The Psychology Underlying "Liberalism"

FrontPageMagazine ^ | September 12, 2002 | John J. Ray

[sbw123]

This is long but well worth the read.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[Noumenon]

The appeal of Leftism to the average person is simple: The Leftist offers something for nothing.

There ya go...

[second_semi_annual_toast_throw]

thanks. i'm new to FR as of today, though have been lurking for some time. great article. i'm going to read this in sections, to digest it all!

[darkwing104]

read later

[w_over_w]

[Fraulein]

Welcome to Free Republic! :)

[45Auto]

Leftists simply reject what does not suit them — regardless of the enormous evidence that shows how wrong and dangerously stupid they are.

[StriperSniper]

Bump for later.

[Clint N. Suhks]

The Psychology Underlying "Liberalism"

Interesting timing in contrast to this article.

UC BERKELEY STUDY - Researchers help define what makes a political conservative

[45Auto]

Modern liberals in the US are mostly just "the useful idiots"; what lies behind the mask, however, is a central cadre of dedicated Neo-Marxists. Here is the opening from an interesting book that puts the lie to the "peaceful" nature of these so-called "peace-loving liberals":

"The problems connected with the creation of the armed forces of the revolution are of immense importance for the Communist Parties of all countries. Disregard of these problems, or, even worse, a negative attitude towards them, hidden behind humanitarian pacifist phraseology, is really criminal.

Arguments to the effect that all violence, including revolutionary violence, is evil and that Communists therefore ought not to engage in ‘glorification’ of armed struggle and the revolutionary army, amount to a philosophy worthy of Quakers, Dukhobors [A Russian Christian sect who refused to perform military service. To escape persecution many emigrated to Canada at the end of the nineteenth century] and the old maids of the Salvation Army.

Permitting such propaganda in a Communist Party is like permitting Tolstoyan propaganda in the garrison of a besieged fortress. He who desires the end must desire the means. The means for emancipating the working people is revolutionary violence. From the moment of the conquest of power, revolutionary violence takes the form of an organized army. The heroism of the young worker who dies on the first barricade of the revolution when this is beginning differs in no way from the heroism of the Red soldier who dies on one of the fronts of the revolution after state power has been taken.

Only sentimental fools can suppose that the proletariat of the capitalist countries is in danger of exaggerating the role of revolutionary violence and showing excessive admiration for the methods of revolutionary terrorism. On the contrary, what the proletariat lacks is, precisely, under-standing of the liberatory role of revolutionary violence. That is the very reason why the proletariat still remains in slavery. Pacifist propaganda among the workers leads only to weakening the will of the proletariat, and helps counter-revolutionary violence, armed to the teeth, to continue."

-Leon Trotsky, 1918.

[MEG33]

i do not like his agnosticism but realize he is right about the dangers in religious tyranny.I found it an interesting read.

[.577 Tyrannosaur]

Good article, thanks for posting it.
In any event, liberalism truly is a chronic mental/emotional illness.

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

Good point. Also I think an often overlooked feature of leftist political thought is that we all (or most of us) grew up in a planned economy, one might say a commune. It's called "the family". The family is definitely an example where it's pretty much from each according to his ability and to each according to their needs.

I think the left basically never outgrow the economic view of the world that they had as children. They think that the benevolent father (i.e. the state) should provide for the dependent children (i.e. them). They never quite figure out that a state is different than a family. Put another way, they don't grow up.

Liberalism can be thought of as largely a case of arrested development.

[RightWhale]

Read soon bump

[EdReform]

Bump & Ping - read later...

[Helms]

Philosophical Discourses ...
http://sincronia.cucsh.udg.mx/modr.htm

The very concept of ‘postmodernism’ is defined by Lyotard (1984, 55) as ‘incredulous towards metanarratives’ and asks ‘where after the metanarratives can legitimacy reside’. For Lyotard (1984) what Habermas is offering one more metanarrative of ‘communicative action’ which is a generalist and abstractual narrative of emancipation. Lyotard (1984) is against the language games of metaphysics and philosophy of science. Lyotard (1984) calls for an ‘irreducible plurality’ of language games each with its own ‘local’ rules, legitimations and practices.

Postmodernism offers to move beyond Habermas’ modernist narratives and is rapidly gaining currency throughout social and human science disciplines way into the 21st century (Powell, 2001). There are several themes that are shared in postmodern analysis, which consolidate Lyotard’s (1984) interpretation.

First, there is distrust in the concept of absolute and objective truth. ‘Truth’ is viewed as contextual, situational, and conditional (Biggs and Powell, 2001).

Second, emphasis is placed on fragmentation rather than universalism, again pushing away from the general and encompassing toward the particular (Powell, 2001).

Third, local power is preferred over the centralized power of the nation state, and the decentralization, or the process of democratization of power, is a pervasive theme of postmodern narratives (Mestrovic, 1994).

Fourth, reality is simulated but is otherwise not a very meaningful concept; reality conceived as a general and universal truth is profoundly doubted (Foucault, 1977).

Fifth, we are seeing the rise and consolidation of consumer culture that tends to put ‘power’ in the hands of the consumers, but can also equally manipulate consumers through marketing ploys and interpolating discourses of consumer freedom by dictating costs in global market place (Biggs and Powell, 2001). Finally, diversity and difference is emphasized and valued above commonality based on homogeneity (Powell, 2001).

Postmodern analysis of culture is no longer a fringe perspective as it promotes strategies of individualism and diversity; and it is critical of strategies that devalue individuals because of any characteristic that control access to knowledge, and that assault identity (Biggs and Powell, 2001). It sees ethics as situational.

[kAcknor]

Soon to finish reading later BBBT

[Gabrielle Reilly]

read later.

[Lee'sGhost]

Welcome to the fray.