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.

 

The problem I see with the Liberal Movement.

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Of course, I'm not going to sit here and say that there aren't Liberals who take it too far,



And thats what im pretty much talking about. Those that take it too far or take up contradictory stances.

but then again, as you acknowledged, there are conservatives who take it too far. So why are you letting the extremists dictate your opinion of the total? I'm sure you'd be offended if I compared every conservative to Timothy McVeigh.

originally posted by: Krazysh0tThis is one of my biggest pet peeves with people against the Liberal movement. Pretending like defending moderate Muslims is apologizing for Muslims who happen to be terrorists. It is extremely frustrating to be accused of this and it is certainly a lie through and through.

If you noticed i used the term extremists islam.
Im again fine with treating honest muslims woth equality.

Im talking about those who wont call a spade a spade or refuse to recognise we are currently at war.




posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

And this is a product of new age liberalism- that is the BLM. Although, I'm not entirely sure what they are, and why they exist, other than to troll the world.




posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Gryphon66

That to me is fine.

Thats what not just the liberal movement should do but all groups.

There have been a few causes in the UK that needed more media attention i have had sympathy for, like the gurkas who fight for the UK in the army and getting them equal rights as UK citizen.


So, now I must confess to confusion. You don't have a problem with New Age Liberals who focus on minorities and work for their equal treatment before the law? That seems to defeat the first part of your "definition."



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:45 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok
The only reason we are "at war" is because our politicians tell us it is so. How many guns have you picked up and fired at enemy combatants though? Me. I haven't so much as THOUGHT of someone as an enemy since '05 when I was in Iraq.

Terrorism is a criminal act. It's an act of extreme murder and violence. If we'd stop pretending it was an act of war, we could treat it correctly and people wouldn't be so damn scared of it. You have a greater chance of dying in your bathroom than you do to a terrorist act. I REALLY wish people would try to understand that comparison a bit better. Sure it's shocking and unnerving when these actions happen so suddenly, but statistically most of the year things are fine.
edit on 6-7-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I wouldn't class them as" new age" liberals. Just people standing up for honest causes.


The thread is about those who take there movements too far or take up hypocritical or contradictory causes.


Sorry i didnt give you the bait you wanted



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Krazy you have just outlined the major divide in the way that we see reality, and there is no bridge to build between people who think like me, and people who think like you. which is quite unfortunate, because we the people will only become further divided as the attacks continue, and pick up in frequency.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

See this is what I'm talking about. A Youtube video trying to present a fallacy of composition. No attempt to even understand Liberal positions. Just let a biased video tell you what to believe... I thank you for proving my point.
edit on 6-7-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

A political group is conducting organised attacks across france, Belgium and mass murdering British tourist abroad?

And tha political group has made countless proclamations of war?

I take that as a sign of being at war.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   
I'd go so far as to question if "Radical Feminists" and some "BLM extremists" should actually be classified as liberal (generically).

One of the components of liberalism (classical, social, etc.) is a belief and efforts working for equality.

Neither of those groups, per se, are working for equality ... and therefore, my response would be that they aren't in fact LIBERAL but are usually fringe authoritarian in their tactics (which would classically be politically right, but nevermind that.)

That is, they aren't working to ensure that everyone is treated equally or that everyone has personal liberty, but, as you suggested, they're working for SPECIAL rights and privileges.

That's not liberalism.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Krazy you have just outlined the major divide in the way that we see reality, and there is no bridge to build between people who think like me, and people who think like you. which is quite unfortunate, because we the people will only become further divided as the attacks continue, and pick up in frequency.

That's your personal problem. I attempt to actually understand the opposing side of the debate's arguments. That's debate 101 right there.
edit on 6-7-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Gryphon66

I wouldn't class them as" new age" liberals. Just people standing up for honest causes.


The thread is about those who take there movements too far or take up hypocritical or contradictory causes.


Sorry i didnt give you the bait you wanted


I'm not looking for bait. I'm trying to have a conversation with you. Have I been unfair in some way?



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

But at the same time, that is a No True Scotsman Fallacy.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, no, that's quite enough... The whole of the BLM has revealed its self to be a pathetic, racist movement, and yes they spawned from new age left wing politics.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

If a child told you he hated you and never wanted to speak to you, would you punch him in the mouth as hard as you can? That's pretty much the way I see ISIS' ranting and raving when it comes to the West. Sure they can hurt us, but relatively their attacks are like beestings and cannot ever hope to topple our society. Also, hitting back will only do more damage than good.
edit on 6-7-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

You're right. That is enough. I don't want to sit here and listen to you slander a whole group of people because you have negative opinions about a few of them. It's going to go nowhere productive.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: HoldMyBeer
I used to consider myself a liberal. Other people used to consider me liberal. Then something happened and the Democratic party moved so far Left that I look Right now. It's crazy.


It's the same on "both sides" - I consider myself an "actual" conservative, which makes the Republican Party untenable to me (more now than ever, but it's been that way for decades.) I'm actually more of a Libertarian, but that movement has also been hijacked by its worst elements.

It seems the policy is: categorize, corral, control, corrupt.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Gryphon66

But at the same time, that is a No True Scotsman Fallacy.


How so? I'm rejecting the original claim, that these groups I mentioned are indeed liberal at all.

There are descriptions and definitions of what it means to be "liberal" ... if a recognized, organized group of people doesn't fit that definition ... is it really logically fallacious to note that?

I'm not sure, for the record, that either RadFems or BLM would define themselves as liberals.

Leftists, maybe, in terms of their radicalism and desire to change the status quo ... but not liberal.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
I just think it is a weak argument to say that just because someone is authoritarian they aren't liberal. Thus the no true scotsman fallacy label. Though that conversation in itself could be a totally new thread of discussion.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I will agree with you that these groups may not in fact be liberals at all, but I will also say they spawned from the politics of liberalism and were in their infancy supported by liberalism. Though perhaps now they are nothing more than a flavor or authoritarians and thus inequality.
edit on 6-7-2016 by TechniXcality because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Leftist thinking here in Canada has doomed us to ever increasing deficits with runaway spending on useless social engineering experiments.

It began with the worst PM in history, Pierre Trudeau who tried to turn this country into Cuba North and has continued through today with his son at the helm who is destined to surpass his father as the worst PM in history.

Heaven help us here in Kanada, no one else can.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join