Have I mentioned that liberalism is idiotic?

[Mr. Hall]

Bathrooms and who's allowed to use them aside:

According to Merriam-Webster:

Liberalism:

"belief in the value of social and political change in order to achieve progress"

Conservatism:

"belief in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society"

"dislike of change or new ideas in a particular area"

Thank goodness for liberalism.  We might still have slavery, prohibition, and the legal suppression of women if conservatism had prevailed.  Maybe horse-drawn carriages and steam locomotives too.  Who knows.


$

 

[Izdaari]

Bathrooms and who's allowed to use them aside:

According to Merriam-Webster:

Liberalism:

"belief in the value of social and political change in order to achieve progress"

Conservatism:

"belief in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society"

"dislike of change or new ideas in a particular area"

Thank goodness for liberalism.  We might still have slavery, prohibition, and the legal suppression of women if conservatism had prevailed.  Maybe horse-drawn carriages and steam locomotives too.  Who knows.


$

I am neither liberal nor conservative by those definitions.
I want to make things better.
I don't care at all whether that requires radical change, or sticking with or returning to old ways.
Whichever works.
I suppose I'm a radical centrist.

 

[Mr. Hall]

I am neither liberal nor conservative by those definitions.
I want to make things better.
I don't care at all whether that requires radical change, or sticking with or returning to old ways.
Whichever works.
I suppose I'm a radical centrist.

Of course.  That's really the point of my over the top statement about conservatism.  It makes no more sense to make a blanket statement that liberalism is idiotic than it does to make a blanket statement that conservatism is idiotic.  Both have their place in making things better. 

$

 

[FSSL]

Only 23% of Dems in Congress voted to abolish slavery

Not one Democrat voted to consider blacks equal to whites - 14th amendment

Not one Democrat voted to give blacks the vote - 15th amendment

"Progressives" are anything but...

 

[Mr. Hall]

Only 23% of Dems in Congress voted to abolish slavery

Not one Democrat voted to consider blacks equal to whites - 14th amendment

Not one Democrat voted to give blacks the vote - 15th amendment

"Progressives" are anything but...

The Democratic party of today bears no resemblance to the Democratic Party of 1865.

$

 

[FSSL]

Sure it does. Two words: Detroit, Chicago

 

[Smellin Coffee]

What IS this thread about?

If the point is that "modern liberalism" AKA "progressive liberalism" is idiotic, as a classical liberal (AKA libertarian) I heartily agree!

But restrooms? That NC passed a poorly thought-out law with lots of unintended consequences is not the fault of liberalism in any flavor! It's more the fault of conservatives reacting without thinking.

https://www.facebook.com/moovzpage/videos/1034341159952934/

 

[FSSL]

Transgenders have their ID's legally altered to match their current "gender." So, unless a tranny flashes out their genitals to others, no one will ever know... and then we have another issue

 

[aleshanee]

which is why public restrooms should all be remodeled and converted into private restrooms with locking doors...... ..... the time for this to have been implemented is long over due....... .........

having been followed at least once into a restroom by someone born of one gender but claiming to identify with another.... ...... i can tell you that if it ever happens again .... whether transgendered or not.... said person better be surgically altered accordingly to match the sign on the door.... and he also better pray the nerve endings got removed along with the hardware.... because he is getting a foot applied to the place it used to be at high velocity and with a great amount of force......... .......... .... .... not everyone in the ladies room might actually be a female.... but i guarantee they will scream like one if discovered by someone tired of this nonsense..... ......enough is enough...... .........

 

[FSSL]

Lol! Solid post! ^

 

[Ransom]

Transgenders have their ID's legally altered to match their current "gender." So, unless a tranny flashes out their genitals to others, no one will ever know... and then we have another issue

I recently read a blog article by a transgender "woman" in the U.K. The law there states that nondisclosure of one's transgendered status is grounds for annulment. The blogger was extraordinarily offended at what appears to me to be a very commonsensical proviso. If I am heterosexual and desire children, is it not my right to know that my "wife" is actually a dude and not merely infertile, but intrinsically incapable of childbearing? Should I demand a DNA test as a prerequisite to dating?

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I am neither liberal nor conservative by those definitions.
I want to make things better.
I don't care at all whether that requires radical change, or sticking with or returning to old ways.
Whichever works.
I suppose I'm a radical centrist.

Of course.  That's really the point of my over the top statement about conservatism.  It makes no more sense to make a blanket statement that liberalism is idiotic than it does to make a blanket statement that conservatism is idiotic.  Both have their place in making things better. 

$

A statement is easily made, I agree.
However, while conservatives may do idiotic things, Progressive Liberalism 'IS' idiotic at its core. Therefore, it produces idiotic policies with idiotic results.

 

[Izdaari]

Transgenders have their ID's legally altered to match their current "gender." So, unless a tranny flashes out their genitals to others, no one will ever know... and then we have another issue

I recently read a blog article by a transgender "woman" in the U.K. The law there states that nondisclosure of one's transgendered status is grounds for annulment. The blogger was extraordinarily offended at what appears to me to be a very commonsensical proviso. If I am heterosexual and desire children, is it not my right to know that my "wife" is actually a dude and not merely infertile, but intrinsically incapable of childbearing? Should I demand a DNA test as a prerequisite to dating?

You could, but you wouldn't get many dates.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

But, at least, she didn't say All lives matter! She doesn't even think unborn lives matter...
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/04/04/planned-parenthood-exec-slams-hillary-clinton-calling-fetus-unborn-child/

 

[Ransom]

You could, but you wouldn't get many dates.

Sounds like a fair trade-off. Do I want to date a woman who isn't both certain and unembarrassed about her genetic credentials?

 

[Izdaari]

I am neither liberal nor conservative by those definitions.
I want to make things better.
I don't care at all whether that requires radical change, or sticking with or returning to old ways.
Whichever works.
I suppose I'm a radical centrist.

Of course.  That's really the point of my over the top statement about conservatism.  It makes no more sense to make a blanket statement that liberalism is idiotic than it does to make a blanket statement that conservatism is idiotic.  Both have their place in making things better. 

$

A statement is easily made, I agree.
However, while conservatives may do idiotic things, Progressive Liberalism 'IS' idiotic at its core. Therefore, it produces idiotic policies with idiotic results.

Right. There's a lot more to both "liberalism" and "conservatism" than those radically oversimplified dictionary definitions. The people who write dictionaries are English majors, not political scientists or political philosophers.

For one thing, it's important to differentiate "classical liberalism" from "modern" or "progressive liberalism". It may share their predilection for change, as per the dictionary definition, but change in the direction of individual liberty, not in the direction of socialism. It's basically a subcategory of libertarianism. I identify as a classical liberal, btw. But that's liberalism like John Stuart Mill, not like Nancy Pelosi.

Also, both progressivism and conservatism are based on different mental models of how the world works. Without examining those models, we can never get to the roots of their differences. A Conflict of Visions, by Thomas Sowell is a good entry level introduction to that.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I am neither liberal nor conservative by those definitions.
I want to make things better.
I don't care at all whether that requires radical change, or sticking with or returning to old ways.
Whichever works.
I suppose I'm a radical centrist.

Of course.  That's really the point of my over the top statement about conservatism.  It makes no more sense to make a blanket statement that liberalism is idiotic than it does to make a blanket statement that conservatism is idiotic.  Both have their place in making things better. 

$

A statement is easily made, I agree.
However, while conservatives may do idiotic things, Progressive Liberalism 'IS' idiotic at its core. Therefore, it produces idiotic policies with idiotic results.

Right. There's a lot more to both "liberalism" and "conservatism" than those radically oversimplified dictionary definitions. The people who write dictionaries are English majors, not political scientists or political philosophers.

For one thing, it's important to differentiate "classical liberalism" from "modern" or "progressive liberalism". It may share their predilection for change, as per the dictionary definition, but change in the direction of individual liberty, not in the direction of socialism. It's basically a subcategory of libertarianism. I identify as a classical liberal, btw. But that's liberalism like John Stuart Mill, not like Nancy Pelosi.

Also, both progressivism and conservatism are based on different mental models of how the world works. Without examining those models, we can never get to the roots of their differences. A Conflict of Visions, by Thomas Sowell is a good entry level introduction to that.

I visited Cuba last fall and a Cuban Pastor made this statement, referencing the acute poverty and suffering in Cuba: "What you see here is the end result of what Americans call progressive liberalism".

 

[Izdaari]

I visited Cuba last fall and a Cuban Pastor made this statement, referencing the acute poverty and suffering in Cuba: "What you see here is the end result of what Americans call progressive liberalism"

That's true, in a way at least. If you follow progressive ideology all the way to the end, that's where you end up.

But Castro was a committed Marxist-Leninist from the moment he gained power, and for years before,  He wasn't much like an American "progressive liberal", not even like Bernie Sanders, who is committed to democracy and social liberty, if not economic liberty. If Bernie were elected and got his entire agenda passed, it would turn the US into Denmark, not into Cuba.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

When will these liberal socialist democrats finally learn that ONLY black lives matter!
http://www.weeklystandard.com/bill-clinton-black-lives-matter-protesters-are-defending-murders-and-drug-dealers/article/2001877

 

[Mr. Hall]

Sure it does. Two words: Detroit, Chicago

Can't argue with that logic.

$