It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What's wrong with Liberals?

page: 24
33
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: STTesc
lmao you completely ignored the entire post I just made and instead decided to bring up statements I made 2 days ago to take out of context and use as another straw man. Respond to my response, I'm not playing your games.


Don't like being confronted with the inescapable conclusions of your own words, eh?

Come on, read it.

You've glorified Hitler, told us how the Aryan Nation is just guys standing up for their race, made ridiculous claims about white people being the most discriminated against, made every excuse under the sun for your "white pride" and in your last bit there, you're talking about miscegenation and your concerns about racial purity.

C'mon, get it off your chest.


I never glorified Hitler.
I never said the Aryan Nation are simply guys standing up for their race. I actually denounced their behavior as ignorance, but again, you're taking everything I've said out of context so I can run around in circles defending myself while you completely ignore the above post I made.
You still haven't refuted any points I've made abut discrimination. You continue to refuse to even acknowledge the posts.

Straw man. More straw man. Refusal to answer simple questions while ignoring entire posts. Hypocrisy. Real racism. Taking what people say out of context. On and on and on. You're so full of it dude.
edit on 8-4-2015 by STTesc because: typos




posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Actually, I've got better things to do.

I'm a liberal.

I'm not a Communist, because I don't believe that totalitarianism is a necessary state on the way to pure socialism.

I'm not a socialist, because I don't believe that the government should be abolished and the means of production and private property handed over to "the people.

I'm not a racist because I do my best to confront my own feelings about inequities and support the idea that all are equal under the law.

I'm not a traitor because unlike you, I've stated multiple times how much I love and respect this country and her Constitution.

I'm not mentally ill because I have the ability to review my own actions and see my own flaws.

The only mistake I've made here is trying to have a reasonable logical discussion with a raving extremist.

I'll correct that as of now.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

That's right, continue to ignore the posts I've made. And when taking things out of context and straw mans don't work, throw a few insults and run away. Typical.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:46 AM
link   
I offered one example above of a definition of liberalism from an outside objective site and compared it with my own understandings.

I've found another one that I'm bringing into the thread for consideration ... this is from businessdictionary.com:



liberalism

Definitions
1.Economic: Concept that a government should not try to control prices, rents, and/or wages but instead let open competition and forces of demand and supply create an equilibrium between them that benefits the vast majority of citizens. It differs from the doctrine of laissez faire in its acceptance of the government intervention to control creation and spread of monopolies and in distribution of public good. Economic liberalism, in general, favors redistribution of income through taxes and welfare payments.

2.Political: Concept that the preservation of individual liberty and maximization of freedom of choice should be the primary aim of a representative government. It stresses that all individuals stand equal before law (without class privileges) and have only a voluntary contractual relationship with the government. It defends freedom of speech and press, freedom of artistic and intellectual expression, freedom of worship, private property, and use of state resources for the welfare of the individual.


Read more: www.businessdictionary.com...


Now theres a lot there. As a liberal though, I can't find a thing there I disagree with.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc
a reply to: Gryphon66

That's right, continue to ignore the posts I've made. And when taking things out of context and straw mans don't work, throw a few insults and run away. Typical.


Actually, I don't see Gryphon66 running away, nor doing dummy spits, unlike certain other posters in this thread.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

You're still completely ignoring my post. And you can't hide behind the definition of true Liberalism. You know damn well that American Liberals are a breed of their own. Stop playing mind games, stop ignoring posts and stop running away. You want a discussion? Then have one and stop acting like a child throwing a tantrum.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: cuckooold

originally posted by: STTesc
a reply to: Gryphon66

That's right, continue to ignore the posts I've made. And when taking things out of context and straw mans don't work, throw a few insults and run away. Typical.


Actually, I don't see Gryphon66 running away, nor doing dummy spits, unlike certain other posters in this thread.


I see he's called in backup. That's okay, I can argue with 5 of you at once.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Here's another great article that outlines a more historical/philosophical take on liberalism complete with logical critiques:

"What is Liberalism" - Philosophy Now

A sample to tease you in ...



Historical insight therefore presents us with a view of the origins of liberal thought and the liberal/conservative distinction which is more nuanced than one which sees conservatism as the natural upholder of free markets, the small state and, in David Cameron’s phrase, ‘the big society’. To some extent, there is continuity between modern conservatism and its origins in the work of Edmund Burke. For example, in their distrust of grand plans, and faith in ‘intermediate’ institutions (churches, charities etc), modern conservatives have a Burkian basis for shunning the activist state. However, this characterisation begs two questions. Firstly, how was the modern fit made between free-market economics and social conservatism? Secondly, why did liberalism take its pro-state turn in the twentieth century?

The first question can be dealt with fairly quickly. Neo-liberals, who from the 1970s onward combined economic liberalism and social conservatism, tended to see the conservatism as a necessary brake upon the socially disruptive tendencies of the free market. In this they were building upon the pragmatism of earlier conservatives. For Thatcherite neo-liberals, social liberty, meaning the legal endorsement of alternative lifestyles, sexual preferences etc, was to be rejected in favour of an exclusively economic understanding of freedom. Whether this combination of economic liberty and social authoritarianism is coherent is left for the reader’s consideration.


I had never considered that what this author calls the "exclusively economic understanding of freedom" is actually the basis of the Reagan Revolution (coupled with, of course, an unholy league formed with the Religious Right).

I understand political values based on Locke's ideas of natural rights ... that we are who we are and have the right to participate in society because we are born human beings, nothing more and nothing less.

Given that the modern conservative has reduced every value to an economic question of value, in other words, money, land, property and power rather than looking for and accepting those innate qualities of humanity that make us what we are ... my own position as a liberal becomes more clear.

There is an intrinsic value in humanity that is not measured in money, status, employment, property or anything else ... and that is what I most value.

I had never thought about that before in quite that context: as a liberal, I care more about people than about money.
edit on 2Wed, 08 Apr 2015 02:09:07 -050015p022015466 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Oh yes, such a philanthropist you are.

Such a joke.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:25 AM
link   


“A liberal is a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel.” ― Robert Frost


I ran across Frost's quote while reading another article on a related matter, and thought it worth bringing into the discussion.

I think that one of the obvious strengths of the modern conservative/fundamentalist/Republican/reactionary/regressive mindset is their ability to embrace orthodoxy, that is, they get on message and stay on message.

The Democrats/liberals/progressives are, in distinction, all over the place, philosophically and politically. And by and large it is our first and best tendency to merely say "live and let live."

I know that there are examples of so-called liberals who are trying to overregulate for what they see as the common good.

And that's just a part of the point here. Liberals are not a united front. If you watch Fox, listen to Rush, Hannity and Beck on a daily basis, you will find that these paragon information distribution points for the right-wing have their crap together on a level that would have boggled the mind a few years ago.

They address the same issues in the same ways with the same language that has been simplified and dumbed down to a sort of rote black and white understanding of the world that is easily palatable.

Democrats are all over the place, they're for the most part ill-prepared, and lets' face it, sometimes they're just incoherent.

But the other side of that is that it reflects the reality of real individual freedom ... as opposed to being in easily detectable lock-step with a media machine providing sound-bytes every day.

LOL .. "seig heil" indeed.
edit on 2Wed, 08 Apr 2015 02:27:32 -050015p022015466 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Walls and walls of text and you continue to ignore simple questions. American Liberals aren't Liberal in the classical sense. Thomas Jefferson was a classical Liberal. You're not a classical Liberal. You're not even close to a European Liberal. You're a closet Communist with real racial hatred issues.

Say what you want about this thread, but I haven't ducked a single question. I've responded to who I was able to and did it with honesty to the best of my ability. You sir are a coward. Good day.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:55 AM
link   
I mentioned Locke earlier ... but most of my real political theory is based on the ideas of Thomas Jefferson:

A few quotes:



Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.

Read more at www.brainyquote.com...


Jefferson was well aware of the political theories of his day. And even though he had his own failings from our 220 some odd year perspective, he was still a wonder of his age, and America was lucky to have him.

When Jefferson was a revolutionary, he waxed ever eloquent about the fiery torch of liberty burning in his breast ... but, after he became President, many of his attitudes toward the necessity of a strong central government changed somewhat:



Jefferson has been a great democratic icon precisely because he so eloquently articulated fundamental tensions in Americans' understanding of the people's power. The United States had "the strongest Government on earth," Jefferson told his fellow Americans in his first Inaugural Address on March 4, 1801. Yet the people's great and irresistible power was a function of their devotion to a free government that guaranteed their rights: this was the only government "where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern." Where an enlightened people determined their own destiny, Jefferson promised, there was no necessary or inevitable conflict between private rights and public good.


Miller Center - University of Virginia -

Jefferson came to understand, as most do, that there must be a balance in all things. He was under no illusions about the power of money, however and how it could be applied.


edit on 3Wed, 08 Apr 2015 03:12:38 -050015p032015466 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:09 AM
link   
a reply to: STTesc

I hope you know how unoriginal your litany of 'complaints' are regarding the oppressed white male. They are part and parcel lies created and promulgated by FOX NEWS.

For the record, I think Grypon schooled you very well on liberal thought. But you appear to be too much of an ideologue for any of that to have mattered.

Oh, btw, I'm one of those immigrants you and your kind constantly gripe about. I came to this country in my teens, finished high school, graduated from college, finished grad school, and started a business which now employs 14 Americans. Immigrants contribute disproportionately to the American economy, and that too is a fact you won't hear on FOX NEWS.


edit on 8-4-2015 by Serawit because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Serawit
a reply to: STTesc

I hope you know how unoriginal your litany of 'complaints' are regarding the oppressed white male. They are part and parcel lies created and prmogulated by FOX NEWS.

For the record, I think Grypon schooled you very well on liberal thought. But you appear to be too much of an ideologue for any of that to have mattered.



Oh yes because Fox News. I was then schooled by lies, straw men and pretending to be Thomas Jefferson.

And the circle jerk continues.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Serawit

Welcome to ATS Serawit!

The erstwhile topic in this thread is "What's wrong with liberals?" and the answer for many of us is "nothing."

You can see that the OP is really nothing more than click-bait for liberal bashing, and when that wasn't what happened, the OP sort of went ballistic on us.

However, there's still plenty of room for you to share your thoughts as well and I hope you will. It doesn't have to be a trash-heap discussion, we can make it into something else still on topic.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes please post your thoughts as long as they conform to Gryphon's thoughts or you'll be labeled racist and he'll refuse to answer questions, acknowledge posts and straw man you by calling you Hitler. Defending yourself from said attacks is then labeled "going ballistic". After all, he believes himself to be Thomas Jefferson.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:42 AM
link   
You want to know whats wrong with liberals? They are usually just people who got a little money together at some point in time and just sold out there basic values, then decided to go all Conservative, either that all there just racist country rednecks........ Hold on, you mean liberals in the US, not Australia right?............. Sorry about that, wrong thread, don't mind me!

Seriously, right wing, left wing, up wing or lower wing............ When will people wake up and realize there all the same party with different rhetoric, that's all. You have all been brainwashed, bunch of 'compliant slaves'. lol, my new favorite phrase.

I'm deleting this thread from the 'myATS' tab, because its feeble minded and I'm sick of seeing it.

Peace out



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
You want to know whats wrong with liberals? They are usually just people who got a little money together at some point in time and just sold out there basic values, then decided to go all Conservative, either that all there just racist country rednecks........ Hold on, you mean liberals in the US, not Australia right?............. Sorry about that, wrong thread, don't mind me!

Seriously, right wing, left wing, up wing or lower wing............ When will people wake up and realize there all the same party with different rhetoric, that's all. You have all been brainwashed, bunch of 'compliant slaves'. lol, my new favorite phrase.

I'm deleting this thread from the 'myATS' tab, because its feeble minded and I'm sick of seeing it.

Peace out


There's a difference between a political ideology, even party, and literally committing treason. American Liberals are borderline Communist, they want to change America. They see their way as "social evolution", it's like a religion to these people. It's not simply political differences, these people are borderline terrorists.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   
When I say these people are terrorists, they are. These are the people the American left supports:



As I said, it's not just an ideology, they hate this country. They want to change it and they will call you every name in the book to justify their assault.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 04:53 AM
link   
It's been posited a couple of times in this discussion that liberals are mentally ill or defective in some way.

Now, I know that's probably nothing more than the same empty rhetoric we've seen several times, but, interestingly, there have been studies done on the relative sanity of Conservatives vs. Liberals.

From Psychology Today



Here are the facts. A meta-analysis culled from 88 samples in 12 countries, and with an N of 22,818, revealed that “several psychological variables predicted political conservatism.” Which variables exactly? In order of predictive power: Death anxiety, system instability, dogmatism/intolerance of ambiguity, closed-mindedness, low tolerance of uncertainty, high needs for order, structure, and closure, low integrative complexity, fear of threat and loss, and low self-esteem. The researchers conclude, a little chillingly, that “the core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and a justification of inequality.”


Hmmm... that doesn't sound so good. But how about liberals, that's what we're here for, right?

Well, if you type that into a search engine ... you'll get a lot of references from right-wing rags like Red State, WorldNetDaily, etc. Results of Google Search

Except that, oddly enough, none of these are actual statistical studies. And I know that for many Republicans/regressives/reactionaries ... all that science stuff is just a load of hooey ...

Well, there you have it. An opportunity to read and decide for yourself.




top topics



 
33
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join