How Modern Liberals Think

If you have the time (47 min.) I highly recommend watching this speech that Evan Sayet gave at the Heritage Foundation. I he does an excellent job of explaining what exactly it means to be a modern liberal.

The modern liberal looks back on 50,000 - 100,00 years of human civilization and knows only one thing for sure. That none of the ideas that man-kind has come up with. None of the religion, philosophy, ideology, or forms of government. None have succeeded in creating a world void of poverty, crime, war, and injustice.

Since all these ideas of man have proved to be wrong, the real cause of poverty, crime, war, and injustice must be found, can only be found, in the attempt to be right. If no one ever thought they were right, what would we disagree about? If we didn't disagree, surely we wouldn't fight. If we didn't fight, we wouldn't go to war. Without war there would be no poverty, without poverty, no crime, and without crime there would be no injustice.

It's a Utopian vision. All that's required to usher in this Utopia, is the rejection of all fact, reason evidence, logic, truth, morality, and decency.

Of course he goes in to great detail with many examples, but the above quote is one of the highlights I liked. Other examples are where he references John Lenin's song Imagine. As he points out the song doesn't say "Imagine there are great counties". It's "Imagine there are no countries". Why? Because that's something that can be used to seperate.

Again, watch for yourself and see what you think.


[edit on 28-3-2007 by dbates]

Well, I watched for about 3 minutes and just couldn't stomach any more. I'm very much opposed to such black and white thinking on any topic. This guy is doing nothing more than bashing liberals. He's also dead wrong; liberals don't hate America. We see the hypocrisy and we understand that our govt is not telling us the whole truth about anything. Because we engage in critical thinking, we see the holes in what politicians are telling us. And we try to right those wrongs. We love our country, we just don't love our government - HUGE difference.
I don't like any kind of hate mongerer, no matter which side of the fence they're on. They're way too black/white about issues, when most things are in shades of gray, life just isn't that simple.

How much better if they had invited a liberal who walks his/her talk and really believes in liberal values. Then the Heritage Foundation might have actually learned some truth about us and promoted understanding and tolerance, instead of just having hatred stirred up. What good purpose does that serve?

He does overstate some issues to make his points, but I don't think he's that far off. It's not that liberals hate America, it's that liberals can't stand to see one nation that might actually be better than the others. To be better would imply that the U.S. is (in at least some areas) doing things right that other nations do wrong.

We can't have these differences because it would offend someone. That might lead to hate, war, poverty, crime, injustice. It's better if we just try to level everything for everyone. Welfare, school busing, health care. All these examples prove his point. Liberals can't stand for there to be differences in society.

Originally posted by dbates
He does overstate some issues to make his points, but I don't think he's that far off. It's not that liberals hate America, it's that liberals can't stand to see one nation that might actually be better than the others. To be better would imply that the U.S. is (in at least some areas) doing things right that other nations do wrong.

We can't have these differences because it would offend someone. That might lead to hate, war, poverty, crime, injustice. It's better if we just try to level everything for everyone. Welfare, school busing, health care. All these examples prove his point. Liberals can't stand for there to be differences in society.

Where the hell did you get this idea???? Liberals are known for wanting differences in society, i.e. diversity, ya know, like homosexuals, different races, etc. What you're talking about above i.e. welfare, school busing, health care, etc. are called "creating equal opportunities". It comes from a position of compassion for those less fortunate who don't have the opportunities that middle-class white Americans have.
But then, it sounds to me taht you are more interested in demonizing liberals than in actually learning what we think. BTW, liberals don't all have just one mindset/opinion, as individuals we have many different opinions, just like conservatives. You can't just put all people of a certain group into one pigeonhole, it's not realistic and only shows that you are out to prove that liberals are wrong and wrong-headed. How come the right so often likes to tell us liberals what we think? It's not only arrogant, it's incorrect.

Originally posted by dbates
He does overstate some issues to make his points, but I don't think he's that far off. It's not that liberals hate America, it's that liberals can't stand to see one nation that might actually be better than the others. To be better would imply that the U.S. is (in at least some areas) doing things right that other nations do wrong.

We can't have these differences because it would offend someone. That might lead to hate, war, poverty, crime, injustice. It's better if we just try to level everything for everyone. Welfare, school busing, health care. All these examples prove his point. Liberals can't stand for there to be differences in society.

Where the hell did you get this idea???? Liberals are known for wanting differences in society, i.e. diversity, ya know, like homosexuals, different races, etc. What you're talking about above i.e. welfare, school busing, health care, etc. are called "creating equal opportunities". It comes from a position of compassion for those less fortunate who don't have the opportunities that middle-class white Americans have.
But then, it sounds to me taht you are more interested in demonizing liberals than in actually learning what we think. BTW, liberals don't all have just one mindset/opinion, as individuals we have many different opinions, just like conservatives. You can't just put all people of a certain group into one pigeonhole, it's not realistic and only shows that you are out to prove that liberals are wrong and wrong-headed. How come the right so often likes to tell us liberals what we think? It's not only arrogant, it's incorrect.

Originally posted by forestlady
Liberals are known for wanting differences in society, i.e. diversity, ya know, like homosexuals

You could apply the same logic here. Liberals support push homosexuality because some people like this type of lifestype and we can't admit that maybe heterosexuals are correct. I know they say it's all about supporting the little man, but I almost suspect that if most of the world were homosexual they would start heterosexual rallies. Got to keep the diversity thing going.

Originally posted by dbates
He does overstate some issues to make his points, but I don't think he's that far off. It's not that liberals hate America, it's that liberals can't stand to see one nation that might actually be better than the others. To be better would imply that the U.S. is (in at least some areas) doing things right that other nations do wrong.

We can't have these differences because it would offend someone. That might lead to hate, war, poverty, crime, injustice. It's better if we just try to level everything for everyone. Welfare, school busing, health care. All these examples prove his point. Liberals can't stand for there to be differences in society.

Boy are you ever mixed up. First you have to start with the presupposition that Liberals "hate America". From that point you try to devise an alternative theory as to why they SEEM to "hate America". But there is no doubt in your mind that we, in fact, hate America, or regularly act as though we do. In this curious fog of delusion, you create a set of mythological beliefs designed to apply to an entire set of people you do not understand and choose to never understand, preferring instead to wallow in your own self-created beliefs of what "liberal" means, backed up by such wonderful people as the fellow you have started this post with, who undoubtedly, understands liberal mindsets about as well as you, though his own preconceived notions and thin-air "facts"

The core of liberalism is equality, the idea that all people deserve a fair shake in life. By contrast, success in the United States is primarily dependent on who your parents were and where you happened to live as a child. A baby born in a clinic in Compton and a baby born in a hospital to a member of the Kennedy clan are, at that point, inherently equal - they're both just babies. Which kid is going to end up owning a few mansions and yachts, have a finger in the politics of his nation, and will more than likely live to see eighty? Which of the two likely won't?

Providing the options for all people to have an even chance at a successful life even with the institutionalized disadvantages of social class, location and race can hardly be seen as a negative idea. The more people who are educated, have livable wages, and don't live in terror of the world crashing down around their shoulders if they end up on the wrong side of a drunk driver, the stronger the society they belong to is, as a whole.

This applies outside our borders as well. As an American and, I presume conservative... do you feel disgust for the exploitive practices your nation engages in in Latin America and Asia? The benign neglect evidenced towards genocide in Africa while at the same time thrusting its military into a minefield because of the scent of oil? As a lover of your country and a defender of democracy, do you feel the least twinge at said nation's support of dictators, repeated violations of international laws and treaties it has agreed to, and cllous disregard for human life in the name of money?

If you don't, how can you claim that someone else "hates America"?

Originally posted by dbates

Originally posted by forestlady
Liberals are known for wanting differences in society, i.e. diversity, ya know, like homosexuals

You could apply the same logic here. Liberals support push homosexuality because some people like this type of lifestype and we can't admit that maybe heterosexuals are correct. I know they say it's all about supporting the little man, but I almost suspect that if most of the world were homosexual they would start heterosexual rallies. Got to keep the diversity thing going.

See this is where you fall flat on your face my friend. 'We can't admit that heterosexuals maybe correct.' Correct about what exactly? Is one right and the other WRONG. Now I'm a gay man and liberal in many ways but not all, and I'll freely admit I find a lot of the burgeoning and agressive brand of neo liberalism very hard to stomach but in short I'm suspecting you're just one side of the coin arguing against the other side, ie both wanting to apply their world view on the rest of us with very broad brush strokes. Show me a political movement that takes the best of both conservative and liberal ideologies and tries to use them with compassion and common sense and they'd have my vote on the spot. What we have here from both sides is falling far short.

Ubermunche, I wasn't trying to force my ideas on anyone. I was trying to point out the errors regarding his ideas about liberals.

Forest Lady, no offence was intended and the post was not directed at any one liberal. Merely a broad overview of what I (who classes himself as a liberal too) see's as a problem of todays political extremes. I fully realise that both Liberals and Conservatives inhabit a very broad spectrum of views.

[edit on 26-8-2007 by ubermunche]

Originally posted by dbates
You could apply the same logic here. Liberals support push homosexuality because some people like this type of lifestype and we can't admit that maybe heterosexuals are correct. I know they say it's all about supporting the little man, but I almost suspect that if most of the world were homosexual they would start heterosexual rallies. Got to keep the diversity thing going.

Liberals push homosexuality? dbates, when was the last time you had a Liberal come knocking on your door trying to persuade you to become gay?

I think it's more like heterosexuals pushing their agenda on homosexuals, by not wanting them to have any human/civil rights.

Ubermunche: Thanks for the clarification. Didn't mean to be so sensitive.

How come liberals always whine about being "compassionate" when it involves other peoples money? Why aren't the happy to simply be compassionate with their own money?

How come liberals always whine about "censorship" when that is precisely what they practice?

reply to post by slackerwire



Slackerwire, can you explain more about why you think this? Give some examples, etc.?

Originally posted by forestlady



Slackerwire, can you explain more about why you think this? Give some examples, etc.?

Sure thing. Which set of examples would you like to see? Being compassionate with other peoples money or acts of censorship by leftists?

[edit on 26-8-2007 by slackerwire]

reply to post by slackerwire


Both. I'd like to see some credible evidence to back up your statements.

Originally posted by forestlady
reply to

Both. I'd like to see some credible evidence to back up your statements.

How about theft of newspapers that prints articles/opinions that the left doesnt like?

Thousands of copies of Berkeley's campus newspaper, The Daily Californian, were stolen from the school's newspaper racks on October 24th. In their place, a flyer was distributed expressing outrage over an ad the paper ran entitled, "End States Who Sponsor Terrorism."

The paper was replaced with a one-page flier entitled, "Stop Racist Speech, Boycott The Daily Californian.

Read more

On November 22 stacks of Liberty’s Flame, a conservative publication at the University of California-Davis, were removed from distribution stations on campus. The environmentally conscious thieves bypassed a trash-can and the option of burning the papers, and instead placed copies of the publication in a nearby recycling bin.

Writers for the publication have been subjected to harassing emails labeling them “bigots” and “segregationists” for disagreeing with the conventional wisdom on campus. Articles outlining the anti-American aims of the Mexican group MEChA-members of which stole large quantities of newspapers at the University of California-Berkeley earlier this year-are one example among many of how the paper infuriates campus leftists.

More censorship from leftist groups such as Mecha:

"MEChA came up to the Courier with, like, four trash bags full of newspapers with a note attached and said we weren't covering them properly, so this is what we get," news chief Dean Lee told the Pasadena Star.
Source

I haven't even begun to get into the alleged "Fairness Doctrine" yet, but I can if need be.

As for compassion, why do you think leftists try and include that emotional word when they propose new ways to waste more of our money?

"We have to be compassionate when dealing the the border problem".

Hell no we don't. It's our border, we can secure it however the hell we want to.

They suggest we compassionately embrace socialized healthcare because it's "for the children".

By no means is the compassionate dog crap sandwich solely a liberal problem, but it is prevalent in their attempts to steal even more of our money.

reply to post by slackerwire


Interesting. So, MEChA's actions on college campus cover "Liberals" as an all-encompassing body?

As for "other people's money"... Heh. I love the "taxes are theft" meme. Do you live in a nation? Enjoy police and fire protection? Do you like having roads to sustain the economy? And cone to think of it, do you enjoy the fact that you have money that's worth a constant amount? Taxes are a user's fee for a civilized society.

Honestly this goes a long way to explaining conservative opposition to taxation.

Originally posted by The Walking Fox

Interesting. So, MEChA's actions on college campus cover "Liberals" as an all-encompassing body?

Interesting how you only chose that example in an attempt to excuse the behavior of leftist groups.

As for "other people's money" Enjoy police and fire protection?

I pay for those 2 services and coincidentally I have never used them. Exactly what protection are they providing? The Supreme Court has found that police are not obligated to protect anyone unless they are in custody. As for the average citizen, no obligation exists.

Do you like having roads to sustain the economy?

I pay for those roads through taxes on fuel.

And cone to think of it, do you enjoy the fact that you have money that's worth a constant amount?

Worth a constant amount? Um, have you paid attention to the value of the dollar over the past few years?

Taxes are a user's fee for a civilized society.

Really? When taxes are used to fund healthcare for illegal aliens or any other unconstitutional programs funded by tax money, how does that benefit a :civilized society"?

Honestly this goes a long way to explaining conservative opposition to taxation.

What are you referring to? Opposition to the socialist ideals that leftists would like to see in place?

Originally posted by slackerwire

Interesting how you only chose that example in an attempt to excuse the behavior of leftist groups.

Given that there is nobody taking responsibility for the first instance, and MEChA is the cause of the other two, and all three occured on a college campus, I'm curious as to exactly what your issue is with my response to your choice of examples.

I pay for those 2 services and coincidentally I have never used them. Exactly what protection are they providing? The Supreme Court has found that police are not obligated to protect anyone unless they are in custody. As for the average citizen, no obligation exists.

So you prefer a pay-as-you-go system for police, the fire department, etc?

I pay for those roads through taxes on fuel.

Now you're getting it.

Worth a constant amount? Um, have you paid attention to the value of the dollar over the past few years?

I said constant, not necessarily stable. That is, merchants can't arbitrarily change how much your money is worth. The clerk at Wal-Mart isn't going to tell you your dollar is only worth fifty cents while accepting full value from hte next person in line.

Really? When taxes are used to fund healthcare for illegal aliens or any other unconstitutional programs funded by tax money, how does that benefit a :civilized society"?

You are aware that illegal immigrants pay taxes and social security just as you do, right? Their SSN# might be fake, but it's still siphoned out of their paychecks. Those few that are paid cash under the table are usually making little enough that they would actually end up receiving money under our tax system.

What are you referring to? Opposition to the socialist ideals that leftists would like to see in place?

No, I'm referring to the conservative disgust for a civilized society. They would prefer to make a profit off of selling weapons to rival gangs in a deteriorating society than ever try to keep that society from deteriorating.