Seven Huge Flaws in the Way Liberals Think

Townhall.com ^ | February 2, 2010 | John Hawkins

[Reeses]

their ideas and ideals have without exception failed every single time and have caused nothing but death and misery

Actually they succeed every time at their true motive: the destruction of those they envy. Leftists are more evil than theives because their goal is the pointless destruction of wealth, health, education, and family.

[MHGinTN]

The public/compulsory school system is a prime example of how liberals work ... they tear down to create equality at a decidedly lower level thus insuring that the norm is low enough for them to be equal to it.

[MrB]

They PROCEDE logically from an erroneous assumption.

They would say that that is also what we do.

Our (the conservative) base assumption is the “tragic” view of mankind, where humans are inherently limited (need I say “sinful”?) and incapable of perfection or even of having enough knowledge to make decisions for others whose situation is not intimately familiar. This aligns well with the biblically revealed truth of the human condition.

Their base assumption is in the perfectibility of the human condition, and the only thing holding us back is the social constraints and institutions we live under. Put the right institutions in place, with the right highly enlightened people in power, and you have utopia. It’s humanism. Plain and simple.

[Nick Danger]

8. Liberals solve dilemmas by escaping reality

Liberals will often insist that simultaneously embracing both sides of a contradiction is the "solution" to a problem. These "solutions" cannot exist in the real world. Like Schröedinger's cat, they are simultaneously A and not-A, a state that is not permitted by the laws of this Universe.

This is how programs that simultaneously feed the hungry and teach self-reliance happen. It is how one arranges Affirmative Action without quotas. To non-liberals, it is apparent that each of these pairs of goals is contradictory; we must choose between them, or at a minimum recognize that any point on the continuum between them represents a tradeoff that sub-optimizes both desired outcomes. Yet liberals will blithely insist that Affirmative Action without quotas is not only possible, but the "solution" to the dilemma.

Where they can (say, in California) liberals will impose many of these "solutions" on vast numbers of people, each solution a surreal layer of bureaucratic fog over what ought to be an explicit tradeoff. As these policies accumulate, they slowly but inexorably tie everything in knots, for they mandate that people behave in ways that do not, and cannot, actually exist.

[karmichit]

One thing that gets me is how liberalism itself is a self defeating philosophy to the extent that the annihilation of the individual will inevitably result in the dissolution of the movement itself and those who support it. I sum it up as this, “If all the liberals in Hollywood really got what they were asking for, would they still be allowed to exist as they do now?” would any liberal?

[bvw]

1) Liberals believe they can change human nature.

No. Liberals proclaim that the MUST change human nature. Why? Because at heart they know they need to change themselves, but they are so childish that they refuse to. Therefore everyone else MUST change.

2) Liberals believe we can talk everything out with our enemies.

No, that's not quite true. The truer rendering is that Liberals HATE US, and want to befriend the enemy of those they hate, especially since it will make us upset. They really don't give a flying f-k about our enemies, except that these enemies make us upset.

3) Liberals don't have enough respect for our culture and traditions: To liberals, our cultural, economic, and political norms were formed by backwards troglodytes making arbitrary decisions based on superstition and racism.

Again liberals do not give a flying f-k one way or the other for our traditions and culture. We could have a totally different set -- even opposite set -- of traditions and culture but they would be just as oppositional to it. Why? Because it is US they want to bug and upset and demean. They would be perfectly happy to demean Genghis Khan, or Andy Warhol with those same cutting terms, if Genghis and Andy had been the ones we admire. Liberals define themselves by oppositional hatred and jealousy -- the objects of those evil feelings fo not matter.

4) Liberalism is a fundamentally immoral political philosophy.

Yes. But 'amoral' is a better term. The immorality is intrinsic to why they hold to their philosophies -- in order to entertain great and constant feelings of hatred, jealousy and envy. Morality, one way or the other, doesn't so much matter to the, although they do incline to moral degeneracy.

5) Liberals believe merely being liberal makes them good people.

Hmmm, maybe. ... No, not quite. What liberals want to indulge beyond anything else is "vain belief"! You hate reality. Why do they love lies? The bigger the lie the more magnificent it is to believe! And what is the only greatness measure of 'goodness' they have -- to hold everyone else to those lies while you yourself can take them or leave them. The sure-est demonstration of RAW POWER over others -- make up some ridiculous lie and force all others to accept it! Such Despotic Power is Goodness to them.

6) Liberals have too much faith in government.

Only in DESPOTIC governments! Government is good when it can exercise raw despotic power over US -- we, the people whom liberals have chosen to be the designated objects of hatred.

7) Liberals have minimal interest in whether the programs they support work or not.

Well, liberals hate facts and hard reality, so of course they hate programs that actually work. Such things challenge the Big Lie. Lies do not survive reality, if reality is allowed to be part of the public discourse.

To libs, however, their is a way of saying a program worked -- if it fails in all regard except as a exercise in despotism and destroying all we hold in any regard.

[qam1]

One thing that gets me is how liberalism itself is a self defeating philosophy to the extent that the annihilation of the individual will inevitably result in the dissolution of the movement itself and those who support it.

I questioned a college professor on that once.

I pointed out that when Communist initially take over, one of the 1st things they do is kill all the teachers and intellectuals, so by supporting Communism he's actually supporting his own murder.

They never really have an answer for that, except that previous communist just weren't the right guys but the new guys will "do it right" or other nonsense.

The same can be said with all Liberals (especially gay ones) and Moslems. If they attack they aren't attacking rural Red State America, they going to hit targets and kill people in the big Blue cities.

[roses of sharon]

Nonsense.

Liberals just pretend to have a higher moral philosophy...to cover their need for control, their hate, bigotry and racism.

All the talk of tolerance and basic rights is faux...deliberately so...for votes.

[ripley]

Why lend credence and legitimacy to Liberal lunacy?

Why not just call it what it is; Absolute insanity or
treachery.

IMHO

[roses of sharon]

One thing that gets me is how liberalism itself is a self defeating philosophy to the extent that the annihilation of the individual will inevitably result in the dissolution of the movement itself and those who support it. I sum it up as this, “If all the liberals in Hollywood really got what they were asking for, would they still be allowed to exist as they do now?” would any liberal?

Precisely...more evidence that they do not believe what they say....their ONLY goal is votes, power and control.

[Dick Holmes]

?

"Liberals are to put it bluntly delusional and insane.

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over & over and expecting a different result - Albert Einstein"

Why are you quoting Einstein? Don't you know he was delusional and insane?