Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is great to hold yourself to a high standard, but when you see yourself as much better you come to view everybody else as beneath you which invites lack of tolerance and superiority complex. It may even invite the mindset of those not like you being subhuman or see other as children needing guidance which leads to tyranny. Hitler had a high standard for himself and his German people. It invites the mindset it is justifiable that some decided acceptable things might be done for the greater good.
You hurl out banal catchphrases and ridiculous insults and then get upset when someone thinks they're better than that? You honestly think that any of the right-wingers on this board are any more willing to give serious consideration to a 'liberal' idea?
I'm pretty sure that the reason so many right wingers think liberals are 'high and mighty' is because they're insecure about their intellects, usually owing to the nature of their education.
It's why they gravitate towards the simplest explanations, why Trump is so popular, etc. They keep trying to pretend that the answer is so simple that anyone who doesn't get it is a moron. This is because complexity and ambiguity frighten and confuse them. Whenever someone tries to tell them that there might be more to an issue than 'bomb the hell out of them' or 'make our country great again', they get upset and start pulling out classic lines like 'liberalism is a mental disorder', etc... which is essentially also what you have done here.
You've even managed to somehow work Hitler into the equation, which is ridiculous since asking people to please not be idiots is hardly fascism.
I don't think I deserve money, fame or power. I don't think I'm important. I don't think I'm special or unique. I don't need to be admired (it would be nice to be listened to before I'm dismissed, however). I don't feel entitled to more than my fair share. What I would really like is if people like you stopped being idiots. It's not that I'm a genius, it's that you and people like you are much stupider than you should be. It's impossible to discuss things when the whole point for 75% of RWers is repeating 'liberals are idiots' over and over.
And if The Dusty wants to compare my intellect to that of a potato for saying so, I would say that The Dusty is the potato, and that we should make potato salad.
Ok, fine, let's do this way. I'll respond to the OPs points not as a liberal and simply as someone analyzing the points in contrast to what liberalism traditionally expects people to believe and we can discuss that and leave this Bono nonsense behind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
It's difficult to sort out their hypocrisy. Please help.
- Tim Cook: It's OK for Apple to do business with countries that execute men for being homosexual, but it's not OK for a baker to refuse to bake a cake for a homosexual couple in the USA.
This is an issue with foreign policy. Liberals do not believe one country has the authority to dictate how another lives. Liberalism is not a outward sort of ideology. You could have made this about Democrats, and had a halfway valid point. Neoliberalism has no problem with invading a country for any reason, including mandating they respect homosexuals. But not every liberal is a neoliberal even if they vote Democrat.
Is it a contradiction to expect a baker to serve homosexuals equally but be ok with Apple doing business with Saudi Arabia? Not really. I get how you came to that conclusion, but again, it's an issue of how one views their own country versus how they view others. Beyond this, there's the argument that the 14th amendment in principles supports the rights of homosexuals, who are then protected by the same anti-discrimination laws as anyone else. Rather or not it's right for Apple to do business with Saudi Arabia may be a question of ethics, but not really one pertaining to liberalism. Because Apple is not doing anything explicitly unethical, a liberal has no real reason to have major issues with this. I personally have disagreements with Apple doing it, though it has nothing to do with liberalism.
I'm skipping out on the paypal and Springsteen arguments becasue my point wouldn't change enough between the 3 of these at this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
- Barbara Boxer: When the Pope speaks about Global Warming Catholics should listen to him. But when the Pope speaks about abortion, he is wrong and Catholics should not listen to him.
This isn't a contradiction at all. It's pretty much what you'd expect. I would argue that most conservatives probably agree with the Pope on abortion, but think he should stay out of the politics of Global Warming. Though most conservatives I know, unless they are catholic, tend to want the Pope out of the spotlight for the most part. Regardless, when the Pope says something a non-Catholic agrees with, it stands to reason they'd support them on that issue, but not on areas of disagreement. I guess I'm not sure why that's even an issue worth discussing.
I'm pretty sure that the reason so many right wingers think liberals are 'high and mighty' is because they're insecure about their intellects, usually owing to the nature of their education.
Ah, back to the liberals are "smarter" argument....
(yawn)
Quote:
It's why they gravitate towards the simplest explanations, why Trump is so popular, etc. They keep trying to pretend that the answer is so simple that anyone who doesn't get it is a moron. This is because complexity and ambiguity frighten and confuse them.
"Complexity" and "ambiguity" mean "agreeing with liberals."
Quote:
You've even managed to somehow work Hitler into the equation, which is ridiculous since asking people to please not be idiots is hardly fascism.
Who would bother asking an idiot not to be an idiot?
All you have are ad hominem attacks -- based on your totally unjustified superiority complex.
Quote:
I don't need to be admired (it would be nice to be listened to before I'm dismissed, however). I don't feel entitled to more than my fair share. What I would really like is if people like you stopped being idiots.
LOL
Do you ever listen to yourself?
Too funny!
Quote:
It's not that I'm a genius, it's that you and people like you are much stupider than you should be.
Mkay.
If you say so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Is it a contradiction to expect a baker to serve homosexuals equally but be ok with Apple doing business with Saudi Arabia? Not really.
Wrong.
Saudi Arabia persecutes homosexuals.
Quote:
I get how you came to that conclusion, but again, it's an issue of how one views their own country versus how they view others. Beyond this, there's the argument that the 14th amendment in principles supports the rights of homosexuals, who are then protected by the same anti-discrimination laws as anyone else. Rather or not it's right for Apple to do business with Saudi Arabia may be a question of ethics, but not really one pertaining to liberalism. Because Apple is not doing anything explicitly unethical, a liberal has no real reason to have major issues with this. I personally have disagreements with Apple doing it, though it has nothing to do with liberalism.
Yes, and while liberals may oppose this, they do not believe one country should have the authority to interfere in another countries affairs, with the exception of extreme cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet
You're really in a muddle here. It is ethical, no it isn't. It is liberal, no it isn't....
I agree. It is unethical. But I'm not a liberal.
Is it liberal to be ok with it? Maybe not. I'm not sure it's anti-liberal to not be against it though either. Again, Apple is explicit saying they support the actions of the Saudi government. Odds are, Apple doesn't care at all. They want to turn a profit and that's it. Liberalism, despite what many claim, isn't really against capitalism, which has it's goal set as turning a profit. From the view of a liberal, Apple isn't doing anything unethical simply by selling a product in a country that does something that is considered unethical.
If one wants to be critical of liberalism and involve Apple, I'd suggest going to who, where, and in what conditions their products are being made. In researching what that is, I'm sure you'll find some issues. I however wouldn't call it an issue of hypocrisy, but more just failures of an economic system that liberals think can be fixed with a regulation or some food stamps.
Actually, they don't. Have you ever worked in a food kitchen with church members? No sermon is required.
People give billions to the needy with no strings attached. You really should get out more often.
Yes, I know. I give charitably, too, with no strings attached. And I know of several shelters where I live where there is some form of religious coercion.
Perhaps you should get out more often, because what happens in your little backyard isn't necessarily what happens in the rest of the world.
This list here of narcissistic traits certainly doesn't only pertain to liberals but does explain why liberals often believe they are more advanced, more educated, more better people, more enlightened and needed by others to guide all those unknowing other people with their rules, regulation, bans and belittling of those they don't agree with while they often exclude themselves from their own rules, sounds a lot like organized religion doesn't it the thing that liberals love to belittle the most?. I think the word I am looking for to describe it in one word is tyrant.
You do everyone a disservice to make these associations the way you do, about liberals for example, because you are basically attempting to explain something you simply do not understand, and that's not me demonstrating any narcissistic trait as you would no doubt like to believe. It's the plain truth, as follows:
The notions you get about what liberals think and/or who they are is actually born from research, surveys, data that goes something like this...
A series of questions are asked of a large enough number of people to determine whether someone seems to be more liberal vs conservative.
Survey is completed, and then they get demographics from those who respond to the survey, for example to ask age, sex, ethnic background, race, level of education, level of success, level of income, family members, religion, etc.
Then they correlate what the demographic seems to be for liberals vs conservatives (or whomever the survey target group may be).
If it so happens that liberals tend to be more highly educated as a general rule vs those who seem to think more conservatively (as shown over and over), then that's not just what liberals think of themselves. It's simply what is shown by the research done, the data such as it is...
And no doubt conservatives hate that!
Here, for example, is a thread and survey that compares how you answer to the demographics established by surveying 10,000 Americans...
It is great to hold yourself to a high standard, but when you see yourself as much better you come to view everybody else as beneath you which invites lack of tolerance and superiority complex. It may even invite the mindset of those not like you being subhuman or see other as children needing guidance which leads to tyranny. Hitler had a high standard for himself and his German people. It invites the mindset it is justifiable that some decided acceptable things might be done for the greater good.
Hard to have conversation or consider one as a peer when the one talking to you has decided they are so right that questioning themself is not n the table for consideration or that everyone else is decidedly beneath them unless they agree.
It would be interesting to see your list of who exactly you consider lower examples of human behavior because I have always believed that narcissism is a lower trait.
This list here of narcissistic traits certainly doesn't only pertain to liberals but does explain why liberals often believe they are more advanced, more educated, more better people, more enlightened and needed by others to guide all those unknowing other people with their rules, regulation, bans and belittling of those they don't agree with while they often exclude themselves from their own rules, sounds a lot like organized religion doesn't it the thing that liberals love to belittle the most?. I think the word I am looking for to describe it in one word is tyrant.
Right-wing authoritarians are people who have a high degree of willingness to submit to authorities they perceive as established and legitimate, who adhere to societal conventions and norms, and who are hostile and punitive in their attitudes towards people who don't adhere to them. They value uniformity and are in favour of using group authority
Right-wing authoritarians are people who have a high degree of willingness to submit to authorities they perceive as established and legitimate, who adhere to societal conventions and norms, and who are hostile and punitive in their attitudes towards people who don't adhere to them. They value uniformity and are in favour of using group authority
right or left - both are authoritarians...with different mechanisms in place to do so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
