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.
Well before I go on, I guess I need a brief explanation of what is a liberal in your mind. Personally I hate labels because they have no definitive definition. Many black athletes come from low-income households that grow up on public assistance. Tons of both black and white athletes (especially from the NHL) have been strong allies and advocates for gay rights. There are some male athletes that identify as feminists. There are some that are hipsters. So what exactly is up with these labels liberal and conservative?
Being poor doesn't make one a liberal. That just makes them poor. In fact, those that have been poor and climbed out of it end up being conservatives more often than not.
For me personally it's relatively simple. Liberty vs. equality. Liberals seem to equate the two, but they're actually diametrically opposed to one another from the perspective of liberalism.
Take "equality" for example. I think we all believe in equality. The difference is conservatives believe in equal opportunity, while liberals believe in equal outcomes. Equal OPPORTUNITY is liberty. It's the freedom to succeed. An equal outcome is generally only achieved by taking from someone else that achieved more and balancing the outcome. That's not liberty, because the over-achiever loses their freedom.
Poor people in general really don't WANT hand-OUTS. They WANT hand-ups. Opportunity. But since opportunity is more often than not taken away from the poor, they settle for the hand-OUTS out of necessity. Very few figure out "the matrix" as I call it, well enough to beat it. But the vast majority are left behind. Whether that's blacks and hispanics left to rot in the ghettos and barrios of the inner cities, or the whites left to rot in the trailer parks of the south and midwest, they get left behind. The elite seem to enjoy pitting them against one another to help keep them all where they are.
I mean think about it, if you were on welfare living on a thousand, even two thousand a month, wouldn't you much rather go to work to live on five thousand or ten thousand? Of course you would. It's getting there that's the problem. Especially when you're told the first step is working like a dog for the same or less than the government would just hand you.
This thread is going to get locked because the topic is so far gone, lol, but I'm still looking for an answer to the original question. This can't be purely cultural. If so, that's scary.
Who said I was overly concerned about it? NOTICING something doesn't necessarily mean you're concerned.
You chose to facilitate a discussion about your observation, which you feel negatively about. That indicates concern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeclanMadden
...and how the hell could one not notice someone wearing what amounts to denim yoga pants and a beanie? I notice what everyone is wearing when I walk into a building. It's part of a threat assessment, not a fashion show.
Is it overwhelming to live in a country where paranoia is so natural?
I'm only calling it as I see it. I used to just laugh at liberal males and move on, but the more I read here the more I'm wondering what the hell is going on. Because if it's some sort of food causing it I want to avoid it.
Without questioning your definition of liberal and conservative, myself coming from the world of sports I will tell you there are tons of left leaning athletes in college and pro sports. In fact I am pretty sure Hillary got more votes out of the NFL then did Trump, and what is more alpha then that? So from my observation politics and being a tough guy have no connection what so ever, and you and your friends need to get around a bit more.
That's a fallacy.
Anyone earning NFL money would be committing themselves to paying considerably more in federal income tax and a whole host of other hidden taxes had Hillary and the Democrats won.
Unless your some kind of idealogue, most would/will vote with their pocket books in mind.
Trump had far more positive popularity in the sports world than Hillary.
Being poor doesn't make one a liberal. That just makes them poor. In fact, those that have been poor and climbed out of it end up being conservatives more often than not.
For me personally it's relatively simple. Liberty vs. equality. Liberals seem to equate the two, but they're actually diametrically opposed to one another from the perspective of liberalism.
Take "equality" for example. I think we all believe in equality. The difference is conservatives believe in equal opportunity, while liberals believe in equal outcomes. Equal OPPORTUNITY is liberty. It's the freedom to succeed. An equal outcome is generally only achieved by taking from someone else that achieved more and balancing the outcome. That's not liberty, because the over-achiever loses their freedom.
Poor people in general really don't WANT hand-OUTS. They WANT hand-ups. Opportunity. But since opportunity is more often than not taken away from the poor, they settle for the hand-OUTS out of necessity. Very few figure out "the matrix" as I call it, well enough to beat it. But the vast majority are left behind. Whether that's blacks and hispanics left to rot in the ghettos and barrios of the inner cities, or the whites left to rot in the trailer parks of the south and midwest, they get left behind. The elite seem to enjoy pitting them against one another to help keep them all where they are.
I mean think about it, if you were on welfare living on a thousand, even two thousand a month, wouldn't you much rather go to work to live on five thousand or ten thousand? Of course you would. It's getting there that's the problem. Especially when you're told the first step is working like a dog for the same or less than the government would just hand you.
This thread is going to get locked because the topic is so far gone, lol, but I'm still looking for an answer to the original question. This can't be purely cultural. If so, that's scary.
I think your getting too deep in your defining labels. Most people would consider those that lean left as liberal and those that lean right as conservative and forgetting that the majority of people are pretty close to the center.
Anyone earning NFL money would be committing themselves to paying considerably more in federal income tax and a whole host of other hidden taxes had Hillary and the Democrats won.
Unless your some kind of idealogue, most would/will vote with their pocket books in mind.
Trump had far more positive popularity in the sports world than Hillary.
Not a fallacy at all. I have earned my living in sports for over 40 years and will tell you that sports is simply a microcosm of the general population.
Trump had support from some in boxing for example because he has been a friend to the sport. Hillary and Trump were pretty equal when it came to endorsements, Hillary had more HOF members and a much higher percentage of black athletes which of course make up two thirds of the NFL.
Not a fallacy at all. I have earned my living in sports for over 40 years and will tell you that sports is simply a microcosm of the general population.
Trump had support from some in boxing for example because he has been a friend to the sport. Hillary and Trump were pretty equal when it came to endorsements, Hillary had more HOF members and a much higher percentage of black athletes which of course make up two thirds of the NFL.
And by the way most of the 200 or so Americans from the NHL voted Libertarian. The NHL is very gay friendly and did not like Pence and his stance that gay people can be cured.
I think your getting too deep in your defining labels. Most people would consider those that lean left as liberal and those that lean right as conservative and forgetting that the majority of people are pretty close to the center.
Yeah but what does "left" and "right" refer to?
They're French terms that date back to the French revolution, and where people would organize themselves into two groups. Terms like "far left, far right, left wing, and right wing" are meaningless. The left and right referred to two groups who met at the national assembly. The left and right was the perspective of the French president when looking at them.
My grandfather was a confused libertarian that called himself a liberal. He was so cheap the man's wallet creaked when he opened it. So needless to say he was fiscally conservative. However socially he didn't seem to care what anyone did so long as they didn't get in his way. Socially liberal.
Think about it. Where do most blacks in their late 30's and above sit? Liberals? None that I've known.
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.
