The Sentimental Nature of the Liberal Socialist

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
13,399
Reaction score
1,706
Points
245
One thing any reasonable individual of conservative opinion will discern from the average debate with the liberally inclined is that liberal arguments are chock full of sentimentality. Any argument at all will eventually lead to denial on the behalf of the liberal socialist and befuddlement on behalf of the reasonable individual.

The liberal reaction to even the most empirical suggestion is always one of subjective judgment, of judging how things ought to be as opposed to how they are. Liberal socialists are marked by idealism, and so are the thoughts which they often produce. That is why it is often difficult to argue with the liberal: because he cannot think in empirical terms when it is absolutely necessary, his inferences are often contaminated by sentimentality.

By itself sentimentality is not a bad thing; one can think of many circumstances under which it produces good moments. But when it is applied to very important issues such as the way people will live their lives, it is almost always a bad thing. For in this case it often leads to all efforts being directed at pleasing the masses, and the masses are almost never a good judge of what is in the common good, especially when the they are numerous and diverse in opinion.

The foundation upon which almost all liberal socialist ideology is based rests upon the assumption that all are born equal. By extension of this it is inferred that all should share equally in the fruits of society: none are to be granted favor whether it is deserved or not, and none are to be subjected to maltreatment whether of their own making or of an external nature. This argument, which has today virtually developed into a religion among the masses, can hardly be called an empirical one. History has demonstrated repeatedly that it is not true, and the biological sciences have been right behind practically begging for our attention.

Any observant man can surmise quite easily that inequalities exist between men. In fact, no matter the system employed to regulate equality, inequalities have always found a way in which to manifest themselves among men. It is almost a natural process. In fact, that is exactly what it is: a natural process. There has always been the elite and there has always been the poor --- in each and every society that has ever existed. Every form of government short of anarchy has always provided for the maintenence of an elite and the eventuality of the poor.

But the liberal socialist will say it is the impoverished environment that leads to the perpetuation of poverty. Since all men are born equal, but not every man can be guaranteed a share in the fruits of society (thus being in a state of poverty), deprivation will rob a man of his equality since equality will be judged by the accumulation of the fruits of society. This argument we are expected to believe despite the glaring fallacy.

The reasonable man might suggest that poverty is more than just being without the fruits of society (money, property, social status, whatever they may be in a particular society). Thus there is such a thing as intellectual poverty and poverty of potential. Being without possession of these things is enough to virtually guarantee a man a life of poverty. Again, history has shown that though a man might be poor in money, property, or status, if he possesses intellect and potential he can overcome poverty. History has also shown that if a man does not possess these crucial advantages, he may not overcome poverty unless money, property, and status is given to him for no other reason than his impoverished state. That is not to say, however, that a poor man (in the sense of wealth) might be necessarily inferior or that a rich man might be necessarily superior.

The reasonable man might now ask, "How can we determine who possesses intellect and potential? And cannot even those people who possess these things be morally impoverished?" This is clearly a question of virtue, not exactly in terms of what is morally right but what is morally right for the society. One might as well ask, "How do we determine who possesses virtue?" Any man that has intellect, potential, and does what is good for the society is a man that possesses virtue. For a man that has all these things, and does what is good for his fellow men, does good for himself and he is a good man. In other words, it is a man's actions that determines for us whether he has virtue or not.

The liberal socialist might now ask, "Isn't making all men equal doing what is best for all men since inequality is injustice towards men?" It is not what is doing best for all men. Creating equality where it does not exist is to stifle the natural process of our evolution since it robs the superior man of developing his potential and it credits the inferior man with potential he does not have.

But these things the liberal socialist refuses to acknowledge. His concern is one of idealistic fantasies, one of dreams. He looks ahead to the day when men may indeed be equal because all inequalities have been made extinct by the hand of nature, the way it seems to have done in so many other species. He naturally thinks that if we enforce equality now we will have reached that potential, or we may reach it sooner than we will have otherwise. He thinks this without considering for one moment that if equality is to be our future, and it may be, it will come about only as a result of a natural process and not one forced by the hand of man. For now inequalities exist, and there isn't anything we can do about it short of committing ourselves wholeheartedly to the principles of eugenics for the next one-thousand years.

Thus, in exposing the fallacies of liberal socialist thinking we have unraveled the great mystery of the liberal socialist. He is a sentimental idealist.

By Ben Cameron
http://www.stormfront.org/posterity/Viewpts/libsoc.html
 
OP
ScreamingEagle

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
13,399
Reaction score
1,706
Points
245
Pls identify all those wonderful Jesus followers among the Socialist Democrats....and pls don't bring up the standard fakes like Shrillary and Pelousy.

You aren't going to find very many....most liberal socialists are bent on destroying the Christian way of life in America (as they've done in Europe)....don't listen to what they say....observe what they do.
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
I disagree with the term "socialist democrat"

and I am certainly an avid follower of Jesus.

You go read the words in red and tell me what would Jesus have to say about the ideas proposed in your post.

I'll wait...and probably a long time because I will wager that you have NEVER spent much time reading the words in red.
 
OP
ScreamingEagle

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
13,399
Reaction score
1,706
Points
245
I disagree with the term "socialist democrat"

and I am certainly an avid follower of Jesus.

You go read the words in red and tell me what would Jesus have to say about the ideas proposed in your post.

I'll wait...and probably a long time because I will wager that you have NEVER spent much time reading the words in red.
You may be an avid follower of Jesus Christ and I commend you for that.

Why do you disagree with the term "socialist democrat"? I believe it is quite appropriate for your party, especially the left wing which is running things.

What words in red?
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
You may be an avid follower of Jesus Christ and I commend you for that.

Why do you disagree with the term "socialist democrat"? I believe it is quite appropriate for your party, especially the left wing which is running things.

What words in red?

do you hear any democrats referring to themselves as socialist democrats? I don't...and I could give a shit what YOU think is appropriate for my party.

how about corporatist/elitist/racist republicans? Does that work for YOU?

not knowing what the "words in red" are is a pretty clear sign that you don't have a fucking clue what Jesus would say about anything.
 

mattskramer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
5,852
Reaction score
362
Points
48
Location
Texas
Pls identify all those wonderful Jesus followers among the Socialist Democrats....and pls don't bring up the standard fakes like Shrillary and Pelousy.

You aren't going to find very many....most liberal socialists are bent on destroying the Christian way of life in America (as they've done in Europe)....don't listen to what they say....observe what they do.
It depends, at least in part, on what you define as “the Christian way”.
Explain specifically how liberal socialists have destroyed the Christian way of life. Have they outlawed individuals going to Church, giving to the poor, or prayer?

Here is an interesting web site: http://christiandemocrat.us/blog/
 
OP
ScreamingEagle

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
13,399
Reaction score
1,706
Points
245
do you hear any democrats referring to themselves as socialist democrats? I don't...and I could give a shit what YOU think is appropriate for my party.

how about corporatist/elitist/racist republicans? Does that work for YOU?

not knowing what the "words in red" are is a pretty clear sign that you don't have a fucking clue what Jesus would say about anything.
Of course you don't give a shit. It might bother you too much if you did.

Corporatist/elitist/racist republicans don't work for me either.

So you mean the quoted words of Jesus. I thot you meant you red words in my post that you highlighted. How about when Jesus said this:

"Away with you, Satan!" replied Jesus, "the scripture says, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only you shall serve'."

Why is it the Liberal Socialists want a secular society? Why do they put down Chrisitians? While at the same time they don't put down Muslims or Buddhists or Wiccans? Is that following Jesus?

Still waiting for that big list of non-fake Jesus followers of the Socialist Democratic party...
 
OP
ScreamingEagle

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
13,399
Reaction score
1,706
Points
245
It depends, at least in part, on what you define as “the Christian way”.
Explain specifically how liberal socialists have destroyed the Christian way of life. Have they outlawed individuals going to Church, giving to the poor, or prayer?

Here is an interesting web site: http://christiandemocrat.us/blog/
Example: They are totally down on Christian prayer in the schools....but, of course, they provide time and space for the Muslims praying to Mecca.
 

Shogun

Free: Mudholes Stomped
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
30,528
Reaction score
2,257
Points
1,045
I don't see lefties putting down Jesus so much as his zealot followers.


unless, of course, by "putting down" you mean not banning the theory of evolution.


"Example: They are totally down on Christian prayer in the schools....but, of course, they provide time and space for the Muslim prayer to Mecca."

I've never seen ANY lefty ban individuals from praying at public school... it's just when christians try to make it POLICY that ALL kids must pray to Jebus.... When was the last Muslim to force ALL the kids in the class to pray to Allah?



I have to say.... Pretending that liberals merely rely on emotion with a total lack of logic and empiracal data is quite a punchline this far after the invasion of Iraq.

but, I guess it doesn't really take much to make rabid conservatives foam at the mouth and bark at the moon.. Just talk some shit and post on newsmax and you've created the daily neocon circle jerk.



how about corporatist/elitist/racist republicans? Does that work for YOU?


Corporatist/elitist/racist republicans don't work for me either.



that pretty much sums up the entire article.
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,909
Points
48
Location
My Shack
I have to say.... Pretending that liberals merely rely on emotion with a total lack of logic and empiracal data is quite a punchline this far after the invasion of Iraq.

//

That was my reaction too shogun. Mushroom clouds, WMD, bad man, democracy, etc.....I mean just another 6 months....
 

mattskramer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
5,852
Reaction score
362
Points
48
Location
Texas
Example: They are totally down on Christian prayer in the schools....but, of course, they provide time and space for the Muslims praying to Mecca.
Who is “they” and what is the name and address of the school. I am confident that as long as it does not cause a major inconvenience to education, a school will allow Muslims to pray facing Mecca. Likewise, I think that the same school would allow Christian children to pray through Jesus. Show me specific evidence to the contrary. Otherwise, it is my opinion that the liberal socialists are not so much destroying the “Christian way” as they are granting as much equal consideration as they can to the “Islamic way”.
 
OP
ScreamingEagle

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
13,399
Reaction score
1,706
Points
245
Shogun said:
I don't see lefties putting down Jesus so much as his zealot followers.

unless, of course, by "putting down" you mean not banning the theory of evolution.

"Example: They are totally down on Christian prayer in the schools....but, of course, they provide time and space for the Muslim prayer to Mecca."

I've never seen ANY lefty ban individuals from praying at public school... it's just when christians try to make it POLICY that ALL kids must pray to Jebus.... When was the last Muslim to force ALL the kids in the class to pray to Allah?

I have to say.... Pretending that liberals merely rely on emotion with a total lack of logic and empiracal data is quite a punchline this far after the invasion of Iraq.

but, I guess it doesn't really take much to make rabid conservatives foam at the mouth and bark at the moon.. Just talk some shit and post on newsmax and you've created the daily neocon circle jerk.

how about corporatist/elitist/racist republicans? Does that work for YOU?

Corporatist/elitist/racist republicans don't work for me either.

that pretty much sums up the entire article.
Your post is off the wall. Answer this if you can focus: we are all created equal under God but does that mean we are all equally entitled to the goodies in life?


Who is “they” and what is the name and address of the school. I am confident that as long as it does not cause a major inconvenience to education, a school will allow Muslims to pray facing Mecca. Likewise, I think that the same school would allow Christian children to pray through Jesus. Show me specific evidence to the contrary. Otherwise, it is my opinion that the liberal socialists are not so much destroying the “Christian way” as they are granting as much equal consideration as they can to the “Islamic way”.
Read this and then tell me things aren't biased:
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?0bacc1dd-7e2f-40d1-9c5e-fece99a72cee
 

Shogun

Free: Mudholes Stomped
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
30,528
Reaction score
2,257
Points
1,045
Your post is off the wall. Answer this if you can focus: we are all created equal under God but does that mean we are all equally entitled to the goodies in life?


didn't you JUST call my comment off the wall?

if you can wipe the foam from your lips long enough to consider the stupidity of your posted article this far after the Iraq Invasion perhaps you can focus on the punchline of your own joke.

Did you want to address my retorts to your accusation of liberals regarding prayer in schools or shall we fall back on rhetorical nonsense meant to, ironically enough, illicit an emotional response from christians?
 

Shogun

Free: Mudholes Stomped
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
30,528
Reaction score
2,257
Points
1,045
Morever, what public school would create an extra recess so that Christian students could pray? The ACLU would be on that school district at light-speed with an injunction against it.
from your posted link


pure conjecture. Perhaps you can provide a specific example that doesn't rely on what amounts to rhetorical nonsense if you are going to accuse people of something.

Again, can you link to ANY example of a christian not being allowed to pray in a public school?


Unfortunatly, Im betting that your schema of "picking on christians" pretty much amounts to resentment that christians are not allowed to dominate everyone else.
 

Shogun

Free: Mudholes Stomped
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
30,528
Reaction score
2,257
Points
1,045
Without Judeo-Christianity, our nation will perish. But, maybe that’s what liberals really want.


again, from your link..


Funny that you should post an article about how libs blah blah blah...


and then post ANOTHER link to a christian behaving exactly how you would pretend only libs behave.

comedy gold.
 

hjmick

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Messages
22,353
Reaction score
7,019
Points
360
Location
Charleston, SC
Have they really banned prayer in schools? Or have they only banned organized, compulsory prayer? I'm sure there are plenty of kids who still prayer for a good grade as they hand their tests forward for collection. I'm fairly confident that many a school aged athlete prays for a hit, first down, field goal, basket, during the course of their games.

As a father, moderate conservative, former Catholic and current agnostic, I don't want religion in the schools my children attend, it doesn't belong there. There is no room for it. Any taxpayer funded school would be forced to recognize all religions since citizens of all religions pay the taxes that go to the schools. To do otherwise would be tantamount to the government endorsing one religion over all the others.

Worship however you choose, I don't care. All I ask is that you don't force your views upon me or my family.

Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the church, and the private school, supported entirely by private contributions. Keep the church and state forever separate. - Ulysses S. Grant
 
OP
ScreamingEagle

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
13,399
Reaction score
1,706
Points
245
Your post is off the wall. Answer this if you can focus: we are all created equal under God but does that mean we are all equally entitled to the goodies in life?


didn't you JUST call my comment off the wall?

if you can wipe the foam from your lips long enough to consider the stupidity of your posted article this far after the Iraq Invasion perhaps you can focus on the punchline of your own joke.

Did you want to address my retorts to your accusation of liberals regarding prayer in schools or shall we fall back on rhetorical nonsense meant to, ironically enough, illicit an emotional response from christians?
My article is "stupid"? Or is it too much on the mark for you? Maybe so much so that you want to jump all over the map in order to avoid it. You certainly didn't answer my question.

I have already responded to the question regarding how the Left is kicking Christian religion in the balls but allowing the Muslim religion a free pass in the name of "tolerance". (read under the reply to Matts) In fact, the Leftist ACLU has been even attempting to banish simple "moments of silence" which are about as innocuous as you can get. They were stopped by the supreme court on that matter. Yet that does not mean the Left has stopped in its attempt to wipe out all aspects of Christianity in the schools.

HOWEVER, religion in schools was not the primary subject of this thread. Can you answer my question or not?

We are all equal under God, but does that mean we all must have equal things in life???
 

Shogun

Free: Mudholes Stomped
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
30,528
Reaction score
2,257
Points
1,045
My article is "stupid"? Or is it too much on the mark for you? Maybe so much so that you want to jump all over the map in order to avoid it. You certainly didn't answer my question.

I have already responded to the question regarding how the Left is kicking Christian religion in the balls but allowing the Muslim religion a free pass in the name of "tolerance". (read under the reply to Matts) In fact, the Leftist ACLU has been even attempting to banish simple "moments of silence" which are about as innocuous as you can get. They were stopped by the supreme court on that matter. Yet that does not mean the Left has stopped in its attempt to wipe out all aspects of Christianity in the schools.

HOWEVER, religion in schools was not the primary subject of this thread. Can you answer my question or not?

We are all equal under God, but does that mean we all must have equal things in life???


yes, the article was stupid and about as insightful as anything RSR drags into the backyard. In fact, your second posted link pretty much makes the irony of your motivation as clear as it can ever be.


Again, can you post specific examples or are we going to rely on rhetoric and water-cooler stories that someone heard about to prove your accusations? I assure you that it is blatant which of us is bouncing all over the place trying to avoid something.

Are christians banned from schools? is christians prayer BANNED from schools?

no?

then your diatribe kinda falls on its ass, doesn't it?

You hardly have a case beyond, ironically enough, subjective judgment just because kids are not allforced to acknowledge your baby jesus as the creater of the earth while forced to pray christian prayers before class.

as to your question, you assume that god has anything to do with social status. Moreso, you assume that liberals deny the very stratofication that has ALWAYS been a part of every society. Further, in a mad dash to talk shit, you ignore the reality of your own christianity for the sake of coultering up a thread with accusations. Finally, given your obvious assumptions about who deserves equal opportunity and a common living standard it sure take a mastermind to figure out why populations would refrain from your particular dogma. Your example taints what benevolence your god may have offered.


by the way... go ask jebus if he was a capitolist right after you ask him why the hell he gathered bread and fishes and then distributed them among the masses. What a fucking liberal socialist, right?
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
Of course you don't give a shit. It might bother you too much if you did.

Corporatist/elitist/racist republicans don't work for me either.

So you mean the quoted words of Jesus. I thot you meant you red words in my post that you highlighted. How about when Jesus said this:

"Away with you, Satan!" replied Jesus, "the scripture says, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only you shall serve'."

Why is it the Liberal Socialists want a secular society? Why do they put down Chrisitians? While at the same time they don't put down Muslims or Buddhists or Wiccans? Is that following Jesus?

Still waiting for that big list of non-fake Jesus followers of the Socialist Democratic party...

I don't "put down Christians" and I don't know a single democrat who does or ever has. I certainly DO put down the arrogance of the religious right to continue to try and cram their religious icons and their religious agenda down the throat of an increasingly diverse and non-Christian nation. We have NEVER been a "Christian nation"...we have, for the majority of our existence, been a "nation of Christians"....big difference. I am a devout Christian. I am a deacon. I have chaired pastoral search committees, I have preached more than a dozen sermons...I sing each Sunday in the choir. Christ is in my life. I have absolutely no problem with the fact that there are people in America who do NOT have Christ in their lives.... who have Buddha or Mohammad or any other deity in their lives. My faith is in my heart...I practice it in my life, in my home and in my church. I do NOT need to have the iconography of Christianity plastered on the walls of the Department of Motor Vehicles or the Court house or the public school.

Now.... I would love to see the list of ANY liberal who has precluded Christians from worshipping their Lord in their homes, in their churches or in their lives. Liberals do not want a secular society, they want a pluralistic society where everyone is free to worship OR NOT any way they chose as long as their worshipping does not impinge in the rights of others.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top