| | The far-left has a morbid attraction for things that are sub-standard, bad, broken, dangerous, or deficient. I'm still trying to figure it out. They don't even appear to know that this kind of motivation is within them. I started thinking that maybe, like in the case of this article calling for well-off people to sacrifice their child's education by sending them to a public school, that the motivation was a deep commitment to altruism. But, I have to say that altruism's sacrifice isn't so much a goal in this syndrome as it is a necessary tool. In this article, where good parents are called 'bad' to shame them into sacrificing their child's education because if everyone does it (they claim), then the public schools will be fixed. Note the start of this sick cycle: the broken schools (or maybe the poor people who can't afford private schools, and that takes us to the broken schools). That attraction for broken schools, has them calling for this collective redemption (we will all link arms, sing Kumbyah, and sacrifice together... and, magically, the public schools will be fixed, the sun will shine, and the poor people's kids will be educated.)
It is a holy parade, a spiritual movement, with a fuzzy of goal of 'then everything will be fixed,' but it is really focused on the ugly, the broken, the bad.
The far-left has a morbid attraction for bad people as well. They put Che on tee-shirts, FDR loved Stalin, Chamberlain thought he could work with Hitler, the liberals are always focused on creating policy that help the disadvantaged, the poor, to redeem criminals, gang intervention programs, and on and on. Always a focus on the low end of the value to society, or heroic, or exceptionally good end of things.
|
|
