Skip to comments.Guilt by Association - Liberal Secularists are Bloodthirsty Monsters!
Posted on 03/26/2013 4:32:16 PM PDT by DeprogramLiberalism
[(DIRECT LINK to original entry) This post is the intro to a compendium essay on liberal hate, demagoguery and violence in America. It is written to liberals in the first person, but is illuminating for conservatives as well.]
Using guilt by historic association is a popular demagogic tool of contemporary liberals to demonize conservative opponents. As an example lets examine the animus contemporary liberals have towards Christianity. Yes, of course, many liberals claim to be Christians, but they seem to have a hard time standing up for Christianity when it is demagogued by secular liberals. They often seem to be ashamed of their faith to the point that they feel they have to hide or even overtly criticize their own professed religion to prove to secular liberals that they would never let their beliefs in Christianity take them off the liberal reservation. Lets deal with one of these arguments.
Secular liberals are compulsively paranoid about Christianity, with delusions about tyrannical theocracies and witch burnings. They love to demonize Christianity by asserting that it is a barbaric world view that leads to mass murder. To make their point they, of course, bring up the Crusades, claiming that barbarous Christians slaughtered unbelievers in the name of Christianity, but my question to them is, So what is your point? Sure Christians killed mostly Muslim invaders that had first killed Christians when overrunning peaceful Christian countries. Liberals have a problem with that?!? If Christianity had not reacted to the Muslim invaders, but turned the other cheek as these secular liberals seem to suggest they should have, the West would not currently exist and neither would secular liberals. We would all be Muslims still living in an extended Medieval age. Is that what secular liberals would have preferred?!? [/incredulousness]
And whats with liberals having to stretch back to Medieval times to make a dubious claim about Christianity being a religion of mass murder? Estimates of deaths over the period of two centuries that encompass most of the Crusades go from one million to as high as five million (this high estimate by an author with obvious animosity toward Christianity, and probably bias in his numbers). And many of those deaths were Christians who died at the hands of the Muslim invaders. [4v64kpz] 
On the other hand, lets take a look at secularisms rich history of mass murder, and we need not go back a thousand years to make the point. Here are the 800 pound gorilla death totals from some notable secular leaders from the recent past (from the book Death by Government by R.J. Rummel):
Here we have the most murderous tyrants in history, all secularists. Just seven of them managed to kill 122 million people, most of them their own fellow citizens. (And new research suggests that these numbers are conservative in the cases of Stalin and Mao who may have been responsible for more than 60 million deaths each.) [mfjc78]  None of them genuinely killed in the name of any religion (Hitler shrewdly used his Aryan superiority delusion and Christian knowledge from his upbringing as religious propaganda tools to cater to a largely Christian German populous, separating himself from the openly atheistic communists, while at the same time planning the ultimate destruction of the church as outlined in The Nazi Master Plan). All were ideological and killed to advance their own power (or in the case of Hideki Tojo, his emperors power). Additionally, Kim Jong Il and his father Kim Il-sung in North Korea doubtlessly killed millions and should also be added to the list. Millions more have been killed by a multitude of less prominent secular tin pot dictators in Asia, Africa and South America, including liberal hero, Che Guevara. So, for you secular liberals who go around stamping your little feet insisting that Christians condemn their own religion for something done a thousand years ago, try looking in a mirror at your own world view first. If we play your own game of guilt by historic association, the person looking back at you is a bloodthirsty monster! (Besides being very delusionally paranoid.)
Is it possible to deprogram a liberal?
Thats what happens when people with no moral compass are put in charge.
And they have to have ‘like-minded’ henchmen around them, who do not object to implementing these horrors.
The only one thing to respect about Militant Islam is what they do to folks who threaten them.
Sooner or later, we are going to have to make libs worry when they display their normal tendency to lie.
That’s worry, as in wish they had a concrete bunker.
Think I am kidding?
Liberal guy and gal walking home from movie and are accosted by two large thugs one of whom barnadishes a large knife. They are robbed and the girlfriend is raped by the one not holding the knife at the guy's throayt. As it all ends, the girlfriend straightens her clothes and goes off with the thugs, leaving the liberal guy standing in his own piss.
Works every time; liberal guy buys a gun or two and starts sending rounds downrange at a loacl gunclub, learning how to defend himself.
No, I don’t think you are kidding.
But I do think that liberals can be converted to conservatives. See my link to dragonblustar.
It doesn’t need to take such a traumatic event. Almost every liberal is conservative in their core beliefs. By showing them this it can lead to a transformation.
The numbers for Lenin, Stalin, and Mao are way off.
A Russian friend tells me that in his Russian public school they taught him that Lenin murdered more than 20 million people, mostly Russians, in Lenin’s first five years. This was part of his plan to eliminate the bourgeoisie, most of whom were Kulaks. If any farmer owned one or more horses, he and his whole family were eliminated - from the ancient right down to babies. Of course, the horses went to the Soviet government.
Mao’s numbers are closer to 90 million, and Stalin’s are closer to 60 million.
I see you don’t actually know any real liberals.
Nobody really knows how many Stalin or Mao murdered no way to take a count.. merely estimates conservatively..
The death rate in hamlets, meadows, barns and forest glens who can tell..
even those not outright murdered but starved, worked, and harangued to death..
Those same seven made lives miserable for 10 times as many.. or more..
Why Socialism is NOT made ILLEGAL in western country’s is a mystery to me..
If only for the death rate forget the misery index..
American liberals should be shot on sight.. if not for stupidity then for the pure evil of it..
But then there are degrees of liberalism.. no doubt even being a democrat is a major “tell”..
Even if they appear to be “NICE”.. they are NOT..
THEY WANT YOUR FREEDOM......... and it looks like they will GET IT..
Yeah, its hard to know for sure.
But the point is the big picture.
I think they should be pittied for living a life of paranoia. In fact, that should be the conservative reply to everything liberal. Liberals are paranoid of almost everything. That’s why they want to control everything.
> But the point is the big picture.
I remember, when I was just a boy, seeing a Life magazine, or maybe it was Look, about 1953. You remember how large those magazines were, about the size of a tabloid, only with thick, stiff, glossy pages.
There was a photo that was spread across two pages with thousands upon thousands of headless bodies as far as the eye could see. It was one of Mao’s great social programs being put into practice.
All for a noble cause, no doubt.
You cannot succeed if the goal is to convince them Christianity is not evil because they believe (religiously) they are good and anything opposed to what they believe must be evil. You want children to starve and they want to feed children, You want people to die from lack of medical services and they don't. Nothing you say can penetrate that closed, unconditional goto loop.
I don't know how you deprogram these people, or if you can. But I will give it some thought from the insight I got here reading the article and posts.
If you go to my home page from there I provide information and a strategy with small tactics that can be used to transform liberals into conservatives. The first essay begins with a question which gets to the core of a liberal’s belief system. When answered, most liberals reveal to themselves that in their core beliefs they are actually conservatives. That is the starting point.
There has never been a “progressive” socialist state that has not created human suffering and human misery and ultimately murder on a mass scale.
> All for a noble cause, no doubt.
What could be more noble than the dictatorship of the proletariat?
What could be more noble than the grand vision of the Dear Leader?
I believe we get the term, “Politically Correct” from “The Thoughts of Chairman Mao”, affectionately called “The Little Red Book” by the SDA acolytes in my college days.
Those are the people running the country now.