Previous post
Next post
liberal writing goddess, camile paglia, was asked this question recently. i’ve condensed it here for brevity:
“Is it possible that there might be something really ugly at the core of contemporary liberalism? You call yourself a liberal, and you vote liberal, yet you are under constant attack by your liberal compatriots. Why?”
here is her remarkable answer and one of the main reasons i read her all the time. sometimes she get’s it quite right.
Yes, something very ugly has surfaced in contemporary American liberalism, as evidenced by the irrational and sometimes infantile abuse directed toward anyone who strays from a strict party line. Liberalism, like second-wave feminism, seems to have become a new religion for those who profess contempt for religion. It has been reduced to an elitist set of rhetorical formulas, which posit the working class as passive, mindless victims in desperate need of salvation by the state. Individual rights and free expression, which used to be liberal values, are being gradually subsumed to worship of government power.
The problems on the American left were already manifest by the late 1960s, as college-educated liberals began to lose contact with the working class for whom they claimed to speak. (A superb 1990 documentary, “Berkeley in the Sixties,” chronicles the arguments and misjudgments about tactics that alienated the national electorate and led to the election of Richard Nixon.) For the past 25 years, liberalism has gradually sunk into a soft, soggy, white upper-middle-class style that I often find preposterous and repellent. The nut cases on the right are on the uneducated fringe, but on the left they sport Ivy League degrees. I’m not kidding — there are some real fruitcakes out there, and some of them are writing for major magazines. It’s a comfortable, urban, messianic liberalism befogged by psychiatric pharmaceuticals. Conservatives these days are more geared to facts than emotions, and as individuals they seem to have a more ethical, perhaps sports-based sense of fair play.
that post on salon is really a fun read and there’s a lot more from camile there then just the above question so go check it out. sadly she doesn’t apply that same level of insight and skepticism she has for the loons on the left, towards The One but there is hope!
which brings me to my point: liberalism is a new religion with very devoted converts. during the last 24 hours i have had a number of hate comments that were caught by my trusty blog’s moderation settings. i have also had 3 or so toxic emails i suspect sent by those same frustrated lefties because their ‘lovenotes’ to me were not posted. alas, my ‘obama’s european apology tour’ post was not appreciated by those on the far left who sit in the rafters of my blog, lurking.
the rabidly unhinged are so willing to protect the interlopers in the white house that they huff and puff at all who dissent. little do they know that they waste precious energy and time on someone who simply laughs loudly at their silliness and is completely and utterly unmoveable. just ask my husband.
Jared says: Is this blog imploding? Just curious.
The things of which you note have become more than obvious over the past 30 years, and really came to a head over the last 8 years. It’s all emotions all the time with the modern-day left. The funny part is they confuse their emotional viewpoints and wrongly assign it to be, instead, logic and analysis.
I have a good friend who works in the offices down from mine who is a psychiatrist and I’ve asked him about this “confusing emotions with logic and analysis” phenomenon I’ve observed from the modern-day liberal. I just wanted to know if there was a clinical term to describe that particular form of mental illiness. He knew exactly what I was talking about, but said he knew of no exact term which has been assign to libs who confuse emotions with logic. I suppse BDS is about the closest that’s been defined.
The amount of “How dare you question BHO!!” I’ve noted on lib blogs and pol sites are too many to mention. They do their best to try and turn phrases they falsely believe were used against them during the Bush years towards conservatives, but it just doesn’t work. For example, I noted one lib on a site I frequent who made mention that, since America still had troops abroad, then it’s treason to object to BHO’s policies; an obvious attempt to try and link to a time when this individual was being labeled a traitor for opposing Bush. But, the things this individual said during that time, and an overwhelming majority of libs were also saying, were more than just objecting to policy. They were openly opposed to even fighting the GWOT, were saying we need to apologize for giving terrorists a reason to attack us, and were actively keeping a count of how many soldiers were dying in Afghanistan and Iraq in an attempt to sway people against the mission. And that was one of the saner responses, in contrast to the loons who believed Bush planned and carried out 911 in “Reichstag fire” fashion. That’s WAY beyond just being opposed to policy, that’s being against America. Of course, I’m so used to it from the modern-day Dems/libs it doesn’t even phase me anymore.
Is Nanny State gov’t their religion? Yeah without a doubt. So interesting that the group that claims themselves to be the “intellegensia” and “independent thinkers” desire a gov’t to wipe their nose for them and see to their every need.
Pat says: Ted
That is an interesting comment. I am most concerned with your thought on opposing GWB on the GWOT. That was an illegal action based on faulty even out and out lies to engage Saddam Hussein. Period. There was no righteousness in that. I am not wild about President Obama’s decision to stay in Iraq a few months longer then expected. I was one of those who voted for him based on his promise to get us out of that mess. But since we are staying a little bit longer, I trust his decision far more to lead us in the ending of that national nightmare then I would have ever trusted GWB or any of the current leading Republicans.
Do I want terrorists to attack again on US soil? Of course not. But I trust this administration’s ability to negotiate and demonstrate a better skill of diplomacy then any one previously.
micky says: Its called “ideological bigotry” and no matter what even if the situation has been reversed (as Ted mentioned above using the GWOT) one must maintain absolute loyalty even in the face of hypocrisy and self contradiction.
Now with Obama in office you’ll hear the left saying that Obama is doing in Afghanistan what Bush never wanted to do so with that it makes the Afghan war more acceptable today than it was 3 months ago.
Its a movement based on an rule that comes with nothing to substantiate it other than the arrogant mindset that “we are right because we are”.
I can imagine that theres a large amount of attraction to being part of an existence that allows you to walk around with an air of superiority about you even though theres nothing of any real sustance to validate you’re having that feeling. But they’ve got to have that feeling even if it means going through life bullsh*tting themselves til they get to the point where the lie becomes real life and you no longer have to pass that pesky thought through your conscience that says; “you know this isnt real”.
It takes a special breed to go your whole life living a lie to the point it becomes real. I guess they figure that if they just keep acting like they’re right about everything enough people will falll for it and come on over. Its like they got some big secret they’re all holding thats the answer to everything and that we should just trust them because we’ll find that answer after living their way for a while.
Look at the rabid devotion Hitlers followers had. It was all based on a air of superiority to the point where nothing was questioned and always approached with zealous blind worship.
Too many times I’ve had debated where the facts speak volumes of truth and you still get told that you’re wrong even though theres nothing to support their argument such as with Global warming.
If theres any example whithin liberlism that depicts religion its the environmentlist whom when debating any environmental issue(global warming/climate change) will insist in the face of conflicting evidence and facts that there us no debate. IT JUST IS !
Instead of rational debate or scientific inquiry we’re subjected to these endless lobby campaigns, endless invectives, and endless personal atacks against anyone who dares question or investigate — and thats the reason we hear the constant authoritarian cry: “Silence! The debate is over.”
micky says: This a perfect example of the “definite” type of mindset I was explaining above.
“That was an illegal action based on faulty even out and out lies to engage Saddam Hussein. Period.”
While there has never been any proof that either claim is true, they keep saying it.
Its like watching a hamster on a wheel
PenniePan says: Mistress Kate
Maybe you wouldn’t have so much trouble controlling the place if you didn’t let overbearing argumentative A$$HOLE’s like Micky, Ted, and Ken in here. I just read something from “Jeff” on the last post and he sounds like a real winner too. Where do you pick up all these men?
Micky I am curious. Just how much of you last comment is actually YOUR words? Some of it sounds like your rambling self but most of it sounds like a bad novel.
Most concerned? Then concern yourself no longer. Anyone who actually believes that Bush intentionally lied in order to attack Iraq is someone who is unworthy of consideration on any number of topics. I have yet to run across one of them who doesn’t accept as evidence what they’ve already predetermined to be the truth and completely disregard all evidences to the contrary. Since they intentially lie to themselves, for what reason would I have to believe they would be honest with me in discussing the events? They won’t and they don’t.
I do, however, believe what I can observe from their postings, the things they demostrate in words and deed without actually coming out and admiting it, and that is they regard B. Hussein as their diety and have placed all their hope and faith in him and his magic teleprompter.
Liberals remind me of the Greek mythologic character, Erysichthon.
As the story goes, Erysichthon destroyed a valuable orchard, and as punishment, was given an insatiable hunger; the more he devoured, the more he wanted.
He ate up everything under the sun, but still wanted more.
In the end, Erysichthon consumed his own self.
micky says: Pennie.
I write my own words, okay ?
Were not all professional authors, I’m just a blogger whos trying to help my country.I’ve been a professional chef all my life so excuse me if I’m not all as brushed up on my writing ability as I could be but at least it makes some f*ckin sense compared your crap filled idiocy.
Ya know, were just people talking.
Do you do this sh*t to everyone you speak to face to face and start criticizing the style of things and not listen to the message ? Probably not right ?
It would make getting anywhere in life a little difficult wouldnt it ?
Then again, just look at where you’re at.
Now tell me something.
Are you ever going to actually discuss any of the topics that Kate posts here or just continue to be a little b*tch pest goin after every stupid little thing that crosses that echo chamber mind if yours? Huh?
You got your nerve calling anyone argumentative when all you do is come here to argue every frickin thing under the sun except for the topic itself !
I thought long and hard about what I wrote as I wanted to get across as well as I could what is a complicated thought process to explain, that has seemingly effected almost half this country.
The term “ideological bigotry” is one that comes from a good friend of mine who just finished writing a book on the subject which has much in common with the subject of this post. If you go to his blog and look in the archives at the comments you will see just exactly where I got most of the positions I hold and also see that my words are my own and probably be repeated a few times there as well.
Here, go learn something for a change.
http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/
“Ideological Bigotry–My book is now available
April 5th, 2009
All,
My book, Ideological Bigotry, is now in stores and available for purchase.
Ideological Bigotry is the hatred of people based on their political views. It is just as harmful as racial or ethnic bigotry, but gets less attention.
The book can be purchased through Amazon, Barnes and Noble, or through iUniverse.”
“Is this blog imploding? Just curious.”
No. Any other questions?
“That was an illegal action based on faulty even out and out lies to engage Saddam Hussein. Period.”
That’s a lie. Period. I’ve gone into the details many times on this blog, apparently some people refuse to listen to anything that doesn’t fit into their narrow view.
“But since we are staying a little bit longer, I trust his decision far more to lead us in the ending of that national nightmare then I would have ever trusted GWB or any of the current leading Republicans.”
That’s it, justify Obama’s lies. How sad you must feel.
“But I trust this administration’s ability to negotiate and demonstrate a better skill of diplomacy then any one previously.”
Yes, and what ability it is. Tell me Pat, exactly what ability are you talking about? Was it that same ability that led Iran to tell us to piss off twice when we “reached out our hand”. Or perhaps it was Russia telling us to piss off when we asked for their help in stopping Iran. Maybe it was North Korea telling us to piss off when Obama pressed him on launching that missile. Or, maybe it was Europe telling us to piss off when Obama asked for more troops for Afghanistan. Oh yes, he’s quite the negotiator.
“Maybe you wouldn’t have so much trouble controlling the place if you didn’t let overbearing argumentative A$$HOLE’s like Micky, Ted, and Ken in here.”
I take it by “overbearing argumentative A$$HOLE” you mean people that don’t agree with you Pennie? Or perhaps its because you are constantly embarrassed on this site by people constantly destroying your weak arguments and exposing you for the typical uninformed and lying neo-socialist that you are?
bonnie says: Let me say that you right wing haters are far more dangerous and violint then anything that liberals might say or do. Just look at Timothy McVey, those creepy people on Ruby Ridge Mountain, Eric Rudolph the abortion bomber, the Waco people all right winger haters.
I sit and laugh at you all in here because you act like you are swatting flies. Defending the homeland like nazis. You are the scary people. Your the violint ones. You are also the ones who Obama was talking about. You are the arrogint, derrisive and dismissive ones. Look how you treat people who don;t agree with you.
“Let me say that you right wing haters are far more dangerous and violint then anything that liberals might say or do.”
Right back at ya, Bonnie.
“Just look at Timothy McVey, those creepy people on Ruby Ridge Mountain, Eric Rudolph the abortion bomber, the Waco people all right winger haters.”
Hey how about the Oakland cop killer that killed four police officers? The black Muslim, was he a right wing “nazi”?
” You are the arrogint, derrisive and dismissive ones. Look how you treat people who don;t agree with you.”
Again, have you nutcases all forgotten about the last 8 years? What color is the sky in your world? Hypocrite isn’t even a strong enough word for what you are.
micky says: “Let me say that you right wing haters are far more dangerous and violint then anything that liberals might say or do. Just look at Timothy McVey, those creepy people on Ruby Ridge Mountain, Eric Rudolph the abortion bomber, the Waco people all right winger haters. ”
Well let me just say that your poor little examples dont really reflect anyone on this blog but if you’d really like to stack up atrocities next to each other we could start with those related directly to the President of the United States.
Theres Obamas buddy Bill Ayers who bombed the Pentagon and other US buildings.
His association with Palestnian professor and Hamas supporter at UCLA.
His church reprinted a manifesto by Hamas that defended terrorism as legitimate resistance, refused to recognize the right of Israel to exist and compared the terror group’s official charter – which calls for the murder of Jews .
His relatives (Odinga) in Kenya are a bunch of murdering terrorists.
Dr. Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America.
the organization she heads, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and its subsidiary foundation, the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), have long-standing ties to terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Muslim Brotherhood. The U.S. government lists ISNA and NAIT as “unindicted co-conspirators” in the terrorism-funding trial of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF). The foundation was charged with conspiracy and providing millions of dollars to the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. In November of 2008, a jury in Dallas, Texas, delivered guilty verdicts on 108 separate charges against HLF and seven of its officers.
Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook and his wife, Nadia Elashi. When Marzook was arrested and imprisoned in the United States during one of his illegal fundraising tours, he publicly thanked ISNA for standing by him and supporting him in an open letter that Hamas ran as an advertisement in Arabic and Muslim publications.
Gaza. Marzook, who is listed by the U.S. government as a “Specially Designated Global Terrorist,”
“I sit and laugh at you all in here because you act like you are swatting flies. Defending the homeland like nazis.”
The “NAZI” crap is the perfect example of your ignorance.
Did you know that the Nazis have more in common with the democratic party than us conservatives ever will ? “NAZI” stands for National Socialist German Workers Party. The Party of the people , just as in “Democrat” which means the honoring of the majority along with there being no doubt you’re also the party of labor.
You worship big government and promote socialism whih is another Nazi platform.
And then theres the Anti-Christian/Anti-God, Anti-Family teachings
The removal of religion as an influence in society
The suppression of individual rights (anti-gun laws)
The disregard to human life (euthanasia, abortion)
The anti-morality teachings (the concept that there is no right or wrong except defined by the government)
The government defines moral issues rather than religion (gay marriage)
And last but not least, nationalized education and health care.
So, think about that the next time you so idiotically run off the Nazi crap.
” You are the scary people. Your the violint ones. You are also the ones who Obama was talking about. You are the arrogint, derrisive and dismissive ones. Look how you treat people who don;t agree with you.”
Right.
If you say so, but so far you’ve been wrong and its all to easy and boring to continue proving you’re wrong
lisab says: Cathryn,
as a liberal i divide it along dem vs. liberal lines
dems will do almost anything to win an election … cheat? no problem. encourage the terrorists in iraq so that more american soldiers die and bush looks bad? sure … so long as the dems gain in power. whatever is good for the dem party is best for the country … and from some of the posts above, you can see that attitude.
don’t you know you reps and cons are all VIOLINT, nazis? 🙂
naturally if they add a few extra ballots to ny-20 or minnesota to prevent VIOLINT nazis from getting in office that is justified. no one wants VIOLINT nazis in power.
true liberals would NEVER support subverting an election … or throwing out 60 to 70% of military votes.
Paula says: Wow! Camille Paglia’s column on Salon is terrific! I recommend everyone who has posted on this topic to read Camille’s stuff – Lots to think about there! Thanks Kate!
hi paula 😀 great to see you again. i knew you would like paglia and i agree about the reading of her column.
Jane says: I don’t think any of you really read the posts on this blog. You would rather fight each other in comments.
Paula says: Yes! Please go back and read Camille Paglia’s column on http://www.salon.com before you post any more.
micky says: Jane;
” don’t think any of you really read the posts on this blog. You would rather fight each other in comments.”
Well then you should comment on the subject instead of doing what you accuse everyone else of doing, ya know ?
Pretty ironic, dontchathink ?
Jane says: [deleted duplicated comment.]
Jane says: You’ve just proved my point beautifully Micky. Get help.
micky says: Jane, no, you proved the point.
Look up above, I’ve made considerable statements relative to the post already, you have not done anything yet so far except for the usual b&tching, which is what I addressed.
Nice try.
No Comments