Thank god I'm not Republican. Did you know that Republicans are racists, bigots, and sexists that have no soul, cannot think for themselves, and are stupid and dishonest?
Enjoy for a moment some mindlessness that reveals how some who symbolically profess diversity, tolerance, and not stereotyping others are actually hostile to these virtues:
http://www.thefrown.com/player.php?/frowners/becomerepublican
1 comment:
Ostensibly, the liberal/progressive/socialist ( it's a relatively wide continuum ) is for diversity, but functionally it's just an array of melanin distribution as part of what is essentially a boutique multiculturism which in turn enforces, or supports a perspective that is shared by all that claim membership.
Inauthentic and unwanted are any who make distinctions, cast judgements or question the actions of any mascot of this group, or point out the internal logical inconsistencies of the prevailing orthodoxy.
Reaching one's "higher self" through regimentation which is at least the goal of the honest socialist and the outcome of some of the creeping socialism of the contemporary Democratic politics, is at odds with the concept of small "l" liberalism as originally understood in the West.
Some honest liberal/progressive/socialists have not read anything by Burke, Oakenshott, Sowell or Buckley and fear some of their ideas or analysis out of ignorance. Or at least, that's my guess as to some of the angry, blind partisanship.
Some others lack even a remedial understanding of Islam and worse, believe radical Islam to be a legitimate response to the oppressive American hegemony.
It's no small matter that Peter Beinart, (editor of the New Republic from 1999 until March of this year) wrote a book about how liberals can win the war on terror and make America safe and got enormous criticism and scorn from the base of the Democratic party.
If there's any truth to the midterm election results, it's that both parties betrayed their base. Many moderates won victories for the Democrats nationally. The Republicans became an institution, rather than acting as the party which was to limit the size and scope of the institution.
I'm hoping blogger Andrew Sullivan's recent example of when British Labour beat out the Tories in one cycle which led to a strengthened, more principled comeback for 4 cycles for the Tories becomes the analogous prognostication for the U.S. political scene.
It's also worth adding to this spiel, the point made by Thomas Sowell in his book "Conflict of Visions" where he discusses two main views of man as the "unconstrained and the "constrained"...
"In addition to these changing asymmetric relationships between the two visions, there is an enduring asymmetric relationship based on how they see each other as adversaries. Each must regard the other as mistaken, but the reasons for the "mistake" are different. In the unconstrained vision, in which man can master social complexities sufficiently to apply directly the logic and morality of the common good, ther presence of highly educated and intelligent people diametrically opposed to policies aimed at that common good is either an intellectual puzzle or a moral outrage or both. Implications of bad faith, venality, or other moral or intellectual deficiencies have been much more common in the unconstrained vision's criticisms of the constrained vision than vice versa."
I'll let you all be the judge of which party contains more of either vision, the "unconstrained" or the "constrained" and what that eventually means for the "New Direction" we're about to witness.
Post a Comment