Skip to main content

Some video

Some would call me a leftist, I imagine, so I feel somewhat obligated to respond to this.

Here's his argument. Something like this? Correct me if I'm being dishonest.

1) Liberals look at history and the ideologies of man, the forms of government, religion, and so forth have not stopped war, poverty, crime, injustice, etc.

2) Liberals think that since all these ideas of man have proved to be wrong, the source of all war, etc., must be found in the attempt to be right, because if nobody tried to be right we wouldn't disagree we wouldn't fight, we wouldn't go to war, which means no crime, etc.

3) Therefore, liberals conclude, we must reject all fact, reason, truth, logic, morality, and decency, just like in the song "Imagine."

4) To achieve this devious goal, liberals thus elevate everything that is wrong and tear down everything that is right.

Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11.

NYT breaking the Abu Ghraib scandal.

Newsweek's Koran story.

The Piss Christ.

The Academy Awards.

By the way, this is only a huge conspiracy orchestrated by the elite liberals and not all the rank and file believe this. Thus the elite propagandize the rank and file with school, TV, movies, etc. that rational thought is an act of bigotry. Therefore, the only way to eliminate bigotry is to eliminate rational thought.

Liberals think that the only way to eliminate discrimination is to become utterly indiscriminate, which is why we don't have racial profiling at the airport. Discrimination is the heart of rationality, so liberals reject rationality as a hate crime.

On and on. Liberals hold opinions dogmatically, and believe in obviously ridiculous things. UN, etc. Liberals hate anyone who discriminates in any way.

Liberals are postmodern, basically. They don't believe in objective reality and rationality. They assume that successful things must have cheated and failures must have been discriminated against. Therefore they elevate evil and denigrate good.

Example: the media doesn't use the word terrorist to describe Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, etc. as terrorist.

My reaction? This guy sets up a whole parade of liberal strawmen, or extreme examples like Ward Churchill, who hold all sorts of outrageous views and uses them to build a whole ideological edifice on top of it. Pull out a few of the strawmen, and the whole thing comes crashing down, so here goes.

He makes a brutal, cynical, and terribly dishonest caricature of "Liberalism" in the outset. He makes a bunch of idiotic and misleading either-or comparisons. The notion that liberals believe that America deserved 9/11 is tremendously offensive. We are not all Ward Churchill just like conservatives are all not David Duke. There's a difference between talking about what we could do in the Middle East to reduce the chance of terrorists attacking us and blaming the United States for 9/11. There's a difference between opposing the Iraq War and supporting Saddam Hussein. During the Cold War when the Hungarian rebellion was brutally crushed, liberals sympathized with the states under the cruel yoke of the Soviets, but they realized that war with the USSR would be even worse for the Eastern Europeans. There's a difference between sympathizing with the plight of the Palestinians and seeking the destruction the state of Israel. There's a difference between supporting sex education and promoting promiscuity. And so on. The end.


Popular posts from this blog

Why Did Reality Winner Leak to the Intercept?

So Reality Winner, former NSA contractor, is in federal prison for leaking classified information — for five years and three months, the longest sentence of any whistleblower in history. She gave documents on how Russia had attempted to hack vendors of election machinery and software to The Intercept , which completely bungled basic security procedures (according to a recent New York Times piece from Ben Smith, the main fault lay with Matthew Cole and Richard Esposito ), leading to her capture within hours. Winner recently contracted COVID-19 in prison, and is reportedly suffering some lingering aftereffects. Glenn Greenwald has been furiously denying that he had anything at all to do with the Winner clusterfuck, and I recently got in an argument with him about it on Twitter. I read a New York story about Winner, which clearly implies that she was listening to the Intercepted podcast of March 22, 2017 , where Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill expressed skepticism about Russia actually b

Varanus albigularis albigularis

That is the Latin name for the white-throated monitor lizard , a large reptile native to southern Africa that can grow up to two meters long (see pictures of one at the Oakland Zoo here ). In Setswana, it's called a "gopane." I saw one of these in my village yesterday on the way back from my run. Some kids from school found it in the riverbed and tortured it to death, stabbing out its eyes, cutting off its tail, and gutting it which finally killed it. It seemed to be a female as there were a bunch of round white things I can only imagine were eggs amongst the guts. I only arrived after it was already dead, but they described what had happened with much hilarity and re-enactment. When I asked why they killed it, they said it was because it would eat their chickens and eggs, which is probably true, and because it sucks blood from people, which is completely ridiculous. It might bite a person, but not unless threatened. It seems roughly the same as killing wolves tha

The Conversational Downsides of Twitter's Structure

Over the past couple years, as I've had a steady writing job and ascended from "utter nobody" to "D-list pundit," I find it harder and harder to have discussions online. Twitter is the only social network I like and where I talk to people the most, but as your number of followers increases, the user experience becomes steadily more hostile to conversation. Here's my theory as to why this happens. First is Twitter's powerful tendency to create cliques and groupthink. Back in forum and blog comment section days, people would more often hang out in places where a certain interest or baseline understanding could be assumed. (Now, there were often epic fights, cliques, and gratuitous cruelty on forums too, particularly the joke or insult variety, but in my experience it was also much easier to just have a reasonable conversation.) On Twitter, people rather naturally form those same communities of like interest, but are trapped in the same space with differe