Since I left East Europe, the biggest lie that I came across in the Western cultures I traveled through, is: “You need to be nice to people.” Apparently in East Europe people are not nice, according to the socialist definition of the term. In East Europe, when we look at all the crime shows on Discovery and we hear all victims, without exception, saying: “There was no reason to doubt what they were saying. Who goes around double-checking on people?”, we crack up with sad, bitter laughter and think: “No, you don’t understand. Everyone double-checks what people say, but you, dear Westerner.” The world that went through socialism does not offer trust by default, an it laughs with sad bitterns watching America making the same mistake. In the former socialist union, people offer respect by default (and you will probably be more respected in an East European home than in any Western house), but they do not offer trust until one proves itself worthy of trust. One is considered naïve and gullible if they offer trust by default.
Anne W Zahra, M.Ed, language teacher, defines the terms “gullible” and “naïve” very well. She says, “A gullible person believes what other people say and does what others ask without thinking. Gullible people trust others too much, too easily. Bad people steal money and take advantage of gullible people. For example, a gullible person would buy a used car without checking it carefully, and later discover the car is in poor condition and not worth its price.
Naive includes a lack of wisdom about life in general. A naive person does not have much knowledge about how people behave and how the world works. A naive person thinks like a child and tends to believe the world is good. A naive person doesn’t understand that many people lie, that life isn’t fair, and that what people promise can be very different from what they do. A naive person is gullible, too.”
But the good news is that naivety is NOT born. Naivety is TAUGHT. In Eastern Europe being trustful is seen as a major character fault and it is one of the first character issues that we address in raising children.
What does naivety have to do with socialism?
Socialism failed in East Europe because it started forcing people to do things they didn’t want to do. In the Western World, socialism gains track because it lures people with promises, so that people would actually want to subject their will to the government; this way, the government won’t have to go through all the hassle of forcing people. In East Europe we didn’t struggle as much with an ideology war in my generation. We struggled with the aftermath of an ideology war that had been won during my grandparent’s time; my generation was born towards the end of the socialist movement, when even the ones who had been willing to go with socialism were no longer willing to put up with it, due to the harm that it provoked as it grew. After the Second World War, people were naïve in Romania; we were a small country and we believed the German socialists when they promised they won’t touch us as long as we gave the Jews to them. So we did. We sold and betrayed the large Jewish communities that lived and built gorgeous, age-lasting houses, the Jews that made our economy grow. As soon as the Jews were in their trains, the German socialists sold us to the Russian socialists. We deserved it. One can’t make a pact with the devil and win. One can’t be a kind person who is befriending a bad monster and win. One can be a good monster and win – even tiny good monsters win sometimes, despite the size of the bad monster; but one can’t be naïve, kind, nice, gullible and a winner. That is never ever going to happen. Romanians didn’t have the guts then to be a tiny good monster, and we paid – and still pay – for it. I salute with respect the Founding Fathers who had the guts to be good monsters and won freedom for America, as opposed to our naïve Romanian Fathers.
The socialist strategy here in the States today has to do with taming the children. It basically lies to them and to us. One of the most prevalent lies is that “you should be nice”. No, we should NOT be nice, we should not be harmless. We should be good monsters. The world does not belong to nice people; it belongs either to the good monsters or the bad monsters. The bad monsters are as we speak in the schools, teaching our children that being nice is more useful than being a good monster. Because… nobody likes monsters, right? Wrong. It is the good monsters that are heroes, not the nice people.
Simply put, our Founding Fathers were good monsters. War is monstrous. Any war is bloody, it brings death, it brings out fears and it’s ugly. Our Founding Fathers were not chit-chatters sitting in a room, smoking cigars and discussing politics. The truth is, these men united the Thirteen Colonies, they started and led the war for independence against Great Britain, built a frame of government during the latter decades of the 18th century and have been opposed at every single step. They had to fight, they had to fight restless, in order to obtain their freedom. They got bloody and dirty, they were monstering around terrifying the British armies. Ironically, most of them started by being nice and kind (considering themselves British subjects), but they broke out of that slavery. They didn’t break out by nicely asking, but by firmly standing up for what they believed in, in spite of the small numbers they had! We can either be Americans who possess a spirit distinct from that of slavery, or we can be subjects.
And this is exactly why we cannot allow the left to continue to educate children and to have monopoly over our schools. When students hang out with their peers, they should not be subjugating their individuality to their peers. The socialist education is based on an “inhibition model”, promoted by Freud, which says that aggression and bad habits have to be inhibited through education. That is why our kids cannot defend themselves against bullies without getting in trouble at school, and that is why the bullies movement is SO predominant in the Western culture – because we teach them to inhibit that God-given aggression that is there to help them protect themselves. We simply couldn’t handicap our children more than by making them inhibit their force of character. Bullying is not an issue in Eastern Europe, we don’t even have a label for it. But when you tie down the good monsters, forcing them to be nice to the bad monsters and let bad monsters run around wild – what do you think will happen? This is not the right educational model; it definitely is not the model that the Founding Fathers have adopted – nor should the Founding Children adopt this model! It’s not the right one. P.A.J.’s approach is much more accurate than Freud’s; he says that what should happen with one’s aggression (and hopefully good people have some left!), is that it needs to get socialized. Par example, children need to learn how to play games but they should not be encouraged to drop down their utter will to win, but should be taught how to integrate that drive to win in the game. You try to win, you play hard, your give your best. However, if you are defeated, you don’t respond negatively to it. This is what fair play is; not keeping score because we are nice is not healthy; it is not fair play. Plus, it is silly, because kids keep the score of the game anyway! They know who won and the know who is best. What that means is that our children need to learn to play a game in a way that also includes the dark parts of them and those dark parts actually become parts of their force of character; those sides do not become inhibited, but directed towards good purposes. The reason why that is the right way to educate children is that as adults, that is definitely what they have to do. They can’t be push-overs and have their rights taken away by the homeless in Seattle, for instance. Children games in the school yard turn into elections and into voting for the people who represent their values as a nation, they become games of real life and death. The left misses this whole concept entirely and it educates children to “be kind” as if that is the highest virtue at all – when in fact, it is the worst thing a nation could teach their children. It prepares them for slaughter. A rabbit is nice and all it helps for is getting eaten. When you are harmless because you are kind and you can’t snap out of being kind, you are actually preparing yourself for being a target. As a woman, I cannot even begin to understand why another woman would like her children to be soft and kind and nice to their aggressor.
People who survive attacks are good people who for just one second were able to turn into a person that is more aggressive and more harmful than their aggressor – and they fought and won. Otherwise, they are not survivors, but victims. We even have different words for them, we know that survivors are different to victims – and the difference is exclusively the capacity they have to do something more horrifying to their attacker than what their attacker can do to them. I don’t know how this crucial detail can elude our minds; we never talk about the role of boundaries and good aggression in our societies. We just trust and not double-check what criminals in political functions or not do and say, and end up being victims. How long are going to allow our children to be programmed to be victims? We need to take the educational system back.
The world does not belong to kind people, but to good monsters. A good monster is a monster who had tamed its own aggression and had learned how to use it, what to direct it towards and when to refrain himself from using it. Freedom was brought to America by good monsters; socialism is ultimately not brought to America by bad monsters, but by kind and nice people who are harmless. Bad monsters CANNOT bring socialism anywhere as long as the land has its own good monsters. Socialism is brought to America by kind and nice people who do nothing. (I really hope at this point everyone who reads this asks himself what are they doing practically to stop socialism from advancing in the U.S.).
Our Founding Fathers were businessmen, lawyers, philosophers, politicians, plantation owners and writers from a variety of social, economic, and ethnic backgrounds. They weren’t career politicians, and they weren’t “nice”. They were ready to roll up their sleeves and step into the mess and unite the colonies and come up with a strategy for the land. They believed in compassionate care and strict enforcement. Sounds familiar? How can we not recognize when we finally have in front of our eyes the living image of what genuine American spirit is.
Washington, please understand, one can’t win a war (be it hot or ideological, just like the one that we are in) if it has no boundaries and no point where to draw the line and say “Enough.” When are we going to draw that line, Washington State, when? When are we going to understand that being nice and not sending OUR messenger to Olympia to clean up house will leave an even more enslaved land for our children?