I've just listened to this -- TWICE. [Probably three times if you count all of the times I stopped, backed up and replayed several parts of his talk].
Anyone who's reading this, and hasn't seen this video REALLY ought to. Those on dial-up should at least stream the audio (there's a link on this page to do that)
It's WELL worth the time. It's about 57 minutes, but you can trim it some by FFWD-ing to the 7:30 minute mark where Evan takes the podium.
From the Heritage Foundation website...
Regurgitating the Apple: How Modern Liberals "Think"
Evan Sayet has been a top Hollywood writer and producer for more than 20 years. His credits range from The Arsenio Hall Show to Politically Incorrect. After the Sept. 11 attacks, Sayet decided to step from behind the camera and speak out in his own voice that of one of the nations top political satirists. At Heritage, his entertaining yet quite serious lecture will examine the modern liberal mindset and how it can lead to siding with evil over good and behaviors that produce failure rather than success.
And, here are my (very) rough notes, for those who need an Executive Summary, or suffer from dial-up.
You're in a restaurant with a friend and he says, "I hate my wife." You blow it off, because he always says that, but they've been married for 35 years...
Then you see his wife out the window getting mugged, and say, "Hey, let's go help her" and the guy says, "Nah, she probably deserves it".
That was 9/13/2001 -- Liberals: "America deserved it"
The "Modern Liberal" invariably sides with evil over good, with wrong over right, with behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success.
They are, WRONG on EVERY issue. On foreign policy, domestic policy, on EVERY policy. They are diametrically -- 180 degrees -- opposed to what's right.
WHY? How do they think they're making a better world?
Are they evil?
No. We know too many Liberals -- friends, co-workers and such -- to believe that. They obviously aren't evil
Are they just incredibly stupid?
No. Actually if it was just stupidity, they'd be right more often.
So, what gives?
Liberalism looks at human history and sees that none of man's ideas have succeeded in creating a world wihtout war, poverty, crime and injustice. So, since all of man's ideas have proven to be wrong, the real cause of war, poverty crime and injustice must be found -- can only be found -- in the attempt to be right. If nobody ever thought they were right, what would we disagree about? What would we fight over? What would we go to war over?
Therefore, all that's required to usher in Utopia -- to get rid of war, poverty, crime and injustice -- is to get rid of all fact, reason, evidence, logic, truth, morality and decency; to create John Lennon's world of "Imagine" where all good has been brought down and all evil elevated to the place where there's nothing left to kill or die for; call it the "Blueprint for Utopia"
Tear down what is good and elevate what is evil.
Tear down what is right and elevate what is wrong.
Tear down behaviors that lead to success and elevate those that lead to failure.
Fahrenheit 911 -- one purpose
To show that America ISN'T that good and that Saddam Hussein isn't that evil so as to undermine our efforts to go to war.
Abu Grahib -- 44 days on the front page of the NYT
Why? "Here's proof that America is not that good; that the Islamists are really the victims, here."
Korans down the toilet -- never happened, but Newsweek ran with it.
Why? It met the one and only criterion for Liberals, it attacked America as not good, and justified the Islamic fascist terrorists.
"Piss Christ" met the one and only Liberal standard of art: it tore down good and elevated evil.
There truly is no standard -- no criterion -- for truth, beauty, justice or anything else amongst the Modern Liberals; the dominant force in today's Democratic Party.
Not everyone who voted for Kerry knows about "The Blueprint for Utopia", and likely wouldn't support it if they knew, but Liberal elites have succeeded in indoctrinating people -- using those venues that they have been allowed to control -- into a "cult of indiscriminateness"; teaching people from the time that they're children that rational and moral thought is an act of bigotry, because no matter how sincerely you gather the facts, or how earnestly you look at the evidence, no matter how disciplined your reasoning, your conclusions will be nothing more than a reflection of your own bigotries. Therefore, the only way to eliminate bigotry is to eliminate rational thought and so indiscriminateness of thought becomes a moral imperative.
So, in airports; in order eliminate discrimination, we have to make ourselves stupid; to accept that the 80-something year-old grandmother is an equal threat to the middle eastern guys chanting "Allhu akbar!" as they board the aircraft.
The key problem is this: discrimination is the essence of rational thought, so, then, the essence of liberalism is the rejection of rational thought as a hate crime.
Liberals exhibit virulent atagonism to any position other than their own because, since indiscriminateness is a moral imperative, any position other than their own must have been arrived at using discrimination and is, therefore, invalid, immoral, unworthy of the least consideraion.
BUT...indiscriminateness of thought does not lead to indiscriminateness of policy; it inevitably leads to siding with evil against good, with wrong against right, and with the behaviors that lead to failure against those that lead to success.
In a vacuum of discrimination -- of reason -- success, by it's simple existince, is proof of some chicanery. Therefore, siding with failure becomes an act of justice.
In a vacuuum of discrimination, good, by it's simple existence, is proof that good must be the beneficiary of some prejudice; evil must be the victim of some injustice. Therefore siding with evil and against good is an act of justice.
In the Cult of Indiscriminateness, good is evil, because evil is the victim of good.
In the Cult of Indiscriminateness, there's no difference between the "terrorist" and the "freedom fighter", therefore, the only reason we call George Washington a hero is because he's a white Christian of European descent, and the only reason Yassir Arafat and Saddam Hussein are called villains is beacuse they're darker skinned men of Middle eastern desecnt.
An example of this is the anti-war chant, "1-2-3-4 we don't want you RACIST war!" There it is, right there.
Once you subscribe to indiscriminateness, anything other than that is the evil of having discriminated.
Liberalism argues aginst many things but replaces them with nothing, which is, essentially, nihilism.
Capital "L" Liberalism is differentiated from lower case "l", or "classical" liberalism.
Diversity is not a virtue; it's just "different" and is meaningless without the critical moral judgement to say "this is different AND good". The elevation of diversity necessitates an increase in that which is rare, and a decrease in that which is common. So, common sense and traditional wisdom are torn down simply because they are common and traditional.
THAT is how Modern Liberals "think".
Well said HK...
To quote an earlier poster - EXCELLENT!!