con·spir·a·cy n., pl. con·spir·a·cies. 1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act. 2. A group of conspirators. 3. Law. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action. 4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design. (American Heritage Dictionary)
A recent survey, for what it is worth, shows that Democrats are tougher on crime than Republicans. This has traditionally been a Republican strength; how did this reversal happen? Is it another idea stolen by the Left? Not really.
At the risk of being called a “conspiracy kook,” I must first explain how conspiracies and political movements can be linked. A subversive political movement is, by definition, a conspiracy.
If a group of people plot to peacefully overthrow an existing government by either organizing protests to tug at the emotions and fears of the masses; the use of demagoguery and propaganda; or perverting the law and other subversive acts, cannot that be called a conspiracy? I think so. Isn’t this exactly what happened during the ‘60s? It has also been widely used during the Clinton era.
To cover their tracks, the Left is ready and waiting to tar and feather anyone who dares breathe the word “conspiracy.” It has been so effective that now even recognized spokesmen on the Right give the tactic legitimacy by ridiculing anyone speaking of conspiracies. Because of this, I will use the term “political movement” in this article to keep my points “valid.” Of course, there are kooks who see conspiracies everywhere. But does mean that there are no conspiracies? (To hear Leftists tell it, there never was or ever will be any conspiracies on the Left.)
We can safely assume that the destruction of the traditional family by Leftist policies (welfare, feminism, homosexuality, secularism) has given us widespread crime. (The number of people in jail who come from broken homes far outnumber those who come from intact families.) Also, criminals have been coddled because we are now told they are not at fault. They turned to crime because of racism, poverty, being spanked as a child, etc. The cost of engaging in crime has dropped because of lax punishment. If criminals believe there are fewer risks, there will be more criminal activity.
More crime equals chaos. Chaos equals fear. A populace in such a state, history shows, will surrender freedom for promises of security.
Has all this happened by chance? I don’t think so. It is a political movement, energized by its own weight. Are there are a few people at the top organizing it? I don't know, and I'll leave that for others to speculate about.
History shows that chaos is followed by tyranny. If one can create chaos, then one can be in position to tyrannize. To tyrannize, you cannot have an armed populace. They must be disarmed first, and that leads us right to gun control. Gun registration has ALWAYS led to gun confiscation. And, the Left tells us, crime is being committed because of lax gun control laws.
As is typical with tyrants, they start out with small, seemingly insignificant usurpations of freedom that few object to, gradually increasing—over generations if they feel it necessary—until they have total control.
In recent years, when things got to the point of public frustration, the Left has stepped in to take advantage of the crisis they created. Now the perception is they are tough on crime, and it gives them the political advantage. If one includes world history, this wouldn’t be the first time the Left has created a crisis only to jump in with the “solution,” which, of course, involves the sacrifice of freedom.
Bill Clinton and his “justice” department were roundly criticized for not enforcing (unconstitutional) gun laws—by none other than the National Rifle Association, who is trying to do the right thing but has been duped. This non-enforcement has been deliberate, to create more chaos.
In the near future, we will see Leftist politicians campaigning on tougher enforcement of gun laws. The clamor for more laws -- eventually leading to total civilian disarmament -- will be deafening. When they actually start implementing this, it will only affect law-abiding citizens who for the most part will turn in their guns. The criminals will go about their business largely unaffected, continuing the chaos.
With widespread crime and chaos, the ignorant masses—especially when whipped up by demagogues—will demand something be done. But the criminals will be left in place to justify ever more restrictive gun laws. Then, once the populace is disarmed, the tyrants will disarm the criminals because they will no longer serve any political purpose.
When America reaches this stage, the jackboots will be a familiar sight to everyone.
