Jump to content

Are Liberals Evil? (Title is slightly sarcastic.)


Starfall

Recommended Posts

Okay @Maou-sama, here's your last comment. I just copy-pasted it from the other thread.

 

For those randomly finding this thread, it's a continuation of a discussion @Maou-sama and I started in another thread where it really didn't belong. Feel free to weigh in if you like. 

 

"The thing is though, it is not on an individual level that is the problem. It is the people controlling information. These hidden sources, tell Liberals what to think, and how to act, and those people influence your beliefs. That is the real problem. I feel they have shaped the party into sheep and shepherds. They've turned the entire party into an easily controlled mob that does whatever they want on a whim. The thing is, is that the Liberals are among the smartest people around. So how did this happen? Well, they removed critical thinking from the equation. They formed the system of control using emotional reasoning, rather than logic. The mainstream media is a perfect example of this. They portray everything as a moral problem, and avoid all logical parts by presenting a narrative. So when someone is presented with information, they accept it without questioning really questioning it. Smart people, will too. Because being smart, doesn't mean you can critically think. I mean, if its presented by the authority, why question it? That is another problem. Liberals have more faith in the government, than a devout religious man in his god. The bad part is, is that we know the government is highly flawed. You should not have any faith in your government, and expect it to fail more than not. "

 

Would it surprise you to learn that I've heard Leftists say everything you said here, but about Right-Wingers? In actuality, I don't think that the majority of people on either side are like this. Unfortunately, the extremists are the ones who get the most public attention, which makes it difficult for the moderate majority on both sides to realize that not everyone is like the crazy people who use their beliefs to justify violent acts. For what it's worth, I don't think that all Rightists are crazy people, and I always try to think critically about everything I encounter, since I have zero trust in anyone, media and government included. My critical thinking just seems to have led me to different conclusions than yours.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Grumpy Alien

Are Liberals Evil?

Yes. I am the evilest.

Image result for evilest

Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday

Political tensions and have been getting worse and worse with the rise of mass media, and it just so happened that Liberals were positioned poorly when things finally snapped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Starfall

 

Like I said, it is not the individuals that is the problem. It is the people calling the shots in the party. I feel there is very little difference between the Right and the Left in that regard. On an individual level, Leftists tend to be more educated, but misguided, and emotionally charged due to the agenda that the Left forces on the population through Mainstream Media, through Hollywood, and through Public education. In their eyes, there is no end goal. They are never satisfied, unless they have another evil to remove. When they have no evil, they make it up. OR, they begin dismantling and dividing up their own. Trying to sort out the "Bad bits". 

 

A recent example of this, is Laci Green. The moment she left the "Hivemind" as I like to call it, they immediately turned on her. It happens constantly in the LGBT community, with the "Oppression Olympics". Like many claiming Gays should not be a focus of the community, now that they have marriage equality. 

 

I'd post more things, but it's on my other computer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Prufrock, but like, worse

Neoliberals are evil.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

A recent example of this, is Laci Green. The moment she left the "Hivemind" as I like to call it, they immediately turned on her.

Yes, that was a ridiculous over-reaction, but not everyone turned against her. Just as many supported her, as condemned her. Personally, I can't say I cared enough about the situation to learn enough to make an educated decision. 

 

7 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

Like many claiming Gays should not be a focus of the community, now that they have marriage equality. 

Who says that? And which community? Are you talking about the LGBT community? Feminists? I don't think the focus of the entire Left has ever been solely on gay rights. I also can't say I've ever heard anyone on the Left make this suggestion, besides which, it's not really an example of the Left turning on itself. I admit I may not fully understand the situation, as all I know about it is what you've said here, but it would seem to me that this is merely an attempt to prioritize which causes currently need the most social advancement. I'm not suggesting that things are perfect for gays now, far from it. But since we've recently won a major victory for the gay community, it might be time to focus our efforts on something like passing legislation to ensure trans-friendly bathrooms, or for that matter, on making asexuals more visible. Again I admit I don't fully understand things here, but just saying that it's time to focus the majority of our efforts somewhere else, doesn't mean that improving gay rights isn't still important.

 

15 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

On an individual level, Leftists tend to be more educated, but misguided, and emotionally charged due to the agenda that the Left forces on the population through Mainstream Media, through Hollywood, and through Public education. In their eyes, there is no end goal. They are never satisfied, unless they have another evil to remove. When they have no evil, they make it up.

Emotionally charged and misguided.... Hmm, now that's exactly how I would have described people on the right. What immediately comes to mind in this regard being the mass evangelical churches as portrayed in the 2006 documentary, Jesus Camp. This is also what springs to mind when talking about an agenda being forced on the population. As for the media, there's sites like Breitbart, even legitimate news organizations like Fox, that seem to do just what you're describing, but for the Right. Now, I'm sure you don't think that such media really has the entire Right brain-washed, and after talking to you, neither do I. Is it so unreasonable to think that if those on the Right believe as they do for legitimate reasons, and not because of cult-like sheep/shepherds behaviour, that maybe, the same is true of the Left?

 

As for not having an end goal, there is an end goal. A very real one. And I suspect, it's the same as yours.

The Left's end goal is a fair, and balanced society, where everyone can live in peace, prosperity, and freedom. 

 

What specific evils do you think we are making up? It'll be easier to address your concerns if I know what I'm talking about. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Starfall said:

The Left's end goal is a fair, and balanced society, where everyone can live in peace, prosperity, and freedom. 

And  the right finds this objectionable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how to break up quotes, so I'll just put your text in Green.

 

>Yes, that was a ridiculous over-reaction, but not everyone turned against her. Just as many supported her, as condemned her. Personally, I can't say I cared enough about the situation to learn enough to make an educated decision. 

 

Yes, but it shows you the mob mentality I was telling you about. The moment someone steps out of line, is the moment they turn on someone. This isn't an uncommon thing either, it happens constantly on places like tumblr and twitter. 

 

>Who says that? And which community? Are you talking about the LGBT community? Feminists? I don't think the focus of the entire Left has ever been solely on gay rights. I also can't say I've ever heard anyone on the Left make this suggestion, besides which, it's not really an example of the Left turning on itself. I admit I may not fully understand the situation, as all I know about it is what you've said here, but it would seem to me that this is merely an attempt to prioritize which causes currently need the most social advancement. I'm not suggesting that things are perfect for gays now, far from it. But since we've recently won a major victory for the gay community, it might be time to focus our efforts on something like passing legislation to ensure trans-friendly bathrooms, or for that matter, on making asexuals more visible. Again I admit I don't fully understand things here, but just saying that it's time to focus the majority of our efforts somewhere else, doesn't mean that improving gay rights isn't still important.

 

I am referring to the LGBT community, being elitist and so inclusive, it is exclusive. This is also based on my experience from what I seen personally come out of the community. I have seen Asexuality be subject to this too, being excluded from LGBT due to it not being "LGBT" enough, despite the fact they sell themselves as a sexual minority support community. The way they handle things, is incredibly unorganized, and erratic. 

 

>Emotionally charged and misguided.... Hmm, now that's exactly how I would have described people on the right. What immediately comes to mind in this regard being the mass evangelical churches as portrayed in the 2006 documentary, Jesus Camp. This is also what springs to mind when talking about an agenda being forced on the population. As for the media, there's sites like Breitbart, even legitimate news organizations like Fox, that seem to do just what you're describing, but for the Right. Now, I'm sure you don't think that such media really has the entire Right brain-washed, and after talking to you, neither do I. Is it so unreasonable to think that if those on the Right believe as they do for legitimate reasons, and not because of cult-like sheep/shepherds behaviour, that maybe, the same is true of the Left?

 

The funny part is, is that most "Right wingers" are no where near as evangelical as the Left makes them out to be. Most do not even go to church. I think what the Left paints as your common right winger is a very inaccurate, and highly exaggerated portrayal of a minority. I also feel the Right portrays the Left fairly, and with consistency. (Please keep in mind, that I am not a Republican. I am a Centrist/Classic Liberal that really values freedom). As for "Agenda", I believe there is only one true agenda at work. That is who actually controls both Republicans and Democrats to create an illusion of choice. It kinda became obvious, when an outsider got elected (Trump), that someone(s) was pulling the strings for both sides. Since the backlash on a scale we have never seen before occurred, and both sides tried to take down Trump. But if it was Cruz who got elected, I guarantee you, the news shit would have all vanished within a month.

 

If you want to gauge real right wing media, most people listen to the radio surprisingly. Rush Limbaugh and Herman Cain are my number 1 sources for conservative media. It is also incredibly informative. I don't watch TV personally. Also, due to the recent election campaign. People go so fed up with the news being incredibly dishonest and biased about Trump. It caused a surge in Alternative media. For the Right, this included Youtubers, Infowars etc. Not because they wanted to, but because it was the only option left. So you can actually blame the rise alternative media on the Left, and its their own fault that the media is no longer trusted. They abused the trust people had in them, far too often. Then they had the audacity to call alternative media "Fake news" , to make people believe what they said again. 

 

I don't think the media can pull the wool over everyone's eyes, but they sure do try. Both sides do. Being a centrist is suffering, because you gotta be aware of the bullshit on both sides. But I guarantee you, that the amount of bullshit on the left is exponentially higher. 

 

>As for not having an end goal, there is an end goal. A very real one. And I suspect, it's the same as yours.

The Left's end goal is a fair, and balanced society, where everyone can live in peace, prosperity, and freedom. 

 

That isn't a realistic end goal, it is an idealistic pipe dream. The world isn't fair, and it isn't peaceful. If you think you can obtain a world like that, you are incredibly naive to the evils of the world, and human nature. 

 

>What specific evils do you think we are making up? It'll be easier to address your concerns if I know what I'm talking about. 

 

Pretty much anything SJW-ish, modern feminism, and most all "institutionalized" bullshit they talk about. 

 

Tell me if I didn't address anything, I was horribly distracted writing this. 

 

BTW, I highly recommend Herman Cain on the Radio if you got a chance. Just to see what I am talking about. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Terrible Travis
2 hours ago, Maou-sama said:

the agenda that the Left forces on the population through Mainstream Media

If the left controls the mainstream media, why did Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton get far more media coverage than Bernie Sanders?

 

21 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

The funny part is, is that most "Right wingers" are no where near as evangelical as the Left makes them out to be. Most do not even go to church.

61% of Republicans attend church weekly or monthly.
 

23 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

Rush Limbaugh and Herman Cain are my number 1 sources for conservative media.

This explains a lot.

 

23 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

But I guarantee you, that the amount of bullshit on the left is exponentially higher. 

lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday
1 hour ago, m4rble said:

And  the right finds this objectionable. 

The right finds the left's definition of "equality, prosperity, and freedom" to be objectionable.  As well as their solutions and tactics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, AcePsycho86 said:

If the left controls the mainstream media, why did Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton get far more media coverage than Bernie Sanders?

 

61% of Republicans attend church weekly or monthly.
 

This explains a lot.

 

lol

Donald Trump knew that if he was insanely controversial, the media would be on his ass to make him out to be the bad guy, and to "end" his campaign. This resulted in more coverage. Because no media, is bad media. They took the bait every single time. To the point Trump was having fun doing it.  

 

Polls are not an accurate representation of a whole. We have discussed this before. 

 

Explains a lot how? Have you ever listened to Herman Cain? It also isn't my only source of information. If you are trying to make a negative point about them, or to say neither are legitimate news. You are incredibly naive. Both are very moderate, and respectable people. But I don't expect someone like you to understand till you get older. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maou-sama said:

I am a Centrist/Classic Liberal that really values freedom).

"Classic Liberal" is just a code word for republican or libertarian. Politics in the US have been more and more to the right. There may be more SJW-type YouTubers now but the American government is substantially more conservative now than it was in the past decades. 

 

1 hour ago, Maou-sama said:

That isn't a realistic end goal, it is an idealistic pipe dream. The world isn't fair, and it isn't peaceful. If you think you can obtain a world like that, you are incredibly naive to the evils of the world, and human nature. 

I sense an edge lord. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

The moment someone steps out of line, is the moment they turn on someone. This isn't an uncommon thing either, it happens constantly on places like tumblr and twitter. 

Well, no wonder you don't think very highly of Leftists if you base your entire opinion of them on tumblr and twitter. This is hardly a fair assessment of anyone, right, or left.

 

5 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

I have seen Asexuality be subject to this too, being excluded from LGBT due to it not being "LGBT" enough, despite the fact they sell themselves as a sexual minority support community. The way they handle things, is incredibly unorganized, and erratic. 

Personally, I've seen far more LGBT groups and individuals who include asexuality. In fact, I don't think I've ever encountered an LGBT community member who didn't think asexuality should count as LGBT, in real life. My overall experience with the LGBT community has been positive, and inclusive, though I understand that yours has been different.

 

As for it being unorganized and erratic, well yes. There is no all powerful LGBT authority who decides everything. It's just a large number of individuals with diverse opinions and ideas, trying to work together towards a common goal without a clearly defined leader. There's really no way to keep it from being unorganized, hence the differing opinions you've noticed. That doesn't mean that our goal of being treated equitably by society is not a worthy one, though.

 

12 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

So you can actually blame the rise alternative media on the Left, and its their own fault that the media is no longer trusted. They abused the trust people had in them, far too often. Then they had the audacity to call alternative media "Fake news" , to make people believe what they said again. 

 

Ummm.... Trump is the one calling everyone 'Fake news', not the Left. I also don't think anyone (other then the big news companies) objects tot he rise of alternative media. Personally, I prefer to get my news from the Philip Defranco show, as he always does his best to make it clear what parts of each story are fact, and what is merely his opinion. 

 

17 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

That isn't a realistic end goal, it is an idealistic pipe dream. The world isn't fair, and it isn't peaceful. If you think you can obtain a world like that, you are incredibly naive to the evils of the world, and human nature. 

I'm aware that it's a difficult goal to obtain, and I have no illusions about this being achieved within my lifetime, but that isn't the point. At one time in history, it would have seemed impossible for us to have come as far as we have. Space travel, vaccines, the internet, etc, are all things that would have seemed impossible from the perspective of a human living, even a few hundred years ago. The fact is though, we have made progress. We've even progressed socially. Back in the middle ages, you could get your head chopped off for speaking ill of the king. Nowadays, we've made huge strides towards gender equality, race equality, LGBT equality, etc. We still have a long way to go, of course, but that doesn't mean we give up. I choose to believe that a society which treats all of it's members fairly and equally is possible, because why even bother striving to achieve this, if you don't think it's possible? Don't get me wrong, I'm aware humans are selfish a**holes, but they're selfish a**holes who are capable of making progress under the right circumstances.

 

27 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

Pretty much anything SJW-ish,

SJW's are just people looking for things to get offended by, and really can't be said to represent the Left.

 

28 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

modern feminism, and most all "institutionalized" bullshit they talk about. 

Is it possible you've just never had anyone explain it to you in a way that made sense? I know the main thing people disagree with regarding modern feminism is the whole 'all our problems can be traced back to the patriarchy' thing. Usually, people choose to disbelieve that this is going on because they assume that it's just 'those evil, man-hating feminists, trying to blame all their problems on men', and I agree that our message has not always been clearly communicated. A large number of problems can be traced back to our current culture, which happens to be patriarchal in nature. Patriarchies and matriarchies are both systems which promote gender inequality, by giving one gender more power than the other. When one person, or group of people, has more power than another, there is always going to be the chance of that power being abused. Especially in a cultural system as old as ours, where the power imbalance is so deeply ingrained. This is what feminists have been trying to get across. The fact that our society is a patriarchy isn't the problem, it's that the power imbalance caused by one gender being dominant, leads to the other gender being treated unfairly. This problem would likely still exist, and be just as much of an issue, if our culture was a matriarchy. Really, this isn't so different from people objecting to monarchies and dictatorships. One individual having all the power results in everyone else being treated unfairly. It's why we're a democracy in the first place. 

 

I am very much aware that this point is not always clearly communicated by modern feminists, and that the impression most people end up with, is that feminists just hate men. This is especially true if one bases their opinion of feminism on extremists on tumblr.

 

49 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

The funny part is, is that most "Right wingers" are no where near as evangelical as the Left makes them out to be. Most do not even go to church. I think what the Left paints as your common right winger is a very inaccurate, and highly exaggerated portrayal of a minority. I also feel the Right portrays the Left fairly, and with consistency.

And these are things we would know if we ever got past our moral outrage and actually talked to each other. If the Left's portrayal of Rightists is exaggerated, isn't it just possible, that the right's portrayal is just as unrealistic? People on the internet may be the most interaction with Leftists you get, but you shouldn't be surprised when these interactions are far from civilized. The average Tumblr leftist probably isn't very good at getting a point across (something you, yourself should be able to understand, given the tag at the bottom of your posts) and if you never go looking for the reasonable people, you're very unlikely to find them. I'm not expecting you to admit anything here, but think about? Please? Just entertain the notion, for the sake of playing devil's advocate, that maybe the Left isn't as crazy in real life, as they appear on Tumblr.

 

52 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

I don't know how to break up quotes, so I'll just put your text in Green.

Highlight the text you want to quote with your mouse. A little bubble saying 'Quote This' should pop up for you to click on. The quote should then appear wherever your cursor is in your response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Maou-sama

I'm also aware of the irony of trying to convince you that not all Leftists are unreasonable crazy people, while you're arguing with two other irate internet Leftists. I think if you got to know them in real life, you'd probably find them much less hostile, and much more sane - as they would, you. The internet tends to bring out the worst in people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

The right finds the left's definition of "equality, prosperity, and freedom" to be objectionable.  As well as their solutions and tactics.

My God. We actually agree on something. How is this possible?! :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Starfall said:

@Maou-sama

I'm also aware of the irony of trying to convince you that not all Leftists are unreasonable crazy people, while you're arguing with two other irate internet Leftists. I think if you got to know them in real life, you'd probably find them much less hostile, and much more sane - as they would, you. The internet tends to bring out the worst in people.

I feel like there's some exponential trend where the more you argue politics online the more "crazies" you find from other sides (and your own for that matter).  :P Not to say there aren't crazy, hostile offline people but it tends to be less of a mob-attack from any perceived "crazy" sect of a group offline.

 

2 minutes ago, Starfall said:

My God. We actually agree on something. How is this possible?! :blink:

Haha, I did that yesterday with someone. Almost fell over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's weird that I'm seeing myself being lumped with, "the crazies" and talked about in the third person now for making a few offhand remarks that didn't even have much of an argument in them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Cimmerian said:

Haha, I did that yesterday with someone. Almost fell over.

I was sitting down at the time, so I'm okay. (You know, other than dealing with the aftermath of my brain exploding.) :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, m4rble said:

It's weird that I'm seeing myself being lumped with, "the crazies" and talked about in the third person now for making a few offhand remarks that didn't even have much of an argument in them. 

Not my intent. Sorry if my language suggested that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Terrible Travis
5 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

Donald Trump knew that if he was insanely controversial, the media would be on his ass to make him out to be the bad guy, and to "end" his campaign. This resulted in more coverage. Because no media, is bad media. They took the bait every single time. To the point Trump was having fun doing it. 

Fair enough, but this doesn't explain why Hillary got more coverage than him.

 

6 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

Polls are not an accurate representation of a whole. We have discussed this before. 

Random things that Tofu pulls out of his ass are also not accurate representations. Please cite your sources for the claim that most right-wingers don't attend church. 
 

8 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

Explains a lot how? Have you ever listened to Herman Cain? It also isn't my only source of information. If you are trying to make a negative point about them, or to say neither are legitimate news. You are incredibly naive. Both are very moderate, and respectable people.

No, admittedly I have not listened to Herman Cain. I have listened to Rush Limbaugh though, and let me tell you, that guy is not a moderate by any sense of the word. He's a lunatic.

I also find it interesting that someone that watches Paul Joseph Watson would call me naive. You don't have much room to talk, buddy.

 

26 minutes ago, Maou-sama said:

But I don't expect someone like you to understand till you get older. 

My friend, I can guarantee you that in 30+ years time I will still find Rush Limbaugh to be a lunatic. I will bet you a thousand dollars on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Starfall said:

Not my intent. Sorry if my language suggested that.

I agree my first post didn't exactly foster understanding between sides, it was more of a jab at the right. If you have an issue with some of my posts though I wish you would explain it directly instead of seeming to reference it indirectly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, m4rble said:

It's weird that I'm seeing myself being lumped with, "the crazies" and talked about in the third person now for making a few offhand remarks that didn't even have much of an argument in them. 

o.o I think there's a misunderstanding there.

My understanding was that no one was referring to you at all, not even in a generic group. I assure you I certainly wasn't, sorry if you got that impression. I was referring to the tendency for humans to run into all kinds of people with more extreme views, on any side when on the internet (who may be seen as fringe within their own party) just because you run into more people and the internet provides a platform for all people to talk, as well as the internal view people tend to hold of those with diverging views that often ends up with seeing the other side as "crazy" for their viewpoints because they have such opposing stances (which seemed to be what Starfall was referring to from my understanding).

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Terrible Travis
20 minutes ago, Starfall said:

@Maou-sama

I'm also aware of the irony of trying to convince you that not all Leftists are unreasonable crazy people, while you're arguing with two other irate internet Leftists. I think if you got to know them in real life, you'd probably find them much less hostile, and much more sane - as they would, you. The internet tends to bring out the worst in people.

Please direct me towards which of my comments you found to be unreasonable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, m4rble said:

I agree my first post didn't exactly foster understanding between sides, it was more of a jab at the right. If you have an issue with some of my posts though I wish you would explain it directly instead of seeming to reference it indirectly. 

I have no issue with any of your posts. If I did, I would have responded to them specifically. I was merely trying to acknowledge the irony of me trying to convince @Maou-sama that not all Leftists are the way he thinks they are, while he's currently arguing with two other leftists who he's unlikely to agree with. That's all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, AcePsycho86 said:

Please direct me towards which of my comments you found to be unreasonable.

As I've been explaining to @m4rble, this was not meant as a direct attack on any of your comments. If I took issue with anything you said, I would have responded to it directly. All I was trying to do, was to address the irony of me, trying to convince @Maou-sama that his views of Leftists may be exaggerated, while meanwhile, he is busy arguing with two other Leftists who he won't agree with, and who consequently will most likely only confirm his view of Leftists, despite my best efforts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maou-sama said:

>As for not having an end goal, there is an end goal. A very real one. And I suspect, it's the same as yours.

The Left's end goal is a fair, and balanced society, where everyone can live in peace, prosperity, and freedom. 

 

That isn't a realistic end goal, it is an idealistic pipe dream. The world isn't fair, and it isn't peaceful. If you think you can obtain a world like that, you are incredibly naive to the evils of the world, and human nature. 

Just b/c something seems impossible doesn't mean you don't try. I think most liberals (including myself) would agree that the utopia we'd like to achieve will never happen. Humans are too selfish and cruel to ever really accomplish that. But that doesn't mean we don't strive for it. For one thing, you never know what kind of impossible things you may end up achieving after all - for instance, I never in a million years thought we'd have legalized marriage equality In my lifetime. For another, while you may not be able to make things fair and equal for everyone, you will succeed for some people - just like the overused fable about the man on the beach with the starfish. But the other side to it is not about the changes you can effect, but about the kind of person you want to be. I couldn't live with myself if I didn't fight for what I believe to be right, regardless of whether or not I thought I would succeed. I couldn't live with myself if I just sat back and accepted other people's suffering as status quo. So yes, Leftists fight for an unattainable goal, but it has nothing to do with being naive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Starfall said:

I have no issue with any of your posts. If I did, I would have responded to them specifically. I was merely trying to acknowledge the irony of me trying to convince @Maou-sama that not all Leftists are the way he thinks they are, while he's currently arguing with two other leftists who he's unlikely to agree with. That's all.

I suppose that makes sense but the fact that he may disagree with me doesn't really support the argument that the left is more prone to terrorism. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
SorryNotSorry

Yes. 

 

Welfare queens, hippies, bomb-throwing radicals, atheists, socialists, people with undesirable genes, Martians, and anyone else who isn't a bigoted, older white guy.

 

Liberals are hell-bent on destroying civilization, turning us all into a bunch of lawless, devil-may-care potheads for whom our beloved fascism will only be a distant memory. They have no respect for the memory of His Assholiness Saint Ronald Reagan.

 

Self-employed people can't be trusted because they might be comsymps. If the country ever goes liberal, we'll see carloads of drunks racing through the streets... cops sitting in the gutter and crying their eyes out... people walking around naked and saying 4-letter words on TV... and at some point, we'll all hear a thunderous OUCH from the sky.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

No, no they aren't, because guess why? Any and all ideologies are just groups of individual people who broadly agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Cthulhu said:

Neoliberals are evil.

Dammit, I was going to post this!

 

Neoliberalism just killed at least three times as many people in London as the London Bridge terrorists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...