Who's afraid of change?

One of the favorite rhetorical arguments you hear from people on the left is that liberals are open to change, while conservatives are prone to fight to keep the status quo. This is part of why they want to label themselves as "progressives" as in they are always looking to push the country forward. On the flip side, they deem this resistance to change as showing a lack of open mindedness and fear of the unknown. Like clockwork, every two three years, there will be some liberal psychologist who will put out some study showing some wonderful forward thinking traits associated with liberals, versus destructive close minded resistances from conservatives.

However, what is being left out of much of this discussion is that these liberals generally judge people on whether or not they agree with "liberal policies" that would offer change. Not just change as it pertains to change. The truth is that societies are always evolving and changing, and historically speaking, this evolution and change is not always positive. Right now it could be argued that there are many many different cultures and societies spread out on the globe at many different stages. Some might be seen as forward or advance, while others might be seen as backwards. Some may be on their way up, while others are probably on their way down. Historically there has always been an ebb and flow to these things. Culture and society has not progressed on a linear basis (building on previous mistakes and knowledge). But rather dominant societies have risen and fallen throughout history.

There is really no reason to believe that twenty first century society will be any different.

So we just had what most analysts suggested was a "change" election. People have been fed up with business as usual. I don't believe that this is "just" the fact that we have had a Democrat in the White House for eight year, but rather it goes deeper than that. This thirst for change likely goes back over the past sixteen years of the past two administrations that were largely different sides to the same coin. Obama certainly offered "hope and change" but really gave us neither. Bottom line: the 2016 election was not just a rejection of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, but also of George W Bush, Bill Clinton, Mitt Romney, John Kerry, John McCain, Harry Reid, Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi and everyone else in the so called "establishment".

This is why we ended up electing a Billionaire with no political experience, who promises to drain the swamp, and has packed his cabinet with many non-conventional choices of people "not" from within the political establishment. He has tapped a media mogul, several former Generals, other Billionaires, with only a spattering of mainstream politicians. Nearly all of his nominees are controversial.

This, ladies and gentlemen is real change. Not just the same old same old liberal policies (that cannot pass through normal political means) being pushed at the stroke of a Presidential decree or a court order that is being pegged as change. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, and the change we are talking about is "not" within the comfort zone of the so called "progressives"... isn't it amusing how these open minded forward thinking people are reacting to real honest to goodness change?

• Liberals demanding recounts to prove Russian hacking.
• Liberals demanding the Electoral College voters break their pledges.
• Liberals threatening to move out of the country.
• California threatening to secede from the union.
• Liberals demanding they can no longer have sex or date because Trump is their President.
• Liberals who claim that they no longer want to leave the house because Trump is their President.
• Liberals demanding (as they did with Bush) that Trump is not "their" President.
• Liberals getting upset because Lynyrd Skynyrd plays in public places. 
• Liberals not knowing what to tell their kids. 
• Etc, etc, etc... 

Trust me when I say that these are not the sort of reactions you would expect from a group of people who claim to be open minded (by nature) and demand that they are more open to real change than their political opponents.  They are not actually any more open to change (probably less so). They are (as most conservatives are) open to their "own" change, while being completely resistant to any change they disagree with. 

One of the things that liberals will have to learn is that just because they offer something as change, doesn't mean it's good change. Take diversity for instance. Diversity is Diversity. As a fundamental principle, it's neither good or bad. It simply "is". In fact, if viewed through a historical lens, the more homogeneous a society is, the stronger those societies tend to be. The more diverse they become, the weaker they become. There is no historical precedent that shows "multiculturalism" can actually survive long term in a society. Yet, liberals arbitrarily "celebrate" diversity as if it actually means something in and of itself. It simply doesn't, and saying it does doesn't change that.

Likewise, globalization is just a modern day term for imperialism. Brexit is simply the political version of resistance that autonomy driven people throughout history have generally achieved through the tip of a sword.  Whether it's the real life William Wallace, or the fictional Katniss Everdeen or Luke Skywalker, the people resisting centralized control have always been viewed as the hero. According to modern day liberals, they were all just bigots who were afraid of the wonderful change offered by a centralized authority and wanted things to go back to the way they were.

Bottom line folks. The election of Donald Trump is currently the testing the ability of people to accept and adjust to real change. I would offer that those liberals (who demand it's their forte) are failing this simple test in alarming fashion.