Can Liberals be Reasoned With?

A very well-written and enlightening piece from the “American Liberty Report.” Never thought about liberals in this matter. Now, I realize why I don’t have any liberal friends and don’t want any. Makes sense to me. Author Unknown.

 

If you’ve ever tried to explain to an extreme leftist why some policy or ideology is good, bad, right, or wrong- you’ve probably run into a wall of shaming language, blame-mongering, and double think.

On one level, what you’re witnessing in such moments is the refusal or the inability of a person to realize that just because some certain aspect of reality is not optimal, or is unpleasant—that doesn’t make it hateful to recognize the unpleasant fact.

For example, the fact that rape is a viable reproduction strategy in nature is an unpleasant factor in the human condition- but if you say that to a liberal, they will assume you are in favor of rape, condone it, and protect people who do it. This, of course, is wrong. Your liberal friend is then likely to do everything he or she can do to destroy you- never seeing the virtue in facing unpleasant facts.

Where the phenomenon of the liberal mind becomes especially pernicious is where leftists begin to seem not so much unable to discern the difference between evidence based fact and hatred, but when they appear to be using the appearance of said disability in order to retain the favor, support—and indeed the jobs—that their fellow liberals afford them for towing the line. This crony leftism is the very coinage of the metaphor of the wolf in sheep’s clothing.

On this second level of liberalism, where we see cynicism in its truest and purest form, this is where we find the Hillary Clintons, the Barack Obamas, and their like. These are the kind of leftists who manipulate and use the previous, dimmer kind. They are intelligent, well-educated social Marxists who do not believe the things they say—but only work to support the half of the system upon which they depend for their prosperity.

Let us take a moment for clarity. I’m using the word, ‘liberal’ under duress. Ideally, I would prefer to use the term in its classical sense which is much more akin to what is currently called Libertarianism.

Classical liberalism is the time-honored tradition of leaving others to do what they will as long as no harm comes of it. It is the ideology that humans have a natural desire to seek prosperity and to try to be free and that no government, entity, or body has a right to interfere with the innocent pursuit of prosperity and freedom.

This does not describe the liberals of today. Modern liberals believe that the officials of government are your rightful superiors, and should have the right to decide exactly where your freedoms should begin and end and that they need not even explain their reasoning to you. They believe that people exist as inextricable from the groups they belong to- whether or not they are in those groups by choice or by genetics.

For example- men are morally inferior to women because it is generally accepted that men have had it better for most of history, whites are morally inferior to people of every other skin tone because it is generally accepted that whites have had it the best the longest. And so on…

Modern liberals do not look at you and see an individual with a unique experience of life, a unique set of talents and flaws, and a capacity for reason and wisdom all your own. They see your gender, your skin color, and they perceive a presumed level of “privilege” based on those two things.

They do not appear to see the fact that white men are the majority of the homeless and fill out the greatest portion of any suicide statistic. According to a modern liberal, or progressive, an AIDS infected, disabled, homeless, veteran- who is white and male- has more privilege than Michelle Obama. This, my friends, is insane—but I promise you it is not an exaggeration. I wish it was.

So to answer the question- can liberals be reasoned with, we have only to look at what they do to their own kind when their own kind transgress the modern liberal code.

Matt Taylor, the astrophysicist who landed a remote-controlled spaceship on an asteroid- which for the record is like trying to land a grain of sand on a moving bullet—he wore a shirt that feminists didn’t like on the day his great achievement came to fruition.

His shirt had images of conventionally attractive women drawn in comic book fashion on it. Cultural Marxists shamed him so heavily that instead of celebrating his great success, as he deserved to do, he was bawling like an abashed child on national television during a press conference about the landing. And they have not let up on him ever since. He was easy prey.

There is a multitude of similar examples all as good as the story of Matt Taylor, and they all serve to answer our question, Can liberals be reasoned with? The answer is that they cannot.

They are not interested in cooperation, reaching across the aisle, or sharing power. They are interested only in seizing the reins of state, crushing those they see as their enemies, and shaming everyone who views the world in even slightly different terms to themselves.

You cannot reason with these cultural Marxist totalitarian bullies. The best you can hope to do is to defeat them. So let us focus on defeating them, and returning this once great nation to a state of grace.

One thought on “Can Liberals be Reasoned With?”

Please leave a comment on this post or on any subject; all are appreciated. Thank you and Semper Fi, Jim