A Political Blog in the abstract . . .
Do you know the meaning of the word apparat? If you do, then perhaps an intense thought process should suddenly descend upon your mind in some outpouring of contempt for others trying to will their dominating minds upon you in a way that could affect your destiny as a free citizen.
The word apparat comes from Russian — so says Merriam Webster’s Dictionary. In essence, then, it means apparatus — ‘the functional processes by means of which a systematized activity is carried out.’ This is also quoted from Webster’s Dictionary. However, the word in its Russian-derived form invites a discussion due to its country of origin!
“Every leftist movement, from Lenin’s to Castro’s, serves first an apparat that finds ways to avoid the real consequences of its own ideological agendas — consequences that fall on the far poorer, less glamorous, and less influential others.” Victor David Hanson, National Review, “Two Resistances,” 5 Sep. 2017.
This idea of a movement that offers agendas counter to stayed tradition interests one who is considering the current day politicking of the Democratic Party in Washington. These are the leftists who sponsor a certain migration of ideology leftward unto the socialist platform touted as the Green New Deal. The key ideation found in the word apparat that should attract your sensitivities is that such an apparat is more of a ghost — an apparition — than a mechanistic operation if one stops and sees through the mist of the misty-eyed authors of an overhaul of a time-proven system of governing, an overhaul that no one really wants.
What might this tell you? There has to be a way to group the people into a mind-frame wherein they are convinced they are wanting in some way — drastically so. Thus, the authors of the new leftist ideology must find something to stomp upon, and they must be heard. Something as ubiquitous as weather would work if it is backed by the more reaching climate level, so that science can be turned onto its head and used by politicians to regroup and re-create an entire governing system now turned socialistic? No. Whether or not climate change is a valid concept or not scientifically, must an entire way to govern a country be changed only to honor and embrace the would-be reality of what is termed global warming, the leading effect of climate change? If so, then we are on a long course through time. At some time unknown to us right now, we will see if our governmental devolution unto socialism as recommended by New Green Deal aspirers had been necessary or not. This is highly quixotic. This is of course ludicrous, but those who launch a political platform into nothingness may have something on the other side. That something might be an agenda for remarkable change only so that power can be gained. The task for the individual citizen is to see in and through the apparat at hand, to know that there is something uncannily telling if a leader believes people can widely be sold on something that is more questionable, waxing indeed unto the invisible. Political man and scientific man would ideally work together to serve mankind’s lot. However, should science be used to revolutionize the very form of government, to precisely devolve that government from democracy into socialism? Never. This is itself the misuse of science. A thriving government, a powerful democracy, does not need to be thrown away due to changes in the condition of the climate. What do you think?
