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.
I hope he was not saying that, but if he was, I disagree that this is the best post of all. It would be claiming that socialism is for smart people and capitalism is for stupid people. People who do not support socialism are stupid?
And do you think that capitalists are opposed to working together? People who don't work together are subsistence farmers. This is not a country built by subsistence farmers, or socialism.
Originally posted by charles1952
Do you really think that Americans trust their government? Of course they don't. Do they like it? Not the president, but the government? They don't. It is reasonable to distrust government and not particularly like it.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Bluesma
Dear Bluesma,
........
The point of the article was, again, that liberals believe that most humans subject to their governance are not deserving of the full rights and freedoms because they are either to stupid or perverse to use them properly. Firearms, large soft drinks, motorcycle helmets, Bucky Balls (ordered off the market by the Feds), NSA snooping, IRS targeted audits, all these and many more say "We don't trust you, you're stupid or evil."
No one is criticizing interdependence, denying that groups are more survivable than individuals, or rejecting the idea of defending against outside threats. No one claimed that people should be isolated individuals with no protection against external enemies.
The article is claiming the government should have the maximum power, because people need to be controlled. People are (according to the liberal belief) "bitter clingers" who need to be controlled.
Well done "brit" for me anyway you have proven out the OPs post quit well, your rant is full of hate, spin, no facts and the old liberal standard "if you don't agree with me you are all these things".
Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by charles1952
I find it hilarious that anyone could have the sheer balls to pass this off as anything other than a heavily biased anti-liberal rant.
For a start, any statement, or collection thereof, which address an entire realm of thinking in such unfavourable terms, is at risk, nay entirely guilty of MASSIVE generalisation. Yes, there are liberals who would probably get behind a program to wipe the human race out so that there can finally be total peace on planet Earth, and if you are honest, you probably felt that way once in your life at some point too!
However, the same could be said, for different reasons, of the more conservative thinkers out there. There are going to be a few who would like to shoot all the people who are a different colour, creed, religion, pay grade, have a strange haircut, or any other excuse. But both these camps must have people in them who are NOT entirely psychotic, deluded, self obsessed, self indulgent, petulant five year olds in adult bodies!
To mark the entire liberal movement as people hating destroyers of freedom, is no more accurate than saying that all Britons are buck toothed weirdos who speak the Queens English, ride horses to work, and take the flag of the realm with them on holiday which they fully intend to plant through the bloated corpses of the local population, while claiming that territory as belonging to Queen Elizabeth , huzzar, spit spot, poppycock and so forth.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by jimmyx
Dear jimmyx,
The article may very well come from a slanted source. I'm not sure whether the author is. But, again, that's not the point.
If the article is wrong, please discuss it so I can set it aside as refuted. But attacking the publishers doesn't advance the discussion at all.
With respect,
Charles1952
Originally posted by beezzer
Originally posted by badgerprints
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.
When/where did I say conservatives hate?
I did state that liberal ideology is more emotional-based.
My opinion.
a person who hates or distrusts humankind
What? It's the title of the article, what's the problem? The author presents his belief, then supports it through inductive reasoning.
I don't even regard the title of your thread as being up for a "discussion"...
Again, I understand you don't like his opinion, but calling it names doesn't disprove it.
it simply is a false premise, disguised as some type of pseudo-intellectual babble by this author, to separate and marginalize an entire political belief, into a subhuman "them"
Originally posted by charles1952
Again, I understand you don't like his opinion, but calling it names doesn't disprove it.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Bluesma
If I understand the article, it claims that liberals don't like people, and they show that dislike by limiting peoples' freedom and power, reducing their standard of living, killing them or wishing them dead, or some combination thereof. It does this by presenting several examples, all seeming to support the claim.
I understand that you disagree with the essay, could you show me why it's wrong?
You are right, my writing was sloppy. I meant to say position. But let's agree that it is his opinion. Still, it is an opinion supported by a broad array of examples. An opinion's value is measured by the evidence one has to support it, and the reasoning applied to that evidence.
Again, I understand you don't like his opinion, but calling it names doesn't disprove it.
You are dismissing everyones arguments as mere opinions and here you conceed that the article is also just someones opinion.