Posted on 02/13/2005 2:00:25 AM PST by The_Liberal Person
A liberal - To the Republican community.
1. What are your goals as Republicans?
2. Is your goal to make Liberals to leave America?
3. If you want us to stay, when does this country go too far to the right?
4. If you want us to leave, will the US government pay for our plane tickets?
I would like to see the end of welfare, the end of the IRS, the end of government intervention in my wallet. I would gladly pay a sales tax over an income tax. I would also like to see this society become more cooperative, better understanding about and cooperation between ALL (Yes, even white European) races, and BOTH (yes, there are only two) genders. I want to see the end of affirmative action and all other government programs that punish some in order to make others feel like they are equal. This is just a start.
2. Is your goal to make Liberals to leave America?
I certainly wouldn't stop any liberal from leaving if that is what they wanted to do. The goal should be to find somewhere in the middle where we all can agree. Shouting about the "moral values" of a woman's right to choose and homosexual marriage won't earn you any cooperation among conservatives. It says quite clearly in the Bible that murder of innocents and sodomy are immoral, but it isn't only Christians who believe those things.
The problem is that Democrats keep attaching themselves and their party to causes and programs that simply make no economic sense, or social sense. Wanting to tax the successful into poverty isn't going to make our country stronger, nor will it find any major support among conservatives. This has been proven. Folks here should be more self reliant, self sufficient, and more responsible for what they choose to do in life. If a person decides to rob, murder, rape, or sit in poverty for his entire life, it is not the responsibility of society to pay for him to have that lifestyle.
3. If you want us to stay, when does this country go too far to the right?
Judging by those who write in the media, post on liberal web forums, talk for Democrat causes, and serve as left-wing attack dogs, our country is as far right as anything that has ever existed in the history of the world. The left accuses the President of taking away civil rights but then has no example to back up this accusation. They constantly liken the President to Adolf Hitler, who was a SOCIALIST, about as far left as one can go.
The question above is meant to bait, and I will not bite.
4. If you want us to leave, will the US government pay for our plane tickets?
Just like a good little liberal, you don't want to take responsibility for yourself, but expect the rest of us to pay for it. How sad. In other words, HELL NO.
I don't think we can build a framework for civil communication when all you do is try to deceive us. Liberals lie to us constantly, in the news, on television, in our houses of legislature, in our community forums. I have news for you. We're not buying it anymore. Liberals like you have been doing this to the American people for decades and now that conservatism is beginning to flourish, you people are getting more and more vicious, like wounded animals fighting for life.
I don't expect the lies to stop, but would it hurt to be introspective for a second and admit to yourself what you really want? You want a socialist paradise, don't you? Shouldn't you at least be honest with yourself and with the American people and fight for that in which you believe? Until you can admit you have a problem and come to the conclusion that socialism is a failed ideology, any attempt at civil discourse will be pointless.
Whatever guy:
Pfft! Like, whatever.
(Dismissive hand gesture.)
Wow. The premises in your posts are so flawed that it's difficult to decide where to begin.
First, regarding the “rhetoric” used by Conservative spokespersons – grow up and open your eyes. If you think that the rhetoric from Conservatives is any worse than that coming from Liberals, you are either willfully ignorant or just plain, old-fashioned ignorant.
Politics ain’t beanbag; it’s a rough game. If you – personally – want to engage in a battle of ideas, the first thing you need to do is grow up. Understand the difference between political humor, “rhetoric” used to persuade the masses in an era of sound bites and mass communication, and the “ideas” that animate the contest.
If you want to whine about rhetoric, you aren’t qualified to talk about ideas.
Second, Conservatives do not believe in Utopia. Only extremist ideologies (Islamism, Communism, National Socialism, some would say Libertarianism) believe in Utopias. Conservatives are realists, and believe that there is no such thing as Utopia – certainly not on Earth. But what we can do is organize ourselves as societies in such a way as to promote the greatest level of human happiness possible in a flawed world filled with flawed people.
We have come to the conclusion – with overwhelming historical empirical evidence to back it up - that the political philosophy which leads to the greatest level of human happiness for the most people is that which is enshrined in our Constitution: Limited Government with self-policing checks and balances, Elected representatives, Individual Rights, and a recognition that – since these rights are bestowed by our Creator and not by Man – Man has no right to take them away.
(And despite what you may think, our Constitution is a decidedly “Conservative” document. The only way that it can be construed as supporting modern Liberal ideas is for it to be reinterpreted by activist liberal judges who keenly spot “penumbral emanances” undetectable by those less liberally “enlightened”.)
Third, your concern about threats to your right to “co-exist,” is so incredibly flawed and child-like that we have to back to political Kindergarten to address it. This will take awhile, so bear with me.
To start, the animating principal of "Republicanism" is the belief in Individual Freedom and the rule of law as opposed to Collective Rights and the rule of the majority.
Republicans do not believe in government by pure majority rule, because the rule of the majority is the tyranny of the majority. We believe in rule of law (which is the definition of a “Republic”) administered by representatives of the people.
To the contrary, the animating principal of modern “Democratic/Liberalism” is Collective Rights/Majority Rule.
(btw, That’s what makes Liberals crazy today – the fact that they – the self-anointed safe-keepers of the power of majority rule – are in the minority! It blows their worldview apart!)
So who has more to worry about – a Liberal in a Conservative world, or a Conservative in a Liberal world? Let’s think about it…..
Suppose 51% of the people on your block vote to take your house, sell it and split the proceeds among them. Is that “right”? No? Well, it's "democratic", isn't it? It’s majority rule, right? That’s why in the US we have “Property Rights” enshrined in the Constitution and inviolable (though Liberals are doing everything they can to change that).
Isn't it a superior political philosophy to respect individual rights, even if that freedom contradicts majority rule (aka “collective rights”)? We have the greatest Constitution in the history of the planet because it limits the power of government to infringe upon individual liberty, regardless of the will of the 51% to do so.
So the very idea that Conservatives are challenging "Liberals" right to "co-exist" is silly. Modern Conservatives do not challenge ANYONES right to "co-exist" because we believe in individual freedom. It is the philosophy of the modern Liberal which truly challenges the rights of others with different ideas to co-exist.
You have nothing to worry about as an individual. The only thing that Conservatives in political power means to you is that you don’t have the power to force your ideas on the rest of the country. You aren’t going to jail – you just can’t tell other people what to do.
Liberalism used to mean "in favor of the precepts individual freedom". It doesn't anymore. Ever since John Rawls, Liberalism has been fatally corrupted by those who believe in collective rights over individual freedom. And collective rights ALWAYS come at the expense of individual freedom.
In a sense, Conservatives now are what Liberals used to be. It is we who are supporting individual freedom and Liberals who support collective rights.
The only areas where Conservatives do NOT believe in pure Individual Freedom is when it comes to activities that can negatively impact the moral and cultural fiber of a society.
This is because we recognize - through hard experience - that individual freedom can ONLY survive if a critical mass of people within the society are of high character and possessing of moral virtue.
- Moral Depravity + Freedom = Decay and Chaos
- Moral Fortitude + Freedom = Strength and Peaceful Progress
Not convinced? I’ll give it one more shot.
Ideas mean something, so it should be instructive to you that ALL of the genocidal and otherwise-motivated horrors of history have been animated by the ideals of collective rights over individual freedom.
- for Hitler it was the collective rights of the Aryan race at the expense of Jews, Gypsies and others
- for Stalin and Pol Pot it was the collective rights of the Proletariat at the expense of everyone else
- for Robert Mugabe it is the collective rights of blacks at the expense of White farmers
- for the Hutus in Rwanda…
- for the Turks in Armenia…
- for the Maoists in the Cultural Revolution…
- you get the idea
I’m not saying that modern Liberals are knowingly leading us in that direction. I consider them to be well-meaning idiots who know not what they do. But I am saying that the underlying premises – the animating ideas – behind those horrors are difficult to distinguish from modern Liberal collectivist ideology.
Thankfully for the past 40 years these collectivists have been constrained by the Constitution and opposed by Conservatives until those ideas have collapsed of their own weight.
For a clue as to what the country could have been like, look at the "tolerance" exhibited by those parts of our society which were successfully dominated by modern Liberals. Look at how well Liberals in academe "tolerate" Conservative thinkers. Look at how well Liberals in Hollywood "tolerate" Conservatives in their midst.
They don't. These parts of our society have succeeded in achieving a level of ideological purity and intolerance that boggles the mind.
So as you can see, the very PREMISE of your question – wondering whether people who espouse certain IDEAS (Liberalism) have the right to co-exist in a society dominated by Conservative principles – is ridiculous.
In a later post you ask if we consider “Equality” to be a virtue. The answer is “it depends on what you mean by that.”
1. We believe that all are equal before the law. We are a country of laws, not men, so no man is above the law.
2. We believe that people are born with the same inherent rights, as these come from God and are not granted by man
3. We do NOT believe in equality of outcomes (i.e., that if you don’t succeed in life everyone else has an obligation to give you their money to make things “equal”. And no matter the virtuous-sounding rhetoric, that’s what it all comes down to.).
It sounds all fine and well that everyone should have “free” healthcare and “free’ education, but the fact is that there is no way to do this without seriously infringing on the freedom of others. The money has to come from somewhere, and it comes from the property - and therefore the labor – of other people.
See my 51% example above – if the proceeds of selling that house was to put the neighbors kids through college, does that make it OK?
Not only is it wrong, but it doesn’t work. Look at the aspects of our economy that have the most out of control costs and are the subject of the most complaints about quality and availability – education and healthcare. Is it a coincidence that they are the two parts of the economy over which the government TODAY has the most control? Government ALREADY controls over 50% of the healthcare and education industries, and they are the worst-run industries in the country. Is the answer to give the government MORE control?
Is medical care any more important than food? Government has very little control over the supply and delivery of food in our country, and yet we have the lowest cost, highest quality food system in the world. Even our poorest people are fat.
Is it worth considering that maybe if we got the government OUT of education and healthcare we might have better quality, lower cost, and wider availability? It’s worked that way throughout history and for all aspects of all economies. So why do some people insist on believing that somehow government control over these things will make them better?
Answer: willful ignorance, or just plain old-fashioned ignorance.
Finally, with regards to your outsourcing issue, you first need to educate yourself. I recommend strongly that you consult Bureau of Labor Statistics publications on the real impact of outsourcing on US employment. It is so low as to almost not be measurable (and is probably even positive – not negative), and an understanding of basic economics will tell you why.
I - for one - am an employer of people both in the US and in India. I can state categorically that if it weren't for the scale afforded by our team in India, we would not have been able to hire as many people as we have in the US.
In other words, offshore labor allows us to profitably grow our business which allows us to hire more people in the US. We now have 150 US employees. If we didn't have the business benefits afforded to us by India, we would have under 100 employees in the US - maybe 0 as it's altogether possible we would be out of business.
If we weren’t “allowed” to invest in India it’s not as if we would have hired those people in the US. We wouldn’t have hired ANYONE because it wouldn’t have been profitable to do so. And we would not have been able to hire those OTHER people in the US that we have.
People who look at the issue only cursorily or emotionally will find it easy to reach a different conclusion. But - as with most things - with deeper understanding of reality comes an intelligent adoption of what today are called "Conservative" principles.
The only ‘reasonable’ argument that you’ve brought forth has to do with how you deal with things like “Single Parent households, Segregation, Sexism, Racism” and what they mean to the ability of people to live up to their potential.
With regards to Segregation, Sexism and Racism, “Liberals” were on the right side of history because they were right. And because they were right, they were rewarded with power for 30 years. However, I will make the argument – again with copious empirical data to back it up – that for all intents and purposes these issues are over.
In a country of 300 million people I’m sure you can still find a few million racists and sexists out there (and more than a few million Communists and Islamists too), but they are too small in number to be relevant in any kind of meaningful way. In any event, racism is now perhaps Problem # 83 in the black community. Problems 1-82 in the black community, in my opinion, are those of moral depravity, lack of respect for character, education and tradition, and the family breakdown that goes with it.
Effectively the “community” threw out the baby with the bathwater when they rejected Conservative principles because they associated them with racism. Single parent families and a variety of social pathologies are a direct result.
So what do you do about it? The problem with Liberal “solutions” to these problems is that they don’t work, and in most cases make them worse by institutionalizing them.
We have to recognize that these problems are only solvable over the long term, and only by nurturing an environment of economic flexibility and freedom, rejection of government-engineered institutionalization of problems, and the encouragement of virtues of self-reliance and personal character.
That’s how people are lifted out of poverty – not giving them lots of free stuff.
1. What are your goals as Republicans? My goals as a Republican are:
a. To love this country first, above and beyond all others, and with this ofcourse goes the protection thereof - internally & externally. Especially illegal immigration.
b. To educate ALL children in this country. The socialist left has de-educated minorities and we are all paying the price. How many Powells & Rices have been left in the ghetto's to wallow in the illiterate mire?
c. Stop the moral decay of society, and I'm not an extremist on this point. Just the basics and it starts with cleaning up our everyday language. I mean we should put an end to frivolous/get rich quick law suits that mostly only go to the benefit of lawyers. I will not go to a movie, nor do I watch TV (sports only) because Hollywood promotes anti American values in disguise.
2. Is your goal to make Liberals to leave America? If you don't love this country then perhaps it would be good to try somewhere else. It would be nice though if some of you liberals would get your head unstuck from the arses of the leftist media, and un-brainwash yourselves of the drivel heaped upon you in our schools. It AMAZES me as to the extent you have been mislead. Look around, where are Conservatives "meeting"? And what do we avoid at all costs? The Media in the form of newspapers, network TV, the movies are almost all completely left. Talk radio & the internet are our meeting house. You are being lied to, and mislead everyday by people who don't give a poop about you.
3. If you want us to stay, when does this country go too far to the right?
It's not about you staying or not, it's about you getting out from under the mythical spell the left has put you under, and you will find this now globally.
As for too far to the right, I don't know what that means. One of the biggest best myths the left has promoted is the notion that conservatives are a bunch of hypocitical, mean spirited, racist, fanaticist religious biggots. My dear friend, I have a news flash for you, the left needs to look in the mirror. And I would be remiss to not mention that it is WE who are the party of compassion.
4. If you want us to leave, will the US government pay for our plane tickets? Now that's just silly.
Your fourth question is SO typically liberal! You ask if the GOVERNMENT would pay for your plane ticket....as usual - a nanny-stater!
I'll tell you what: How about if you ask if each Conservative would pay for each liberal's plane ticket?
I literally would buy one - and I know most Conservatives would as well - under one condition:
It has to be a one-way ticket and you cannot return.
You're trying to turn this country into something it was never intended to be - a socialism.
You'll eventually fail, but you do so much damage along the way that we just wish you'd simply STOP...and then you'd be welcome to stay.
It really is just that simple.
Now that proves you're a liberal. You're going to sit on your butt until the government provides you a way to leave. Sheesh.
Excellent post.
I haven't read the entire thread, maybe you've already explained what in the world a "socialist utopia" is. If so, point me to that post. I'm really curious as to what that might be.
Yes, those things do exist, and they will ALWAYS exist. It's that human nature thing, you know.
poverty doesnt benefit any of us. In a global economy when you have ghettos in this country with people who are living in poverty you won't be as competitive as you would be if everyone had access to a decent education. The way out of poverty should be hard work, but the way out should be highlighted by conservatives.
The way out of poverty IS hard work, desire to succeed and education. People have to WANT to be educated, they can't be forced. Government is taxing us to pay for schools and teachers, it is up to the individual to take advantage of them. And how should conservatives highlight the way out?
If education is the way out then don't you think we need to pay for that? If you don't think people in poverty should ever get out of it then how is the ownership society going to work?
We are paying for schools (K-12) now, and state colleges are heavily subsidized by the taxpayers. There are grants and loans available for those who want to continue and can't afford it. Many people also work and save to pay for their own college expenses. I worked summers and saved money for tuition, and had a part-time job during the school year. Yes, my parents helped, but had they not been able to, I would have found a way. My husband had to borrow heavily to get through college and medical school; he came from poverty, and the government didn't pay his way through college. And yet, here we are - hubby has an MD degree. How is that possible without the taxpayers paying for his school? It is not my husband's nor my responsibility to pay for higher education for others.
I see government getting bigger, too big, and I see our freedoms being removed. But if you all are comfortable with this then I'll shut up and let the majority have what they want.
The government IS too big and getting bigger, and our freedoms ARE being taken away. But the answer isn't voting for "progressives". From what I've seen of progressives, they want to control more of my life, and take more of my money for even bigger government programs.
No Liberals ALWAYS want to share--my money with people too lazy to work and save!
Wrong. Everybody gets a CHANCE to win; the playing field is level. If someone chooses not to work, not to save, not to care for themselves, then tough s***; they're on their own.
Amen. My husband is married to a Democrat (yours truly) who voted for Bush last election and will probably never vote Democrat again. Liberals, while wrong headed on many issues, used to have a fairly honorable traditional leadership in FDR, Truman, JFK. Now they have moved into the realm of openly supporting islamicfascism, communism and anti-semitism. Sure, the latter exists on the right here and there, but Israel and the Jews have no better, more loyal friends that the conservative Christians. Liberals should hang their heads in shame at what their party has become; a shelter for bigots, terrorists and terrorist supporters, race-baiters and treasonous haters of America.
Actually, ozone is O3, not H02. Anyway, I corrected it quite a while back...
Yes, why is it yours or my responsibility to take care of someone who makes poor choices?
You were quick to pick out the responses that solidified your world view of conservatives and ignored sincere attempts at dialog. We DO share America, and many in "blue states" are conservatives (I live in a blue state!) and many in "red states" are liberal so dividing the union by states is not a viable solution. Didn't work in 1861-1865, won't work now.
Try responding to the more reasoned posts, start with mine, if you'd like, which don't resort to insulting you, despite your baiting and goading by generalization of all conservatives.
Leaving America is your choice--most of us have no real opinion on it; it is amusing at times, and annoying at other times. But on a practical level, it's not our business if you choose to leave America. As to how far right is too far, that's kind of a loaded question. If you stay a while and read through the threads on FR, you will find that we are not a monolithic group with one mind and one opinion. We often quarrel as much amongst ourselves as we would with someone on DU. Some of us are farther to the right than others. So the response to that question depends on who you ask.
Generally, we don't want liberals to leave--I have family members who are liberals. My beloved father and sister are liberals. My daughter would be devastated without her favorite aunt. You don't seem to understand that our communities are entertwined and connected by family, work, community. We don't all live on some compound in Idaho. I wish liberals would think more for themselves, but that's another issue. I do wish liberals who hate this country and wish death upon its citizenry, like your compatriot Ward Churchill, would leave, since it is so obvious he despises not only America, but her people. Someone like him could be dangerous to our citizenry.
And no, no one should pay for your ticket to leave, should you make that decision. But I think you knew that.
I await a civil response to mine.
Constitutional Conservative Republican white guy here, in Maryland, and I say, in a New York second I'd vote for Condi for President of the United States. And I'd bet there isn't more than 5% at FR that would disagree with that. Maybe less. And they'd really really mean it, not just say it like the leftists do. Leftists are by far the most racists people I've ever met.
ding
Nice!
Funny...there was no talk of sharing when the libs were in charge.
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.