Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

The unlogic of the liberal left Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Ronald Regan said “Our liberal friends know things that are not.” I would add to this that they don’t seem to know many things things that are or they seem to have formed some kind of cognitive dissonance.

    Any inequality between groups (the groups they like to focus on: gender, race, sexuality and religion) must be according to the liberal left a consequence of oppression and prejudice. Natural and biological differences between groups are to be shunned, any person who believes in this is a heretic and any studies which show this are pseudoscience regardless of their merit.

    The liberal left often don’t understand social theory enough to grasp this, but their system of thought is underpinned pretty much word for word by postmodern social theory - the idea that people are primarily groups and the world is a group struggle between “oppressed” and “oppressor” groups, and their political plan is to come up with solutions to equalise all groups.

    Like we saw with Soviet communism, equality regimes first suffer from loss of objectivity (don’t arrest pedophile gangs of a certain ethnicity out of fear of being called racist), then loss of truth (gender and race are social constructs - needed to stop the terrible inequality creating source called biology), and loss of freedom (jailing people for “offensive” Tweets when they are from an “oppressor” group slating an “oppressed” group but not vice versa).

    This system uses former Soviet tactics and to harm dissenters for example Margaret Thatcher’s daughter for using a term for an ethnic minority that was perhaps 5 to 10 years out of date.

    There are many examples of liberal contradictions and impossibilities ranging from support of African nationalism an simultaneously hatred of European nationalism. A recent mantra that has circulated around the liberal “Community”, is that the far-right are far worse than the far-left.

    When you mention the spates of bombings in the U.S. in the 1970s by the Weather Underground, they raise you a Nazi Holocaust. Then the natural thing to do is mention to them by 100 million killings under Stalin and Mao. Then comes the interesting part they say “you’re just trying to justify it” or “two wrongs don’t make a right.”

    No, wrong. The only thing I’m trying to justify is don’t have single minded thinking, learn to accept challenges and learn that the education system, media and politics is always biased and to read through that bias. People are not encouraged to work with objectivity.

    The attached picture is from a set of political predictions playing cards from 1981 by Steve Jackson, and the card is called “political correctness”.

    Attachment 700252

    Recently in a Canadian university someone put up some posters saying “It’s OK to be white”. There was complete outrage and the police were called. The university staff deemed it to be a racist incident.

    The short film Modern Educashun shows the effect of postmodern social theory on education. 2 2= multiculturalism and 3 * 3 = feminism, And everyone gets the same score as that’s equality and then their privilege points are added on to get the final score.



    What liberals have historically done to keep out the people who disagree with them (the “racists”, bigots and “basket of deplorables” - according to Hillary Clinton) is sear, censor and lie about us, because that is far easier than actually debating postmodern social theory for people than don’t have the ability to debate. The mainstream population, political machinery and the media helped prevent any debate with us from reaching the masses and only used depictions of some real extremists, for example the swastika wearing brigade to portray anyone who disagree with postmodern social theory - thus intentionally creating a culture of fear, illogic and mistruths in challenging this awful ideology.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Stop using that sacred word to refer to an ideology, i.e. socialism lite or social democracy, that is the opposite of what the word has always meant.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Also, I've read your post like 3 times and I still don't know what you're even talking about. Are all right-wingers just incredibly stupid?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FakeNewsEditor)
    Stop using that sacred word to refer to an ideology, i.e. socialism lite or social democracy, that is the opposite of what the word has always meant.
    Yes I agree with you. These people use these words as the opposite of what they mean, for example liberal meant free to express yourself, freedom of thought, freedom to be oneself but modern liberals want to lock people up if they offend people as part of their drive to use taking offence as a way to command group equality.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FakeNewsEditor)
    Also, I've read your post like 3 times and I still don't know what you're even talking about. Are all right-wingers just incredibly stupid?
    I’m talking to the confirmation bias of the liberal left which is the mainstream in Britain.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    Your message is somewhat distorted by your poor sentence structure and grammar... but you are making a good point with your conclusion. I would just like to point out that your conclusion applies to certain groups of people on both sides of the extreme on a political scales... not just "liberals" or the "far-left"

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wolfmoon88)
    Your message is somewhat distorted by your poor sentence structure and grammar... but you are making a good point with your conclusion. I would just like to point out that your conclusion applies to certain groups of people on both sides of the extreme on a political scales... not just "liberals" or the "far-left"

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I have now corrected the sentence constitution. I write it First thing in the morning!
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wolfmoon88)
    Your message is somewhat distorted by your poor sentence structure and grammar... but you are making a good point with your conclusion. I would just like to point out that your conclusion applies to certain groups of people on both sides of the extreme on a political scales... not just "liberals" or the "far-left"

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The conclusion applies to The liberal left to a much higher degree because their views are confirmed by the mass media, government and education system. A right wing person has to speak in the terms of the liberal left or he will not be heard.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    For example a recent mantra that has circulated around the liberal “Community”, is that the far-right are far worse than the far-left.
    When it comes to amount of crime committed, or number of violent incidents, those supposed to be the "far right" are statistically far worse than the "far left". This has been the case for decades. There are hundreds of race or religion motivated criminal acts committed on a daily basis, it is a serious problem that everyone should be taking into account, no matter which political tribe they choose to support.

    To be honest I find the whole "right" vs. "left" thing to be a pretty tedious argument. Anyone so simple-minded that they can define their entire ideology by such tribalism isn't really worth the time of day.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dez)
    When it comes to amount of crime committed, or number of violent incidents, those supposed to be the "far right" are statistically far worse than the "far left". This has been the case for decades. There are hundreds of race or religion motivated criminal acts committed on a daily basis, it is a serious problem that everyone should be taking into account, no matter which political tribe they choose to support.

    To be honest I find the whole "right" vs. "left" thing to be a pretty tedious argument. Anyone so simple-minded that they can define their entire ideology by such tribalism isn't really worth the time of day.
    When they talk about “hate crime” they are also including Tweets. I don’t class those as crime, I just class those as what in the States would be called the First Amendment, free speech. People get offended by speech- boo hoo. And of course the liberal left with their biased only prosecute speech against blacks, Muslims, women and gays not whites, Christians, and men. So have an American professor called Noel Ignatiev, who says abolish whites people - and no outrage.

    So if someone has an analysis that actually compares real crimes, and I mean violence of killing then that would be valid.

    I agree with you that the left right paradigm is redundant but when calling out peoples bias for one idea but not the other, it is required.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Most of them are entirely out of touch with reality because they come from middle class backgrounds, and have never paid taxes or done a hard day's work. The group which calls itself 'Hope not Hate' to evade the electoral commission is so keen to shut down debate and instead have violence and ignorant protest.

    Certainly in the UK the far right is a tiny minority compared to this new "liberal" far-left.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hatter_2)
    Most of them are entirely out of touch with reality because they come from middle class backgrounds, and have never paid taxes or done a hard day's work. The group which calls itself 'Hope not Hate' to evade the electoral commission is so keen to shut down debate and instead have violence and ignorant protest.

    Certainly in the UK the far right is a tiny minority compared to this new "liberal" far-left.
    That’s right - they are out of touch middle class Guardianistas who have no clue about reality and form they views based on this orthodoxy of opinion that is build upon the opinions of the 60s French revolutionary academic types which turned into the 70s British left revolutionaries who ended up taking power. Government, the media and universities are stuck with these people for the time being. Our PM and Home Secretary fall into this category.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    When they talk about “hate crime” they are also including Tweets. I don’t class those as crime, I just class those as what in the States would be called the First Amendment, free speech.
    So if you send someone a death threat, is that hate crime or is it free speech?

    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    People get offended by speech- boo hoo. And of course the liberal left with their biased only prosecute speech against blacks, Muslims, women and gays not whites, Christians, and men. So have an American professor called Noel Ignatiev, who says abolish whites people - and no outrage.
    Seems like you're the one with the bias here, assuming that because prosecutions are not brought against certain views the "liberal left" must be somehow nefariously pulling the strings, even though as I've already said such a generalisation is basically absurd.

    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    So if someone has an analysis that actually compares real crimes, and I mean violence of killing then that would be valid.
    Even if you only look at violent crime, the statistics still show an overwhelming amount comes from the "far right". I'm not sure what you're hoping to prove with this anyway, violent crime is everybody's problem.

    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    I agree with you that the left right paradigm is redundant but when calling out peoples bias for one idea but not the other, it is required.
    So in order to combat perceived bias and generalisation you're relying on further bias and generalisation? Don't you think that might be a bit circular?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dez)
    Even if you only look at violent crime, the statistics still show an overwhelming amount comes from the "far right". I'm not sure what you're hoping to prove with this anyway, violent crime is everybody's problem.
    Really? Could you provide some evidence for that please.

    Generally the far-left are far more intolerant and violent yet aren't demonised and everything jumped on and exaggerated.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dez)
    So in order to combat perceived bias and generalisation you're relying on further bias and generalisation? Don't you think that might be a bit circular?
    The far left and even many parts of the American Democratic support base are openly advocating violence.

    The US Anfita are threatening a massive violent revolution on 4th October.

    Can you show us these statistics please that show that far-right violence is greater than far-left violence.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    The far left and even many parts of the American Democratic support base are openly advocating violence.
    The "Democratic support base"? Are you kidding me? That's such a broad brush, you might as well talk about the parts of the American PB&J support base advocating violence for all the relevance it has.

    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    The US Anfita are threatening a massive violent revolution on 4th October.
    I think you're referring to this? I had a skim through but I can't see any calls of "massive violent revolution". Nor do I see why the actions of one protest group justifies your use of mass generalisation.

    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    Can you show us these statistics please that show that far-right violence is greater than far-left violence.
    There's some data on hate crime within England & Wales available from the Home Office here. Knock yourself out.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dez)
    There's some data on hate crime within England & Wales available from the Home Office here. Knock yourself out.
    No sorry linking to hate crime is no good, you need to find a source for political violence.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    No sorry linking to hate crime is no good, you need to find a source for political violence.
    Er, says who? :erm: I've made no claims about political violence whatsoever.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dez)
    Er, says who? :erm: I've made no claims about political violence whatsoever.
    Right so your barometer of hate cr
    (Original post by Dez)
    Er, says who? :erm: I've made no claims about political violence whatsoever.
    The exam question is in my OP, the mantra that the far-right are far worse than the far-left.

    Are you able to compare all negative events from the far-right and far-left from these hate crime statistics? For a start are these hate crime statistics broken down into far right and far left? Do they capture, I don’t know say antifa pulling down a statue?

    How can you associate someone saying **** *** ***** as being far right- have you measured their familiarity with far right personalities like say Sir Oswald Moseley or Enoch Powell?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    The conclusion applies to The liberal left to a much higher degree because their views are confirmed by the mass media, government and education system. A right wing person has to speak in the terms of the liberal left or he will not be heard.
    Education system that contains 0 mandatory political education and our (fairly) right wing government?

    Are you maybe the delusional one?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 4, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.