It Has to be Said Again

I made this point in "Beyond Criticism" a couple days ago, and it's by no means a new observation, but I really can't let a certain point go about political discourse these days.

Something in the minds of loony leftists seems to be telling them that liberal policies are the only proper way to run a country. As a consequence of this elitist mindset, they believe that every liberal position is inherently correct, and any logical person would support the liberal platform.

There's just one problem, however: A lot of Americans disagree with liberal positions and think that some are downright nutty. Unfortunately, some of the tinfoil hatted crowd can't seem to grasp this fact.

Instead, they blame every conservative success on some sort of conspiracy, since people who haven't been influenced by neocon propaganda would clearly support liberals.

For example, when Bush won the election, they started saying that he stole it, because clearly no intelligent American would actually vote for a *spit* REPUBLICAN *spit*! It could only be the work of the Bushitler propagandists.

The same goes for the recall election in California. When people voted to remove Gray Davis, some liberals (DU, I'm looking in your direction) figured that it must've been a conspiracy, because nobody capable of free thought would choose to replace a Democrat with a Republican. What kind of retrogressive stupidity is that?

This also applies to the war with Iraq. I fisked an editorial a couple days ago that demonstrated this mindset quite nicely. The author observed that the majority of Americans support the war. Now, logically, this means that most Americans believe the war is right and have good reasons for holding that belief. That's obvious, right?

Well, according to the author, the reason most people support the war is because they've been lied to by the administration. He says that the polls are proof not of Americans' support for the war, but of the success of right wing propaganda! Do you see what I'm saying? Because some liberals think they can never be wrong, they figure that any support of conservative ideas is evidence of a conspiracy (or, should I say, a NEOCONspiracy).

For another example of this, look at some of the attitudes toward patriotism. When some liberals see the American flag being displayed, they think that it's evidence of people being brainwashed by the administration or creating the illusion of support so John Ashcroft won't hunt them down. They don't even stop and consider the possibility that people can actually agree with what the U.S. does occasionally.

Here's yet another example: The attitudes toward the media. Many liberals don't believe that there is a liberal bias in the media. Why? Because liberals CAN'T be biased in their world. They see the same news we do, but since it supports their worldview, they see it as the truth instead of liberal bias.

If a reporter calls Iraq a quagmire despite the fact that the war was hugely successful, they don't see that as liberal bias. Instead, they realize that they also see the war as a failure, and since they're liberal, they must be right. Therefore, the quagmire meme isn't bias, but absolute, unvarnished truth!

This is why some liberals have a problem with Fox News. Since they can't see the liberal bias in most of the media, anything that doesn't align with their views has a conservative bias. When they look at Fox News, they don't see "fair and balanced" coverage, because it occasionally supports the right wing position.

Now, because they think liberal logic is the obvious choice, they take this one step further and assume that Bush actually CONTROLS Fox News, because a free press wouldn't espouse the warped views of Republicans. This is why Fox is seen as propaganda by some people (like Howard Dean) who can't grasp the idea that the liberal worldview isn't inherently correct and true.

We can also look at conservative talk radio here. People like Rush Limbaugh are able to gain a huge number of listeners because a lot of people agree with the views presented on the program. When liberals look at this, however, they see a bunch of "sheeple" or "dittoheads" who have been manipulated by propaganda to believe anything Rush says.

It doesn't occur to them that he may actually make good points, because they don't think conservatives are even CAPABLE of making good points. After all, how can you make a good argument for an obviously flawed position? It can't be done unless you brainwash your fans!

People like Michael Moore and Al Franken, on the other hand, are liberal, so nobody on the left seems to question the critical thinking abilities of their followers. They believe that Moore and Franken speak the truth, so people are justified in following them.

They haven't been brainwashed at all, but are instead opening their minds and learning the truth about the world after evil conservative demagogues like Limbaugh tried to fool them into becoming Republicans.

Let's examine yet another issue: Affirmative action. Now, most conservatives think affirmative action is racist, right? It's preference based on race, which is racism. However, the liberal view is that minorities are constantly being discriminated against and need a helping hand, so they think that NOT having affirmative action is racist.

This partially explains the view of conservatives as racists. Instead of using logic to figure out that affirmative action is racist, they compare their belief that it helps minorities to the conservative belief that it's wrong. Since they don't see the conservative version as beneficial to minorities, they paint conservatives as racists.

For proof of this, look at how Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice have been treated. They've both basically been called race traitors and house negros at some point in their respective careers. Why? Because certain liberals can't fathom the idea of a conservative minority. Conservatives are racists! Why would minorities be against themselves unless they were trying to suck up to the massa (my apologies to dialecticians everywhere)?

This can even be applied to President Bush's environmental policies. Some liberals seem to think that he's trying to destroy the environment by reducing some protections. What else could possibly explain his choice to oppose the left-wing position? It couldn't be because he thinks it's wrong, because liberals are never wrong! He must be trying to kill us all!

Overall, this partially explains why liberals often resort to name calling or pointless memes when trying to argue for their position. They don't think that they can ever be wrong, so they go into the debate assuming that everyone knows they're right, and the entire point of the argument is to make the conservative look foolish for not holding the right view.

Instead of trying to show why the liberal view is correct, they can only focus on why the conservative view is wrong, as they believe the correctness of the liberal view is so obvious that it shouldn't need to be explained. The only way to change a conservative is to humiliate them, because this can undo the evil dittohead rays that are transmitted by Rush Limbaugh.

Let's look at a hypothetical conversation between a liberal and a conservative and see where the problem is:

CON: You see, the war in Iraq was...

LIB: The war was racist and we only went to Iraq for their oil! HA! You lose!

CON: But you didn't even give me a chance to...

LIB: WAR FOR OIL! YOU LOSE!

CON: But what about the WMD?

LIB: Bush lied! People died!

CON: There was plenty of evidence...

LIB: Saddam never bought yellowcake from Niger!

CON: Nobody ever said he...

LIB: Bush lied! I win again!

CON: In any case, this was one of the most successful military...

LIB: Quagmire! It's a quagmire! You lose again!

CON: But we've captured a bunch of Baathist leaders...

LIB: Did you see that on...FOX NEWS?

CON: Well, yeah. What difference does...

LIB: Neocon propaganda agency! They lie! You lose again!

CON: Do you have any proof that...

LIB: QUAGMIRE!

CON: You didn't even let me...

LIB: WAR FOR OIL! WAR FOR OIL!

CON: I'm going home.

LIB: HA! My arguments must have been to much for you, you stupid neofascist!

CON: There's no need to resort to name-calling...

LIB: If you're not a neofascist, why did you vote for the chimp?

And it'll go on like that for a while.

I think I've taken this too far, so I'm going to step away and let this piece speak for itself.

Posted by CD on January 3, 2004 09:04 PM
Category: