[CatoRenasci]

This is a good article. What troubles me, however, is now many of us on the right, especially we Freepers, do not really read the Left's intellectuals. Oh, sure, we're exposed to the daily bias of the press and liberal pontificating, but few, I suspect, actually read the liberal and leftist intellectuals. This is as much a mistake as the left's not reading conservative thinkers: we risk attacking only a caricature of the left, which transmogrifies into a straw man.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

This is a good article. What troubles me, however, is now many of us on the right, especially we Freepers, do not really read the Left's intellectuals. Oh, sure, we're exposed to the daily bias of the press and liberal pontificating, but few, I suspect, actually read the liberal and leftist intellectuals. This is as much a mistake as the left's not reading conservative thinkers

You have far more confidence in Left intellectuals - and far less confidence in Right intellectuals - than I do. If the Left had a strong intellectual argument, Thomas Sowell and others would chew on it immediately.

But in fact my analysis of leftism is that it is primarily a phenomenon of exploitation - the sincere leftists are "misinformed" and/or self-deluded by the strength of their wishes. You need only assume that the people who trouble themselves to become journalists have more desire for power and less scruple about abusing power than the general population to understand the negative, superficial, arrogant, cowardly nature of journalism.

And to understand that is to know that journalists are bullies, and naturally push people and institutions to the left. And thus to understand that only the principled and courageous withstand that pressure - and are labeled "right wing" for their trouble.

Anticonservative arguments are arrogant, cynical arguments. Nothing more.