We’re Not Losing the Culture Wars Anymore

City Journal ^ | 27 OCT 03 | Brian C. Anderson

[onemoreday]

.....
.....Buggman.....

".....Secondly, which "real issues" exactly are being stifled?...."
~~~~
~~~~
the "real question" is what "real issues" are being debated.

Even as you respond to my saying"

"........"some" liberals ARE full of hate....... .....but that is surely not the defining quality of liberalism..."

by responding:

"...It's turning into it. Since the shifts in the political/news structure outlined in the above article started taking place, the mainline liberals have grown increasingly...."

....you are showing that we can rarely make a statement without using the word "liberal" in some manner....and this only as broad generality in which we "comment" on THEIR "hatred.....", (as you have done)

Very, very rarely is this done with anything called "conservatism" used as a backdrop to the word "liberalism"

IF I ASK THIS IN CAPITAL LETTERS, IT IS BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THE RIGHT THING TO DO TO EXPRESS ....MY.....IDEAS.

Let us not as American citizens reduce ourselves to IRRELEVANCY,......which we do by simply entering into the media induced stupidity being called "political discourse"

[Steel Eye]

First: I didn't use the word hate. It wasn't my post. I just wanted to hear your definition of Reality and "Real Conservative." Mostly, I was curious.

Second: I don't hate liberals. I hate the idea of liberalism. Everything about it. I hate the fact that so many people have been duped into believing in it. I think it is great that, as this great article points out, a lot of young people are realizing what a crock it is and how deluded the proponents of it really are.

Third: I am subservient to no one. (Except for God and, sometimes, my wife.) Nor am I a victim of "A RUSE BY THE.....CENTRAL POWER STRUCTURE....TO DIVIDE THE POPULACE INTO A LIB/CONSERV DICHOTOMY THAT IS REALLY NON-EXISTANT.....IN ORDER TO STIFLE DEBATE ON REAL ISSUES."

It's been fun. Gotta go now.

SE

[TEXOKIE]

bump

[Chuckster]

"I hate hate." Yosemite Sam

[Buggman]

the "real question" is what "real issues" are being debated.

Um, quite a few. Just scroll through the articles on FR alone and you can see the issues that continue to be debated every day. So again I ask you, which "real" issues do you think need to be addressed that nobody is talking about?

....you are showing that we can rarely make a statement without using the word "liberal" in some manner....and this only as broad generality in which we "comment" on THEIR "hatred.....", (as you have done)

Umm, perhaps that was because I was responding to your post denying that hatred is becoming the standard polemic of the left.

Geez, your post is the equivalent of going up to a perfectly sober guy, saying, "So how long have you had a drinking problem?" "What drinking problem?" "Aha! You're in denial, proving my point!"

I will happily take the "media-induced stupidity being called 'political discourse'" to your nonsensical drivel masquerading as a post.

[dsc]

You seem to be implying that a "monopoly of the Right" is somehow different from a "monopoly of the Left"...A MONOPOLY IS A MONOPOLY AND IS ANTI-FREEDOM...There is a "leftist line" and a "rightist" line.
....sleep....sleep.....sleep....sleep......."

I don't think you have it right.

Reality is not a symmetrical continuum, with the American "right" being as objectionable as the American left. In fact, as Bork points out, the true "right wing" in America today is infinitessimal and powerless. When we speak of the "right" today, we're really referring to the common-sense middle.

I see the situation as one in which some people are contaminated to a greater degree with leftism, which is anti-freedom, and some are contaminated with leftism to a lesser degree.

As normal people who are not highly contaminated by leftism are instinctively pro-freedom, the situation is essentially one of "the anti-freedom left" against "the rest of us."

The eradication of the anti-freedom left would therefore create a monopoly of the pro-freedom rest of us, with considerable diversity of opinion in that latter group. And such a monopoly would most definitely not be morally equivalent to a monopoly of the left.

Plus, a monopoly of the pro-freedom rest of us would make us much more able to defend ourselves against outside threats such as the anti-freedom forces of Mohammedism.

[Political Junkie Too]

I'd have thought that the Media Research Center would also have gotten a nod.

-PJ

[dsc]

"........"some" liberals ARE full of hate....... .....but that is surely not the defining quality of liberalism..."

Actually, it is. Liberalism is from and of Satan, and he is its animating force.

[Clemenza]

“The label is really about rejecting the image of conservatives as uptight squares—crusty old men or nerdy kids in blue blazers. We might have long hair, smoke cigarettes, get drunk on weekends, have sex before marriage, watch R-rated movies, cuss like sailors—and also happen to be conservative, or at least libertarian.”

Count me in as a "South Park Republican!"

BTW: Why the hades do we have to wear a suit and tie to CPAC? When will the old timers at ACU get casual for a change!

[Elliott Jackalope]

Great article! Thanks for posting it.

[Qwinn]

HAHAHAHAAHAHAH...

I just went through DU (belly of the beast), looking for something someone had referenced regarding some DU'ers actually not wanting to cheer the death of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

Haven't found that, but -did- find the DU thread about -this- article.

This was my absolute favorite part... would you believe these people think CNN has a conservative bias? Get this logic...

---

They say sarcastically before a news break things like:

Partial Birth Abortion, new law really needed? coming up next...
Medical Marijuana, Is this a state issue?....
War in Iraq, time for the troops to come home?....

They do it every time, it's so scripted it's sick. Ask the question in that type of format like (do the stupid liberals have a point?), then they come back from break with some stupid right wing pundits explaining why everything Chimpy does is wonderful and correct....

---

They call phrasing like -that- ("time for the troops to come home?") subliminal -conservative- propaganda?!?! ROFLLLLLL!!!!!!! Hey, buddy, if you think that stating your own positions in the form of a question behind every broadcas makes liberals sound stupid, maybe it's because, uh, you are.

Qwinn

[whereasandsoforth]

The socialist left is all lies. It is not morally equal to conservatism. Lies are evil and are meant to lead in a direction where the follower is bound to get lost. Leftist are full of hate. They don't take any other point of view with respect. If you are not a leftist, you should be dead in their opinion. They hate, they lie, and they are bathed in darkness and evil.

[dsc]

"Count me in as a "South Park Republican!"

Count me in as a crusty old man.

"BTW: Why the hades do we have to wear a suit and tie to CPAC?"

Because that is an indication that one takes seriously the endeavor in which he is engaged, and, by extension, the others who are also engaged in that effort. It is a form of self-sacrifice that demonstrates respect for one's self, and for everyone else who showed up.

Dressing in a special way has always been an acknowledgement that one is engaged in an important activity. Coming as you are (which started with the Kennedys, by the way) says, "This isn't important enough for me to bother."

[ThinkDifferent]

Count me in as a "South Park Republican!"

Ditto. That's the best term I've seen for what I believe. "Small-l libertarian" is close, but can still carry an association with some of the LP's more wacky positions like extreme isolationism and pacifism.

[dsc]

"The socialist left is all lies. It is not morally equal to conservatism. Lies are evil and are meant to lead in a direction where the follower is bound to get lost. Leftist are full of hate. They don't take any other point of view with respect. If you are not a leftist, you should be dead in their opinion. They hate, they lie, and they are bathed in darkness and evil."

Yes.

Did you mean to address that to the other guy, or were you just agreeing with me?

[lodwick]

Hoping that you're wrong...but not betting on it.

Cheers.

[InterceptPoint]

... I don't know how they can discuss the power of conservativism in this medium without mentioning Free Republic.

Excellent point that I was going to make but you beat me to it.

Someone must have some statistics on how we rank with andrewsullivan, for example. I would be very surprised if Free Republic isn't a bigger Internet force than any of the right wing bloggers. We're not Drudge but we're a big player.

[EternalVigilance]

One of the biggest. Certainly bigger than most of those that the writer mentioned.

And it isn't just hits. It's impact.

[EternalVigilance]

It would be my contention that even if Drudge gets more hits (I don't have a clue what the numbers are), FR is still much more significant in the bigger scheme of things.

Bless Matt's heart, but all he mostly does is redirect people looking for information.

Free Republic is a treasure house of original content, debate, a political training ground, a base of action for activism, plus being one of the most reliable and fastest sources for breaking news. Can't count the times FR has beat Drudge to the punch on breaking stories.

Plus we have alot of fun! :-)

And by the time I see stories in print, it is generally days since it has been discussed thoroughly and some kind of consensus has been reached here.

[whereasandsoforth]

Agreeing!