BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program

Subject: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Once Famous
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:00 PM

I apologize for the blue clicky problem I have.

Please read at this URL

http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=1218

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:09 PM

Here's the clicky for whatever good it will do.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Piers
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:09 PM

Liberalism is pretty daft, but I prefer this analysis: here and
here

Yours for world socialism!

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:13 PM

Martin:

Cute but shallow; your author would do well to take his own advice by getting his facts straight (to begin with) about what being "liberal" means. The fact is the nation was founded on liberal principles and they are what makes it unique among nations (or at least unusual).

Her is indulging in the very sin of laziness for which he upbraids others.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Once Famous
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:13 PM

Piers, are you on welfare because you are unhirable, uneducated, mentally ill, a social misfit, an ex-con, or all of the above?

BTW, thanks Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Once Famous
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:15 PM

Poor defense Amos. There are a million other articles out there saying the same thing and why the defeat of Kerry is marking the real beginning of the mental disorder known as radical liberalism.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Cruiser
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:17 PM

About the only 12-step program I see to overcome liberalism it that 13th step off a very high cliff...

Cruiser (somewhat tongue-in-cheek)

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:23 PM

Conservatives now singing "We Shall Overcome"? I am surprised.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Piers
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:43 PM

Martin, Actually none of the above.

Piers xx

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:46 PM

Several months ago, I heard radio host Michael Savage refer to liberalism as a "mental disorder." As odd as this concept might seem, I think I actually agree with him. I've seen liberalism turn some of the most intelligent people I know into propaganda-spewing robots who care only about the message, not the inaccuracies behind the message. Emotion always trumps logic for them, regardless of the blatantly obvious.

I think we could easily substitute the word "partisanship" for "liberal" and have a much more accurate description of the real situation. Like this:

Several months ago, I heard (insert name of favorite talking head here) refer to partisanship as a "mental disorder." As odd as this concept might seem, I think I actually agree with him. I've seen partisanship turn some of the most intelligent people I know into propaganda-spewing robots who care only about the message, not the inaccuracies behind the message. Emotion always trumps logic for them, regardless of the blatantly obvious.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:48 PM

Nothing to defend against, Martin -- smokey, foul-smelling clouds of generalized nabobism aren't lucid argument. Apparently neither your boyo nor you know what the word means. Instead you have decided that any kind of sloppiness or apathetic drivel or weak-eyed stupidity qualifies. Unfortunately no-one who thinks of themselves as liberal believes those definitions so you are just preaching to your own hateful choir.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:54 PM

Excellent, Carol.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:33 PM

I would like to hear from any of the anti-liberalism faction, exactly what practices or beliefs -- specifically -- they belief they are battling which they call "liberalism".

Here are several definitions from a brief search on the web:

a political orientation that favors progress and reform
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn


an economic theory advocating free competition and a self-regulating market and the gold standard
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn


A political philosophy "historically associated with the idea of freedom: the civil freedom of the individual: free political institutions; freedom of religion; free enterprise and free trade in economics." In its contemporary form, liberalism includes a belief in democratic capitalism, and in the duty of the state to alleviate social ills, and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. (Alan Bullock and Oliver Stallybrass (eds.), The Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought (London 1977), 347). Political parties calling themselves "Liberal" do not always reflect "liberal" values.
www.heritage.nf.ca/confederation/glossary.html


A school of economics that relies primarily on a free market with the minimum of barriers to the flow of private trade and capital. Underdevelopment in the Third World, acording to this school, stems from certain domestic economic policies of the developing country which tend to accentuate market imperfections; reduce productivity of land, labor, and capital; and intensify social and political regidities. The adoption of market-oriented domestic policies is the optimal way to remedy these weaknesses.
www.indiana.edu/~ipe/glossry.html


refers to thinking from the Liberal school of thought that posits that an economic system based on the market and free trade operates under 'natural' laws and brings benefits to the population. The Liberal school of thought, however, has changed and evolved over the years in particular with respect to the role of the state in the economy, which may be confusing. Here are some categories that might help to clarify:
www.trentu.ca/ids/glossary.html

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:34 PM

And a few more:

political philosophy whose basic tenet is that each individual should have the maximum freedom consistent with the freedom of others.
highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/076742011x/student_view0/chapter11/glossary.html


Liberalism is the political philosophy believing in intellectual freedom and progress, as well as economic equality. Based on the works of John Maynard Keynes. This "Modern Liberalism" grew out of Classical Liberalism; the political philosophy believing in economic and intellectual freedom.
apella.ac-limoges.fr/lyc-perrier-tulle/europ/glossary/glossideo.htm


A political philosophy that elevates individual freedom and autonomy as its key organizing value.
businesslaw.nelson.com/glossary3.html

A

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: DOpfer
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:36 PM

I don't believe this country was founded on liberalism. Seems the concept was more "help your neighbor (or countrymen)" not "let the government help your neighbor with YOUR money." In fact direct income tax on individuals was unconstitutional until the 16th amendment, which was ratified in 1913. That's a few years after the founding of the U.S.
   Left alone to their own devices most decent people, and most people are decent, always looked out for each other after their own. The people working in government provide no better with people's money than the people would do for themselves and others if allowed to keep what they earned.
   The government should provide national defense, judiciary functions and infastructure, PERIOD. The well being of the people should be left to the people.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:38 PM

We don't NEED a 12 step program to overcome liberalism! Talk about a non-issue. Bor-ing!!!

No, what we REALLY need, and desperately, is a 12 step program to overcome wanking! See if you can find something on that, Martin.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: artbrooks
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:39 PM

Martin Gibson, do you seriously believe that anyone, let alone the mythical "liberal," as defined by the mythical "conservative," actually believes all of those things?

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:43 PM

Actually, CarolC hit it right on the nose. It is rigid partisanship which is a mental disorder. That can be found in both "liberals" and "conservatives".

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: BanjoRay
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:43 PM

He's right - to defeat liberalism you have to convince yourselves of the truth of twelve obvious pieces of rubbish.
Nice one.
Ray

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:49 PM

There you go again, Amos. Inserting clear thinking.

This is an interesting non-issue. Most "liberals" are conservative on some issues and many conservatives are liberal on some issues. Oh, that the world was so black and white!

On second thought, thank God it isn't.

That's why they call them political cartoons. They have all the reality of one.

People use labels to over-simplify life, and they are almost always used to judge others while justifying the person's own actions.

Too often, they are confused with "truth."

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:52 PM

Matter of fact, all American schoolkids are schooled in the mental disorder of partisanship from an early age, as they are taught to be good little Democrats or Republicans, thus perpetuating the myth that there is actually a real CHOICE at the polls!

The priniciple is fear. You instill people with fear of the "other party" and the rest takes care of itself. A public divided against itself is easily led and easily duped. The same big financial interests control BOTH parties, so they win and everybody else loses.

This doesn't mean that the party machines don't try like hell to win elections...just like the different football teams try like hell to win the Superbowl...but it's the same stupid game, regardless of who wins, and the public foots the bill.

Partisan politics = divide and conquer.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: DOpfer
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 05:55 PM

From Amos (highlights are mine): Liberalism is the political philosophy believing in intellectual freedom and progress, as well as ECONOMIC EQUALITY. Based on the works of John Maynard Keynes. This "Modern Liberalism" grew out of Classical Liberalism; the political philosophy believing in ECONOMIC and intellectual FREEDOM.

"Economic equality" AND "economic freedom"? WHICH is it? Everyone's equal or everyone's free to make as much as they want? You can't have it BOTH ways.

Let's face it, no one is going to change their philosophy from reading this forum. I'm moving on. Come on Martin. You can't enlighten even the most liberal thinkers.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:09 PM

Equality? What does that mean? Does it mean an equal start for everyone? (I'd be in favour of that.) Does it mean equal rights for everyone? (I'd be in favour of that.) Does it mean equal protection under the law for everyone? (I'd be in favour of that.) Does it mean equal opportunity for everyone? (in favour of that too) Does it mean equal PAY for everyone? (I am not specifically in favour of that...given the present structure of society.)

It is your chosen interpretation of the term "economic equality" that is leading you to form possibly erroneous conclusions about what other people are in favour of, DOpfer.

You are simply choosing to interpret it in a way that supports your argument.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: artbrooks
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:11 PM

Actually, LH, I was taught in school and by my parents to look at the issues, examine the facts, and vote my conscious. I think I'm much more typical of the educated US voter than the person who votes the "party line."

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:16 PM

Getting hung up on definitions doesn't really address who believes what.

I believe people should receive free health care when they need it. Period.

I believe people should be able to improve their lot in life by the work they do, and if they are for one reason or another unable to do or find employment, they should receive a helping hand from the rest of us.

I believe that people have worth regardless of their 'station' in life; the job they do, the circumstances under which they live.

I believe that women have as much intrinsic worth as men, and I also know that people should be judged based on what they do and the intent with which they do it.

I believe that all people, regardless of their mental, physical or spiritual 'disabilities' deserve respect simply because they are human.

I believe it is wrong to exploit people for money.

I believe that people are more important than things.

I believe that 'isms' have caused too many problems on this planet.

I don't know what that makes me, and I am not really interested in how I am perceived because of what I wrote above. I don't figure any of it makes me one political thing or another. It's enough for me that it makes me feel good about being human.

Bruce M

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:21 PM

Dang, brucie! You can write my Bill Of Rights anytime you want to. And nothing you wrote so eloquently is inherently "Liberal" or "Conservative."

Labels are the lazy man's way of justifying their own actions.

Jerry (A liberal/conservative/progressive/Traditionalist)

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:31 PM

Good for you, brucie. Have you thought about moving across the border?

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: pdq
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:33 PM

WHAT LIBERALS REALLY WANT:

   Free/Universal Health Care
   Ban all firearms
   Ban the Bible because it is "hate speech"
   Ban all private vehicles that get less than 40 MPG
   Make male+male homosexual marriages legal/normal
   Make female+female (lesbian) marriages legal/normal
   Make Social Security death benefits pass to homosexual partners (married or not)
   Nationalize the oil industry
   Nationalize the electricity industry
   Nationalize the transportation industry
   Nationalize the gas industry
   Nationalize the health care industry
   Nationalize the auto industry
   Nationalize the pharmaceutical industry
   Ban Private ownership of radio and television stations
   Make the US subject to decisions of the World Court
   Make the US subservient to the United Nations
   End the two party system and only have "Democrat" on ballot
   Unlimited immigration (6.2 Billion more people are OK)
   Give all new immigrants free social services, same as American citizens get
   Give all new immigrants full Social Security benefits
   End the GI Bill
   End Veteran's Hospital System
   End all special care for veterans
   Ban all rallies by white and other "non-minority" groups
   Support gays in the military so that Cpt. Jones and Cpt. Smith
       (both males) can kiss while reviewing the troops
   Ban all CB and Ham radios as possible weapons of right-wing extremists
   Ban the Boy Scouts and declare them a "Hate Group"
   Ban the practice of "loyalty oaths" at all levels of government
   Ban The Ten Commandments from any public display
   Ban Christmas from all public documents
   Remove all trace of religion from all government-owned buildings
   End pledge of allegiance from all schools, public and private
   Ban all private schools unless they follow exact curriculum of public schools
   End home schooling
   (this is a partial list...add more if you wish to...)

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:38 PM

Liberal...Oxford dictionary defines as..Directed to general broadening of mind,..generous, openhanded,..not rigorous or literal,..open minded, candid,undprejudiced..favourable to democratic reform and individual liberty.
So the opponents of Liberality must be;
directed to general narrowing of mind, ungenerous, closefisted, rigourous and literal,..close minded,disingenuous,prejudiced..not favouring democratic reform or individual liberty.
simple really..if the cap fits...

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Once Famous
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:52 PM

Glad you are enjoying this thread, Amos.

I sure am.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:52 PM

Good gracious, pdq! Do you want all that??

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:53 PM

PDQ:

That is the biggest load of hooey I have ever seen. Where did you learn to think?

Oh..well, that explains it.

Seriously, how can you sleep at night knowing that you subscribe to such idiocy? Your list is preposterous and full of things that would be totally bad news to almost any liberal who had more than a few brain cells.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: pdq
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:55 PM

Anus - I put out ideas and facts, you put out personal attacks. Yep, business as usual!

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 07:50 PM

Oh boy! This is gonna be fun... Thanks, pdq. Ahem!

WHAT LIBERALS REALLY WANT:

   Free/Universal Health Care    -   Yes! I do want that, most advanced societies pretty well HAVE that already, and I more or less have it already...in Canada. More or less. Could be improved upon some.

   Ban all firearms - No! I absolutely do not want that, and I oppose such an idea utterly. Dictatorships in the works are the people who ban firearms.

   Ban the Bible because it is "hate speech" - No! I read the Bible, find much good in it, and I oppose banning any book from any religion or philosophy.

   Ban all private vehicles that get less than 40 MPG - Huh? Don't be silly.

   Make male+male homosexual marriages legal/normal - How does one make "normal" what is not the norm, and clearly never will be? :-) I don't give a damn if homosexuals marry one another. That's their business. It doesn't hurt me. I think they should get the same chance to suffer that other people do!

Make female+female (lesbian) marriages legal/normal - Ha! Same answer as the last one...though I find lesbians personally a bit more appealing than male homosexuals. :-)

   Make Social Security death benefits pass to homosexual partners (married or not) - As I am largely ignorant of what those death benefits might be, I am in no position to have an opinion about it, am I? And in any case, I don't care one way or the other.

   Nationalize the oil industry - I don't trust the oil companies. Neither do I trust the government. Accordingly, I have no strong opinion about that one way or the other.

   Nationalize the electricity industry - ditto

   Nationalize the transportation industry - ditto

   Nationalize the gas industry - ditto

   Nationalize the health care industry - I'd be in favour of doing that both ways...private AND governmental.

   Nationalize the auto industry - Nope.

   Nationalize the pharmaceutical industry - Nope.

   Ban Private ownership of radio and television stations - Nope. Just provide a few that ARE publicly owned, so people have an alternative to programming riddled with commercials. I say, you can have 85% privately owned, 15% publicly owned, and NO advertising on the public stations, and some imaginative programming where you can hear something BESIDES top 40. (Try CBC in Canada for that.)

   Make the US subject to decisions of the World Court - Damn right. Every country should be subject to international law.

   Make the US subservient to the United Nations - Nope. Just an equal player in a community of nations, under international law.

   End the two party system and only have "Democrat" on ballot - Ha! Ha! Ha! No...I would like to end the PARTY system, period. That means getting rid of the f**king Democrats as well as the Republicans. They both lie like a rug. Parties and thier big money backers are the main problems standing in the way of honest government.

   Unlimited immigration (6.2 Billion more people are OK) - Now you're really getting silly...

   Give all new immigrants free social services, same as American citizens get - I would give all people in the whole World free social services if I could, believe me. I can't, but I would.

   Give all new immigrants full Social Security benefits - With a sanely operating society worldwide, you would not HAVE an immigration problem in the first place. You think small, pdq, I think big. The whole World is my home, not just the country of my birth.

   End the GI Bill - I know nothing about that. No opinion.

   End Veteran's Hospital System - Same as above.

   End all special care for veterans - I would give special care to anyone who needs it, veterans included.

   Ban all rallies by white and other "non-minority" groups - I'm white. Why would I want to deprive myself of the fun of rallying? (I despise racism and prejudice on the part of certain vocal minority groups.)

   Support gays in the military so that Cpt. Jones and Cpt. Smith
       (both males) can kiss while reviewing the troops - I don't give a damn about that issue. I think it highly unimportant. Mind you, Roman soldiers used to kiss each other on the cheek, and it didn't stop them from conquering most of the known World. Do you really lie awake at night worrying about this kind of crap?

   Ban all CB and Ham radios as possible weapons of right-wing extremists - No. I like the idea of CB and Ham radios. I would encourage more of them. Lots more.

   Ban the Boy Scouts and declare them a "Hate Group" - If you looked at a list of the groups I want to ban, it would probably be the shortest list you ever saw. The Boy Scouts wouldn't be on it. I think the only people I would ban would be groups into human sacrifice, murder for hire, bank robbery, that sort of thing. :-) (stuff that's already totally illegal, and pretty well always has been, in other words!)

   Ban the practice of "loyalty oaths" at all levels of government - That depends on the content of said loyalty oath. I am suspicious of the concept, but it depends on the circumstances and the intent.

   Ban The Ten Commandments from any public display - No.

   Ban Christmas from all public documents - Absolutely No.

   Remove all trace of religion from all government-owned buildings - Definitely no.

   End pledge of allegiance from all schools, public and private - No, just make it voluntary, without bringing undue pressure on those students who don't want to say it.

   Ban all private schools unless they follow exact curriculum of public schools - Absolutely not.

   End home schooling - Absolutely not.

   (this is a partial list...add more if you wish to...)

You are reeling around in a paranoid fantasy, pdq. The liberal boogeyman you imagine is largely a creation of your own mind.

I, however, am not so much a liberal as I am a radical...if you must come up with a convenient (and probably misleading) label.

Please, tell us more of what it is that you think "liberals" believe in... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: pdq
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 07:57 PM

Little Hawk - Made ya work, didn't I! And you are quite correct about one thing: you are a 'radical' more than a 'liberal'.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 07:59 PM

He's a fan of William Shatner. That says it all, pdq.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 08:00 PM

In Canada a Liberal is a member of a well-known political party. In the USA he's a quiche-eating, atheist dumbass. :-)

In the UK a Liberal is a member of a well-known political party. In the USA he's a marriage-destroying, gay-loving, limp-wristed traitor. :-)

In France or Denmark or Norway or Holland or a liberal is someone with an open mind. In the USA he's a godless, dope-smoking, knee-jerk, writeoff.

Makes you wonder why any decent liberal would want to stay in the USA, doesn't it? My advice is, move out of the Fourth Reich while you still can...or brace yourself and get ready for a really tough time.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 09:03 PM

If it's any comfort, pdq, I AM aware that there are certain people who largely fit the extreme "liberal" stereotype you have presented above...a few here and there...and I regard them as major dumbasses who are incapable of original thinking. They are just as annoying as their arch-conservative counterparts.

But any extreme stereotype is more a cartoon figure than a real person.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 09:41 PM

There may be a few wildass liberal nuts out there who would byuy that whol;e shopping list. I object, however, to the notion that PDQ asserts he is listing facts when in fact these are bigoted assertions. PDQ, I am sorry to say this, but you are seriously mistaken ion both of your posts here. Your list of extremist perspectives does not describe any liberal I know, and you did not list facts.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 09:43 PM

We are what we are!

Whatever that is at any given point in time determines that those who aren't that will be doomed to a life spent putting up with you who differ with us--and vise versa. You may be poweful for the moment. And power is defined (for me) as the extent to which you can inconvenience others. Eventually the tables could be turned.

It can often be quite sad---but it's always a fascinating adventure.

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 10:43 AM

Bloody brilliant! Thanks for that link Amos, very funny but apposite!

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 10:48 AM

"power is defined as the extent to which you can inconvenience others" LOL! That's true, Art.

It can also be defined as the extent to which you can assist and empower others. Depends on how it's used and from whose perspective.

For instance, Joan of Arc proved to have great powers of personality, faith, and decision. Those permitted her to massively inconvenience the English invaders of France (and their Burgundian allies) and tremendously assist the rest of the French people, to the point of saving the nation. As such, she is remembered as a heroine and a martyr (even by the present-day English).

Evidently, power can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on one's perspective and one's intentions and purposes. France was very much in need of someone who could "inconvenience" the English at that juncture in history.

We are in great need of leaders with the wisdom to exercise power for the benefit of all persons, not just for the benefit of themselves and a privileged few at the top.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: artbrooks
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 10:56 AM

pdq, I think I'd come close to agreeing with about three of the things on that list. Most of them are just plain silly.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 11:41 AM

I find the 12 points of roguery hilarious, and obviously one of Martins' famous wind-ups,but they do bring out some uncomfortable truths for the soft left.

I have long believed that the "democratic" left philosophy parroted by so many Mudcatters and an absolute ooze of politicians,was politically correct, self deluding hypocisy.

Their position of supposedly trying to bring about meaningful change within a Capitalist system,is at best laughable, and very probably an impediment to the achievment of real freedom and equality.

The sad thing is, that these people dont really want change, they are quite happy in their own "neverland", spouting their "democratic" theories, and hoping for the EVOLUTION that will never come.
Whereas Martin and his followers KNOW they are right.
Nomatter how outrageous their opinions seem to you and I, to the right these opinions are not up for debate and they will defend them "tooth and claw".
They see straight ahead to a shining light and will not be diverted by what they see as "liberal values".

If only we on the left had the same self-belief, we might be able to set the world on a better kinder path, but as Little Hawk says, we are so unsure and frightened,that we allow ourselves to be bullied into accepting a false freedom and a psuedo democracy.

If we were honest, we would agree that the soft left are only conservatives in disguise,and as Martin says "unworthy of respect".

Whenever anyone writes on this forum to point out the contradictions in the position of the "democratic" left, they are kicked around like a football by the psuedo-intellectuals, proving that they are more afraid of the real left than they are of the conservatives.

I would conclude that Martin is probably right ,and that "liberalism" will not be too hard to exterminate....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Grab
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 12:52 PM

Nice troll, Martin. I feel obliged to affix you to the wall with your own nails though...

Step 1: Admitting that you're a liberal

Yep. Per our friendly Guest above, "Directed to general broadening of mind,..generous, openhanded,..not rigorous or literal,..open minded, candid, unprejudiced..favourable to democratic reform and individual liberty." Proud to be so. Are you proud to say that you don't fit any of those categories? And incidentally, in the last three UK elections I've voted Liberal Democrat.

Step 2: Pledge to support your beliefs with facts

Yep, always do. I don't need to blindly believe that WMDs really were out there, or that Saddam really had links to Al-Qaeda, or that the Department of Homeland Security (and the corresponding UK Home Office section) are really making our lives safer, or that imprisonment without trial or even telling prisoners what they're imprisoned for in the UK and US (and certainly not presenting that to the public) is for everyone's good. If we can't believe that the government is efficient, can we trust them to behave morally without people being able to speak up in opposition to them? After all, if you couldn't trust JFK, Nixon or Clinton to behave morally, where's your guarantee from Mr. "Now Watch This Drive" and his appointed officials?

Step 3: Love America

Certainly do. It's a great country (even though I don't live there myself) and the bravery of its founding fathers is an inspiration to us all. However its recent leaders have been less inspiring. Think McCarthy and J Edgar Hoover's witch-hunts, JFK and Clinton using their presidential status to get laid, Nixon, and the various undignified involvements in Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Cambodia, Grenada, Somalia and Iraq. Please don't think I'm singling out the US government for particular attention - I know the UK government's record in Aden, Indonesia and Northern Ireland (to name just three) isn't anything to be proud of. My point is that you can love a country and still be clear that the actions of that country's present government are unjustified and/or immoral. I mean, as a Republican you're totally prepared to call Bill Clinton a "a lying-cheating-sexist-racist-rapist jackass", even though he was your president. Why are we not allowed to make similar criticisms of politicians and their actions when they're in power?

Step 4: Take a college level economics class

Sorry, I can't make this one. I looked at the careers path for economics and it was basically empty. That sounds like some kind of economic truth to me - if there's no future in spending 3 years and a bunch of your own money studying something, you're better spending the time and money somewhere else...

Step 5: Say "no" to Communism and Socialism

I'm with you on the former. However Europe has a long history of "Social Democrat" and "Christian Socialist" parties, who represent centre-left AND centre-right positions. There's a big spectrum of opinions in the socialism arena - if you doubt that, remember that the UK is being run by a socialist government right now, and very few would say they have much to do with Communism!

Step 6: Corporations are not evil

So far so good. However that doesn't make them benevolent either. In law, a corporation is its own entity, like a person. An individual can be held responsible for their actions, but it's less easy to be clear about a person taking some illegal or immoral action for the good of their corporation. For that reason, there are rules on what corporations can and can't do.

Step 7: The government is inefficient

Yep. So is any large company though. The private sector will *not* necessarily put your money to better use. The UK government has contracted out many IT projects to the private sector over the last 20 years, and I cannot remember a single one that came in on time and on budget, due to the failings of those private-sector companies.

Also bear in mind that the private sector is required to make a profit for private owners, where the public sector is required to work for the public users. So to take an example, a centre to look after aging diabetics will make a large profit by looking after a few rich people, but a centre to provide basic healthcare (setting broken bones, immunisation, etc) in an inner-city area is unlikely to turn up much income, even though it is helping many more people.

By the way, I'm interested in the way it's axiomatic that "government is inefficient", and yet other actions such as military action are beyond criticism. Where's your threshold for allowing constructive feedback on government actions?

Step 8: The earth is not your "mother," and she's not dying

"Face the reality that the earth, society, and our environment are better off today than ever in recorded history and that they are continuing to improve." Well, some places certainly are. Other places certainly aren't. Much of Scandanavia has suffered from acid rain, to the extent that nothing can live there. The Exxon Valdez didn't do much good to the Alaskan coastline either. And whilst the world currently may be in a good state, someone has to keep an eye on what's going on. Corporations aren't going to, because they maximise their income by clear-cutting the forests. Maybe in 100 years there won't be any forests to clear-cut, but this doesn't bother a corporation when tomorrow's share price is the prime concern. For a good example, look at Canada's Grand Banks which are now fish-free and may never recover after massive over-fishing - even when it was clear that over-fishing was destroying the fish stocks, it carried on until there was nothing left to catch. This is one part of economics maybe you missed?

Step 9: Stop smoking the wacky tobaccy

Doesn't do anything for me. I'd get your president to lay off the Jack Daniels though.

Step 10: Eat a hamburger

Yep. Not from McDonalds though, since their own literature makes it clear that they're 50% water.

Step 11: Stop re-writing political history

OK - in spite of any disagreements in there, those events are gone. Please can we also be clear though that there were *no* WMDs in Iraq, and that war-crimes were committed in Vietnam and Cambodia, and that there is no reason to maintain sanctions against Cuba? The current US government is not prepared to own up to any of these. (As an interesting aside, the governments opposing the creation of a independent UN war crimes court look like a list of the world's rogue states...and the US. Why? Because if this was ever set up, Henry Kissinger would be liable for war crimes committed by US forces in Vietnam and Cambodia. But Kissinger is now an "elder statesman" and a respected US envoy. How's that for re-writing political history?)

Step 12: Be a missionary

Oh, I am, I am. I'm spreading the righteous word, man, and the word is "LIBERAL"...

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: pdq
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 12:55 PM

artbrooks - Wouldn't it be better to argue with or defend those three points rather than say "most of them are just plain silly"? We just went through a four year election cycle where the liberals put few (if any) issues on the table for consideration. They said "I hate Bush" or "anybody but Bush". Maybe liberals don't really know what they want. Forcing them to discuss issues will result in changes that benefit all sides.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: artbrooks
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 01:01 PM

It is more that a little difficult to argue/defend a proposition that nobody espouses, which is where nearly all of your alleged "Liberal Ideas" fall.

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 01:05 PM

What a load of twaddle!
I am a liberal, and none of those things fit me.
I once spoke without careful consideration, a generalization, and my wife said "Sure, and all Indians walk single file too."
I said "what kind of silly statement isthat"? and she said "Well, I saw an Indian once, and he was walking single file."

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: M.Ted
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 02:13 PM

"I apologize for the blue clicky problem I have."

Your apology accepted, Martin--after all, it is Christmas-

Subject: RE: BS: Overcoming Liberalism. A 12 step Program
From: Piers
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 02:14 PM

Grab, 'the UK is being run by a socialist government right now' - if you define socialism as consistently acting at the behest of the capitalist, free market ideology (except where British Industry needs protection) and generally acting like the previous conservative government then you are right. But I really wish people wouldn't try to redefine 'socialism' and 'communism' - the founders of the movement used the terms interchangebly for a society of common ownership (not state), democratic control of the economy and access to goods and services on the basis of need, rather than ability to pay. It was Lenin that defined socialism and communism as different, and then as state ownership and control of the economy - doing a great diservice to the socialist cause in the process.

The problem with liberalism, and I talk in very general terms here, is that it is essentially an emotional response which sees freedom as the absence of direct physical constraint (freedom from something). This ignores poverty, unemployment, wage/salary labour and alienation as the hugely oppresive constraints that they are.

Under capitalism (mainly private or mainly state), the working class are unfree. Individual workers may have some 'freedom' of action (to change jobs, for example), as a member of the working class you are coerced into selling your labour, or taking on any of the roles involved in the reproduction of labour power, such as schoolchild, housewife or pensioner. Because the capitalist class own the means of life, workers cannot escape from their class position in society: they are wage slaves.

For socialists, freedom is self-determination. On the new basis of common ownership, democratic control and production solely for self-determined needs, socialism will be a society in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

Liberals would rather tweak the capitalist system here and there, but seem unable to recognise the social relations that give rise to the majority of blights on people in society.