Are Liberals Misanthropes? (Disturbing Essay, Episode #6)

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


The Old Saying........" Live and let Live " has Never been translated into Liberalese since the Dawn of Time . I wonder Why ? .....




posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Did Glenn Beck write this trash?



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by kazanoom
 

Dear kazanoom,

May I take it from your comment that you didn't read the article? The author's name is provided.

And while you can write and post anything you want on the Internet, I prefer having posts with some substance. I try to discourage minimal, off-topic posts.

Apparently you disagree. Do you object to his examples? Isn't he applying inductive reasoning in a sufficiently rigorous manner for you? I'd be glad to discuss your objections.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 10:10 PM
link   
It's an opinion. I disagree with it.

Living in France, which has a culture more "collectivist" or as I tend to say, "social", I have had the same thoughts as the author of this essay.
But then I learned more, got a deeper insight into them and found out that their values are different, but equally valid, and that it is us- the ones who value individualism to such an extreme that are closer to being misanthropes.

They understand that a community, or a relationship, is held together through interdependance between individuals.
They have seen, through history, that a community that fragments into extreme individuality falls- and even our own culture is full of messages trying to warn us of that- the myths of Atlantis, the Fall of Babylon, the fall of Rome.....

In each individuals search for "freedom" is the simultaneous movement towards destruction of the glue of their society.

No wonder that in placing that goal ahead of ourselves, we worry about being self-sufficient; about ourselves, and those closest to us, being able to fight for their own survival without aid- because we aiming to bring down the social structure.

It's the same as not wanting to need our spouse, because we are actually planning on divorcing them as soon as possible and don't want to suffer.

I continually struggle on a daily basis with this, and still have moments of getting really upset when people try to help me with anything- I am afraid they'll make me "weak" or less capable, in that act.
It is hard for me to get used to the idea that I don't need to be invincible and alone, my community really is there for me and will continue to be. I can trust others.


I will say that there is some validity to both points of view- maternalisation to an extreme can be detrimental, but what is not being acknowledged here is that extreme paternalism can also be detrimental.

In the individual freedom corner, you have love of the individual- the specific person who is related to you,
In collectivist (americans call liberal) corner, you have a love of people in general- non-specific love for others.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by beezzer
 


The Old Saying........" Live and let Live " has Never been translated into Liberalese since the Dawn of Time . I wonder Why ? .....


Because the liberal acknowledges that individuals have a higher chance of survival when part of a social group or herd. To let them alone is to let them die.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


A Wise Man once said.......".You Help Those in Need Just Enough To Help Themselves " . This Wise Man is Still UNKNOWN by Liberals with Good Intentions Today .



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
To adress some specifics of the article-




Liberals don’t want humans to enjoy themselves. They feel guilty about living and existing, and especially about living opulently.


I doubt this isn't obvious to anyone reading- it is an obvious twisting of perspective to support their ridiculous claim?
Some people cannot enjoy themselves when there is others near them suffering. They feel the pain of others.
For empathic people, competition is not enjoyable- they only feel good in cooperation.
That doesn't mean they feel guilty about existing. It could also mean that they feel existing can be done in cooperation and relation with others, and that is more enjoyable than solitary material opulence.




We are being governed by people who don’t like us.


We are being governed by people who's job is to encourage and weave a social structure that is strong, and that can stay together faced with potential outside threats. They are trying to fulfil that duty.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by kazanoom
 

Dear kazanoom,

May I take it from your comment that you didn't read the article? The author's name is provided.

And while you can write and post anything you want on the Internet, I prefer having posts with some substance. I try to discourage minimal, off-topic posts.

Apparently you disagree. Do you object to his examples? Isn't he applying inductive reasoning in a sufficiently rigorous manner for you? I'd be glad to discuss your objections.

With respect,
Charles1952


yes i did, by some hack that no sane person could take seriously. With #e like this:"Dislike of humans explains why liberals love regulations." you'd have to be more than half crazy. Is he being sarcastic? Oh then now I get it .har har har. Liberals hate getting their time wasted by hyperbolic bill#e. and i would cuss if i could on this site.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952

In my mind he has made the case that liberals either don't like, or don't trust, people.


Consider for a moment the the flip side, the counter argument...when it comes to conservatives we are governed by people who either don't like or don't trust government.
That's not very functional either.

So, as you can see, any extreme is somewhat counter-productive to the greater good.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 12:12 AM
link   
But what is the intent of this article what is the outcome?

The intent is to divide us when we know that united we stand. The intent is to denigrate and intimidate moderates who may have a few 'liberal' views or who may identify with 1 or more 'left' talking points.

The outcome is that once again, at least on this board we are squabbling with each other about republican and democratic ideologies. Why?



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 04:05 AM
link   
time and again studies come out showing that conservatives are motivated by fear.

does this mean conservatives are cowards?



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 04:09 AM
link   
At the very far left it means- full control
At the very far right means anarchy- no control



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
Consider. A brief post containing the following: "Cheap," "Porn," "Hot and sweaty orgy," all from someone named "ForbiddenDesire?" I can't wait for the movie to come out. (Remember not to embed it here, this is a family site.)


Well let's not talk business here. Besides, it will be a tv show. Classy Jersey Shore meets Games of Thrones, and it will be drama:


Set in conservative Iran, a young women rebels against her highly religious upbringing. She becomes part of the underground clubbing, and finds herself in all sort of nasty positions.


Now, back to the subject. I reread this. I was serious that it is like porn. It's a fantasy. Here's "liberal" porn:

www.alternet.org...

It all comes to the same thing.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by seabag


They do have a dislike for people.....people who disagree with them!




That's the emotional element.

Another old saying.

Liberals think conservatives are evil.
Conservatives just think liberals are wrong.

We take a more pragmatic approach to the world's dilemmas. Liberals the emotional element.

It's like a left brain/right brain writ large.


Well according to this article liberals hate people, so either the saying you provide or the essay here that you are supporting is wrong -- or possibly both. Which shows the typical cognitive dissonance of conservatives.

But let me ask all of you here in this thread piping in on how right this essay is: why is it that conservatives have to make threads about how evil/stupid/wrong-headed/immoral/etc liberals are? At least here at ATS, I don't see a lot of threads by liberals doing the same thing to conservatives. Yes, there are threads pointing out specific actions by conservative/GOP lawmakers or individuals, but liberals don't tend to rant about conservatives per se. Want to prove me wrong? Then please provide links to some ATS threads in which liberals rant against conservatives in a general way, as is the gist of this thread. And I mean recent threads, not cherry-picked ones that are six months or several years old.

Also I note in comments here and at lots of other sites with news articles, that conservatives seem compelled to have to tie just about any negative news story with liberals and/or with the president -- to the point that their comments are non-sequitors to the article. Again, why is this? The reverse does not happen -- at least not to the same extent.

Admittedly there are sites like Salon, which is essentially a DNC propaganda organ, which has way too many articles about how conservatives are this or that (in a negative way), but that is a paid propaganda electronic rag -- and the non-Obamabot, i.e. thinking liberal and progressive, readers at the site criticize such articles (I myself do this, and I have even found myself agreeing at times with some of the notorious conservative trolls on said site). But in the comments section of articles you will not find the liberal posters making gratuitous jabs about conservatives and/or Republicans in non-sequitors as conservatives do here and elsewhere on the web.

Charles1952, I'm not sure exactly what you think of this essay that you created this thread for, but by your last sentence or two in your OP, it would seem you agree with it. Generally you're a more sensible and critical-thinking person than that, from the posts/comments of yours I have read. Must say that I am terribly unimpressed with this one. And although you and I certainly don't agree on many issues, I thought you better than this. The same goes for Beezzer, and your comments here.




posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by MrInquisitive
 


I'm saying the article/author is wrong.

I don't think liberals hate people, I just think that liberals are more emotional, judge emotionally, than conservatives.

I'm actually defending liberals here!


You all may be a bunch of pinko-commie-socialist-Prius driving-vegan-whine baby-taxing-big government-elitists, but you aren't haters!





posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 09:16 AM
link   
The perfect quote for this thread:

There was a word that I always liked; the classical economists used it: liberal. The word liberal really meant, in the classical sense, the liberalization of the individuals from the tyranny of the State. That word was expropriated by our opponents and it has now come to mean liberality with other people’s money. The word was taken over. And so I, more than anybody else, was responsible for introducing and publicizing and perhaps making world-wide the word libertarian. I am sorry I ever did it. Why? Because the word libertarian has now been just as much expropriated as the word liberal.

~ Leonard E. Reed



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 




The Keystone pipeline and fracking provides more abundant energy for Americans

The pipeline will provide nothing for Americans. All the oil was for export only and the pipeline was going to a foreign tax free zone so we wouldn't even be getting taxes from it. In fact they even commented our gas prices may go up because of it. And fracking is more trouble than it's worth. It poisons the ground water and increases earthquakes in the region.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 
I would draw your attention to a couple of items from that noted Liberal rag, Psychology Today.

Conservatives Big on Fear, Brain Study Finds
Peering inside the brain with MRI scans, researchers at University College London found that self-described conservative students had a larger amygdala than liberals. The amygdala is an almond-shaped structure deep in the brain that is active during states of fear and anxiety. Liberals had more gray matter at least in the anterior cingulate cortex, a region of the brain that helps people cope with complexity. Link



Why Liberal Hearts Bleed and Conservatives Don't
Political liberals are “bleeding hearts” because they empathize so strongly with the sufferings of others. As Bill Clinton so succinctly phrased it, “I feel your pain.” When Republicans wanted to compete in the empathy department, they had to invent a new terminology to identify this strange bird. They called it a “compassionate conservative.” Link


Certainly a tad more reputable a source than the rant you quoted. I cite these pieces because the actual research papers are considerably more dense...but y'all get the idea.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
Aren't we agreed that there is a generally accepted liberal philosophy which is distinguishable from the conservative philosophy?

Well lets see just how easy it is to actually draw a clear line between these two philosophies. First let us start with the dictionary definitions.


1. willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas:liberal views towards divorce
* favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms:liberal citizenship laws
* (in a political context) favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform:a liberal democratic state

oxforddictionaries.com...


1. averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values:they were very conservative in their outlook
2. (in a political context) favouring free enterprise, private ownership, and socially conservative ideas.

oxforddictionaries.com...

Ok... so far so good, it seems like we have clear definitions for these words. Based on these definitions, is it not fair to say that liberals value individual liberty and personal freedom? They also promote ideas such as free market economics instead of centralized banking and government interference with the market. They argue that the government should get out of healthcare for that reason, and point to places like Hong Kong as a prime example of what free market capitalism can achieve. Listen to Gary Johnson or Ron Paul speak about their policies, back in the 80's when Ron Paul was running for office in the Libertarian party he said things like this:

"If you think government is supposed to deliver all goods and services then you need to subscribe to a philosophy called socialism or welfarism and we reject it, of course, for moral reasons and humanitarian reasons. We believe the best distribution and highest standard of living is done under a free market system. You have an obligation personally to help someone in need, but the government doesn't have the right to take something from you and deliver it out to someone on the streets"

Now, the political definition for Conservative also says that private ownership and personal rights are a big deal, and that free trade or "free enterprise" are important aspects of the philosophy... where then do these two philosophies actually deviate besides liberals being more tolerant of new ideas and conservatives holding onto traditional values? Can you actually say which philosophy leans more towards socialism and which is more focused on individualism? Based on the comments in this thread it's almost impossible to make a distinction...


Originally posted by beezzer
Liberals feel for people.
Don't you CARE about the environment?
Don't you FEEL for the homeless?
Don't you have a HEART for the environment?

Conservatives on the other hand, use phrases like "Equal oppourtunity, not equal outcome".
Responsibility.
Individualism.
Ethics.

According to our old bud beezzer here, liberals are actually like hippies or something who lean towards socialism or collectivism, where as the conservatives place a high importance on personal responsibility and individualism.


Originally posted by charles1952
Perhaps I am a liberal, or you are a conservative, but it seems we agree.
...
Conservatives (politically) see the individual as the basic unit of rights and liberties who should give up only those liberties neccessary to form a government, and the fewer given up the better.

And you are using words like "liberties" to define a conservative, and saying that conservatives place a high importance on a non-invasive government and few regulations... after telling us that you could be a liberal, but you're not sure.


Originally posted by Bluesma
They understand that a community, or a relationship, is held together through interdependence between individuals.
...
In each individuals search for "freedom" is the simultaneous movement towards destruction of the glue of their society.

I think this is the best post of all actually. This poster is saying that liberals are smarter because they understand the benefit of socialist philosophies and working together to achieve common goals, and that the conservatives are leading us to destruction as they seek individual freedom.

I hope this has made things clearer...
edit on 31/8/2013 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by charles1952
 



I don't think liberals hate, but I do often feel as though their perceptions are coloured emotionally.

Sincerest regards,

beez



So conservatives aren't emotional but they hate?
Liberals are emotional but they don't hate?

This is the problem with people in politics.
They arbitrarily pick and choose how they are going to feel about others, then they make up some twisted set of rules to justify what they think.





top topics
 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join