When did Liberals become establishment sell-outs?

[BluesLegend]

Anti-Americans have taken over the Democratic party. Virtually all of their policies and actions are damaging to America and our citizens, most are damaging to your average Democrat blue collar family. A coup has been under way for a couple decades now. How often do blue collar unions yell and scream at Obama and the Dem leadership for shitting on them and their jobs? This is the great question mark this election, will millions of Democrats who have been shit on by the illegal loving jobs killing left say fuck you and vote for Trump.

 

[ColonelAngus]

I recall a time when Liberals were the free spirits that liked nothing more than challenging the establishment and "Sticking it to the man". Now that seems to have reversed and Liberals appear to have sold out and will buy whatever snake oil the Democratic leadership is selling. Now the cool people challenging the corrupt establishment are Independents and Conservatives. Who knew?

I have been trying to figure this out, too.

All of a sudden, the "COOL KIDS" are running for school government. It's weird.

 

[emilynghiem]

They are not classical liberals. They are just social justice warriors, nothing more.

It's hard to fool a lady with 62,000 posts !!!!

The good instinct, the innate distrust of concentrated power and influence has been bred right out of them. They never see the unintended consequences of their actions to meddle in things that the people never really GAVE them power to meddle in. Or the failures, inefficiencies, and general dysfunction of the bureaucracy.

They worship it --- and reward it. And make constituents dependent on it.

H.D. Thoreau should be REQUIRED college reading. Instead of the leftist crap that they hit freshman with to get their "attitudes adjusted"...

Dear flacaltenn the instinct is still there but misdirected. Like teens whose growth toward independence includes a phase of questioning or rebelling against authority, they are doing that but in a misguided way where the teens in the household or the students on campus think they know how to run it better than the administrators with experience building houses and running schools. They don't get it yet.

Do universities allow any student on campus to vote on how to manage the administration?
Wouldn't you require business management and knowledge of policies and experience.

All ppl should have equal access and opportunity to learn to manage a college campus or run a small business district or Township before running for office, or else the only ppl we will see are the Clintons and Obamas who can buy and sell their way to the top, or Trump or Romney who can pay for their own campaigns.

At least Trump has the concept down to build universities. That model can work if everyone joins in creating jobs in education and services across the states and across the border to make sure all people have equal access and opportunity to learn business and mgmt.skills

www.campusplan.org
www.earnedamnesty.org
www.ethics-commission.net

 

[ColonelAngus]

Anyone can take the power away from Social Justice Warriors...just ignore them. Fuck them.

Call her a stewardess or a waitress. It's perfectly fine. The SJW crowd can lick my taint.

 

[aaronleland]

Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I wouldn't call liberals or conservatives sell outs. Partisan hacks are, but always have been.

 

[flacaltenn]

Anyone can take the power away from Social Justice Warriors...just ignore them. Fuck them.

Call her a stewardess or a waitress. It's perfectly fine. The SJW crowd can lick my taint.

There ARE issues that fall under Social Justice. However the SOLUTIONS are rarely another program and a check from Washington.. A LOT of it is one on one volunteering and counseling and learning INDIVIDUAL problems. Fixing these with a vague one solution for all approach -- just never works..

 

[emilynghiem]

I recall a time when Liberals were the free spirits that liked nothing more than challenging the establishment and "Sticking it to the man". Now that seems to have reversed and Liberals appear to have sold out and will buy whatever snake oil the Democratic leadership is selling. Now the cool people challenging the corrupt establishment are Independents and Conservatives. Who knew?

when did republicans become the representatives of the alt right? as long as donald represents the breitbart radical right "base" of the GOP, there isn't any reason to vote for him.

why would we vote for someone who doesn't know anything?

Republicans have been moving further left with each passing year, and the Donald happens to be a lifelong Liberal. The fact that you're referring to them as "Alt Right" only goes to show that Democrats never knew what left and right were. The fact that they've been attacking Donald for the behavior Democrats have been exhibiting for years goes to show that they can't even tolerate themselves when the behavior is coming under a different name.

you're clueless. sociopathic donald and his alt right goons are the furthest thing from conservative

too bad if you don't like the title that accurately describes trumpeters

Dear jillian I think Pumpkin Row was AGREEING with your statement that Trump was NOT a conservative. Are you trying to prove PR right about liberals not knowing what they're saying? If so, good job, you prove the point! ;-)

 

[forkup]

I recall a time when Liberals were the free spirits that liked nothing more than challenging the establishment and "Sticking it to the man". Now that seems to have reversed and Liberals appear to have sold out and will buy whatever snake oil the Democratic leadership is selling. Now the cool people challenging the corrupt establishment are Independents and Conservatives. Who knew?

I remember that to, it was the time when you could be a Republican and didn't have to cater to the tea party and it's reincarnation called the Trump movement. As the Republicans moved farther and farther right, the Democrats moved to the center. It's ironic but the Democratic party are the Republicans in the eighties.

 

[emilynghiem]

Anyone can take the power away from Social Justice Warriors...just ignore them. Fuck them.

Call her a stewardess or a waitress. It's perfectly fine. The SJW crowd can lick my taint.

No, ColonelAngus the best way to deal with social justice warriors is require them to pay for their own programs. Mentor and invest in the ones with sustainable solutions, and those will take the burden off govt and taxpayers by shifting social programs back to private and local management that is far more cost effective and accountable to investors and donors with a vested interest in making that work. We don't have this ability with govt, so transfer the responsibility for resources and mgmt back to local communities to select which programs and models work so well they are willing to invest their income and tax breaks directly and take charge themselves!

 

[Bush92]

The Totalitarian Doctrine of ‘Social Justice Warriors’

Because SocJus is so focused on changing bad attitudes and ferreting out subtle biases and insensitivities, its hostility to free speech and thought is not an unfortunate byproduct of the movement but its very essence. You can be welcoming and respectful toward transgender people yet still be branded a bigot if you don’t quite believe that transwomen who identify as female but have an intact male anatomy are “real women”—and even if you keep that opinion to yourself, you can be challenged to prove your loyalty to the party line.

Obviously, retaliation for unpopular opinions isn’t limited to SocJus, but it’s hard to think of another present-day political group so unforgiving to even inadvertent verbal offenses. At California’s Claremont McKenna College last fall, Dean of Students Mary Spellman had to resign after protests. Her crime: In an email replying to a student who had written to her about racial issues on campus, Ms. Spellman had mentioned her wish to “better serve students, especially those who don’t fit our CMC mold,” supposedly implying students of color don’t belong at the school.

Nor is any other group so preoccupied with linguistic cleansing. A discussion on a social justice forum advocates expunging from one’s vocabulary such “ableist” terms as “crazy,” “dumb” and even “depressing”; at Smith College last year, the student newspaper’s report on a panel (ironically, one dedicated to free speech) rendered“wild and crazy” as “wild and [ableist slur].” Calling somebody one’s “spirit animal” is frowned upon because it’s an “appropriation” of a concept specific to some oppressed cultures. An academic list of “microaggressions” includes asking, “Where are you from?” or complimenting a foreign-born person’s English.

SocJus speech- and thought-policing includes self-policing. “I rigorously manage my own thinking and purge myself of dangerous ‘unthinkable’ thoughts—‘mindkill’ myself—on a regular basis,” wrote columnist and former Jeopardy champion Arthur Chu in a 2014 Facebook discussion. “This is what you have to do to be a feminist anti-racist progressive, i.e. a social justice stormtrooper.”


Example of Social Justice Warriors post on Tumblr.

Some conservatives describe SocJus as “cultural Marxism”; it has also been compared to Maoism, and particularly to the Cultural Revolution, with its focus on re-education and public confessions of ideological errors. But, as atheist blogger Rebecca Bradley has argued, the movement also has many elements of an apocalyptic religious cult that sees the world as mired in sin and evil except for a handful of the elect. A popular post on Tumblr, a major SocJus hive, laments, “being on Tumblr all the time gives me such a deluded view of the world. I start believing that everyone is pro-choice, open-minded, have moral compass…care about sexism, racism, body shaming, etc, but then I walk out my front door and realize that everyone is still just as moronic as they were two years ago.” This is a classic cult mindset.

There is a word for ideologies, religious or secular, that seek to politicize and control every aspect of human life: totalitarian. Unlike most such ideologies, SocJus has no fixed doctrine or clear utopian vision. But in a way, its amorphousness makes it more tyrannical. While all revolutions are prone to devouring their children, the SocJus movement may be especially vulnerable to self-immolation: Its creed of “intersectionality”—multiple overlapping oppressions—means that the oppressed are always one misstep away from becoming the oppressor. Your cool feminist T-shirt can become a racist atrocity in a mouse click. And since new “marginalized” identities can always emerge, no one can tell what currently acceptable words or ideas may be excommunicated tomorrow.

Conservatives have long railed against ‘political correctness’; but now, even some progressives are saying that activism based on identity politics, self-righteousness and intolerance toward dissent and error is a dead end.

Intersectionality also makes SocJus uniquely vulnerable to internal conflicts and tensions. How do you reconcile progressive beliefs about gender with an “anti-Islamophobia” that treats defenders of misogynist and homophobic Islamist fundamentalism as sympathetic “marginalized people?” Very awkwardly: At Goldsmiths College, University of London last December, campus feminist and LGBT groups joined in solidarity with the Islamic Society, which complained that a campus talk by Iranian-born feminist and ex-Muslim Maryam Namazie was a violation of “safe space.”

The social justice movement has many well-meaning followers who want to make the world a better place. But most of its “activism” is little more than a self-centered quest for moral purity. Dropping “crazy” from one’s vocabulary won’t improve health services or job opportunities for the mentally ill. Protesting a white singer’s “appropriation” of cornrows or rap music will have zero effect on the actual problems facing African-Americans.

Wow...awesome piece of work CL.

 

[ChrisL]

 

[ChrisL]

The Totalitarian Doctrine of ‘Social Justice Warriors’

Because SocJus is so focused on changing bad attitudes and ferreting out subtle biases and insensitivities, its hostility to free speech and thought is not an unfortunate byproduct of the movement but its very essence. You can be welcoming and respectful toward transgender people yet still be branded a bigot if you don’t quite believe that transwomen who identify as female but have an intact male anatomy are “real women”—and even if you keep that opinion to yourself, you can be challenged to prove your loyalty to the party line.

Obviously, retaliation for unpopular opinions isn’t limited to SocJus, but it’s hard to think of another present-day political group so unforgiving to even inadvertent verbal offenses. At California’s Claremont McKenna College last fall, Dean of Students Mary Spellman had to resign after protests. Her crime: In an email replying to a student who had written to her about racial issues on campus, Ms. Spellman had mentioned her wish to “better serve students, especially those who don’t fit our CMC mold,” supposedly implying students of color don’t belong at the school.

Nor is any other group so preoccupied with linguistic cleansing. A discussion on a social justice forum advocates expunging from one’s vocabulary such “ableist” terms as “crazy,” “dumb” and even “depressing”; at Smith College last year, the student newspaper’s report on a panel (ironically, one dedicated to free speech) rendered“wild and crazy” as “wild and [ableist slur].” Calling somebody one’s “spirit animal” is frowned upon because it’s an “appropriation” of a concept specific to some oppressed cultures. An academic list of “microaggressions” includes asking, “Where are you from?” or complimenting a foreign-born person’s English.

SocJus speech- and thought-policing includes self-policing. “I rigorously manage my own thinking and purge myself of dangerous ‘unthinkable’ thoughts—‘mindkill’ myself—on a regular basis,” wrote columnist and former Jeopardy champion Arthur Chu in a 2014 Facebook discussion. “This is what you have to do to be a feminist anti-racist progressive, i.e. a social justice stormtrooper.”


Example of Social Justice Warriors post on Tumblr.

Some conservatives describe SocJus as “cultural Marxism”; it has also been compared to Maoism, and particularly to the Cultural Revolution, with its focus on re-education and public confessions of ideological errors. But, as atheist blogger Rebecca Bradley has argued, the movement also has many elements of an apocalyptic religious cult that sees the world as mired in sin and evil except for a handful of the elect. A popular post on Tumblr, a major SocJus hive, laments, “being on Tumblr all the time gives me such a deluded view of the world. I start believing that everyone is pro-choice, open-minded, have moral compass…care about sexism, racism, body shaming, etc, but then I walk out my front door and realize that everyone is still just as moronic as they were two years ago.” This is a classic cult mindset.

There is a word for ideologies, religious or secular, that seek to politicize and control every aspect of human life: totalitarian. Unlike most such ideologies, SocJus has no fixed doctrine or clear utopian vision. But in a way, its amorphousness makes it more tyrannical. While all revolutions are prone to devouring their children, the SocJus movement may be especially vulnerable to self-immolation: Its creed of “intersectionality”—multiple overlapping oppressions—means that the oppressed are always one misstep away from becoming the oppressor. Your cool feminist T-shirt can become a racist atrocity in a mouse click. And since new “marginalized” identities can always emerge, no one can tell what currently acceptable words or ideas may be excommunicated tomorrow.

Conservatives have long railed against ‘political correctness’; but now, even some progressives are saying that activism based on identity politics, self-righteousness and intolerance toward dissent and error is a dead end.

Intersectionality also makes SocJus uniquely vulnerable to internal conflicts and tensions. How do you reconcile progressive beliefs about gender with an “anti-Islamophobia” that treats defenders of misogynist and homophobic Islamist fundamentalism as sympathetic “marginalized people?” Very awkwardly: At Goldsmiths College, University of London last December, campus feminist and LGBT groups joined in solidarity with the Islamic Society, which complained that a campus talk by Iranian-born feminist and ex-Muslim Maryam Namazie was a violation of “safe space.”

The social justice movement has many well-meaning followers who want to make the world a better place. But most of its “activism” is little more than a self-centered quest for moral purity. Dropping “crazy” from one’s vocabulary won’t improve health services or job opportunities for the mentally ill. Protesting a white singer’s “appropriation” of cornrows or rap music will have zero effect on the actual problems facing African-Americans.

Wow...awesome piece of work CL.

Not my work, but it is a great piece of work.

 

[Bush92]

The Totalitarian Doctrine of ‘Social Justice Warriors’

Because SocJus is so focused on changing bad attitudes and ferreting out subtle biases and insensitivities, its hostility to free speech and thought is not an unfortunate byproduct of the movement but its very essence. You can be welcoming and respectful toward transgender people yet still be branded a bigot if you don’t quite believe that transwomen who identify as female but have an intact male anatomy are “real women”—and even if you keep that opinion to yourself, you can be challenged to prove your loyalty to the party line.

Obviously, retaliation for unpopular opinions isn’t limited to SocJus, but it’s hard to think of another present-day political group so unforgiving to even inadvertent verbal offenses. At California’s Claremont McKenna College last fall, Dean of Students Mary Spellman had to resign after protests. Her crime: In an email replying to a student who had written to her about racial issues on campus, Ms. Spellman had mentioned her wish to “better serve students, especially those who don’t fit our CMC mold,” supposedly implying students of color don’t belong at the school.

Nor is any other group so preoccupied with linguistic cleansing. A discussion on a social justice forum advocates expunging from one’s vocabulary such “ableist” terms as “crazy,” “dumb” and even “depressing”; at Smith College last year, the student newspaper’s report on a panel (ironically, one dedicated to free speech) rendered“wild and crazy” as “wild and [ableist slur].” Calling somebody one’s “spirit animal” is frowned upon because it’s an “appropriation” of a concept specific to some oppressed cultures. An academic list of “microaggressions” includes asking, “Where are you from?” or complimenting a foreign-born person’s English.

SocJus speech- and thought-policing includes self-policing. “I rigorously manage my own thinking and purge myself of dangerous ‘unthinkable’ thoughts—‘mindkill’ myself—on a regular basis,” wrote columnist and former Jeopardy champion Arthur Chu in a 2014 Facebook discussion. “This is what you have to do to be a feminist anti-racist progressive, i.e. a social justice stormtrooper.”


Example of Social Justice Warriors post on Tumblr.

Some conservatives describe SocJus as “cultural Marxism”; it has also been compared to Maoism, and particularly to the Cultural Revolution, with its focus on re-education and public confessions of ideological errors. But, as atheist blogger Rebecca Bradley has argued, the movement also has many elements of an apocalyptic religious cult that sees the world as mired in sin and evil except for a handful of the elect. A popular post on Tumblr, a major SocJus hive, laments, “being on Tumblr all the time gives me such a deluded view of the world. I start believing that everyone is pro-choice, open-minded, have moral compass…care about sexism, racism, body shaming, etc, but then I walk out my front door and realize that everyone is still just as moronic as they were two years ago.” This is a classic cult mindset.

There is a word for ideologies, religious or secular, that seek to politicize and control every aspect of human life: totalitarian. Unlike most such ideologies, SocJus has no fixed doctrine or clear utopian vision. But in a way, its amorphousness makes it more tyrannical. While all revolutions are prone to devouring their children, the SocJus movement may be especially vulnerable to self-immolation: Its creed of “intersectionality”—multiple overlapping oppressions—means that the oppressed are always one misstep away from becoming the oppressor. Your cool feminist T-shirt can become a racist atrocity in a mouse click. And since new “marginalized” identities can always emerge, no one can tell what currently acceptable words or ideas may be excommunicated tomorrow.

Conservatives have long railed against ‘political correctness’; but now, even some progressives are saying that activism based on identity politics, self-righteousness and intolerance toward dissent and error is a dead end.

Intersectionality also makes SocJus uniquely vulnerable to internal conflicts and tensions. How do you reconcile progressive beliefs about gender with an “anti-Islamophobia” that treats defenders of misogynist and homophobic Islamist fundamentalism as sympathetic “marginalized people?” Very awkwardly: At Goldsmiths College, University of London last December, campus feminist and LGBT groups joined in solidarity with the Islamic Society, which complained that a campus talk by Iranian-born feminist and ex-Muslim Maryam Namazie was a violation of “safe space.”

The social justice movement has many well-meaning followers who want to make the world a better place. But most of its “activism” is little more than a self-centered quest for moral purity. Dropping “crazy” from one’s vocabulary won’t improve health services or job opportunities for the mentally ill. Protesting a white singer’s “appropriation” of cornrows or rap music will have zero effect on the actual problems facing African-Americans.

Wow...awesome piece of work CL.

Not my work, but it is a great piece of work.

We need more free thought like this in our society that is becoming more and more dominated by the political and media elites in WashingtonDC, New York City, and our college campuses.

 

[Norman]

I recall a time when Liberals were the free spirits that liked nothing more than challenging the establishment and "Sticking it to the man". Now that seems to have reversed and Liberals appear to have sold out and will buy whatever snake oil the Democratic leadership is selling. Now the cool people challenging the corrupt establishment are Independents and Conservatives. Who knew?

Exactly when it became profitable for them to do so.

These guys don't care about anything except mere power.

 

[ChrisL]

I know people don't like to watch videos, but you should watch these. They are very "enlightening."

 

[Bush92]

LMFAO great.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

I recall a time when Liberals were the free spirits that liked nothing more than challenging the establishment and "Sticking it to the man". Now that seems to have reversed and Liberals appear to have sold out and will buy whatever snake oil the Democratic leadership is selling. Now the cool people challenging the corrupt establishment are Independents and Conservatives. Who knew?

when did republicans become the representatives of the alt right? as long as donald represents the breitbart radical right "base" of the GOP, there isn't any reason to vote for him.

why would we vote for someone who doesn't know anything?

Republicans have been moving further left with each passing year, and the Donald happens to be a lifelong Liberal. The fact that you're referring to them as "Alt Right" only goes to show that Democrats never knew what left and right were. The fact that they've been attacking Donald for the behavior Democrats have been exhibiting for years goes to show that they can't even tolerate themselves when the behavior is coming under a different name.

I love you Pumpkin Row and your posts,
but at this point I'd be willing to come out in public as a "birther" demanding to see your birth certificate, because the maturity of your
words DEFIES your age. Thank you, and I hope you take that as a compliment as much as I get out of your posts!
Thanks! * * * * * 1/2 + + + × 1000 ^ 1000 !!!
You go!!! Bravo! Wish you'd run for office in time for me to vote for you. You've won my vote for the next "200 years"!
Handshake, applause and bows, I hope the next generation
thinks like you, votes like you, and changes history before I leave the planet.

Thank you, thank you~
It makes me happy that you think so highly of me, and I hope I can continue to live up to your praise.
Sadly, I actually can't run for president, since I wasn't born in the United States.

I'll get Trump to create a city state just for you to govern after you finish your internship, residency and post doctoral dissertation on what's wrong with America and how to fix it.

We can develop a "Pumpkin Row" across the border to offer education and training for women and minority leaders to manage and govern campuses and city states before running for the UN and higher offices.

may I ask where you were born, or does that make me a "birther"? What do you think of earned citizenship and earned amnesty, Ms. President? www.earnedamnesty.org

I was born in Germany, but I'm a legal citizen of the US. I don't agree with any form of Amnesty or "Earned Citizenship", I think anyone who conducts any form of business with Illegals should be fined massively, as well as anyone who hires, teaches, or provides any sort of service to them. If that were done, nobody would have any sort of incentive to cross the border illegally.

 

[ChrisL]

Basically, leftist (fake liberal) ideology boils down to "you are not entitled to your own reality or your own thoughts. Your reality and thoughts are what WE tell you they are. If you dare to color outside the lines, we will lynch you."

 

[ChrisL]

Oh . . . my . . . god. You should watch this one. It is absolutely hilarious! Absolute nutter butters. Lol.

 

[jillian]

I recall a time when Liberals were the free spirits that liked nothing more than challenging the establishment and "Sticking it to the man". Now that seems to have reversed and Liberals appear to have sold out and will buy whatever snake oil the Democratic leadership is selling. Now the cool people challenging the corrupt establishment are Independents and Conservatives. Who knew?

when did republicans become the representatives of the alt right? as long as donald represents the breitbart radical right "base" of the GOP, there isn't any reason to vote for him.

why would we vote for someone who doesn't know anything?

Republicans have been moving further left with each passing year, and the Donald happens to be a lifelong Liberal. The fact that you're referring to them as "Alt Right" only goes to show that Democrats never knew what left and right were. The fact that they've been attacking Donald for the behavior Democrats have been exhibiting for years goes to show that they can't even tolerate themselves when the behavior is coming under a different name.

you're clueless. sociopathic donald and his alt right goons are the furthest thing from conservative

too bad if you don't like the title that accurately describes trumpeters

Sounds like you're all nostalgic for Ronald Reagan there Jillian..

no. but i will say i would appreciate a sane republican candidate.

btw, unlike the righties on this board, i've actually voted across party lines.

that won't happen again until the GOP dumbs its loons and becomes functional again.