Trying to understand liberals

Thoughts on socialism and leftism generally

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Elliott » 15 Aug 2014, 00:33

All I can say is well done, Paul. And, next time, could you record the conversation with your phone, surreptitiously? It would be great to hear the thing playing out!

Their ignorance sounds hilarious. 800 years? Where did he get that from? Just a guess, I'll bet. Just a wild guess, plucked from the air, on the assumption that everyone else would be as ignorant about history as he is, and only too glad to casually agree with the right-on remarks he was coming out with.

As for "British pride is the problem"... what can you say? Presumably this same woman believes that black pride or Chinese pride or Muslim pride are wonderful things.
Elliott
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 22:32
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Paul » 15 Aug 2014, 10:32

Thinking about the incident again, and re-reading the post I made above about it, I almost have to pinch myself that it actually happened. But it did, I've not exaggerated anything.

It's almost bizarre, completely cliche, a distillation of every lefty excess of the mind. These type of people have become a complete parody.. Their views are so way out left and their self-hatred so complete that one wonders how they are functioning in this society and how they slot into everything and manage to earn a living. It's tempting to say they should be exiled. Driven out, never to return. They certainly would be if they were part of a smaller group, other than a national citizenship. You couldn't have members of a sports club, a hobby gathering, a community scheme or even a family displaying such treachery and hatred of the group. They would be asked or forced to leave.

I'm not too sure that the fellow was that ignorant of history. Maybe I'm being generous on the one hand (he isn't that stupid) - but damning on the other because if he does know that his claim is ludicrously exaggerated, then his statement is all the more wicked, because he cares not that it's a lie.

I fear there are lots of people like this now. They will influence those on the fringes who aren't quite so 'intellectual' or well-heeled. Most people now are ignorant of history, and of many other articles of learning and are ripe for brainwashing by these kind of views.

Despite the incident playing out with astonishing predictability and the fact that I knew exactly where the conversation was leading, did you notice (in my account) that it was I who was kind of on the back foot from the beginning? It was I who had to be polite, was I who tried to make some light of it, was I who gently introduced an alternative view. That got me nowhere as could also have been predicted. These lefties hold the whip-hand in almost every socio-political discourse. Even relatively mild disagreement (or correction) is met with sneers, an almost spitting rage and further extremism. Nasty people.

But imagine I had been belligerent from the off and peppered my speech with profanities and spoke with the kind of (fanatical) zeal that they (mainly he) had done. I would have been termed a rabid Nazi straightaway. A murderer at heart, a slaver, probably even a rapist in the making. All the buzz words would have issued forth upon my shoulders. If they can exaggerate an empire by just a few centuries (!), then casting false accusations upon a hated right-winger would have been no problem to them. They probably already consider me 'hard right' and no doubt words were exchanged after I left. They probably discussed me last night at the lefty equivalent of a cocktail party.

Imagine he is that ignorant. Would he undertake a bit of research last night to check out what I said? Probably not, in the spirit of 'I've heard all the rhetoric before', as did the other chap I mentioned. Wilfully blind. Deliberately ignorant. It might be the truth (I suspect they know it is) but the truth might burst their carefully constructed bubble. The truth is an enemy. How bizarre.

It's likely that mere mention of things like Magna Carta makes them angry. It represents England and real history. It's something to do with the King and aristocrats. That's more then enough to inspire fury and a detachment from any rational thought or desire to learn more. Mention Magna Carta or Habeus Corpus, etc - you'll be a racist. It doesn't matter there is no connection. A quantum leap from one mention to one accusation is now easily done. It rolls off the tongue so easily. Ramzpaul did quite an amusing video along these lines. Say anything they don't like and lefties will screech - Nazi, racist, bigot, etc.

I've got my daughter onside by continually mentioning the hypocrisy of the left. She sees what I mean, but only because I see her often and can dominate (time-wise) the amount of political view she might see. If I failed to see her for say a year, I fear our lefty society would unduly influence her and infect here with lefty, feminist views. I'm dreading such a thing happening. But for now, I have her political education in hand. We have now developed a slightly amusing game. Everything unusual or questionable is.....racist.

The other day I gave her a lift home and, annoyingly, I have to drive all around a block to get onto a certain street because of one-way traffic. If one was on foot the distance travelled would be much less, but in a vehicle one has to comply with road signs and traffic direction. I tutted as usual when we came to this point. Imagine just nipping down this deserted street (the wrong way) and shaving 400 yards off the journey. I would never do this of course, even without the army of bristling traffic surveillance cameras.

"Ah Dad", she said - "if you did that you would probably be a racist". That made me laugh out loud. She's not that far from the reality - of such a potential accusation.

Edit: I will try to remember the recording of any such future conversation, in the event I can manage to do so.
Paul
 
Posts: 512
Joined: 02 Aug 2011, 11:37
Location: Lancashire, England.

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Elliott » 21 Aug 2014, 22:26

I just read this bit again:

Dreadlocked imbecile wrote:It pi**es me off. People are so stupid. The fact (?) is, all the immigrants in this country are sound people. We just can't leave them alone. If we left them alone we would all be enriched (I nearly spat out a mouthful of tea). The fact is (fact again), that 99.9% of the problems in this world are caused by White Man.

Does reality mean anything to that guy?! It's incredible that someone could come out with so many unsubstantiated, politically correct, mindless slogans. I think it just goes to show the danger of living in an echo chamber. The man obviously is used to coming out with things like that and getting instant unanimous agreement from his peers, so he never needs to examine its truth.
Elliott
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 22:32
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Gavin » 07 Oct 2014, 23:07

Lots of liberals all arguing against each other here, as a petulant and evidently ignorant Ben Affleck throws straw men at Sam Harris and Bill Maher. Mr Harris responds with calm reason in his article.

Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Andrea » 08 Oct 2014, 13:58

Having already long come to the conclusion that Ben Affleck is a poor excuse for an actor and a strongly dislikable fellow, the video above only served to move him straight into the "odious individual" category. His anger and petulance (which may be misinterpreted by those who agree with him as "passionate") is intensely annoying in a debate. I don't often agree with Maher or Harris, both of whom I find outrageously liberal (they're soft on drug use, for example) but there was nothing, absolutely nothing, that Affleck could say against their sound arguments. Even arch-conservative Bill O'Reilly, whose views I tend to agree with, has come out in support of Maher and Harris on this issue. Islam is dangerous, and Affleck, by saying that it's "racist" to have such views, showed he is an ignoramus. We already know Islam is not a race, but an insidious political and totalitarian ideology. The man obviously has not studied the texts!
Andrea
 
Posts: 158
Joined: 30 Jul 2011, 21:55
Location: England

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Paul » 08 Oct 2014, 19:20

Yet another man-child, with all the potentially dangerous attributes of repressed and confused adolescents. He cannot stop interrupting, waving his arms about and throwing himself around in his seat. His voice displays thinly-veiled anger, almost to the degree where spittle will begin to fly, if not almost foaming at the mouth. I know a few like him, though not quite as well-heeled as he.
Paul
 
Posts: 512
Joined: 02 Aug 2011, 11:37
Location: Lancashire, England.

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Nathan » 08 Oct 2014, 20:34

Wow, that was fascinating to watch. I'm impressed such an open debate is actually allowed on TV over there without the programme being shut down for "Islamophobia" or whatever!

I know Ben Affleck is an actor and I've heard of Sam Harris, but I don't really know anything about any of the people on there. Ben Affleck looked so uncomfortable as if he was about to explode! What can one say, the truth hurts?

I hope the public watching his petulance and anger blows up on him and has made any neutrals less sympathetic to his views.
Nathan
 
Posts: 880
Joined: 08 Dec 2012, 17:58

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Gavin » 08 Oct 2014, 21:12

I strongly suggest a read of many of Mr Harris' books and articles. In particular The End of Faith, The Moral Landscape and his stuff on gun control and passenger profiling. I've linked to it in the past. I also like his position on Judaism and Gaza which he recently expressed. I'm not sure I agree with his take on drugs, spirituality or lying. TD probably thinks he simplifies matters somewhat but I think he does speak sense on a fair few issues. Calmly too, which is usually in stark contrast to his "fellow" liberals such as Mr Affleck, who invariably argue solely from emotion, without any regard to facts.
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Elliott » 12 Oct 2014, 05:50

I think this is a good, perhaps very good, essay about Islam and how liberals see it.
Elliott
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 22:32
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Nathan » 18 Oct 2014, 11:46

I was just reminded of a conversation I had a few months ago which might be of interest. It was the day of the World Cup final, and I went to a pub to watch it with an old schoolfriend, who had his girlfriend along with him. (For some reason a lot of my friends seem to have very left-wing girlfriends, which can make conversation a little bit difficult, none more so than on this occasion!)

The pub we were in was probably 90% male, and of course everybody connected with both of the teams was male, something which my friend's girlfriend mentioned as evidence that football needed to make the effort to get more women playing the game. I said that there actually was a separate Women's World Cup (I couldn't tell from her reaction if this was news to her or not), but people just weren't that interested in it.

She said that this was the media's fault for not promoting the women's game as much as the men's. Rather than say outright that the reason for this was just that women's football was nowhere near as good as the men's game and even women wouldn't be interested in watching it, I thought I'd make sure to get myself out of trouble by saying, "It's just a different standard".

She said the reason for that was because girls weren't encouraged to play the game as much as boys, and if girls had the same opportunities to play the game there's no reason why some of them couldn't make it as professionals.

I said that it wouldn't be fair for women to play with the men, given that men were normally bigger and stronger and women would be at risk of getting hurt. I thought she'd play the "But some women are bigger and stronger than some men!" card, but she didn't actually have anything to say about that, but gave me a shocked "Did he really just say that? How dare he!" look and said very little to me for the rest of the evening. My friend did the wise thing and kept well out of it!

What made the whole exchange even more ridiculous is that this woman who thinks women are equally physically capable of playing top-level sport as men are has no interest in sport herself and is quite petite even for a woman, probably 15 cm shorter than me and 20-25 cm shorter than my friend, yet she's so clever that she must know better than received wisdom, even to the point of arguing something that a six-year-old with any common sense will just know is obviously wrong.
Nathan
 
Posts: 880
Joined: 08 Dec 2012, 17:58

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Gavin » 16 Nov 2014, 17:33

This is more a post on trying to understand hardcore socialists than airy liberals, but I will write it here anyway.

I was just watching the BBC documentary "The Planets" and thinking how nice the RP narration by Samuel West was, so I decided to read up about him. It turns out he is a hardcore leftist. I suppose I might have guessed.

The calm and collected tones of the narration are gone in the clip below. Look at the bitter, pinched expression and the sense of entitlement:



Mr West doesn't think people who want to do the arts should fund it themselves. He thinks (on no evidence presented) that trade unionists are particularly distinguished for having educated themselves. He also says that they were "quite clear" about how a 24 hour day should be divided: eight hours work, eight hours sleep and eight hours improving oneself. So now we know, we're told.

But quite often one can be improving oneself at work, and quite often I actually want to work longer than eight hours - more like sixteen. Am I not allowed to do that? Presumably not, because then I might rise up above my fellow socialist subjects.

He says "you shouldn't be able to experience better art because you're rich". Um, why not? That's something to aim for. Anyway, most galleries and museums in this country are either very cheap or completely free to enter, and have been for a long time. Perhaps Mr West would like to explain, incidentally, why I hardly ever see any Muslims or black people choosing to visit them?

Mr West says "ballet is not just for the middle classes but for miners' children too!". Yes, so what? They're welcome to try it. Don't argue with us, argue with thugs on estates who will bully them for doing so.

He seems to reason that because money is lost to corporate tax evasion (something of course none of us would support) then it follows that more money should be given in grants for entertainment. He thinks this should be done instead of "subsidising" the arms trade (i.e. in many cases investing in self defence in a very dangerous world - ISIS anyone?). He wants a "Robin Hood tax on the banks" and claims that "conservatives don't like art being cheap because it educates and enlightens working people".

Something of a blanket statement there. Conservatives generally like the market mechanism, and art will respond to this. Sadly most art people want to see is very vulgar and does not enlighten "working people", but it must be said that conservatives are working people, too. He seems to have forgotten that - some kind of snobbery there.

Mr West sees some contradiction in reading being encouraged while some - not many - libraries are closed. But books are given away virtually free on Amazon and by countless charity shops now (with many classics completely free online too). The underclass are not avoiding books because some libraries have been closed, but because they're not intelligent or interested enough to read. They do have money for games consoles, cigarettes, sportswear, phones and tattoos.

It's not so much the points, because I don't think there are any good ones, here, but I ask you to note the attitude we see. A bitter, self-entitled and self-righteous one. I don't like these leftists and I think this video provides some insight into their typical manner and character. On the whole nasty people who just want to be given other's people's money rather than make it themselves.

p.s. This particular socialist has had a baby, but not with a woman who is his wife - par for the course. Instead he described another lady as "absolutely perfect": none other than the editor of Tatler magazine, which is supposed to be for people who enjoy "immense privilege"!
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Nick J W » 29 Nov 2014, 12:54

Didn't know about Sam West until I saw... (well three minutes was more than enough) the youtube clip.

I did a google search and on family values he says, among other things:

"I got all my tastes in music from our half-sister, Juliet, who was into bands like Pink Floyd and Sparks. She's my father's daughter from his first marriage and came to live with us on and off when I was eight. She was 10 years older with a great succession of cool boyfriends. She's a hairdresser now with two children in their 20s, and I don't see her nearly enough."


A 'great' succession of cool boyfriends, or girlfriends for that matter, is the root of the Gresham’s law of culture: the bad drives out the good.
Nick J W
 
Posts: 20
Joined: 17 May 2014, 11:37

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Gavin » 29 Nov 2014, 23:22

Yes, it's such a shame about him. When you hear his narration it's really excellent. Fine RP, good timing, enunciation and so on, a nice intelligent and measured tone of voice. Just goes to show how actors really are acting, I suppose.

I similarly think it is a great shame when you get these young women playing at being ladies in period dramas, programmes like Downton Abbey - then, if you ever have the misfortunate to see them as themselves it is a whole different matter: invariably "empowered", superficial yet with high self regard, using F words etc. Not even dressed as well as their characters.

How odd it is that these people play people more appealing then themselves, yet they don't see this. That would be an indication of our time. We are supposed to look back at times when people had good values, stiff upper lips and decency, as a matter of curiosity, but something to tear down if at all possible. These trendy modern people are for the most part determined to perpetuate a feeling of guilt among the British people about their past, while ushering in other cultures to replace us.
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Trying to understand liberals

Postby Nick J W » 02 Dec 2014, 12:53

Just goes to show how actors really are acting, I suppose.

I similarly think it is a great shame when you get these young women playing at being ladies in period dramas, programmes like Downton Abbey - then, if you ever have the misfortunate to see them as themselves it is a whole different matter: invariably "empowered", superficial yet with high self regard, using F words etc. Not even dressed as well as their characters.


Indeed, I've often thought about this, especially regarding Jane Austen adaptations, which I usually enjoy though I couldn't stomach much more than ten minutes of Gwyneth Paltrow as Emma.
Nick J W
 
Posts: 20
Joined: 17 May 2014, 11:37

Previous

Return to Socialism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron

Login Form

Who is online

In total there are 0 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 0 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 175 on 12 Jan 2015, 18:23

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
Copyright © Western Defence. All Rights Reserved.