Posted on 10/12/2008 10:59:09 AM PDT by redhead
Liberals love to think of themselves as intellectual and nuanced, but liberalism is incredibly simplistic. It's nothing more than "childlike emotionalism applied to adult issues." Very seldom does any issue that doesn't involve pandering to their supporters boil down at its core level to more than feeling "nice" or "mean" to liberals. This makes liberals ill equipped to deal with complex issues.
Since liberals tend to support or oppose policies based on how those policies make them feel about themselves, they do very little intellectual examination of whether the policies they advocate work or not. That's because it doesn't matter to them whether the policy is effective or not; it matters whether advocating the policy makes them feel "good" or "bad," "compassionate" or "stingy," "nice" or "mean."
Because of this, liberalism has more in common with religion than it does with other political ideologies like conservatism or libertarianism. Moreover, liberal beliefs are more like religious doctrine than any sort of battle-tested policies that bear up under logic or examination. Although the interpretation of the doctrine that the Left supports may change a bit over time, just as religious doctrine does, it's essentially taken on faith, like scripture.
That's why, for example, you may see ferocious debates on the right side of the blogosphere about the war, illegal immigration, or spending. But, with the netroots, the debates almost always revolve around the best strategy to get more liberals elected. The issues are not really up for debate, other than debate over how to get them enacted.
This same thinking leads to very little criticism of liberals by other liberals. Liberals will ferociously defend and even happily echo the lies of other liberals. Liberal feminists will defend Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy. Liberals who pride themselves on being tolerant of other races will support Robert Byrd. Why? Because even if they're wrong, they're still fellow liberals -- which must mean they’re nice people. What this leads to is an attitude that can be summed up like so: "The only things that a liberal can do wrong is to be insufficiently liberal, to question an important plank of the liberal agenda, or to do something politically that aids conservatives."
Conservatives, on the other hand, just by virtue of being conservatives, are mean at best and evil at worst. Is it wrong to lie about an evil person?
Technically, "yes," but there's a reason "two wrongs don't make a right" is said so often -- it's because so many people do believe "two wrongs do make a right." Moreover, what about defending the indefensible? Well, is it wrong to defend a good (liberal) person who is being attacked by an evil (conservative) person, even if it's justifiable? At the gut level, most liberals don't think so.
Once you understand what I've written so far, you can understand everything that liberals do.
* Why are so many liberals hostile to religion? Because religion sets rules and tells people that if they break those rules, they're sinning! That keeps people from doing things that make them feel good and telling people that they're sinning makes them feel bad.
* Why are so many liberals hostile to the troops? Because the troops tend to be conservative (evil) and because they're out killing people and breaking things (which would make most liberals feel like bad people).
* Why are so many liberals unpatriotic? It makes liberals feel morally superior to rant about what's wrong with their own country. Plus, as an added bonus, people from other nations agree with them and that makes them feel good as well.
* Why do so many liberals have so much confidence in the government? With liberals, it's not about whether something works or not, it's about how it makes them feel.
So, they can look at the IRS, post office, airport security, FEMA, and ICE and then say, "These are the same people we want handling our health care" -- because it's about making themselves feel good that they got people insured, not about getting the best system of health care for everyone.
* Why do so many liberals have so much confidence in the UN? See the previous answer and apply it on a global scale. The UN may be corrupt, anti-American, and utterly incompetent, but it makes liberals feel good to think that they're sending money to the poor in some godforsaken country (sure, it's not their money and almost all the money may be wasted or stolen, but it's the thought that counts).
* Why are liberals so hostile to successful people who don't happen to be celebrities, trial lawyers, or big donors to the Democratic Party? Again, this is another great opportunity for them to feel morally superior. They can feel like good people because they want to give money to the poor -- granted, not their money, but rich people's money. The rich have so much and the poor have so little, so why shouldn't liberals take it from them and then pat themselves on the back for their compassion?
Once you understand the basics of how liberals think, you can understand everything that they do. Granted, there will be a few exceptions, but if the vast herd of liberals is doing something that doesn't seem to fit the template, it's either because there's money or sex involved, they're doing what they have to do to win politically, they’re taking that position because they refuse to be on the same side as conservatives, or there's something going on you don't know about and it's not really an exception.
You've heard of the Dog Whisperer, right? Well, congrats, because after reading this column, you are now a "liberal whisperer" and you understand everything you need to know about the way that liberals think.
“Why are so many liberals hostile to religion? Because religion sets rules and tells people that if they break those rules, they’re sinning! That keeps people from doing things that make them feel good and telling people that they’re sinning makes them feel bad.”
liberals want to set their own rules and control everyone. They don’t believe in free will because that is a spiritual concept.
It's nothing more than "childlike emotionalism applied to adult issues.
I can explain liberal thinking in three words: A is non-A.
Most libs I know vote more as a fashion statement than anything.
darn good post! thanks
some liberals are stupid
some are evil
and most are both.
Liberals also have a very strange perception of cause and effect. They don't understand how things like markets work, and can't believe that anybody else does either. The failure of liberals' predictions and the accuracy of conservatives' is purely a result of dumb luck.
Now, reversing the trend of liberal dominance of this nation?
Yeah, we are still floundering there badly and need more columns about that.
Trending to liberalism is a default state for most people, make sense, right? childish emotional impulses will always be the first instincts. They have to be presented conservative thinking, willing to listen, and in a positive way.
And I suspect that conservatives will always be fighting to present conservatism properly.
Trending towards liberalism is never going to change. Just human nature. Just the way it is.
But appealing to common sense and logic are on our side. Almost always it is the liberal that converts to conservatism as they get older, wiser, more exeperienced. Rarely ever is it the other way around. There is still many unexplored ways to reach people I am sure.
I’d also refer you to Evan Sayat’s lecture “Regurgitating the Apple:How Modern Liberals think”
You can find it over at Heritage
Utopian thought with a twist of mindless confusion.
“Socialism is the opium of the intellectuals.”
- Raymond Aron
I think the author wanted to express in very clear and un-nuanced terms the childishness of the liberal feeling-process. We have all had to deal with youngsters. Some of those circular arguments go on for days, and do nothing but frustrate us and alienate the child. Sometimes, I’m convinced there is nothing we can do to make anybody change their point of view. As Rush has said, we are going to have to drag Yosemite Sam across the finish line. We can do it by voting FOR SARAH. The alternative is incredibly frightening.
ping
At the time I graduated college, after having had two semesters of economics, I was a liberal, and I believed that the laws of economics said what would happen unless the government made things behave otherwise. Since then, I have come to realize that in anything resembling a free society, many of the laws of economics say what will happen, period. All the government efforts in anything short of a slave state notwithstanding.
Unfortunately, few people will realize the irony in Obama's acceptance-speech story of a minimum-wage worker who had her hours cut. Had she been allowed to work more hours in exchange for a lower wage, she could have increased her take-home pay at the same time as she was offering a better deal to her employer.
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.