Posted on 12/21/2005 1:56:42 AM PST by mal
When you rule your life by emotion the facts get lost.
Mal, you started something really great! Up until now, few haved questioned where liberals have come from, and if the first posts here are any indication, then when these excellent responses are all in, some nerves will surely have been touched.
ITS A CULT!
Excellent post. However, I expect more: Specifically, how do we use this to our bes advantage?
I'm not a psychologist, and neither are many (if not most) of the contributors to FreeRepublic. So how does a psychologist deal with a psychosis?
Now we can use the term "Liberalism Syndrome" or LS.
Witness the standard Liberal form of "discourse". This includes the "first amendment" to use coarse and vulgar language, to verbally batter a perceived opponent "by any means necessary" in order to win a "perceived self-interest" argument (check out DU forum threads).
Liberals subscribe to the "ME TOO" argument as a "unifying" theme. I've seen it happen in every single instance -- perhaps best illustrated in the movie "Annie Hall" -- wherein the Woody Allen character brings up "politics" ("the grassy knoll") in order to avoid saying directly to the Carol Kane character -- that he isn't in love with her anymore.
Thomas Lifson has covered this in an article entitled "The Liberal Bubble" at American Thinker
I have found most instances of domestic battery, personal assaults to occur in the blue zones. Why? Did someone forget, in midst of altercation, to remark that Bush was "Evil"? Would that have staved off the conflict?
Liberals use the "single-lobe" approach to problems through a unifying theme of creating the "evil strawman".
Imagine, should the strawman disappear -- all those great nasty forms of discourse in Liberal-land -- would be directed at each other -- at other liberals.
Ergo, liberalese, to the liberal mind, is about "group cohesion". In order for Liberals to have this "group cohesion", there has got to be a unifier. That unifier is "evil Republicans".
President Bush has made tremendous strides and dings into that appellation, working with both Dems and Repubs.
This has continued to frustrate Dem leadership. Ergo, their plan to pick off Republicans (DeLay, Rumsfeld, Cheney) in hopeful attempts to Moderate the Bush Plan while perpetuating the "unity" syllogism within the Dem rank and file.
The "clique" mentality. Meanwhile they also assert they love diversity and respect and honor persons of all individuality. But of course, they mean, anything but that. Unless it involves "physical differences" like skin color, disability, ethnic birth differences, economic class -- But even that is not true, ultimately if you are male of any of the "classifications of acceptance" into the clique of Liberal "oneness".
I'm not buying this explanation, but I believe that liberalism is driven more by psychology than by reason. Liberals tend to have lax morals. They bitterly resent anyone calling them sinners. They attempt to make up for their lack of personal virtue by identifying with "virtuous" causes.
I only read through the first third. My mistake then.
The only thing this article left out is the observation that this particular pschycosis makes them particularly susceptable to the various tenents of Marxism.
bttt
In other words, freepers and other conservatives, Free Republic and other conservative forums are unforgiveably beneath the strata of rarified air found in the liberal eastern elite salons, high exclusive political and diplomatic circles, the world of leftists-only acadamia and the incestuous networkings of the various MSM outlets.
A liberal's worst nightmare is picturing the pitchforks and torches of neanderthal American peasants swarming across the moats and disrupting the smug, egotistical and holier-than-thou occupants of the baronial manors or ivy-covered ivory towers in this country's centers of power.
______________________________
Truly excellent.
The pitchfork brigade of the French Revolution was aimed squarely at the fops in the Big House. Liberals are indeed the disdainful royalty of Marie Antoinette. "Let them eat cake if they are hungry. Now, where did you say this caviar is from?"
This is the best analysis of the Liberal Gestalt I have ever seen. It made my hair stand on end as I recognized many individuals in the analysis and it explains why arguing with them can be so frustrating.
It also occurs to me that our saying "Now the grown ups are in control" may be more truth than we knew. I have definitely noticed what can ony be described as arrested development in many of my Liberal acquaintenances and I now see that analysis as being confirmed.
Oddly enough I can offer no arguments to refute this writer. I can offer no individuals or anecdotes to refute any point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.