A question for Conservatives

[hortysir]

Oh, like I can't criticize crack smokers because I've never smoked crack? Well I don't have to because I've seen how it destroys people.

I don't need a degree in Communism to see how it's never worked in any place it's tried and destroyed millions of lives.

I know people who actually lived in actual repressive countries (Like Iran, China, Vietnam) so I don't need you spoiled, pointy headed intellectuals trying to lecture me.

Besides, you have a bigger problem: Islam is taking over your country. Enjoy your Sharia Law faggot.

Iran is not Communist or Socialist.

Did he say that?

 

[The Rabbi]

Yall have mass, bloody, destructive riots, your royals are being attacked by POS trash, your economy's in the shitter.

Mother England is coming back stronger than ever in 2011. We've got some things in the works that I'm not allowed to divulge. It's bigger than iPad 2. Just you wait. You haven't heard the last from the greatest empire in history.

Rum, sodomy, and the lash.

 

[SFC Ollie]

It has been many years since i last read anything by Marx; but then again I don't go about calling people a Marxist either.

 

[daveman]

It really doesn't matter what Marx said. All that matters is what has been done in his name.

And that's been nothing but bloody, murderous failure.

 

[Cuyo]

Have you ever read a complete text by Marx?

Have you ever studied Marx in university context, where you unpacked his terms inside their historical context?

Here is why I ask.

I notice that Conservatives make constant references to Marx, but I never get the sense that they've studied his work in depth. I get the sense that they've been exposed to Marx mostly by interested 3rd parties (Talk Radio, partisan literature, the echo chamber) who provide only cherry picked quotes.

I have a friend who has been referring to Marx for years. I finally found out he had never read anything by Marx and it scared me.

When I tried to investigate why he would do such a thing, I discovered something horrific.

First, I should mention, I understand that Conservatives have created a universe which circulates talking points to their members. [This is what all political parties do] These talking points, which contain references to Marx, are pumped through a vast media network and repeated endlessly until they are experienced as "facts". I get this, and I realize that these talking points are designed for lemmings who can't think for themselves. Both parties have this regrettable element.

The horrific part is that so many people do not experience any cognitive dissonance when they use a reference that they've never fully investigated.

Here is my question, again. Why do Conservatives use terms that they've never studied? Is there anything about their personalities that would explain this? Does the movement attract a certain type of person? Is it a quasi-religious thing whereby they trust "higher powers" for their information? Or is this just a malignant strain of Machiavellianism, e.g., say anything to "fight the other side".

Please help me understand.

[Please don't say "liberals do it too". We already know this. The question is not "why do commie liberals act stupidly or unethically?" rather: "why do good conservative americans act stupidly or unethically?"]

History, all types, and Literature were what I excelled @ in High School. I used to read my history book just for fun in study hall.

That said, I see no need to read Marx's literature fully. I've skimmed over it before, but it's easy to pick out the main points, the crux, all that really matters, and pwn it. Random curiosity always fuels my Google searches for historical figures, events, etc.

I study objectively, what I need to to be properly informed, and versed, but reading up on Marx's childhood, or his mannerisms is really unnecessary.

I also wouldn't generalize on the scope you are sir. I could just as well ask: "Why is this Briton's teeth so bad? Why is he so concerned with us, our politics, when his own nation is going to hell in a hand basket?"

See how easy that was?

If you were as well read as you claim... You would not be a young, urban, Latino, gay 'Republican.'

 

[Two Thumbs]

Never studied Marx or Mao. Or even that much about hitler and stalin.

Why would I need to?

All I truly need to do is understand that those systems failed at exactly what they were meant to prevent.

In truly horrific fashion.

Next time you want to make an accusation. Try some honesty and not attempt to color an insult by putting a question mark at the end.

 

[Gadawg73]

Groucho, Harpo or Chico?

"I won't belong to any organization that would have me as a member."

 

[daveman]

If you were as well read as you claim... You would not be a young, urban, Latino, gay 'Republican.'

What an astoundingly arrogant claim.

 

[Cuyo]

If you were as well read as you claim... You would not be a young, urban, Latino, gay 'Republican.'

What an astoundingly arrogant claim.

If you say so Hank Hill, but you guys have been demonizing all 4 of those demographics for half a century.

 

[daveman]

If you were as well read as you claim... You would not be a young, urban, Latino, gay 'Republican.'

What an astoundingly arrogant claim.

If you say so Hank Hill, but you guys have been demonizing all 4 of those demographics for half a century.

You guys have been telling minorities how to think for at least that long. And it pisses you off when they refuse your orders and instead think for themselves...as your post shows.

Remember, (R)...a straight white liberal knows better than you how you should think.

 

[Two Thumbs]

wow - all the responses have been personal digs insults or excuses about how ppl dont have to really read


its not surprising given the audience tho

Who's making digs? How much do you have to read to know the end result?

Do you know anything about electricity?

Do you know why it was used for executions?

Do you know who's idea it was to do so?


I do. Does that mean you are not allowed to voice your opinion on the DP b/c you don't know the details, but just the end result.

 

[Cuyo]

What an astoundingly arrogant claim.

If you say so Hank Hill, but you guys have been demonizing all 4 of those demographics for half a century.

You guys have been telling minorities how to think for at least that long. And it pisses you off when they refuse your orders and instead think for themselves...as your post shows.

Well, in the case of R1, I don't think he exists as we know him. I think, actually it's rather obvious, that it's a character somebody is playing. Possibly somebody else's sock, but not necessarily.

And no, I demand obedience from nobody, unless I sign their paycheck. I find it discouraging and sad to see people tricked into voting against their self-interests, though.

 

[daveman]

If you say so Hank Hill, but you guys have been demonizing all 4 of those demographics for half a century.

You guys have been telling minorities how to think for at least that long. And it pisses you off when they refuse your orders and instead think for themselves...as your post shows.

Well, in the case of R1, I don't think he exists as we know him. I think, actually it's rather obvious, that it's a character somebody is playing. Possibly somebody else's sock, but not necessarily.

And no, I demand obedience from nobody, unless I sign their paycheck. I find it discouraging and sad to see people tricked into voting against their self-interests, though.

And what the hell makes you, a white straight liberal, qualified to tell a gay Latino Republican what his self-interests are?

 

[Cuyo]

You guys have been telling minorities how to think for at least that long. And it pisses you off when they refuse your orders and instead think for themselves...as your post shows.

Well, in the case of R1, I don't think he exists as we know him. I think, actually it's rather obvious, that it's a character somebody is playing. Possibly somebody else's sock, but not necessarily.

And no, I demand obedience from nobody, unless I sign their paycheck. I find it discouraging and sad to see people tricked into voting against their self-interests, though.

And what the hell makes you, a white straight liberal, qualified to tell a gay Latino Republican what his self-interests are?

Common sense. Will you honestly tell me that Republicans are the champions of gay and minority affairs?

 

[westwall]

Have you ever read a complete text by Marx?

Have you ever studied Marx in a university context, where you unpacked his terms inside their historical context?

Here is why I ask.

I notice that Conservatives make constant references to Marx, but I never get the sense that they've studied his work in depth. I get the sense that they've been exposed to Marx mostly by interested 3rd parties (Talk Radio, partisan literature, the echo chamber) who provide only cherry picked quotes.

I have a friend who has been referring to Marx for years. I finally found out he had never read anything by Marx and it scared me.

When I tried to investigate why he would do such a thing, I discovered something horrific.

First, I should mention, I understand that Conservatives have created a universe which circulates talking points to their members. [This is what all political parties do] These talking points, which contain references to Marx, are pumped through a vast media network and repeated endlessly until they are experienced as "facts". I get this, and I realize that these talking points are designed for lemmings who can't think for themselves. Both parties have this regrettable element.

The horrific part is that so many people do not experience any cognitive dissonance when they use a reference that they've never fully investigated.

Here is my question, again. Why do Conservatives use terms that they've never studied? Is there anything about their personalities that would explain this? Does the movement attract a certain type of person? Is it a quasi-religious thing whereby they trust "higher powers" for their information? Is it really enough that William F Buckley read some Marx at Yale, which lead to an industry of secondary criticism (twice removed from the source), which criticism has produced fully formed opinions in people who've never consulted the source?

Please help me understand.

[Please don't say "liberals do it too". We already know this. The question is not "why do commie liberals act stupidly or unethically?". We know why? -they're commie liberals. The questions is: "why do good conservative americans act stupidly or unethically?"]

Is it possible that huge portions of the Right have never studied a word that use daily? Is it really possible that the party of Lincoln has been taken over by morons?

(Lie to me. Tell me you've studied Marx. Stretch the truth. Invent some rationalization about how you don't need to read an author to understand him -- and how you can trust news personalities to educate you and your children. Anything. Just don't tell me that you've never directly studied one of your key terms)

(Conservatives rely on the term "Marx" more than anything in their lexicon -- it is their lynchpin to criticize the Left. What if most of them have never read Marx and don't even understand his theories?)

(Is the most powerful political movement in my lifetime -- the Reagan Revolution -- kept afloat by an army of useful idiots?)

Yep, my grandfather made me read The Poverty of Philosophy, and thThe Communist Manifesto when I was 9. He then helped me to understand what was written so I could become a good little commie like him. Didn't work though, I don't like collectivism.

 

[Missourian]

Marxism will never work, because the State cannot be trusted.

Inevitably, some animals become more equal than others.

The more centralized the control, the more danger of dictatorship or oligarchy, which so far has been the result of Marxist theory when put into practice.

 

[earthling01]

@Londoner

A great post which I feel indicates a unfortunate American ignorance of anything happening outside of America. I was disappointed to read that so many bloggers (not all!) have an excuse at the ready why they have not read any of Marx's books. Many of those are the same people who equate Liberalism with Marxism, while having very little understanding of either term.

[You may recall a recent candidate for Senate who did not know that the separation of Church and State IS in fact in article VI of the First Amendment of the US Constitution. It sounds like many of us throwing out words like "unconstitutional" should sit down and read the Constitution first.]

I personally read the Communist Manifesto way back in high school by my own choice, but honestly found it repetitive. Having said that, I am not one of those who use the words "Liberalism" and "Socialism/Marxism" interchangeably. I do not support or loathe any form of Communism because I think all ideologies need to share ideas to find the best system that works for the greatest segment of the population.

Yes, I recognize the govt responsibility to "redistribute" wealth from time to time, but that is not entirely Socialistic; it is a necessary element of Capitalism. Many bloggers here refuses to recognize that. It's the typical "We are Americans; why should we change?" attitude you find throughout most of the States.

By the way, I worked abroad in a company that was mostly young British men. And without being too critical, I felt they spend far too much time smoking and drinking in local pubs. I hope like you that they would open a book from time to time as well...

Cheers!

 

[georgephillip]

It really doesn't matter what Marx said. All that matters is what has been done in his name.

And that's been nothing but bloody, murderous failure.

If Marx said capitalism becomes a revolutionary force after emasculating government, does that have the potential to really matter?

How much blood, murder and failure did you help inflict on the people of Iraq in the name of capitalism?

Hypocrite.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You need to take a grad level course in "common sense". Intellectualism only goes so far, and then like the Brits, they find out that socialism doesn't work, just look at their healthcare system mess. When you want to discuss systems that actually work, we'll talk.

You didn't answer my question.

I was not advocating socialism. If you want to know my own beliefs. I side with John Lock and a minimalist state built around the maximization of individual freedom. I think the free market gets incentives right, where Marx gets human nature wrong; and I think his prediction of the ascendancy of the proletariat, and the eventual withering away of the state is utopian rubbish.

Your complete avoidance of the question proves my point. My fear is that conservatives are using ideas and data that do not come from direct study, but popular conservative media.

My fear is that your comment about British healthcare didn't come from studying it in a rigorous university context, but mainstream republican sources. [FYI: British living standards have been declining ever since the costs of Empire bankrupted us. That's why we all have bad teeth. America is headed there. Denmark and France, however, are making American health care seem as if from the 3rd world. My wife is from Denmark and my parents are from different countries: mother = England, father = USA. This gives me experience of 3 health care systems. British HC is a joke. USA is fast becoming an inefficient overpriced monopoly that uses Government to crush foreign and generic drug competition -- thus giving welfare to big business. Denmark is incredible because the service is quicker and more comprehensive. And you don't have administrators sitting between doctor and patient - administrators whose sole job is to grease share holders by diminishing care to sick people]

(psst: our views are closer than you think. I'm just trying to figure out where Republicans are getting their information. Have they studied Marx directly in a context designed to fully unpack his thought, or do they get ready-made conclusions and data from other sources, far removed, mediated by political interests?)

Great...Only thing is Obamacare in no way resembles the Danish system.
Our care level is superior. Our system of dispensing and administering medical care sucks.
The federal government has crushed health insurers with overbearing regulations and mandates. The very notion that health insurance is available only through one's employer( because individuals who buy on the open market pay through the nose) is absurd.
The idea that we cannot buy the type of coverage tailored to our individual needs is ridiculous. The idea that we cannot buy insurance across state lines is incredible.
The whole thing is a friggin nightmare.
Obamacare is ten times worse.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It would be more meaningful to ask whether any liberal has actually read a book on economics. Periodically I'll post some basic econ quiz and it is amazing how many libs gripe about the "conservative bias" of the test, when in fact there is no bias at all.

No surprise there. Think about affirmative action, the lowering of standards for police officers and firefighters.
Any time liberals find statistics that have an adverse affect on one of the many PC protected classes they claim discrimination or bias.
SAT and ACT tests for college entry. These were culturally biased. Height, weight strength and agility standards for firefighters...Gender bias. Hiring standards for the Postal Service, racial bias..There are many other instances. In each case liberals, do-gooders and other drones forced the lowering of standards.
It's always unfair. Everything that requires the least bit of effort or achievement is "unfair".