On Taking Over the World

Most assuredly.

[NB: Back in the Bad Old Days, I would often equate Newt Gingrich's ravings and plots with those of The Brain, and his rotating cast of sidekicks with Pinky. Now that Gingrich's star has been eclipsed, we have a New Model Brain. Read on...]

Over at Salon.com, Emma Mustich has put together a consideration of Glenn Beck's ravings over the Soros Plan To Take Over The World that attempts to mirror the facts of Beck's own actions and suggests the doughy little munchkin may be... how do you say... projecting.

Indeed.

Actually, the 5 Step Plan Beck is promoting as the Soros Scheme is pretty much how any activist movement that's serious about "Change" has to proceed if they are going to successfully overturn -- and replace -- an entrenched Establishment.

You will note as I go through the list that these are things that American "Leftists", especially on the Internets, absolutely will not do. Which really tells you all you need to know about how serious they are about real change.

Form a Shadow Government

This is so utterly basic, and yet it is not even considered by the putative Left of the Internet libertarian spectrum. The point of having a Shadow Government is to be able to authoritatively assert alternative policies while undermining the Establishment, and to have a substitute government ready to roll as it were when the Rotting Old Establishment collapses. But no such thing is happening on the Left; it is always the purview of the Right. There is a fairly obvious reason why: The so-called Left is or wants to be part of The (existing) Establishment. Oh noes.

Control the Airwaves

Or at least some of them. Again, this is not done at all, or is done only on the margins, by the Activist Left, particularly that part of it that is well-known on the Internets. What they try to do instead is worm their way onto the Established Talking Heads programs, and thus achieve credibility within the Establishment. The efforts on the Left (so-called) to capture any significant portion of the AM radio airwaves and cable television have been a failure for many reasons, but one of the main ones is that so-called Leftist funding sources (where are you, My George Soros??!!) refuse to back them with anything like the kind of financial support they require -- Rupert Murdoch has dumped billions into his right wing media empire, for example, much as Sun Myoung Moon has done -- and of course personality clashes within the failed Leftist Media are legendary. But then, why try to set up a media plex to compete with the Murdochs and others on the Right when it's so much easier (or at least appears to be) to work you way onto a seat at the Big Table the Establishment already provides?

Destabilize the State by compromising the economy.

This is a big-boy effort that you don't want to play around with unless you are prepared to do it and are prepared for the consequences, but it is something Leftist Activists won't even consider. They don't want a destabilized State, for one thing. If anything, they're desperate for stability, not more destabilization -- which has long been a trait of the Rightist authoritarians. The Activist Left (on the Internets) would be calling for General Strikes and No-Pay Days all the time if they had any interest in "destabilization." Instead, they typically advise against any sort of effective destabilization action (even street protest), advising their audience to use their energy to back candidates for office and to vote. Which we know is effective on behalf of the Establishment. QED.

Provoke an Election Crisis

Again, this is something -- ie: the provocation -- Internet Leftists simply will not do. Instead, they are almost completely absorbed with electing their Great Man (or Woman as the case may be) to office, by the rules, and gracefully conceding when they lose. The Election process is sacrosanct to them, much as the Constitution is often seen as Holy Writ. They cannot conceive of provoking an election crisis (as for example the Busheviks infamously did). Again, this is not something you want to do unless you are prepared to do it and prepared for the consequences (as the Busheviks clearly were). But it is one very effective way to achieve Change objectives -- if that's what you really want, and I would suggest that the disinterest on the Internet Left in using effective techniques like this is yet another sign that they aren't interested in Change except as a rhetorical device. What they want is stability, the status quo, and to be accepted and respected by the Establishment many of them pretend to loathe and despise.

Finally:

Stage massive demonstrations.

Ha! Internet Leftists will not do that; nothing gets them crabbier than seeing People in the Streets for any reason. Nothing terrifies them more than Giant Puppets on Parade. They reflexively denounce and despise "demonstrations" and condemn them as useless feel-good exercises or mob actions. And yet, Massive Demonstrations are part of how you effectively achieve Change. Cf: the Fall of the Soviet Empire, indeed, the fall of the Soviet Union itself. Just as examples. You've got to get off your duff and go bang on some pots and pans, block the streets, and take some physical risks. But Internet Leftists absolutely will not do that. They will reflexively denounce even a rally like that of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. They can't help themselves. They hate demonstrations.

All this is to say that there specific things that can be done by organized interests to effectively Change the System. Glenn Beck accuses arch-Leftist-Devil and Self-Hating-Jew George Soros of trying to engineer some sort of Leftist coup, and he cites all these nefarious things Soros is doing to achieve his goal of World Domination. Only he's not doing those things nor are his minions. If only they were! But no.

The only people doing these things are the only ones who really want significant, systemic Change: the Rightists aligned with Beck and his sponsors.

Funny how that works.

Not funny ha-ha.