The American Left and the Erosion of Public Discourse

American Thinker ^ | 3/8/12 | Steve McCann

[Nachum]

Much has been made of the precipitous decline in the level of discourse in the United States. Many attribute this to the coarsening of the language and the ever-widening gulf between the various factions in the political spectrum. However, these factors are a symptom of a current underlying and foundational dilemma: the inability of not only the general public, but nearly all of the so-called societal leaders and opinion-makers to generate an original thought, as well as a stubborn refusal to use reason and logic when confronted with irrefutable facts and arguments.

These traits can be explained, insofar as the general public is concerned, as the consequence of their subjection for the past forty years to a woeful and deliberately incomplete education bordering on indoctrination. However, this factor does not fully explain many of the so-called best and brightest falling into the same abyss and being unable to coherently expound on an original thought or concept. While this is true for a few on the conservative side of the political spectrum, it is overwhelmingly the case among those who self-identify as liberals or progressives.

Those who publicly espouse the statist philosophy do so in age-old and threadbare platitudes. The depth of thought rarely exceeds three basic tenets: 1) capitalism and individual wealth accumulation are evil; 2) only an economy and society dominated and controlled by a powerful central government can guarantee fairness of outcome; and 3) anyone who disagrees with 1 and 2 is dangerous, ignorant, and not only greedy, but tyrannical and thus must be relegated to the ash heap of society.

Failing to understand that these tenets have been in existence since the late 1840s, the current proponents act as if they have discovered some new and overwhelmingly successful concept. The failure of those nations that chose to

[Puppage]

Much has been made of the precipitous decline in the level of discourse in the United States.

THAT'S RACIST!!

Next topic.

[A. Morgan]

Shirley you jest!

[AngelesCrestHighway]

The gulf is to wide between the parties for any discussion. The radical left has taken over the democratic party and closed off any chance of negotiation. They do not want to negotiate by design! It’s time this country wakes up and realizes they must be obliterated from the political scene. Any dummy can see the damage the whack radical left has done to the mainstream media in this country. I saw these people in college. They were very dangerous then and they are more dangerous now! They must be stopped! They are mentally deranged!

[MeganC]

I’m personally at the point where I have no liberal friends, no friends who are Democrats, and if I find out that someone I do business with is a liberal, Democrat, or both then I find a different person to do business with.

If they want to taunt and ridicule me for my values and principles then they surely do not want my business or friendship.

So the matter of discourse with people I hold in the highest contempt is not a concern to me as I’ve no interest in talking to them in the first place.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Hard to stop them when our so-called GOP leaders in D.C. are hiding in a cave.

[pingman]

Abso-frackin’-lutely.

After getting sucked in to the recent Limbaugh kerfuffle on FB, I ventured that he could have chosen his words more carefully, but after all, his right to blather is the same as your’s and mine.

You can guess the reaction: “ You’re a woman-hater!” “Right Wingnut teabagger!” Ad infinitum.

You’d think I’ve learned by now. I think I’ll follow your lead going forward: I’ll fart in their general direction, at best.

[haroldeveryman]

I’ve got a problem with this. How could a conservative and a leftist possibly disagree with the following “leftist tenet” (3rd paragraph in the posted article):

“only an economy and society dominated and controlled by a powerful central government can guarantee fairness of outcome”.

That statement is the one thing that we can that conservatives, libertarians, and communists can all agree on. Where we differ from the left concerns the desirability of a powerful central government. Fairness of outcome is impossible in a free country.

[haroldeveryman]

I’ve got a problem with this. How could a conservative possibly disagree with the following “leftist tenet” (3rd paragraph in the posted article):

“only an economy and society dominated and controlled by a powerful central government can guarantee fairness of outcome”.

That statement is the one thing that we can that conservatives, libertarians, and communists can all agree on. Where we differ from the left concerns the desirability of a powerful central government. Fairness of outcome is impossible in a free country.

[haroldeveryman]

Sorry about the double post.

[x]

Check out the advertising on the page with this article at americanthinker.com:

What's up with that?

[Nachum]

Check out the advertising on the page with this article at americanthinker.com:

It is a 'Google Ad'. American Thinker has little control of who Google sells to. If you were to click on it, Google has to pay something to the site and Grayson might have to pay something to Google. :) click away!

[Nebr FAL owner]

The point is the left does not want a free country but a nation of slaves all equally poor & downtrodden with the vanguard cadre of leftists in charge . They will use whatever means they think will be needed to gt their vision of utopia . The problem with that is that it always leads to open mass graves for any who do not march in lock step with the those self proclaimed leaders of the proletariat