7 Reasons Why The Right Should Not Seek to Convert The Left
An appreciation of Dennis Prager and multimedia celebration of his magnum opus, Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph.
June 8, 2012 - 7:00 am
The image of oneself as a persecuted minority is one form of idolatry challenging the American value of a Rule of Law which applies equally to all.
This was a terrific effort, and thanks a million!
“More important than what you think you are is what you are doing and how you are doing it. A person’s actions and their practical effects are more important than his intentions or beliefs in doing them. More important than believing in God is Struggling with Him. You have to fight to rise up, beyond your animal nature.”
This meant a lot to me. Thank you for a great article. Interesting and enlightening.
The God of ethical monotheism is the God first revealed to the world in the Hebrew Bible. Through it, we can establish God’s four primary characteristics:
•1. God is supranatural.
•2. God is personal.
•3. God is good.
•4. God is holy.
You say, “The way to be a good person is through imitating God. Note: one does not need to Believe in God in order to imitate God. (Though as an agnostic theist I recommend both.)”
Why just borrow from God? Why just observe from the side of the lake? Why not jump in, come what may? You’re almost there, Dave.
First rate analysis, by the way.
Thank you. If my piece didn’t make clear: I have jumped in. After 12 years or so of silence I’ve started praying and believing in God again. I specify my current position as “agnostic theist” as a way to indicate that I do not KNOW that God exists, and I do not claim the existence of God can be demonstrated. I just argue we should choose to worship God-as-a-Verb because if we don’t we’ll end up engaging in idolatry whether we intend to or not. And then our lives will be miserable.
“If my piece didn’t make clear…” Sorry if I missed something. And thank you for the response.
“I do not claim the existence of God can be demonstrated…” Perhaps not scientifically, although science strongly points to God’s existence, but I think it can be demonstrated in the evidence of a changed life. Ephesians 3:16-19. I apologize in advance for making any incorrect assumptions. I cannot, of course, claim to know you at all.
I might be waaaay off base, but I’ll throw it in anyway… It’s still idolatry to worship the image (moral idea) of God and not God himself.
No apologies needed. Thank you for your response and encouragement. Don’t worry — sounds like we’re on the same page.
I’m planning a follow up on the different kinds of idolatry. And yes, worshipping an image of God is idolatry — and one of the types I intend to talk about.
“Worshipping” seems to be a normal and universal human endeavor. Mankind seems to have a real need to relate to something higher. The attaching verb of “love” ranges from God to ice cream.
However, the road to blashphemy starts when humans worship other humans; hence the first commandment. Worshipping other humans before God is daily displayed with the concepts of “royality, Hollywood stars, the rich and the famous.” That tool of the tools is never going to be reconciled until final judgement.
Instead of asking, “Does God exist?” ask, “Did Jesus Christ rise from the dead?” That will focus you on evidence that can be used to judge the matter by the courtroom standard, “beyond reasonable doubt.”
Since we’re going by courtroom standard and “beyond reasonable doubt” perhaps you’d like to start with the date of Christ’s Resurrection.
These kinds of arguments that I have with Marxists about the problems with their theology I can have with fundamentalist Christians too. That was the theology I embraced in junior high and high school so I know all the apologetics arguments, the Josh McDowell, the Lee Strobel, etc. I spent years in Bible studies and did the Billy Graham crusades and youth retreats and Jars of Clay concerts and WWJD bracelets and all that. So by all means, if you’d like to provide some “beyond reasonable doubt” evidence that you think I didn’t come across in all my years of searching (as my fundamentalist biblical literalist faith collapsed) then please provide it.
I don’t have a problem with Christians choosing to have faith in Jesus’ resurrection and Biblical miracles. But I’ve got a big problem with Christians who think they can prove it or that it’s some kind of historical fact we can know “beyond a reasonable doubt” like the Kennedy Assassination. If you could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt then there’d be no need for faith and thus no need for God. And it would just be a historical fact everyone understood; and not an article of faith people use to transform themselves and achieve union with God.
Of course, the beauty of it is I don’t have to prove it; you’ve already accepted it. As C.S. Lewis put it, “Either Christ was exactly what He claimed to be, or He was a lunatic. No other possibilities exist.” Since you are claiming belief, you’ve rejected option 2.
As for Leftists, if you can’t live with them (because they will try and enslave you) and you can’t argue them out of the beliefs that lead them to try and keep on trying to take power, then there is nothing left but to expel them from our midst. Civil War II is the inevitable conclusion.
To SDN.
“Either Christ was exactly what He claimed to be, or He was a lunatic. No other possibilities exist.”
Christ didn’t claim to be anything. He didn’t write anything. The Gospels were written decades after his life and words were put into his mouth by his followers. I know C.S. Lewis too. The Liar/Lunatic/Lord theorem was one of my favorites in high school. It leaves out another L: Legend. It only works if you ignore that the four Gospels disagree about who Jesus claimed to be. See Bart Ehrman’s Jesus Interrupted http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0061173940/pjmedia-20
Jesus Christ is God. But that means different things depending on whether you define God as a noun or a verb.
I was never impressed by the lunatic/lord “theorem”. I’m totally comfortable with choosing the lunatic option for the individual in question.
Jesus got so much right that I don’t think he was crazy. And one can still worship Him while doubting all the supernatural acts ascribed to him.
Huh! I also came up with the legend part. I admire C. S. Lewis, but I think those arguments don’t work for non-Christians like myself. I have no problem with liar and/or lunatic (no offense intended, please). Also, based on that argument, I should be worshipping Elijah and Elisha and maybe Pat Robertson.
Dave,
From a Christian perspective you will never “Know” that God exists, otherwise you would not need faith. Keep talking too him and seeking!
I think you’re overlooking:
Why are you overlooking:
*5 G-d is just: Half the Tenach (Hebrew Bible) is about G-d the lawgiver, most of which were to “his people” and to “his priests”
Re your larger point of trying to convert a liberal: I think all of us have had this frustrating experience. Surely they “feel” the same about their experiences with us. For anyone to change they must be:
1) Fair enough to give the opposing side a hearing,
2) Self-analytical enough to see how it applies to them,
3) Courageous enough to alientate/antagonize their own peer group, and
4) Big enough to admit the error.
I find these traits lacking in most folks generally and in “progressives” in particular.
That leaves extermination . Do you know how big a mess that will leave?
But it solves the problem!
Thank you for this, Mr. Swindle. You’ve clarified a whole lot of points in my own thinking about belief in God (with whom I struggle almost daily), and about the worth of believing in America. America may not be the end point of human philosophical evolution, but it is most certainly the most advanced beachhead to date. May it continue to the end of time.
As for Mr. Pink, I don’t want to dismiss him (or her) out of hand, but the most telling impression I came away with was that he (or she) simply could not give up the “black” identity… and by that, I most specifically mean, the African-American identity. That’s probably the result of a lifetime marinating in leftist, multiculti, Black Nationalist theology: the notion that identifying as an American first, black second, is merely capitulating to “white culture”— as if “white culture” could never be, or has never been, powerfully influenced by so called “non-white” resources (the Middle Eastern Judaeo-Christian base, and the attendant major influences of Native American, and African, and yes, even Asian, cultures on America over the centuries, just as a couple of examples).
America, as it was envisioned by the Founders, was never about one Old World culture. It was always, and remains, the idea of human liberty and creativity applied (however reluctantly at times by its implementers) to all of humankind. Perhaps the Founding Fathers thought their ideas would matter only to the people of this continent, but I don’t think so. I think they had a sneaking suspicion that their idea of liberty would leak out to the whole world. And so it has.
Ask a leftist “Why do people need to be good?” From TS Eliot:
Why should men love the Church? Why should they love her laws?
She tells them of Life and Death, and of all that they would forget.
She is tender where they would be hard, and hard where they like to be soft.
She tells them of Evil and Sin, and other unpleasant facts.
They constantly try to escape
From the darkness outside and within
By dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good.
But the man that is will shadow
The man that pretends to be.
T.S. Eliot, Choruses from “The Rock”
Let’s try this. Goto http://therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/engl_mir.htm, and scroll down to Miracles by country. Try Italy, and Lanciano.
The Lord Jesus Christ is Truly Present in the Consecrated Host. It is not just a symbol! (As Flannery O’Conner said, “If it’s just a symbol, then I say the hell with it!”)
Two out of Seven ain’t bad.
Oh, wait, …. yes it is.
Re: “Christ didn’t claim to be anything.” From John 14:6 Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.”
You are, of course correct. He claimed to be everything
You mean the writer of the Gospel of John claimed he claimed to be everything. We don’t have anything that Christ actually wrote himself. Interestingly other Gospel writers had different ideas about what Jesus did and didn’t claim about himself. Suggested reading: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0061173940/pjmedia-20
A rigorous scientific examination of the Gospels will not create Faith. Try this experiment, on one’s knees, ‘O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fire of Hell. Lead all souls to heaven, especially those who are most in need of thy Mercy’
If you want to try something really scary, kneel in front of your favorite statue of Christ with His Sacred heart and try turning your own life and will over to Him. The second through infinite numbers are easy. The first is very hard.
“IHS”
Have you encountered Frank Morison’s Who Moved the Stone?
http://www.amazon.com/Who-Moved-Stone-Frank-Morison/dp/0310295610/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1339791223&sr=1-1&keywords=who+moved+the+stone
I’ll believe Muslims have American values of tolerance when they allow a Catholic or Protestant church or Synagogue to be built in Mecca, and the 7th Day Adventists to wander around town knocking on every door and handing out literature. Why do I think that in the 1200 years since Arab conquerors started judtifying their depradations with immitation of the Torah and the Bible with some holy writings from some guy named Mohammed, have caught up with the Christians and Jews on the issue of tolerance and religious freedom. As a White Spanish male I cannot think skin pigmentation is any more important than the color of one’s eyes and hair. I know it is but Speed the Day when skin color and hair color in America and the world are equally unimportant. God bless us All and Everyone.
Yes, wonderful effort as always, of course there’s lots of room for God. But let’s not forget the less spiritual among us, many a little dizzy from turning the other cheek and now drawn to the rough side of life:
James Bond: Do you expect me to talk?
Auric Goldfinger: No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die.
Plus, perhaps, something for the left to mull over regularly, in easy-to-understand language… say a Two-Minute Hate after every school-day Pledge of Allegiance. Any teacher showing hesitation, hey, zap ‘em.
Increasingly, the GOP lacks balls, vision and will, plainly not a winning formula. What leads any sane person to conclude that Romney is up to cleaning the stables? We need someone who at least talks like Hercules, ideally who also walks the walk. Saintly twittering won’t do it, either.
Meanwhile, can we reintroduce the words “crusade”, ”barbarians” and ”smite” into daily life?
I’m not interested in converting lefties. I just don’t want to be forced to pay their bills.
Well, that was a long and thoughtful article. My own thoughts about charlatans on the conservative Right is to demonstrate how marginalized they are – they are not institutionalized. And looking at the political Left, I think sometimes we forget that just because a thing is institutionalized doesn’t mean it’s not crackpot or racist or that institutions can’t change over time from being noble to disgusting. In fact we seem to think Miss Black USA Pageants and Image Awards given by skin are just fine until we think of white doing it – then it’s Adolph Hitler/KKK time.
If you want to look at this with clear eyes look at the things you most disagree with on both the conservative Right and the liberal Left and see to what extent those things have been institutionalized. For example: racism. On the Right it could be said there is Stormfront and David Duke. But look at their websites: no mainstream ads, celebrities, authoritative writers – they are in kooksville.
Now look at some pretty foul expressions of this on the Left. I give you The Root. They recently had an article titled “Black Professionals: We’ve Got Obama’s Back.” I think we know how this would go down at PJM if that article was published here and about whites and Romney. Those types of articles are not welcome at PJM and rightly so but completely common at The Root.
But The Root has mainstream car and hotel chain ads as well as ads for PBS, with black celebrities and the full participation of the black Left’s academics. The Root is owned by the WaPo and run by Obama’s friend Henry Gates, Jr. The Root is a non-stop diatribe of black obsession and disdain of whites. Virtually all of the articles posit whites with a default setting of racist while believing blacks incapable of it. In short, The Root is a hate-speech site. Now, I could give many more example of this institutional vs. marginal thing but suffice it to say there is not one mainstream organization, law or website on the political Right founded on race – not one. Pretty startling considering the charges of racism directed at the GOP and Tea Party.
Lack of racialist institutions on the Right is the sole reason the Left and particularly the black Left are in love with racism seen by it’s shadows. Code, dog-whistles and circular and self-sealing theories like Jim Crow and white privilege all put the behavior of others onto conservative whites. It’s quite clever if you think about it – the more blacks in prison the greater the proof of white racism. Saying no blacks are in the GOP becomes an accusation, not against blacks for not being more issue oriented, but against the GOP for being a party of old white men. I could easily argue rap is a party of young black men or that the NHL are white racists using the same logic.
An actual lack of racialist institutions on the Right is why the L.A. Chapter of the NAACP had to hold a press conference 2 years ago to accuse Hallmark of having a racist science graduation card. The NAACP maintained Hallmark purposefully said “black ho’” rather than “black hole.” Sad and stupid.
So that’s one really gigantic and glaringly obvious fact – institutionalized vs. anecdotal racism. This was the fundamental civil rights fight from the armed services desegregating after WW II to Jackie Robinson to Brown vs. Board of Education, overturning the separate but equal of Plessy vs. Ferguson. If all black Americans had to face 1865-1965 was racist emails, Hallmark Cards and bumper stickers, there would be no NAACP.
The other thing is liberalism as a religion. It does in fact require faith to believe in a world and history as those liberals on that Facebook page do. The number one thing liberals do is decontextualize history – the 2 unsourced, anecdotal lynching photos shown without context but smeared onto America were a pitch perfect expression of this – typical. When the Left talks about slavery or lynchings in America, they purposefully restrict it to whites and talk about them like they occurred equally all over America when in fact many states or territories were never permitted or had slavery from even before the Constitution was ratified, as in the case of the Northwest Ordinance – there were tiny anecdotal exceptions that in the larger picture amount to nothing. As for lynchings, they amounted to 3,700 blacks over 1882-1968, 90% in the deep South which is where 90% of black folks lived til 1910. Outside the South the numbers are 80% white. Oregon for example had 21 lynchings, 1 black. Many states had virtually none.
Michelle Alexander wrote The New Jim Crow, which you may be familiar with – it is delusion heaped on top of statistics. Google Michelle Alexander’s comment about more blacks today being involved in the criminal justice system, e.g. prison, parole, etc. than were slaves in 1850 and you’ll find an amazing thing – none of the articles that picked up that meme ever mention that total number today and are shy even of using the 1850 number. Liberals just swallow it because it confirms their preordained faith in the nature of racist America. The articles and videos show Alexander throwing out 2 million one time then 850,000 (actual prison) and in the end no hard info is gained but this meme went out over the HuffPo and a large number of liberal outlets unchallenged. In fact some 3.2 million slaves existed in America in 1850 but only in the South and there were 750,000 free blacks elsewhere.
Why would Alexander or the Left want you to know that or that N. Africa raided S. Europe for slaves to the tune of 1.5 million whites over 3 centuries or that Turks took hundreds of English ships in the 17th century alone, even raiding Cornwall? Early in the 17th century England’s parliament even held sessions about how to repatriate English slaves whose freedom had been negotiated. The black Left rarely acknowledges the positive side of the Civil War preferring to show the North as sinners simply making up for their guilt – the fact they really didn’t indulge in slavery is lost and guilt becomes color as long as that color isn’t black and in that case it becomes racial profiling. The Left doesn’t like to advertise the fact that 20 million whites in the North stood against 5 million in the South – that also interferes with the narrative.
Liberals want to decontextualize history until it fits their views but in the end, it is unrecognizable. And they refuse to acknowledge the difference between institutions and anecdote and where those institutions reside. To acknowledge either one severely undermines the Left’s sad lies about America now and in the past. The Left is race-obsessed and claim racists make them so, and if you call them out on it consistently they will point out your obsession with race.
At its height, only 3% of Americans actually owned slaves. The libtards are race obsessed and race only matters to racists.
The most admirable qualities of the progressive/left is that they organize and keep their focus on long term goals, which is to turn the country into a communist/socialist utopia. During that time conservatives mostly went about their business raising families, working, and just being productive individuals. Now, it is almost too late to stop the left from their goals. I don’t think the left can be converted. We can only hope to emulate their best qualities above and wrest some power back, and hopefully get the country back to some fiscal, free market, and Constitutional conservatism.
During the American Revolution, approximately a third of Americans wanted independence, a third were loyalists and wanted to stay with Great Britain, and a third were neutral. Imagine what would have happened if, instead of declaring independence, the third that were patriots did not do anything until they were able to convince the other two-thirds of Americans that breaking away from England was a good idea? We would have remained part of the British Empire. The Founding Fathers had a vision for this country and very definite opinions on independence. So you either agreed with them, or you were with the enemy.
Sometimes you just can’t talk to those who disagree with you. Sometimes you just have to lead and bring them along with you, like Ronald Reagan did. If you sit there and try to “convince” the far left of anything, it’s just pointless. The far left will tolerate anything as long as you agree with them. If you don’t, you invite scorn, ridicule, and hatred. Don’t bother. I’d rather be a leader and show people the way.
Chances are, for those people who are undecided out there, they will respect people with firm beliefs rather than politicians that try to be all things to all people and stand for nothing except their own jobs. Lead. That’s the only way you will get results. You will win no arguments and change no minds with people who hate you. Because, if you could somehow pursuade them not to hate you, they’d have to admit that they were wrong to begin with. And a liberal would never, ever, do that.
There is no point to arguing with leftists. There is also no point to sharing a country with them….we have totally different versions of what America was and is supposed to be.
An incredible amount of damage has been done to our nation by these devotees of socialism and marxism.
It is time to peacefully separate. Let them live with the consequences of their beliefs, and we can live with the consequences of supporting American values.
Hear! Hear!, Beth. (But you knew I would say that.)
In the future we won’t be arguing over who is wrong or right and that–in effect–this whole matter will be considered rather backwards. People will be able to choose the kind of world they want to live in and, inso doing, we’ll quickly find out that one system is probably better at generating the greatest good for the greatest number. But that won’t stop some people from choosing to walk away from that system due to their own priorities and values. And more power to them.
Here, no argument is necessary. It will just be:
“Oh, Fred? Last I heard he went over the boarder to join Wiccan World. Sounds a little funny, but hope he can make it work for himself.”
Its no problem to see Fred go over the boarder because it has no effect on your life. Of course, Liberal World a thousand years on will still be blaming everything on the evil white man. But at least we don’t have to hear it anymore.
And another thing they’ll be asking about us in the future is why we were so damn insistent on other people having to agree with us when we could just go off and create our own nirvanas. Conservative Americans today want to hold the country together because of its collective greatness. After all, no other country can currently top us when it comes to both wealth generation and shear size of population.
But what conservatives don’t consider is just how mighty an even larger country of like-minded, liberal-thinking (liberal in the traditional sense) people gathered from all over the world would be. And that once people have chosen where and how they want to live, the thought of even war would be ridiculous. After all, why would you want to dilute the cohesion of your own nation with the ideologies of those you conquer? It would be like liberals asking for more conservatives to move to America.
Okay, maybe I won’t go as far as to declare there would be peace on earth, but we would surely be far, FAR closer.
“Don’t talk! Do!” I thought conservatives would be the first to get that simple truth. But after suggesting a new Velvet Revolution and not getting much back, I think even they are too far into control–and maybe even lacking in faith in their own beliefs–to grasp it. So everybody keeps yelling at each other to try to convince themselves by convincing others that they are right.
Well Beth, maybe you and I should both go head for the hills.
Those kinds of fruitless arguments with “progressives” is the reason I deactivated my Leftbook account. I got tired of my daily dose of Marxism and any effort to engage them in actual debate inevitably ended up with them pummeling a straw man and calling me names.
Facebook is a terrible place to debate ideas; it’s designed for teenage girls, you know, the ones who dot their i’s with circles and fill in happy faces. Facebook almost forces one to become trivial.
And you should not try to win arguments, but plant seeds. Especially with old friends. You aren’t going to get anywhere with, “But, I just proved you wrong, why won’t you admit it!” You can use humor to point out contradictions in their arguments and let them flounder trying to rationalize the indefensible.Then sign off with a pleasant word or two.
In my opinion, we should insist that dialogue between us and liberals be civil, respectful and calm. A person’s demeanor, and ability to make rational, coherent arguments, to remain cheerful even in the face of incivility, is more important than winning debater’s points. It’s our greatest strength. In one-on-one debates there’s no advantage in the clever put-down, there isn’t any audience to appreciate it. And, besides, you and I are not Christopher Hitchens.
Sometimes I thinks its pointless to argue with the left. I just wish they would go away and leave me alone. But they won’t! If they want to live they way they want I don’t care, but they always have impose their point of view on everyone else. Hang around lefties and you hear constant lectures designed to make themselves look superior. They always have to impose their values on everyone else : “you will not use plastic grocery bags or else!” “You must not read The Wall Street Journal,you must not watch Fox news read PJ media” etc. The best course to take is let them know you mean it when you tell them to leave you alone or they might get hurt!
The problem is that: Leftists want to impose their fantasies upon all of us via government. Conservatives just want to be left alone and want as small of a government as possible.
What do you do with aging Democrats who still think the Democrat Party is the party of the “little people”. Two of these are my sisters and their children. Personally I’ve given up. One said, well Bush spent, too. Then I asked how long is the country going to last spending a Trillion+ dollars more that we take in. All I get is silence…… The other one said, that finally she was glad that they were “doing something about energy”. Really,I can’t locate what planet she is on. So, I searched for articles about all the energy stopping/stiffling policies enacted either by law or regulation. I made copies of them and sent them to her via snail mail. All I got was silence, nary a comment. You just can’t reach some people.
The top reason why Conservatives should not try th convert the Left: Because you can’t.
“You Cannot Reason Out What Was Not Reasoned In.”
Stupid cliche: people reason their way out of vague prejudices all the time. And I doubt Swift could have said that, given the crappy, late 20th-century quality of the English.
I’m reminded of my 98 year old great aunt who told me how surprised she was to have broken her hip falling on her right hand side. This concerned her because she pointed out, “I’ve always leaned to the left.”
I just reject a lot of arguments from the right because they are petty, short sighted, self serving, illogical or mean spirited.
Like Joe the Plumber. A man who wasn’t a licensed plumber, didn’t have capital to start his own business yet railed against the idea of a excessive taxation on income that didn’t exist and could literally be described as a pipe dream.
No tax policies that actually benefit my current economic status if it takes a big chunk of my MegaMillion winnings. Can’t have that.
Hmm, seems you’ve gone ahead and proved the thesis.
1. “I just reject . . . ” (Another way of saying, “I just feel . . . “) and a wholesale spewing of nasty adjectives without any justification.
2. Straw man (and I paraphrase): “Joe the Plumber isn’t even a thieving, capitalist plumber, why would he rail against taxes? He’s obviously inauthentic. I mean, he’s not even unionized!”
3. Presupposition that taxes help an economy, so anybody against taxes must be out only for themselves.
And by the way, Lefty. My grandma’s 99, she’s a conservative–always been one–and could kick your grandma’s ass in a heartbeat.
The problem with debating leftists is that they automatically label your contrary opinion as hatred. For example:
criticize Obama- you’re a racist
against gay marriage- you’re a homophobe
against gold-plated union benefits for teachers and increasing your property taxes to pay bloated teacher union salaries: you hate children
concerned about creeping shariah and Islamist terror: you’re an islamophobe
against abortion and paying for women’s contraception: you hate women
want voter ID or enforcement of immigration laws? You’re a racist and hate Hispanics
I could go on and on. In the US, we still have freedom of speech but for how long? The term “racist” has been used to destroy careers and shut down the free speech of conservatives. In Europe and Canada, being accused of racism can get you hauled before a “human rights” court and jailed! To be called a racist in 21st century Western nations is the equivalent of being called a witch or a heretic at the height of the Inquisition. And I don’t see much challenge from conservatives and republicans in fighting these blood libels.
Where do these prejudiced minority loons come from! His screaming about the worth of his racial identity is sickening! He does not have American values. He should feel free to leave, and I shall wave “good-bye.”
If you want to look at this with clear eyes look at the things you most disagree with on both the conservative Right and the liberal Left and see to what extent those things have been institutionalized. For example: racism. On the Right it could be said there is Stormfront and David Duke. But look at their websites: no mainstream ads, celebrities, authoritative writers – they are in kooksville. Sinh vien
To the moderator:
I was at first rather shocked to see that my comment comparing lynching rates to modern-day capital conviction rates being bounced (first appearing and then being removed). But soon after, I think my main worry was that–at first glance–the quotation toward the end could be misconstrued to suggest a justification for racially motivated lynchings. This was clearly not what was stated nor was it the intent.
The statement was to underline that the racial composition of lynchings that took place in the past were not much different from today’s conviction rates, which can lead to one of two conclusions.
1. We are as racist today as we were in the past, or
2. Blacks commit more capital crimes than whites (for whatever reason).
Stating that “vigilante justice is not necessarily unjust” states I believe, personally, that the evidence points to #2–in that vigilantes convicted perceived criminals by race not much differently than the current legal system does today, making the assumption that today’s criminal justice system is relatively just.
My final statement saying that what I had written was extremely politically incorrect may have been not only unnecessary and misleading but may have drawn the moderator to conclude that the intent of the statement was racist, for which it was not and for which I now regret having added.
Why is it that writers on this site and other conservative opinion sites have been bringing up certain ugly truths lately? Is it because we want to damage blacks in that we innately mistrust/hate them? Speaking for myself–and I can only assume the same for other echoers of similar statistics–it is more the act of a cornered animal that has been so set upon that its final recourse is to bare its fangs. In that for those who believe that this is a “cowardly country,” as stated by AG Eric Holder, for not wanting an honest debate about our past, persistence in pushing this narrative can have costly repercussions by the revelation of these other truths about the very people making the accusations.
And for those who believe that racism is at the root of black societal failure and that this justifies racial preferences and unending atonement from a race based demographic that neither committed the acts–nor were even alive when they occurred–continuing to attack this group is a dangerous game that is escalated sentiments of the accused to higher and higher levels.
These statements are, in effect, growls that should be listened to–an attempted strong-arm to a perceived assault–as the warning that they were meant to be before a vicious fight actually occurs.
The characters in the movie “The Others,” can be made a good analogy:
The mother and children (representing the reparation-ists) are terrified of the “ghosts” that haunt their house and run about attempting to protect themselves while the help does everything in its power to maintain the peace by excusing the bumps in the night and going so far as to cover the graves with leaves. (The help being perhaps the better instincts of our nature). In the end we find just who should be afraid of whom and the dark secret about the mother, which her hysteria over “the others” (in this case, those accused of racism) eventually forces her to face.
I hope this last analogy (though perhaps a bit ham-fisted) helps explain the reasoning behind the motivations for delving into the ugly truths of the actual world in which we live and the desperation of those who–for all or most of their lives–have been made to pay for the perceived sins of their fathers.
The race rules have been made, since the early ’50s, mostly by white, liberal elites with no actual experience of black people. I have worked with all classes of blacks my whole life, from the poorest criminal class to black professionals. I think the greatest injustice we do to them is to force righteous, law-abiding blacks to live alongside hardened criminals all their lives, polluting their schools, their churches, their neghborhoods. These good people truly have no spokesman.
Thuggy blacks need to be in jail. While I do think that drug enforcement, like homeland security and drunk driving, has become mere revenue enhancement and an occupational bonanza for law enforcement and the legal system, and a very large sector of blacks in prison are due to these anti-freedom boondoggles, truly dangerous rapists and killers are often set free after trivial jail sentences, free to repeat their mayhem forever. Most of those should be put to death, instead.
But the good, decent black people, who comprise a large majority in this country, have been left to their own devices since the ’60s. They are the primary prey of the predators. Is it a wonder that they seek a savior?
If you don’t agree, tell me who does represent them. The wacko race crminals like Sharpton, Jackson, Farrakhan, et al certainly don’t. So who does?
We’ve had 50 plus years where it has become cool to be bad. It’s time we once again held black people to the same standards as whites. If that results in every single one serving time, so be it.
I assure you, that will not be the case, and the good, law-abiding blacks will thank you for it. A sane policy, one not driven by idealistic good intentions, but one driven by reason and law, would appeal to them.
As an aside, I don’t think Obama got 90% of the black vote in 2008, either. My black sources tell me that vote corruption in their communities is so rampant that most good blacks don’t bother to vote, as they know it’s all rigged. That’s what they tell me, anyway.
You must be a glutton for punishment because I couldn’t have conversed with that person for 2 seconds.
Another arguing tactic is to partially agree with the person. This makes them less defensive.
You’ve left out the real reason libs are libs, in the first place: they’re stupid, self-absorbed jerks, in love with the sound of their own voice.
Liberals only succeed in endeavors devoid of any accountability. Unfortunately, politics and lawyering are two of their favorites, along with their ne plus ultra: academia, where the most foolish people credential other foolish people who agree with their foolishness.
We make our greatest mistake arguing with them. Call them fools and move on. When a child continuously smears his poop all over the bathroom, you do not humor him, you spank him and send him to bed without supper!
Likewise liberal fools. Suffer not a fool gladly.
One reason: It’s a waste of time and energy.
I went to a private high school where being liberal was very much in vogue amongst the wealthy kids in the AP track. So was being atheist. The connection between the two that I always observed was that they were all desperate to be perceived as intelligent. For some reason, perhaps because some of our teachers encouraged it, they thought this was a shortcut of sorts to reaching that state. I’ll never forget the day a bunch of them tore one of our conservative, ranch-dwelling classmates to shreds when she told us a story about having to kill feral dogs on her property. By senior year, only about three or four of us in the track were willing to admit to being conservative, the environment towards us had gotten so nasty.
By contrast, I went to a somewhat conservative college where people were generally quiet about their views outside the classroom. Only one girl, still a good friend of mine, on my floor was liberal and atheist. She routinely attacked other people for their views and opinions, often out of the blue and for little reason at all. It was like watching somebody throw herself at a wall; she’d get so angry she’d start crying. It wasn’t something anyone singled her out for it (at least, not until she started annoying the crap out of everyone over it), it was a lot of self-volunteered pain. Even today, invocations at events send her into furious screeds, and nearly had a heart attack about a year ago when it came out in a conversation that I was Catholic – she said she thought I was too decent to be one of those people.
I’m not saying this is everyone’s experience with folks like this. But in my own life, at least, I’ve found it an interesting dichotomoy.
SOME ARE SEARCHING AN CANNOT FIND THE ANSWERS THEY SEEK, SOME HAVE NEVER SEARCHED AND HAVE THEIR ANSWER(S), SOME WILL NEVER SEARCH AND HAVE THEIR ANSWERS(S).
DID WE NOTICE ONE ITEM WE ALL HAVE IN COMMON-EVERY HUMAN EVERYWHERE? A CONSCIENCE!, HOW OFTEN DO WE IGNOR IT, HOW OFTEN DO WE EVEN REALIZE ITS US!.
THE UNIVERSE HAS (SO OUR SCIENTISTS SAY) EXISTED FOR BILLIONS-MAYBE TRILLIONS OF YEARS?)
YOU CAN WASTE THE LITTLE TIME AND A LOT OF PSYCHIC ENERGY ATTEMPTING TO DELVE INTO THAT SUBJECT. OR YOU CAN – ASK ONE SIMPLY QUESTION AND BE DONE WITH IT.
HOW LONG IS A SECOND ON GODS; CLOCK (ASSUMING “IT” HAS ONE?) AND DOES IT MATTER. YOU HAVE YOUR ANSWER?!