jump to navigation

Mayors Need Money to Fight More Violence: Fighting Liberalism Would Be More Effective in the Long Run March 26, 2007

Posted by Daniel Downs in culture war, economics, gangs, government, law, liberalism, liberals, news, politics, violence.
trackback

Gang MemberMayors across the country have less money for their police departments since federal funding totaling nearly two million dollars was cut. They are telling Congress more money is needed to fight the increase in violence.

In a recent press release, Mayor Douglas H. Palmer, President of The United States Conference of Mayors, quotes these statistics gathered by the Executive Research Forum from 56 policing agencies:

  • Total homicides were 10.21 percent higher;
  • Robberies increased 12.27 percent;
  • Aggravated assaults increased 3.12 percent; and
  • Aggravated assaults with a firearm increased by almost 10 percent.

Mayor Palmer went on to identify a number of factors causing those increases of violence. He wrote:

“As stated in our new Mayors’ 10-Point Plan: Strong Cities, Strong Families, and police chiefs have identified a number of factors contributing to this rise in culture of violence among youth, gangs, a proliferation of illegal guns, drug activity, ex-offenders, and social problems related to school truancy and a lack of jobs.”

No doubt police departments could use more working capital to put more qualified officers on our city streets. Beyond the obvious need for more police officers, a more effective way to prevent violence is to identify the root cause of the violence. The increase of violent acts mentioned by Mayor Palmer is symptomatic of the cause, not the cause itself.

A careful analysis of factors contributing to rising violence traces back to liberal politics and its social policies. Gangs are not new to American culture. The extent of their violence is. The question that must be asked is why have youth gangs become a serious problem now? Or, when did it first become a societal threat?

The problem began during the socialist-humanist-anarchist movements of the 1930s. These ideologies were unified when incorporated in liberal politics during the 1960s. Public education, media, entertainment, and party politics are and have been the prophets and evangelists of modern liberalism in America. These institutions of learning also form beliefs, values and attitudes. They are the controlling voice of ideology, and with a following of a third to a half of the American population.

What does liberalism have to do with gangs? Doak Bok works with ex-gang members. In “The Revolution: A Field Manual for Changing Your World”, what Mayor Palmer lists as factors contributing to greater violence Bok listed as the typical profile of the gangsters. Judge Robert Dierker, Jr wrote in “The Tyranny of Tolerance” “radical liberals do not believe in law, only in power.” That is interesting because Bok wrote gangsters are motivated only by “the desire for power and respect,” which are gained by creating fear through violence. Liberals are a law unto themselves. They often create laws through the judiciary not the legislature. As liberals have created a quasi-state, gangs are a quasi-state unto themselves. Turf boundaries and wars are part of their small “islands” as Bok calls their local neighborhoods. Because they have “charters, bylaws, rules, codes of conduct,” I prefer to call their “islands” constituted states. Like all government, states are supposed to be a form of protection, gang ‘states’ provide protection from other gangs. Just as some Americans hate terrorists as liberals hate Christians, so gang members hate other members of gangs–enemies hating enemies.

Are gangs all that different than—say–the liberal left and conservative right? Is not the hate and fear of the other and their views not behind the rants of modern political commentary?

The only real difference between gang wars and the culture war is the type and level of violence. Gangs are merely acting out their particular sociopathy engendered by the ‘structural’ violence created by the cultural war. Liberals, not Christians, created the culture war. Liberal politics and policies have also created the gang mentality and its reality.

In his Farewell Address, George Washington warned about the evils of party politics or ‘revenge’ politics. He said,

“The alternate domination of one [party] faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism…. It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”

The solution to the problem of increasing violence is not more money for police. In the long run, the only solution is an end to the liberal war against America, one nation founded under God and nature, not one against either or both.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. fairlane - May 9, 2007

That is utterly ridiculous.


Leave a Reply

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

%d bloggers like this: