The Dangers Behind a Kasich Cultural Revolution

Republican U.S. presidential candidate Ohio Governor John Kasich formally announces his campaign for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination during a kickoff rally in Columbus, Ohio July 21, 2015. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein
Republican U.S. presidential candidate Ohio Governor John Kasich formally announces his campaign for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination during a kickoff rally in Columbus, Ohio July 21, 2015. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein

Students of history will wisely pay heed to the lessons attributed to China’s “Cultural Revolution”. There are to be sure merits behind the very public gestures offered by Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, a Republican candidate for president of the United States. However the record will demonstrate Chairman Mao Zedong’s decision to engage in concentrated social engineering proved catastrophic.

Propaganda poster for the Cultural Revolution (1966-76) featuring Chairman Mao Zedong.
Propaganda poster for the Cultural Revolution (1966-76) featuring Chairman Mao Zedong.

“Revolutionary culture is a powerful revolutionary weapon for the broad masses of the people. It prepares the ground ideologically before the revolution comes and is an important, indeed essential, fighting front in the general revolutionary front during the revolution.”

-Mao Zedong

Of course, a strong case today is made this is happening under Barack Obama. But for Gov. Kasich, the problem dips dangerously deep into the socialist Democrats’ hypocrisy rejecting the Establishment Clause through introducing the rise of Sharia law supplanting the Constitution for Muslims. Kasich, should he win the presidency, would launch his proposed new government agency designed to promote “core Judeo-Christian, Western values” as a means to combat the threat posed by the Islamic State (ISIS) and other terrorist cells.

There is of course precedence to such a policy; one, in fact, need only look north of the border into Canada’s francophone province, Quebec, who through its ministry of culture, has acquired it virtual political autonomy in the aftermath of the near miss in its referendum to secede in 1995. The one political and social reality agreed upon by both Canadian Federalists and Quebecois Sovereigntists is, simply, that the Quebec independence movement will never end, unless Quebecers decide to secede via plebiscite.

The overwhelming response among the consensus of Quebecois Sovereigntists is the referendum would have passed had the federal government not peddled the “No” campaign, most especially the controversial Unity Rally in Montreal just three days prior to the October 30, 1995 plebiscite. The progression in public opinion was so rapid that a scant six months earlier, 39 percent of Quebecers opposed secession. As the election approached though, that figure had increased to 50 percent.

According to former Quebec Premier Bernard Landry, “Today, the polls say sovereignty is at 40 per cent support. The idea of Quebec independence is extremely powerful and logical. If sovereignty comes back in the news and we have a good campaign I think Quebec will have its place at the United Nations.” And after better than 94 percent of the francophone dominated population missed independence by less than one percent, today Quebec’s drive towards secession and independence appears well on its way to another referendum, with the fate of Canada at its mercy.

Sovereignty Figures for Quebec

Much like the lingering discontents between the American North and South more than 150 years after the Civil War, the situation in Canada is still partitioned behind the nationalist lines which defined their history of global warfare between French and British descendants. Founded by the French explorer Samuel de Champlain, Canada was forcibly ceded to Great Britain after France’s catastrophic defeat during the Seven Years’ War in 1763. Ever since, political actors have risen to stake claim to Quebec’s autonomy, with the term “sovereignty” liberally applied that originated in the 1967 Mouvement Souveraineté-Association of René Lévesque that ultimately spawned the Parti Québécois in 1968.

America’s Divisions Based on Cultural, Racial, Geopolitical and Antiestablishmentarianism

While addressing the National Press Club in Washington, Gov. Kasich made his case for why America needs to “beam messages around the world” to promote her values in totalitarian regimes like China, Iran, Russia and the Middle East. But what he disingenuously proposes would resurrect the unintended consequences behind global McDonaldization from the immediate post Cold War years to nations too affronted by the American cultural ethos clashing with their own. It violates every convention behind which we conservatives stand for and uphold.

Gov. Kasich insisted in a seemingly Amerocentric tone too often overdone by the neoconservative faction that this would send a “clear mandate to promote core Judeo-Christian, Western values that we and our friends and allies share.” Yet he contradicts himself by espousing that “It means freedom, it means opportunity, it means respect for women, it means freedom to gather, it means so many thing,” reflecting his lie “There’s nobody who’s spent more time shrinking government than I have,” he said.

Yet if “Civil Wars don’t work out,” why does he propose nation building through propagandization? It appears his proposed brain child will in fact be broadcast into America’s homes. “U.S. public diplomacy and international broadcasting have lost their focus on the case for Western values and ideals and effectively countering our opponents’ propaganda and disinformation,” according to Gov. Kasich.

But why “consolidate them into a new agency that has a clear mandate to promote the core, Judeo-Christian Western values that we and our friends and allies share”Who are America’s friends and why might they support in spirit the malleable Kasich Politburo on grounds of the values of human rights, the values of democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of association”? A left-wing Democrat like Barack Obama would rapidly alter the programming to one of secular ideological platitudes or Islamic fundamentalism.

“I’ve about had it with these people,” promulgated Gov. Kasich, in practically announcing his big break with the conservative movement. “Telling our people in this country who are seniors, who are about to be seniors that we’re going to abolish Medicaid and Medicare?”

“We got one person saying we ought to have a 10 percent flat tax that will drive up the deficit in this country by trillions of dollars,” in reference to Sen. Ted Cruz, while immediately redirecting his ire towards Donald Trump, who “says we ought to take 10 or 11 [million] people and pick them up — I don’t know where we’re going to go, their homes, their apartments — we’re going to pick them up and scream at them to get out of our country. That’s crazy. That is just crazy.”

Gov. Kasich finally admits his latent leftward drift towards socialism along the same lines as the Democrats.  “We got people proposing health care reform that’s going to leave, I believe, millions of people without adequate health insurance,” Kasich says. “What has happened to our party? What has happened the conservative movement?”

In counting beans, Gov. Kasich has a history of proficiency. But that achievement was nearly a generation ago. Today, he intends to manufacture the Trotskyist establishment’s idyllic socialist utopia, only purloining Jesus’ likeness.

As Chairman Mao promulgated in 1942 during the height of the Sino-Japanese War, “There is in fact no such thing as art for art’s sake, art that stands above classes, art that is detached from or independent of politics… they are, as Lenin said, cogs and wheels in the whole revolutionary machine.” Given the curious description of the Kasich ethos is “the U.S. should tout liberal political values but insists on describing them as “Judeo-Christian’ or as expressions of ‘our Jewish and Christian tradition,'” he appears prepared to do a little social engineering himself, thus defying the great conservative principle of methodical, organic societal evolution. After all, the biggest losers would be both religious liberty and freedom of the press.

Remember that due to its welfare model, Denmark charges a “… Church tax (kirkeskat) of 0.89 percent, paid only by registered members of the Danish National Church.”  And just as with other Nordic countries like Sweden, Denmark is also among the world’s most secularized countries, where both religion and Christianity play “a minor, often indirect, role in public life.” Yet religion in Denmark still enters into highly controversial, oft unacceptable political conflicts due to Copenhagen’s power to tax and destroy its detractors through the Church as with the Muhammad cartoon controversy of 2005‒06, in which Islamic and other religious communities supported primarily via exemption from taxation on donations to recognized religious bodies. And while 3 percent of Danish church members attend services regularly, most still utilize the Church for baptisms, confirmations, weddings, funerals and religious holidays.

If Denmark is willing to crush free speech through the so-called Arabian Initiative “to build positive relations with Muslim countries,” a Kasich Cultural Revolution engaged in any religious dialogue will find marvelous excuses to gradually nationalize the mass media.

Till then, common sense should dictate Gov. Kasich to let Confucius say and Arabian Nights live well beyond its 1,001 days of lore. It is not becoming of any man, let alone an American president, to preach his brave new world by publicly aspiring to become the emperor wearing new clothes. If the narrative portends the puzzling perspective that “no one believes, but everyone believes that everyone else believes,” it is questionable whether Gov. Kasich truly cares about the elderly or President Obama’s precious little orphan DREAMERs. However, if “everyone is ignorant to whether the Emperor has clothes on or not, but believes that everyone else is not ignorant,” Gov. Kasich might well prove to be the Republican Barack Obama. The American people can rest assured peddling socialism under the Cross will place him in the same political camp as Bernie Sanders.

Advertisements

Comments

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s