Liberal Hatemongers

The Wall Street Journal ^ | January 17, 2008 | ARTHUR C. BROOKS

[Aristotelian]

A politically progressive friend of mine always seemed to root against baseball teams from the South. The Braves, the Rangers, the Astros -- he hated them all. I asked him why, to which he replied, "Southerners are prejudiced."

The same logic is evident in the complaint the American political left has with conservative voters. According to the political analysis of filmmaker Michael Moore, whose perception of irony apparently does not extend to his own words, "The right wing, that is not where America's at . . . It's just a small minority of people who hate. They hate. They exist in the politics of hate . . . They are hate-triots."

What about liberals? According to University of Chicago law professor Geoffrey Stone, "Liberals believe individuals should doubt their own truths and consider fairly and open-mindedly the truths of others." They also "believe individuals should be tolerant and respectful of difference." Indeed, generations of academic scholars have assumed that the "natural personality" of political conservatives is characterized by hostile intolerance towards those with opposing viewpoints and lifestyles, while political liberals inherently embrace diversity.

(snip)

In the end, we have to face the fact that political intolerance in America -- ugly and unfortunate on either side of the political aisle -- is to be found more on the left than it is on the right. This may not square with the moral vanity of progressive political stereotypes, but it's true.

[Aristotelian]

Only an academic would find this conclusion surprising. If you have two political philosophies -- one which believes in using the power of the state to coerce individuals and another which believes in the freedom of the individual -- which one is likely to be more politically tolerant? This isn't rocket science.

[lonestar67]

As someone working in academia, this article is powerfully true.

Academia has reduced itself to some of the most dangerous encroachments on freedom of thought in American history. This happens to the peril of the fundamental premises necessary for education to take place.

Academia constitutes some of the least free arenas of free expression.

Liberalism constitutes a mindset on college campuses which transcends even the metaphor of a religion. It is dangerously cultlike.

Good article post.

[Aristotelian]

You surely know better than most how academia has turned freedom of speech on its head. I recall my first experience with higher education more than 35 years ago and how I was so impressed by the concept of a campus being a haven for the free expression of thought, however radical. Now it’s the opposite. If you’d asked me back then if such a thing could happen in America, I’d have insisted it could not. How wrong I would have been.

[driftless2]

"rocket science"

Agreed. I have liberal friends, family, and co-workers who go apoplectic at the mention of Republicans or conservatives. Not just Bush, all Republicans. Even when I'm present. It would be funny if these people weren't allowed to vote. The Bush Derangement Syndrome if just a corollary of the Republican Derangement Syndrome.

[kindred]

[If you have two political philosophies — one which believes in using the power of the state to coerce individuals and another which believes in the freedom of the individual — which one is likely to be more politically tolerant? This isn’t rocket science.]

No, but the left is not interested in science or kindness or manners, they are intolerant bigots of the neo nazi persuisions who have abandoned all the first ammendment rights of the American constitution.

[The Louiswu]

"What about liberals? According to University of Chicago law professor Geoffrey Stone, "Liberals believe individuals should doubt their own truths and consider fairly and open-mindedly the truths of others." They also "believe individuals should be tolerant and respectful of difference." Indeed, generations of academic scholars have assumed that the "natural personality" of political conservatives is characterized by hostile intolerance towards those with opposing viewpoints and lifestyles, while political liberals inherently embrace diversity."

Straight out of Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead!

[ripley]

“according to university of chicago law professor geoffrey stone, ‘liberals believe individuals should doubt their own truths and consider fairly and open-mindedly the truths of others.” they also “believe individuals should be tolerant and respectful of difference.’ indeed, generations of academic scholars have assumed that the’natural personality’ of plitical conservatives is characterized by hostile intolerance towards those with opposing viewpoints and lifestyles, while polical liberals inherently embrace diversity.”

indeed, this represents the epitome of prairie pancakes, meadow nuggets and fiddlesticks not to mention the finest of balogne. indeed, it is also reminiscent of a certain bridge in brooklyn which is up for sale at a reasonable price.

[BillyBonebrake]

Emotional immaturity is the hallmark of the the loony left.

[tillacum]

Yep, 35 years ago, universities were places for free thought, and we accepted it. Now we have the “free thinkers” of that era 1960s professors who, then, had the privilege of free thought, now think the free thinkers, students, are dangerous to the professors way of thinking.

[beejaa]

“No, but the left is not interested in science or kindness or manners, they are intolerant bigots of the neo nazi persuisions who have abandoned all the first ammendment rights of the American constitution.”

I believe that you are doing an unintentional parody. Some people on the left think that Bush is a Nazi; you call people on the left the same thing, plus... How about becoming a little more tolerant of the left? I used to be liberal-left but changed. Give people the benefit of the doubt.

[beejaa]

“Emotional immaturity is the hallmark of the loony left.”

I’ll say the same thing to you. I believe that you are doing an unintentional parody. How about becoming a little more tolerant of the left? I used to be liberal-left but changed. Give people the benefit of the doubt.

[BillyBonebrake]

I said “loony left”. Code pink, for example.

[weegee]

In the end, we have to face the fact that political intolerance in America -- ugly and unfortunate on either side of the political aisle -- is to be found more on the left than it is on the right. This may not square with the moral vanity of progressive political stereotypes, but it's true.

Political correctness is not about tolerance. It is about silencing any dissent from the liberal agenda.

Despotism (1946) - Encyclopedia Britannica Films

The leftist "comments" on that site claim it portrays Bush's policies but they are wrong. From the media bias to the Rat control of major metropolian areas, to Political Correctness indoctrination in academia, there is one agenda striving for control. And it is a racist and intolerant ideology. Just look at the venom spewed by the proPalestian War Moveon, Daily KOS, DUmmy types. Look at the attacks on Lieberman and Codi Rice.

Measures how a society ranks on a spectrum stretching from democracy to despotism. Explains how societies and nations can be measured by the degree that power is concentrated and respect for the individual is restricted. Where does your community, state and nation stand on these scales?

[weegee]

George Orwell was a Socialist until he observed firsthand how the Stalinist Left would not tolerate any disclosure of the abuses of Socialism/Communism or criticism Stalin or the USSR.

It is funny that the Left talks of a “Red Scare” but sees the value of Orwell’s books without calling Animal Farm a Red Scare Fairy Tale (which it is, the Red Scare was a genuine menace).

[okie01]

If you have two political philosophies -- one which believes in using the power of the state to coerce individuals and another which believes in the freedom of the individual -- which one is likely to be more politically tolerant? This isn't rocket science.

Scratch a liberal...and you'll find a latent totalitarian underneath.

[Common Tator]

I believe that you are doing an unintentional parody. Some people on the left think that Bush is a Nazi; you call people on the left the same thing, plus...

NAZI is the German languate acronym for German Workers Socialist Party.

You speak like a true Socialist. You defend socialism the same way socialists do, They don't defend against the charge... they accuse the name caller of being a bad and unfeeling person whose name calling will be counter productive.

NAZI is the German acronym for the National Socialist German Workers Party. NAZI means NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY in German and its members were German Workers!

What part of the Left is Socialist and the Right is NOT Socialist excapes you? You seem to be saying that some on the left are accusing Bush of acting just like Democrat? Bush is a GERMAN socialist? Who would have ever believe that?.. Perhaps ignorant leftists would.

It is what the left always does. When the name it is using comes into disrepute they change their name and accuse those who oppose them of being that name.

In the 1910s and 1920s the left in the USA called themselves Progressive Socialists. They called their political party the Socialist party.Once the Progressive Socialists took over the Democratic party they called themselves Progressive Socialists. Socialism was not in bad repute back in the 30s. And many Democrats including the Kennedys, and Auto workers union were suporters of Hitler and the National Socialists and Joe Stalins Soviet Union.

Joe Kennedy (JFK's Dad) was ambassador to England and his constant praising of Hitler caused the British to complain to FDR. Only then did FDR remove Kennedy as ambassador to England.

The Democratic parties belief in socialism is why so much of the FDR new DEAL used the term SOCIAL to name their programs. I.E SOCIAL security. NEW DEAL was just another name for taking America down a socialist road just as Hitler was taking Germany down a Socialist road.

When Socialist came into disrepute the Socialists just denied they were really socialists. When the right replied you are still calling yourselves Progressive they changed their descriptive name from Progressives to Liberals.

Now that Liberals are in disrepute they have taken to calling themselves Progressives again. They figure that everyone is too old to remember that Socialists covered up their Socialism by calling themselves Progressives and when that didn't work they called themselves Liberals

It matters not if they are called Nazis, Socialists, Communists, Leftists, Liberals or Progressives. It is all the same political philosophy. The people who believe in that failed system just change their name.. they never change their beliefs.

And they always call those that oppose them by their own former but now disreputable name, Then they whine when the right describes them for what they really are.

The left has always held the following view. Socialism is great.. it is just that Hitler, Stalin, and Mao did not do it right.

[GatorGirl]

Not only in academia—watch the MSM or really any political debate. The conservatives are mostly firm in their convictions, will willingly argue their points in a polite and rational way, and will listen (albeit skeptically) to the arguments of their opponents.

Liberals will march and protest and shout down anyone they disagree with.

It’s really crystal clear!