Judeo-Christian morality of the American culture, was later called “capitalism.” This is somewhat unfortunate. The term is automatically juxtaposed with Communism. Capitalism is a economic term which meant you were basically free to make what you would out of your life. Morever, it was your responsibility to do so. America was a wide open opportunity to make something of yourself. If you did not, you were an immoral louse, a ne’er-do-well bum, and you were condemned by society for your lethargy and irresponsibility. You were a sinner and a fool.



Communism tempts all such leech-minded people with the thought that it is someone else’s responsibility to take care of them. This is childhood certainty gone socially retarded. Communism is a blank check for the elite tyrannists, that’s all. It is based on the reticence of the weak, the fearful, and the self-deceived to fend for themselves.



Modern liberal morality has it that it is wrong to be strong. It is immoral to be responsible, and arrogant to advocate independence. This is the clash of morality. Conservative (Puritan) morality says it’s wrong to be weak. The individual has a choice in the matter.



Now, the measure of material wealth, or “property” is, unfortunately, the standard of success of these competing moralities. Communism says all should have less (except for the elite tyrannists who rule in Communism); Puritanism says each individual has the responsibility to accomplish whatever he can. Some do better than others. Of course, laws had to be made to prevent those with colossal achievement from ruling mercilessly over those who didn’t do so well. That inequity right there is the open door to Communism, at least rhetorically. The rich inevitably abuse the poor. Communism pretends to counter that imbalance; but, in fact, Communism creates a worse imbalance. More people have less, fewer people have astoundingly more.



The lyiny black African Communist traitor in the White House is the emptomical example of the deceit of Communism. Americans suffer want, while the Negro in the White House parties 24/7, with great rigor and stunning expense. This is Communism. This is racism, as well. This is making white America pay for historical sins. There is no atonement. The cup of black indignation is bottomless.



But the truth of ideology is concrete. The end of deception is abundantly exposed. Materialism is not the basis of Puritanism, but personal responsibility for oneself. Materialism is the basis of Communism, and those who preach are elite tyrannists, willing to see masses have much less, while they themselves luxuriate publicly, and dramtically.



Puritanism never promised everyone a Cadillac. But Communism promises everyone a Volkswagen (like Hitler did). Are you more comfortable with a government-promised simple car, or a chance to get a Cadillac? The white oedipal liberals and their Negro minstrel want you to play it safe, by their rules. Don’t gamble. Don’t risk. You’re better off with four wheels that roll (if you can afford the gas), than some immature, irresponsible, immoral hope of a Cadillac.



Thus, modern liberal morality presents itself as more American, more conservative, and more Puritan than Puritanism. Modern liberal morality wants you to have less, to be happy with less (while the elite liberals have continually more). Liberals want you to be more humble, to have less hope for improvement, and to be satisfied with much lower standards–material and moral.



It’s an interesting ploy, and outrageous in its success. Liberals have made right seem wrong, and personal responsibility look like rebellion. Liberals make original American values seem immoral, selfish, and individualism seem satanic. To surrender to the Communist sway is made to look like a religious conversion. It is the image of Christ. Give up your arms, cast away the burden of responsibility. Be free! Absorb ye into Group think. Be part of something bigger that youself. Worship ye Humanity. Should be easy enough. You’re human.