Wednesday, March 14, 2007

An Answer To Les

Les attempts to differentiate between Nazi's and liberals:

The Nazis started a world war, made genocide national policy, made the assumption their own nation was the greatest in the history of history (and then proceeded to destroy that nation), had absolutely no respect for international law, eliminated civil liberties, consolidated "emergency" war powers in the hands of the head of state (voted against by ONLY the Social Democrats), used propaganda to bolster public support for their fascist policy, aggressively pursued the destruction of homosexuals and the physically/mentally impaired, banned pop culture media that didn't conform to their ideology, used the "cult of the dead" to glorify sacrificing one's life in the name of the state, rewarded an antiquated notion of womanhood that supported a family structure straight out of the Old Testament, replaced empathy with aggression, poured the bulk of their resources into the military...

I believe that I've pretty much shown that liberals do all the above, are attempting to, or wish would happen. This will pretty much put the debate to rest:

"A professor at North Idaho College says it's all right to talk about executing "anyone who's ever voted Republican" as long as it's said with a smile.

The belief was expressed by instructor Jessica Bryan when her comments were challenged by a student, Linda Cook, who served as an aide to the late U.S. Rep. Helen Chenoweth, R-Idaho, and is a longtime supporter of the Republican Party.

Cook wrote to the school asking for a refund on fees she paid for a course taught by Bryan, after she withdrew because of the instructor's comments. Cook told the Spokane Spokesman-Review that Bryan used every class period in the English composition course to criticize and disparage Republicans, including the suggestion of the death penalty for everyone who chooses to support a Republican with a vote.

....Among the allegations: Bryan reported President George W. Bush won the election "because people … can't read," and, regarding the death penalty: "First we line up everyone who can't think and right behind them, anyone who's ever voted Republican."

...Bryan said she thought Cook had enjoyed the "debate" of the classroom, but Cook said she chose not to confront the teacher during class time. "If someone's suggesting you just be killed you don't sit down and say 'let's talk,'" Cook said

Unfortunately this sentiment is far too prevalent on college campuses today. David Horowitz has documented thousands and thousands of similar statements. Once again, the only difference between Nazi's and liberals is that liberals don't have the means to exterminate their enemies, at least not yet.

7 Comments:

Anonymous Linda said...

The professor at North Idaho College would love to see us all executed....His remark was it was okay to talk about executing republicans as long as you have a smile on your face. News for the idiot...
It's not going to happen. This is the U.S.A. He belongs in a third world country with the other terrorists and he should take the liberals with him.

March 14, 2007 11:54 AM  
Anonymous Les said...

Wow. I think this is the second time you’ve dedicated an entire post to me. I must be doing something right.

As I’ve said so many times before, CJ, you tend to base your arguments on the assumption that the viewpoints of the extreme leftist “wingnuts” represent the beliefs of everyone who doesn’t vote GOP. I have absolutely no problem with you attacking people who endorse violence, intimidation, and outright immorality to push their political agendas. They should be called out for their behavior, and I believe it’s actually our duty to do so, as in the case of this Bryan professor you linked to.

The problem stems from the fact that you make no distinction between those extremists and liberalism as a whole. Whether you admit it or not, it is possible to disagree with your political opponents’ basic beliefs without automatically associating them with Nazis and terrorists. For example, I disagree with many of the political aspects of conservatism, but I don’t think conservatives are evil people. I’ve got a ton of conservative friends, and my friendship with them is based on their qualities as human beings - nothing more. Attempting to link your ideological opposites to Nazis does a disservice to the millions of people who died at the hands of the Third Reich. It’s a wildly unfair and inaccurate comparison.

I’m amused by your conviction here, CJ. Where exactly are you getting your data? How is liberalism responsible for genocide? When did liberalism target homosexuality? When did liberalism decide a woman’s role should be limited to babymaker? When did liberalism concede the argument that it’s ok to let the head of state maintain an unchecked level of power in the name of national security? When did liberalism make a blanket endorsement of the idiots who beat people up under the pretext of war dissent? Again, please try to differentiate between an ideology and a bunch of idiots. Do I associate conservatives with the KKK?

That said, thanks for the answer. I think it helps paint a clearer picture of how you choose to view all of us here on the other side of the fence. Hopefully someday I’ll be able to convince you we’re not all the devil incarnate.

March 14, 2007 12:25 PM  
Blogger Capitalist Infidel said...

Les, I completely reject your thesis that these are only "extremists." There is no question that this kind of attitude is mainstream. You want evidence of the vicious homophobia on the left? Well, here it is. If you don't conform to the liberal agenda you're to be destroyed. Again, kind of reminds you of Nazi's no?

As you well know David Horowitz has thousands and thousands of similar comments made by professors. If you think only "extremists" make those statements you're either lying or intellectually dishonest. By the way, have you heard any prominent liberals denouncing such statements?

March 14, 2007 2:53 PM  
Anonymous Les said...

Perhaps I responded wrong here, CJ. I’ll try again:

Granted, we see more and more of these examples of cruelty you’ve illustrated time and time again here on Capitalist Infidel. I can’t argue with that, because it’s a fact. The point I’m trying to drive home with you, however, is that you have a tendency to misconstrue these extreme viewpoints (is that a better choice of wording than “extremists”?) with the very idea of liberalism itself, which I champion. We’ve covered this territory before - either here or elsewhere. Liberalism, by its very definition, is a philosophy that is supposed to challenge the status quo. On the flip side, conservatism is designed to protect that which has already been established. It was liberalism that was the driving force behind the civil rights movement. It’s liberalism that allowed shows like “Queer Eye” to even exist. Heck, if you think about it, it was a species of liberalism that motivated a bunch of folks a few centuries ago to ditch the world they were familiar with and start up a brand new country called the United States.

Getting back to the homosexual issue for a second, are you really trying to convince me that the conservative movement is the horse to which the gay community has hitched its wagon? Puh-leeeeez! There’s no question homophobia can be found in people of any political stripe, but seriously - can you honestly deny the gay rights movement finds its roots in liberalism? C’mon, man - let’s tell it as it is, shall we?

The question we need to be asking ourselves is this - how the hell did we allow political discourse to devolve to the condition that it has? Why do we see such an escalation of hateful rhetoric lobbied back and forth between our fellow Americans, as you’ve so diligently highlighted here on your blog? Some cowards beat up a veteran, and you respond by saying liberals are nazis? Huh? Listen - escalation breeds escalation, folks. Hate is never the solution. Shouldn’t freedom involve being able to speak your mind without being labeled anti-American? Part of the problem is the fact that this president began his presidency under a cloud of controversy. Remember, there are still a ton of people who believe Gore lost the election under questionable circumstances. Whether you believe there’s any credence to that or not, the fact remains this is the starting point we’ve been given. From the word go, half of this country felt they somehow got screwed. A year later, 9/11 happened. Throw the element of war into an already bitter political environment, and watch out - fireworks are destined to ignite. It’s just sad that it’s reached this point.

Quite honestly, I think the blogosphere has to take its fair share of the blame for this, too. Specifically, blogs with primarily political themes. The allure is the element of anonymity involved. Anyone in the world with access to the internet can chime in with their comments and do so without any real consequences, because no one knows who they really are! They can swear up a storm, start damaging rumors, threaten the vice-president, create ridiculous conspiracy theories, etc. There’s simply no effective way to check such malevolence, which is why you have to take everything you read with a grain of salt. Not to mention, even those who openly announce who they are undoubtedly have varying degrees of their own personal agendas, so one must be careful to get all the facts before jumping to any hasty conclusions. Just cuz it’s written don’t mean it’s true.

And I apologize for running long here, but I want to address a point you brought up that I think is important. CJ, you asked why liberal leaders don’t denounce controversial public comments more often. I may have mentioned this before, but it bears repeating. When you pressure someone into denouncing comments they had nothing to do with in the first place, you unfairly lump them together with the person who actually made the comments. Again, to revert back to the KKK example, should conservatives be expected to publicly denounce the Klan following every moronic thing they do? I think not. Conservatives shouldn’t have to speak for the Klan, and liberals shouldn’t have to speak for wingnuts.

More later, I’m sure...

March 14, 2007 4:50 PM  
Anonymous blake said...

Excellent comments on this blog from both sides. What astonishes me is the fact that Ms. Bryan is an instructor at a small college in Northern Idaho. If she had been in one of the northeast ivy leage universities it would be no surprise at all, just another school day.

March 14, 2007 5:30 PM  
Blogger hashfanatic said...

the bush crime family is the best government osama bin laden could have hoped for, and very wonderful for israel

for americans, not so hot

March 15, 2007 8:45 AM  
Anonymous Jane said...

I hope Ms. Bryan gets her come-uppance someday soon.

March 16, 2007 5:50 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home