Is the Left diverse? If so, how?

[AllieBaba]

given your background?

hehehe.. I guess seeing a pair of gay men in a fast food rester aunt after graduating from bob jones U. counts then, eh?

No, given the fact that I work in human services. Gays are my coworkers and my clients, tardo. And, as I've told you before, my friends as well.

 

[Doug]

Okay, I take it from the lack of relevant responses that what I and many othes have noticed -- that almost all of the intellectual controversy is on the Right-- is essentially true.

I'm curious as to why this is so, given that most of the intelligentsia are on the Left.

A couple of theories:

(1) The great vessel of Left theorizing about the world was Marxism. This is now moribund, so many of its central propositions having proven false, and in any case was never so widespread among intellectuals in the US as in the rest of the world.

Contrary to what you might think, there was plenty of controversy within the Marxist world, some of it even relevant today. (In the last remaining bastions of Marxism in the US, the universities, Marxism has mutated into a particularly sterile variant, "Critical Studies". Lenin must be turning in his mausoleum.)

(2) Because liberals, and Leftists in general, see their beliefs as a morally-inspired defense of the underdog against the oppressive status quo, they tend to presume that anyone who breaks ranks on a particular issue has been morally corrupted by the establishment.

Thus a liberal who is skeptical about the human contribution to global warming, or who inclines towards assigning a major share of the cause of poverty in the United States on the behavior of the poor themselves, or who begins to question whether our nationalized educational system is perhaps not subject to the same ills as we have seen in other nationalized industries -- such a person is necessarily regarded as having succumbed to the pressures of the corporate media/millionaire-financed-think-tanks, etc.

But conservatives, on the other hand, don't really have a conveniently powerful enemy the effect of whose propaganda can be blamed for 'deviations' in our ranks. True, the "Mainstream Media" are reviled, and their malign influence and degree of malignity sometimes exaggerated, but you seldom see one conservative blaming another conservative with whom he disagrees on an issue, for being unduly influenced by them.

I don't think these two observations even begin to explain the lack of political controversy within the Left, however.

If anyone has any ideas to offer, please do so.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Maineman and Larkinn have explained why they do not disagree in public with people that vote their way. On more than one occasaion. The easiest way to put it is " The ends justify the means" They are more then willing to put up with retards, idiots and kooks as long as when it is time to vote, they vote for their party.

Maineman is of the opinion that the far left has no power so ignoring them is perfectly ok. Any ignorant thing they say is fine because according to maineman, they will never actually get any of their ideas passed into law. Larkinn is less willing to be actually pin down why it is he won't take on the ignorants in his party. His usual defense when called on it is " ohh I never saw that" followed by no response anyway.

 

[William Joyce]

I skimmed past the replies to Doug's original post, but I think there is definite "diversity" in the conservo-world, more so than in liberal land. True, it's the rah-rah Bush morons who get the attention, but there are lots of odd creatures in the conservative forest --- Objectivists, libertarians, Christian righters, America-firsters, free marketers, and of course, my favorite, the pro-whites of the so-called "far right."

Neocons are a pretty noxious breed, in my view... they are definitely nowhere near what Russell Kirk would consider a true conservative. They are basically Jews who want internationalist economics and perpetual war in the Middle East.

 

[CharlestonChad]

There are basically the exact same divisions of liberals as there are conservatives. Few people actually have identical beliefs, so it would be logical to say that both liberals and conservatives are equally diverse. Please don't be lead ignorant by the mainstream talking heads like o'reilly and limbaugh b/c they attempt to lump all liberals together in a smear attempt. It's sad that they do this, b/c they not only make themselves look foolish, but they make their fans look equally as ignorant.

 

[CharlestonChad]

And by the way, this board is obnoxiously conservative. This is why you're not going to find too many liberal minded posters. I left for a year or so b/c I just got tired of the repetitive threads concerning every past action the clinton's have ever done, and the neocons always whining about the "liberal media" portraying bush to be a bad president.

 

[Doug]

I am willing to believe that no two human beings have the exact same identical beliefs about every single possible issue. That's not the point.

The point is, there seem to be few disagreements among liberals on any of the major issues of the day. And where there are, these do not seem to be the topic of serious discussion.

If I want to read a good debate on the wisdom of the war in Iraq, I turn to [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Right-War-Conservative-Debate-Iraq/dp/0521673186/ref=sr_1_3/103-9655811-7155832?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1183149038&sr=1-3]The Right War [/ame]. The contributors to this volume go at it hammer and tongs. And they are all on the Right.

I know there is not total unanimity on this issue among liberals -- initially, some among the New Republic wing of liberalism supported the invasion, and there is of course the famous Christopher Hitchens, and Paul Berman -- but you have to look under a microscope to find any actual debate or discussion on the Left on this issue, or, more generally, how to respond to Islamism.

Sometimes you find a prominent liberal who is willing to critique the liberal movement from within -- Todd Gitlin is the most recent example, in his latest book [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Intellectuals-Flag-Todd-Gitlin/dp/0231124937/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-4466679-7342551?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181063578&sr=1-1/theclaremontinst]The Intellectuals and the Flag[/ame]. (Recommended for both liberals and conservatives.)

And from the other direction, Alexander Cockburn, from his Beat the Devil column in the Nation magazine, regularly attacks liberal beliefs: from their belief in the myth (as he sees it) of "Global Warming" (a plot to bring in nuclear power), to their timid refusal to act out the logic of their position on Iraq, and openly support the "insurgents".

But these are isolated voices. You usually cannot read more than three or four consecutive issues of a conservative journal, without finding an intra-Right dispute. But the liberal magazines read like they are written by one person. (I make a partial exception for the New Republic -- but it is half-conservative anyway. And you do find a little bit of debate among the democratic socialists of Dissent and New Politics, although nothing compared to the arguments on the Right.)

Of course, one of the problems is that people who begin to dissent from the mainstream political views of the liberal movement quickly find that they are no longer welcome there, and leave, to take up their place in a movement which is more tolerant of dissidents and which doesn't mind a political argument.

Perhaps it's because conservatives enjoy fighting more that we do fight more among ourselves.

 

[Diuretic]

And by the way, this board is obnoxiously conservative. This is why you're not going to find too many liberal minded posters. I left for a year or so b/c I just got tired of the repetitive threads concerning every past action the clinton's have ever done, and the neocons always whining about the "liberal media" portraying bush to be a bad president.

I think you might find the sloganeering is a lot less now, if enough of us engage the issues and be prepared to admit error (hey it's difficult but if the Fonz can almost do it, well then so can I) and to learn from others knowledge and the frenzied use of Google and Wikipedia then that is a good thing.

I think I may have to declare my own personal War on Political Stereotypes.

I won't declare war on Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity or Coulter et al, my mother brought me up not to take on idiots who can't talk without speckling and foaming......damnit now I have to go through my ignore list yet again

 

[midcan5]

Dougie,

The only diversity on the right is whether Bill or Hillary is at the top of your 'dislike the most list.' Your constant jabbering away about the right is always directed at what you see as the left. Your particular left is limited to Chomsky and Zinn, no mention of Rawls or any others.

As I have stated elsewhere, often, without your foe, you guys wouldn't know what to do. The diversity you note on the right is something like do you like coffee or tea. We've already established in the beliefs post your major memes, you all share them. As far as Iraq, Iraq was a blunder, plain and simple, arguing some justification is only necessary for you right wing warriors because it is a grand failure of your policy. Had it been successful you will be bragging to holy hell your great insights in regime change and the lack of insight or diversity of your foe.

http://www.politicalpass.com/2005/09/what-is-a-conservative/

What is a Conservative in America? I offer this quick definition, a conservative is a person or group of people who blame everything they disagree with, or consider wrong with the world, on Liberals. Too simple you say. Given our current right wing media spin I challenge a counter definition.

And please don't give me a link to some book that may not even support your argument.

 

[William Joyce]

Of course, one of the problems is that people who begin to dissent from the mainstream political views of the liberal movement quickly find that they are no longer welcome there, and leave, to take up their place in a movement which is more tolerant of dissidents and which doesn't mind a political argument.

If you're looking for an area on which conservatives do not allow dissent, try the issues of race and Jews.

Joe Sobran, Sam Francis, Kevin Lamb, Jared Taylor -- all these men were hounded out of conservative publications for taking politically incorrect stands on those topics. On race, your average conservative is about as open-minded as your average liberal, and on Jews, they're even worse (all races are equal, Jews are more equal).

Conservatives live in perpetual fear of being called racist, so much so that they design their entire platforms around desperate attempts to appear "non-racist" or "anti-racist." The result is that they're easily whipped around: just threaten to call them "racist" and they fold like plastic wrap. As Alex Linder has noted, "racism" is just conservatism with balls. Conservatism, is, well, neutered.

It's all a load of bullshit. You could have the lowest taxes, the strictest abortion laws and guns for all, but if you're sharing turf with 30 million Mexicans, you may as well be living in Mexico. Put another way, when Tyrone is raping and dismembering your white daughter in the name of "civil rights," a six percent cut in the capital gains tax ain't all that much to crow about, bow-tie boy. Whites need to realize that no ideology will save them, save white nationalism.

 

[CharlestonChad]

If you're looking for an area on which conservatives do not allow dissent, try the issues of race and Jews.

Joe Sobran, Sam Francis, Kevin Lamb, Jared Taylor -- all these men were hounded out of conservative publications for taking politically incorrect stands on those topics. On race, your average conservative is about as open-minded as your average liberal, and on Jews, they're even worse (all races are equal, Jews are more equal).

Conservatives live in perpetual fear of being called racist, so much so that they design their entire platforms around desperate attempts to appear "non-racist" or "anti-racist." The result is that they're easily whipped around: just threaten to call them "racist" and they fold like plastic wrap. As Alex Linder has noted, "racism" is just conservatism with balls. Conservatism, is, well, neutered.

It's all a load of bullshit. You could have the lowest taxes, the strictest abortion laws and guns for all, but if you're sharing turf with 30 million Mexicans, you may as well be living in Mexico. Put another way, when Tyrone is raping and dismembering your white daughter in the name of "civil rights," a six percent cut in the capital gains tax ain't all that much to crow about, bow-tie boy. Whites need to realize that no ideology will save them, save white nationalism.

I haven't posted much in a while, but I didn't remember you to be so centered around jewish peoples a year ago? What happened that made you compelled to bring up jews in almost every post of yours?

 

[William Joyce]

What happened that made you compelled to bring up jews in almost every post of yours?

It makes up for the fact that despite their incredible and overpowering influence over American media, culture, education, politics and policy, they're NEVER mentioned elsewhere.

 

[AllieBaba]

I don't think Conservatives are unnerved by the racist label. It's one we've lived with ever since the Dems realized, in their own hearts, that they were racists, and they figured the best way to hide it was to accuse us of it.

It worked for a while, but it doesn't anymore. People have learned to see past the term and look at the actual collective track record.

 

[Diuretic]

It makes up for the fact that despite their incredible and overpowering influence over American media, culture, education, politics and policy, they're NEVER mentioned elsewhere.

Is that really the case - the influence I mean, or is it just a perception without grounds?

 

[Diuretic]

I don't think Conservatives are unnerved by the racist label. It's one we've lived with ever since the Dems realized, in their own hearts, that they were racists, and they figured the best way to hide it was to accuse us of it.

It worked for a while, but it doesn't anymore. People have learned to see past the term and look at the actual collective track record.

The term "racist" for me at least is now meaningless. When I see or hear it used I immediately dismiss it as cant unless I can see a point to it.