The Myth of the Benevolent Left

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Oh fer godssakes ...

Do you who always default to the "keep your hands out of our wallets" response ever take your logic a step further?

Do you also resent the Federal monies given to international corporations?

Do you also resent the Federal monies sent to foreign governments, like Israel?

Do you also resent the Federal monies used to buy weapons used in your name to kill innocents?

If not, your resentment may be a bit one-sided.

Yep, yep and yep. But I do like money spent on weapons that kill bad guys.

Fair enough. What about the ones who kill more good guys than bad ones at the same time?

So why ... given that you dislike these government expenditures as well, do they rarely get brought up in these discussions by conservatives?

I'll tell you ... helping a millionaire CEO get a bigger mega-bonus hurts me a lot more than a few poor folks possibly scamming food stamps.

But then ... in general, following the same generic fake logic as the OP ...

The Benevolent Right is okay with giving public monies to millionaires and warmongers ... just not poor people.

a reply to: Gryphon66

The stereotypes are there for a reason, usually because they've been acted out in one form or another, and often expected of them. If anything, it seems that is all the OP did was refute some stereotypes.

I'm also unaware of when he/she said all lefties were this way, since your argument seems to be not all lefties are like that. Don't worry, we all agree with you.

originally posted by: Bluesma
I woke up this morning with a sudden comprehension of what the reasoning is behind the assertion of the OP and others, that I just couldn't totally get before.

This idea springs from the notion that helping others requires self sacrifice.

That's it isn't it? That is not only what you mean by "doing REAL acts of care", but also why you fear the concept of social programs in general (that is would require your self sacrifice in one way or another) ??

There has to be some sort of loss experienced by the giver for it to count as a caring or compassionate action, right?

You guys can tell me if I have put a finger on it or not, but I am almost sure that i have.
I do not like self sacrifice for other, nor the opposite , so I was not reading it from that angle originally... but I see now this is a polarized group of people in all ways of thought!

I bet that is also why the concept of one being both a giver and a receiver doesn't compute here.

I think the notion is the difference between doing something vs doing nothing to help your fellow man, and whereabouts you fall on that spectrum. Having taxes taken from your check is close to doing nothing. Therefor there is not compassion nor benevolence involved.

In the end, it appears that after a lengthy diatribe, all the Op asked for was proof of compassion, instead of promises of it.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Gryphon66

The stereotypes are there for a reason, usually because they've been acted out in one form or another, and often expected of them. If anything, it seems that is all the OP did was refute some stereotypes.

So stereotypes strike you as the basis of a logical, reasonable, or evidence-based discussion? Really? Fair enough. I utterly disagree with you. Did the OP mention the word "stereotype" or any analogue in their essay? LesMis was if nothing else very specific in their chosen language ... if they had meant "stereotype" they would have said it.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm also unaware of when he/she said all lefties were this way, since your argument seems to be not all lefties are like that. Don't worry, we all agree with you.

Good heavens, did you read the title? What does "the Left" refer to if not all "lefties" since we're mixing the OP's nominclature with mine made in a specific response to another poster?

Go back and read the OP again, you will find approximately in every sentence some specific statement about the utterly vague group of people deemed "Left" or "leftists" or any of the other commonly-deployed slang terms.

My comment to another poster in the context of their post was clear and frankly does not need restatement from you, though I thank you kindly for the attempt, and further, I don't expect anyone to agree, least of all self-defined conservatives ... I do expect them to discuss rationally and address the facts of the matter.

Care to?

a reply to: Gryphon66

You have a point. Maybe that was it. Compassion is not a property of all lefties.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Gryphon66

You have a point. Maybe that was it. Compassion is not a property of all lefties.

That is not my point and you are well aware of it.

I can see that you've chosen sly innuendo over rational discussion.

Good day.

a reply to: Gryphon66

So benelovant of you. The rate to which you verbally attack others is indicative of that.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Gryphon66

So benelovant of you. The rate to which you verbally attack others is indicative of that.

I am not and have never claimed to be "benevolent."

And I am not the topic.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Compassion is a tenant of left-wing politics. Is it not?

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Gryphon66

Compassion is a tenant of left-wing politics. Is it not?

I have certainly never claimed compassion to be a "tenet" of anything.

In my experience compassion is either felt or it is not. It also happens on an individual basis, person-to-person.

From the Latin "to feel with" ... compassion is one of those words used all too often with mere rhetorical fetish.

It is not an aspect of any politics per se, in my opinion.

EDIT: Nevermind

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Sorry but I don't think you're in a position to speak on the benevolence of billions of people being a myth...

Whether right or left.

As a sort of litmus test, ask anyone who advocates for a right to housing, to food, proper wages, proper welfare, and healthcare, if he himself has ever inclined to provide these “rights”.

The lefties I know are very vocal in the idea that their tax money should be spent on the above.
That's why they will vote for Hillary/Sander's/Corbyn, or support(ed) Obama/Miliband etc


We put our money where our mouth is.


Whether you agree if government should be involved in any of those is moot, it's what leftists believe in.
Including myself as centre left.

Well...if you and your friends want to put your money to those causes, tell ya what I'll do. Send me 90% of your income (I'll provide my address in a PM) and I'll open a company to distribute that money. I'll be taking a salary of $250K and hiring a bunch of others to help distribute and track the use of your money. We will need land and a large building, all employees will get free health care (not that Obama care crap) and we will receive a pension until we die equal to our highest pay. We can't be fired nor terminated but we promise to do the best we can with your money and handing it over to "the needy". Of course, we will need to through lavish "training seminars" a few times a year in Hawaii or some other nice place. Forgive any leaked videos of our partying.

So, if you're ready to have us help get your money to the poor...let me know and I'll PM you. I'll even give you a receipt.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Gryphon66

Compassion is a tenant of left-wing politics. Is it not?

it's more a tenant of religions or the spiritual, not sure it has a political affiliation

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Well...if you and your friends want to put your money to those causes, tell ya what I'll do. Send me 90% of your income (I'll provide my address in a PM) and I'll open a company to distribute that money. I'll be taking a salary of $250K and hiring a bunch of others to help distribute and track the use of your money. We will need land and a large building, all employees will get free health care (not that Obama care crap) and we will receive a pension until we die equal to our highest pay.

I think you know very well what realy is talked about by what LesMis here is pointing to. And if not, let me remind you:

1.) Who owns what for what kind of justifications?

2.) Arguing INSIDE of what is wrong, is not considered as being on topic.

So, if you're ready to have us help get your money to the poor...let me know and I'll PM you. I'll even give you a receipt.

IF LesMis and/or CharlieSpears would have more money to spend than being able to take care of themselfs, me thinks, they would do so. What about your money? Where have you invested it into?

And don't ask me, I don't even have more than 350 Euro to provide for my food, electrition, telephone, and clothing each month in some major city in northern Europe. I can't spend any reasonable amount of it, other than sharing some cents with "beggars" who sit infront of every supermarket nowderdays even here in my hometown.

Well...maybe I should fast more...

I'm not sure how social equality and egalitarianism is anything BUT benevolent?

The left would see a starving child and give them food, water, shelter, and opportunities.

What would the right do?

From the examples I've seen, they would drug test them, restrict them to as little as possible to survive, remove their educational opportunities, and make them just ignorant enough to be productive while removing their ability to be cognizant of their situation.

originally posted by: TheTory


I think the notion is the difference between doing something vs doing nothing to help your fellow man, and whereabouts you fall on that spectrum. Having taxes taken from your check is close to doing nothing. Therefor there is not compassion nor benevolence involved.

In the end, it appears that after a lengthy diatribe, all the Op asked for was proof of compassion, instead of promises of it.

Well, from my point of view, being in a place which already has the type of social programs proposed, for a long time, it doesn't seem to be a matter of just having some money taken from your paycheck. Because I have seen that putting more resources into such a social structure creates lots of jobs in it- which means that for a large part of the population, their job is no longer an exercise in pure self interest- it is simultaneously a service for others around as well as your own source of sustenance.

It impacts also the types of attitudes and behavior people have towards each other, as they are more highly aware of their interdependence upon each other- it strengthens social bonds and the strength of the nation.

Of course, if those job sectors are not yet voted in and created, it is impossible for anyone to be doing them.

But in any case, I do not see the place of compassion in any of this.
Compassion is a spiritual theme, for people's internal construction (how they feel inside about other and the world).
I think politics should be based on logic and reason- it is logical and reasonable to make effort at keeping your collective healthy and uneducated. The state of the collective has an impact on the individuals within it and vice-versa.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Bluesma

So, in terms of your family, would you say that all of the "lefties" believe the exact same things?

When it comes to their political choices, from what I can tell, yeah.

Do they all respond (or fail to) with the same level of compassion and empathy? (or lack therof?)

I don't know. I haven't exchanged with them at all on their spiritual life and emotional states.
We have had lengthy discussions on political and social issues, but none of those were about the private emotional feelings on them- only the observations, facts, the logical arguments and reasoning behind their positions.

Do they all say and do exactly those stereotypical things that OP and others have everyone on "the Left" saying and doing, like a bunch of sock puppets?

No! I haven't seen any of the accusing the right of being non-compassionate. I HAVE seen, in moments of heated debate, accusations of them being ignorant on certain things, or having a flawed argument or expectations- but I see that from both sides!

My point is that while we can certainly gesture with broad meaning toward "the right and left" politically, the specific and detailed claims that the OP and others here make regarding a percentage of the American people that ranges from 1/3 to a bit more than half (so between 70 million and 110 million people) make sense?

Or are they basically empty propaganda, jingoism, and mere political platitudes?

I don't know. This kind of short sighted and childish behavior being described, I have only witnessed online- never amongst the people I interact with in real life. That makes me think that here, on this conspiracy site, there might be a lot of personalities that have certain things in common, which can give the impression that the concentration in the US is higher than it actually is...?
Like when I go the MRA site, and end up feeling down for days because I faced with proof of both extreme misandry and misogyny, clashing in the ugliest, most hateful, and absurd ways... I could be left thinking my country men and women have completely lost their minds and every american town is filled with men and women tearing each other up in the streets....

I have to remind myself that community is not a realistic representation of the nation. Same here, I am guessing. People come here because they are largely distrustful of other humans. It can be very saddening if I don't remind myself of that.

Done. I'm going to call up my loved ones over there and balance out.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

What a load of BS. Only a fool couches such a screed by muddling the meaning of the word poor and conversely downplaying the inherent corrosive power of wealth as it contributes to the existence of poverty. I bet you would say the peasants in mid evil England starved because they were lazy and not simply because royalty and nobility hoarded and consumed an excess of food and resources. lmao

The modern American Right Wing is wholly dedicated to augmenting the wealth and power of powerful by implementing policies to achieve just that aim. This why the 2012 presidential candidates who were intentionally augmented by American conservatism used the terms "Makers and Takers" to describe economic diversity in America. OP fails to recognize the soul of America's right is dedicated to promoting the already successful and punishing those who do not make the grade or have the expertise to amass fiat currency. SMDB






The OP is long and winding because it takes a great deal of words to so thoroughly twist and confuse the very basis of reality and human condition. For Christ's sake the OP parses the word POOR in a seeming attempt to pretend that the word does not even represent a real phenomena in the human condition.

The left champions the poor because the conditions of poverty creates human suffering and rarely does suffering spawn things thatconsider positive. In fact, some people actually think that doing positive things, that help reduce human suffering, feels good as a byproduct. Go figure?! I guess Jesus fed people because he just thought they were pathetic infants and he was just rewarding laziness and stroking his own ego!

Here is the soul of American conservatism, intentional sociopathy is the mantra

originally posted by: grahag
I'm not sure how social equality and egalitarianism is anything BUT benevolent?

The left would see a starving child and give them food, water, shelter, and opportunities.

What would the right do?

From the examples I've seen, they would drug test them, restrict them to as little as possible to survive, remove their educational opportunities, and make them just ignorant enough to be productive while removing their ability to be cognizant of their situation.

The right have to spend time on trying to muddy up this common perception because they are in deep denial about the nature of their beliefs.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Sorry but I don't think you're in a position to speak on the benevolence of billions of people being a myth...

Whether right or left.

As a sort of litmus test, ask anyone who advocates for a right to housing, to food, proper wages, proper welfare, and healthcare, if he himself has ever inclined to provide these “rights”.

The lefties I know are very vocal in the idea that their tax money should be spent on the above.
That's why they will vote for Hillary/Sander's/Corbyn, or support(ed) Obama/Miliband etc


We put our money where our mouth is.


Whether you agree if government should be involved in any of those is moot, it's what leftists believe in.
Including myself as centre left.

Well...if you and your friends want to put your money to those causes, tell ya what I'll do. Send me 90% of your income (I'll provide my address in a PM) and I'll open a company to distribute that money. I'll be taking a salary of $250K and hiring a bunch of others to help distribute and track the use of your money. We will need land and a large building, all employees will get free health care (not that Obama care crap) and we will receive a pension until we die equal to our highest pay. We can't be fired nor terminated but we promise to do the best we can with your money and handing it over to "the needy". Of course, we will need to through lavish "training seminars" a few times a year in Hawaii or some other nice place. Forgive any leaked videos of our partying.

So, if you're ready to have us help get your money to the poor...let me know and I'll PM you. I'll even give you a receipt.

You inadvertently describe why private charity does absolutely nothing to combat poverty. Meanwhile foods stamps filled millions of bellies yesterday in a very real way, just saying...

a reply to: Bluesma

This idea springs from the notion that helping others requires self sacrifice.

Helping others requires a surplus. First one needs to take care of one's self. Be a burden on no other to the best of your ability is the priority of the natural social order and natural rights.

Then helping others is a source of pleasure or a relief of discomfort.

Lefties don't contribute their own personal time or wealth to relieve. Lefties command obedience from the lives of others and call it a sacrifice from the Lefties. That is what the OP is about.