Wednesday, May 19, 2010

The Scourge of Liberalism

It has been said by such atheist philosophers as Daniel Dennet that Christianity is a disease. One could easily say the same thing about Liberalism. Liberalism, like a disease, infects people through state controlled media outlets such as MSNBC, CNN, and even such seemingly innocent non-news related outlets like Comedy Central and HBO. Surely their programs are innocuous enough at a cursory glance, but a closer look reveals the insidious and infectious nature of this programming. Ironically, it has been noted by many liberal commentators that conservatives are conformist and propagandized- yet in a recent study it was shown that the majority of young people and college students get their news from Comedy Centrals ‘The daily Show’, a parody of news networks that delivers leftist commentary on world affairs, entertainment, and politics. The popularity of this show and the pervasive influence of MSNBC and its ilk reveals, without a doubt, that the left is far more conformist than the right (not to mention the liberal bent of most institutions of education). In fact, the vast majority of media is controlled by marxist schooled journalists (ie columbia university), cynical leftist entertainers, and politically nihilistic anarchists- and, excluding a few exceptions, the main narrative one receives from the majority of television, film, and academia is one of all out class warfare, hatred of the rich and corporations generally, and a ‘progressivism’ that is really nothing other than a thinly veiled form of socialism.
This isn’t, of course, to say that this is some kind of Evil force or some such thing, but merely that the claim that conservatives are conformist is a blatant lie, and it is far easier to be a liberal today than to take a strong stand of any kind whatsoever. Liberals, inherently, don’t ‘stand’ for anything. They simply take the predominant ideology of the times, accept it as their own because it is what is presented as ‘hip’, and ignore the important philosophical distinctions which have been made historically. Ultimately, what this amounts to is the morals of the slave- and liberals will always have the morals of the slave regardless of whether it is in their best interest or not! This is a form of suicide- but not even noble suicide like committing sepiku because one has been shamed- no- this is the suicide of lemmings. They simply follow the persuasive rhetoric right off the end of a cliff, all the while claiming to be doing so for the common good. Not only is this ignorant, but it is a despicable form of collectivism, in which one puts the good of society over the excellence of individuals. This is the origin of the liberals resentment of the free market, of capitalism, and of the very idea that one can become successful of ones own accord. As a matter of fact, liberals hate success if it goes contrary to their notion of the collective.
The collective is a difficult notion to express, as no one can deny that community is very important- but to get what I am saying, I must first address the fact that America was founded on individualist principles. The rights of the individual, garaunteed by the constitution, are the cornerstone of americas intended destiny- and I hate to say it, but we have, today, strayed far from this path. We are, as of the publication of this article, a socialist nation- in which the business class is being subverted by socialist party leadership. People seek to gain status not by true grit and sheer determination, but by pleasing party leadership. They look towards the government and beuracracy as a means of personal achievement, and in all but a few rare exceptions, seek good standing from their peers through a pathetic ‘please approve of me’ mentality. Well I don’t want to be ‘approved of’ by socialists, marxists, or beuracracies. I would rather stand alone in the cold than take part in this deceptive charade.

That may seem like a bit much, as everyone would like to be accepted and loved by their community- but in socialist societies like the one in which we are now living, ‘true community’ is replaced and eroded by a Jungian ‘Collective mind’, and we are now subject to the devious design of psuedo-intellectual rationalists who have no real philosophical foundation and have an inherent prediliction for simply accepting ideology (this is all to true in academia unfortunately).
William F. Buckley Jr. once talked of the difference between ideology and philosophy, and while this is a somewhat complex distinction, it is elucidated quite simply by the following decree-
The left has ideology, and the right has philosophy.


  1. in all sincerity, you're mad. You really need to get professional mental-health related help... I mean it, you sound like a paranoid schizophrenic (I've had personal experience with this, and you're emitting some blatant signals of paranoia). You're view on the world in general is radical and you seem to think most of everything you see is a possible conspiracy; plus you skew definitions. Every authority in the world (dictionary, encyclopaedia, political philosophers, inventor/founder, etc.) could tell you what "XX" means, but you decide that since it doesn't make sense to you (or you just don't like it), you should just change the word or meaning of that word to your liking. I mean, really, what would you think if you met a lefty showing these very same symptoms? You'd ask yourself, "wtf is up with this anarchist nutter, did he just escape from the loony bin?"

    Seriously, let go of the whole, "They're the ones who are wrong!!!" mentality, it's insane. You may ask, "What's wrong with that?" The problem is no one listens to crackpots and they end up getting locked up in the mental hospital. Jesus was killed over that kind of foolish nonsense.

  2. Thanks for the response Hobbes- but I would argue that this article has a great deal of validity. Your criticisms are heard, however, and thanks for reading.

  3. You sound fully indoctrinated -- you really can't complain about the Daily Show when some of the most popular right wing pundits include Hannity and Glen Beck. Your description of socialism demonstrates a very limited understanding of what the term means; I can tell you now that America is not and never has been socialist, nor has it been or ever will be this meritocratic wonderland that you seem to think it was upon founding.

    All you're showing with this article is that you can phrase things nicely, the content is still typically ultra-paranoid right wing nonsense. Any thinking person can clearly see it as such.

    Your final comment about the left having ideology and the right having philosophy is utter rubbish of the highest degree. Ever heard of Noam Chomsky?

  4. Thanks for the comment Patrick. Yes, I studied Noam Chomsky when I was a liberal, and now I loathe him.

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.