Progressive unanimity can seem enviable because of the strength it projects, but it can also lead the way to madness and systemic collapse.
If you’re old enough, you can remember back to 1981 when the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Kansas City suffered America’s deadliest, non-terrorist caused structural collapse, which killed 114 people and injured another 216. The disaster occurred when the hotel was holding a tea dance in the lobby and two walkways suspended above the lobby collapsed on the dancers.
Subsequent investigation showed that the design plan was horribly flawed and would support only 60% of the minimum load requirement under Kansas City building codes. The contractor noted the flaw . . . and proposed an alternative that was even worse because it didn’t correct the original problem but, instead, melded with and augmented it. The problem — as is the case with so many horrific disasters — was failed communications between the parties responsible.
I remember the disaster, not just because it was awful, but because it introduced me to a new concept. Before the investigation revealed the myriad engineering and communication failures, a lot of people speculated that the dancer’s feet, all tripping lightly to the beat, caused the collapse. You see, it’s long been known that, if soldiers march in step across a bridge and trigger the bridge’s natural frequency, the bridge can collapse:
In April 1831, a brigade of soldiers marched in step across England’s Broughton Suspension Bridge. According to accounts of the time, the bridge broke apart beneath the soldiers, throwing dozens of men into the water.
After this happened, the British Army reportedly sent new orders: Soldiers crossing a long bridge must “break stride,” or not march in unison, to stop such a situation from occurring again.
Structures like bridges and buildings, although they appear to be solid and immovable, have a natural frequency of vibration within them. A force that’s applied to an object at the same frequency as the object’s natural frequency will amplify the vibration of the object in an occurrence called mechanical resonance.
Sometimes your car shakes hard when you hit a certain speed, and a girl on a swing can go higher with little effort just by swinging her legs. The same principle of mechanical resonance that makes these incidents happen also works when people walk in lockstep across a bridge.
If soldiers march in unison across the structure, they apply a force at the frequency of their step.
If their frequency is closely matched to the bridge’s frequency, the soldiers’ rhythmic marching will amplify the vibrational frequency of the bridge. If the mechanical resonance is strong enough, the bridge can vibrate until it collapses from the movement.
So — I’ve now offered you a little physics and a little engineering, but what does this have to do with politics and, more specifically, with Progressives?
As I see it, we conservatives often have cause to complain about our lack of unanimity. While Leftists/Progressives will almost invariably present a united front, getting conservatives to agree on things is like herding cats.
Take, for example, the different approaches to presidents. During Obama’s administration, Democrats/Progressives never wavered in their devotion to him. There was nothing Obama could say or do, no matter how far he strayed from campaign promises, no matter how dishonest, no matter how damaging to his supporters, that would cause the Proggies and their ilk to break ranks. They supported him unreservedly.
Bush never got that kind of support and, when it comes to Donald Trump — O.M.G.! Conservatives are all over the place. The first break in ranks came with the #NeverTrumpers. They have proven themselves to be so hostile to Trump that they willingly abandon core conservative principles, whether because they never held those principles in the first place or because they’re extremely allergy to anything Trump means that they willingly reject everything Trump.
Then there are what I call the Policy Trumpers. These are people like Andrew Klavan and Ben Shapiro. Before I go further, I should say that I like both men a great deal and think they’re two of the smartest, most interesting political and cultural critics around. I listen to and read them regularly.
However, both of these men, as well as those in their camp, while admitting that Trump has been a pleasant surprise to them at a policy level, thereby earning their support, cannot get over their personal distaste for the man. No matter what approving things they write or say about Trump’s practical effect as President, they invariably toss in an obligatory disclaimer about the fact that the don’t like Trump’s style.
I’m a little tired of these constant disclaimers, which are a conservative form of virtue signaling. While the Proggies attack Trump both stylistically and substantively, these Policy Trumpers, while thankfully supporting Trump’s substance, keep providing the Proggies with ammunition by endlessly criticizing Trump’s style. Moreover, the Policy Trumpers seem to be slow to catch on to the fact that part of Trump’s signal policy success is because of his style. It takes a pushy, blustery, deeply secure man, not to mention a powerful counter-puncher (for he never throws the first punch), to achieve his successes in the face of both historic opposition and typical D.C. foot-dragging.
And of course, thankfully there are the people like Don Surber, Dan Bongino, and me, who have decided that Trump, blustery charm and all, is the last best hope for America. Until he proves himself truly unworthy of it, Trump has my unreserved support. Sure, he’s had some failures (most significantly not firing Comey instantly and prosecuting Hillary instantly, thereby helping to return the U.S. to the rule of law), but for the most part, he’s been extraordinary. Moreover, he’s learned fast from his failures and, as I think is happening now with the temporary halt to the shutdown, set some sweet traps for his political opponents.
To reiterate, then, there’s no such thing as unified conservatives. Dealing with conservatives, whether in Congress; in state houses; or on the internet, on podcasts, talk radio, and on YouTube, is about as easy and successful an endeavor as herding cats. In the face of the unified front the Proggies present conservatives routinely go down in flames, both in Congress and in the voting booth.
BUT (and this is where I was going all along with this essay) sometimes perfect lockstep carries within it the seeds of its own destruction. As with those bridges, should the lockstep vibrate too closely with the natural vibration of a supporting structure, the whole thing collapses.
What I like to think I’m seeing with today’s Democrat Party is that, when intelligence and sanity dictate that they should be breaking strike, Proggies instead pull their formation even more tightly together, increasing the risk of harmonic frequency convergence with the core stability of the American political body.
Specifically, rather than embracing them wholesale and unanimously, Proggies should be breaking stride over the following ideas:
The Border Wall: No border means no nation. If Proggies had even a scintilla of historic knowledge, they would look to the Romans who, as their empire became debauched and decayed, were unable to prevent the barbarians from overrunning them. While the Roman Empire lasted another thousand years in the twisted ways of Byzantium, the core empire, the one that dominated the ancient world, fell with staggering rapidity.
Human biology and gender: Proggies are doubling down with aggressive ferocity when it comes to their decision to reject entirely human biology. That biology, which is completely programmed to advance the survival of the species in the most efficient way possible, is predicated on binary sexuality (i.e., male and female).
Sure, we have anomalies, such as homosexuality, which sees people being decidedly male or female in their sexual identity, but having same sex attraction. These desires, though, do not change basic biology. We also have the minute percentage of people born with genuine chromosomal mix-ups.
But what we mostly have thanks to the Proggie pod mindset is a world in which young people — and I mean really young, as in ages 2, 3, 4, etc. — are told that the contents of their undies bear no relationship to their sex. Instead, the dominant culture, guided by the Proggies, insistently tells them that their sexual identity is a smorgasbord from which they can choose at will, changing their minds from day to day or even minute to minute. Here is just a minute portion of possible modern “gender identities”:
Abimegender– A gender which is profound, deep, and infinite.
Absorgender– A gender that changes to conform to the genders of those around you. As you are around more people, even if some leave, they continue to add to the genders you feel. You remain as the genders that you have taken in until you hit a max of some sort. At that point you become like a blank slate, being only one gender (it doesn’t have to be agender or neutral, it can be any gender and the base gender can be different each time).
If you absorb one gender more easily than other genders, you can replace gender in the term with the gender you absorb best. Like absorgirl, absornonbinary, absordemiboy, etc.
Adamasgender- A gender which refuses to be categorized….
[AND THE LIST GOES ON and ON; SEE ORIGINAL ARTICLE FOR MORE ABOUT THE LIST, OR READ ON, HERE: ]
…That’s the A’s, B’s, and two of the C’s. The list goes all the way to “Zodiacgender,” defined as “A catch-all gender term that is used to describe when one’s gender is related to a (or their specific) zodiac sign.” This list bears no relationship to reality.
As long-time readers know, I believe there’s a possibility that basic transgenderism, in the form of a man who believes he’s a woman or a woman who believes she’s a man, may exist thanks to the prevalence of the Pill. Whether there’s estrogen in the drinking water or it has lingered in a woman’s system after she discontinued the Pill to become pregnant, it’s not unreasonable to think that, even if fetuses have normal chromosomes, they are getting abnormal hormone washes in utero. If this is true, and if we were still a sane society, we’d give these children hormones aligned with their DNA, rather than giving them hormones that cause sterility and cancer and subjecting them to slice and dice surgery.
Again, let me return to my point: Pretending biology doesn’t exist is the path to insanity, and it’s magnified when Proggies, instead of retreating to fact, dig deeper and harder into this world of gender delusion.
Islam. Proggies cultivate Islam. They desperately want Islamism in American politics and that desperation is turning into genuine political success. Before I go further, let me say that I know that there are millions of Muslims, both at home and abroad, who are decent people who just want to make a life for themselves and their family. I wish them well.
However, I also know that Islamic doctrine is inherently antisemitic, anti-Christian, indeed, anti-any religion that’s not Islam, although it’s animus to Jews is especially potent. I know too that its core doctrine demands world conquest, the complete subjugation of Muslim women, the sexual enslavement of non-Muslim women, the death of gays, and all sorts of other stuff at complete odds with Western civilization as it existed at least up until a decade or so ago.
Regarding Muslim doctrine, I know as well that, of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims, 10% (or 116 million) will actively fight and die for these sharia principles. (As an aside, think about this: Christian martyrdom requires that you die for your faith, as so many Christians in Africa and the Middle East are doing today, while Muslim martyrdom requires that you kill for your faith.) In addition to these soldiers of Allah, throughout the Muslim world, whether at home or abroad, a plurality of Muslims strongly supports those sharia principles and, while these people will not do the enforcing, they will provide both moral and practical support for those who do.
While individual Muslims can be good people, Islam is not a demographic that any sane, civilized, pluralist, democratic nation should encourage — yet the Proggies do. Their lockstep march into Islam’s embrace is a disaster waiting to happen for Western civilization. We should be challenging Islamic ideas, not embracing them.
Anti-Semitism. Throughout world history, those nations that were nice to the Jews thrived, while those that were not were miserable places that often ended into a welter of blood. This is not because (contrary to Ilhan Omar) Jews cast magical evil spells on this nation. It’s because the same values that led a nation to tolerate Jews also led that same nation to give its citizens more individual liberty than found in surrounding nations. Totalitarians hate Jews, who stand for morality, justice, and the value of the individual. It turns out that what’s good for Jews is good for everyone.
Despite this truism, the Democrat Party, in order to keep Islam within its fold, is marching fast and hard into overt anti-Semitism. This is bad for the Democrat Party for the same reason that, as I pointed out above, anti-Semitism is bad for all societies and groups that it infects. America’s only hope is that the Proggies’ lockstep love for anti-Semitism destroys Proggie politics before it destroys America as a whole.
Climate change. I don’t believe in anthropogenic climate change. I simply believe in climate change, which has happened since earth’s inception. Vast forces in our universe, some of which are manifestly connected to the sun and others of which we don’t understand at all, have seen endless cycles of heating and cooling across the planet. I also believe that we humans, with our capacious intelligence, should be wise stewards of the planet, making it a fruitful and livable place not just for our generation, but for generations to come.
Proggies, however, are hurling themselves off the climate change Armageddon cliff. They live in a constant state of existential panic. At a political and economic level, this panic is a useful device to control the economy and to redistribute wealth away from America (which they hate), leaving only enough for total government power and an enriched nomenklatura class.
(By the way, have you noticed that, Ocasio-Cortez’s and Warren’s dreams notwithstanding, socialist countries have lots of billionaires? It’s just that these billionaires — from the Maduros, to the Castros, to the Chavezes, to the Kims, to the Arafats, to the Mullahs — don’t create wealth by benefiting human kind; they just steal it from their starving, demoralized, tortured, enslaved people.)
At a psychological level, though, there is nothing good that can be said about having 50% of the population, especially the young people, living in a state of existential panic. That way lies madness — yet nothing deters the Proggies’ unrelievedly unified approach to this imagined apocalypse.
Toxic masculinity. I happen to like men. I like them a lot. I like the way they look. I like the way being with them enhances my own sense of my femininity. I like the way they complement my femininity by being the yang to my yin. I like their bravery, their loyalty, their goofiness, their pragmatism, their creativity, and their analytical abilities.
I recognize that there is a flip side, in that men can be boorish, violent, stupid, etc. But my life motto is “catch them being good.” Rather than berate men for their testosterone-driven faults as if I and other women were without faults, I want a society in which we recognize men for their best traits and encourage them to cultivate those qualities. A society with healthy men is a healthy society.
Notwithstanding how obvious my point is (that is, I’m not claiming any special insight when I voice it), the Proggies are embracing en masse a vision of men as inherently toxic and desperately in need of destruction at most or subordination at least. If there were any native intelligence or sanity left on the Proggie side of the aisle, at least some Proggies would reject this toxic view of masculinity. But noooooo. Proggies march to the same beat about toxic masculinity, blind to the horrors of a world in which men abandon the effort to embrace their virtues and, instead, cultivate their vices.
Racism. Martin Luther King poignantly dreamed of a world in which people would be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. Proggies, even while insisting that they, and only they, inherited the mantle from King (who was, incidentally, a Republican who spent almost his entire life at odds with Democrats), have completely inverted his message.
Embracing their antebellum, Confederate, and Jim Crow progenitors, Proggies claim that race is the only measure of a person. If they abandoned this race-defined close march, they might save themselves. As it is, though, they’re resonating with one of the most evil frequencies that humankind can offer, which is to rank people by externalities rather than core values.
I could go on, but I think I’ve hit the big issues. The bridge towards which Proggies are marching is the American nation. If Proggies were smart, they would “break step” to diffuse the vibrations they’re creating. But they’re not smart. Instead, they’re staying synchronized and, indeed, quickening and making ever harder and firmer the sick rhythm to which they march.
Our only hope is that, when their lockstep hits that bridge, they get a good dunking, ending their political power. I worry, though, that their mad, utterly cohesive rush to insanity may doom the grand American experiment and turn America into just another pathetic third world-esque nation. Even as it’s Proggies who are obsessed with dystopianism, it is their unified madness that can led to a dystopian American future