Changing Minds in Crunch Time
We are in crunch time in our politics. It’s late in the fourth quarter and the lead is swinging back and forth.
Unfortunately, we don’t have Kobe or Lebron to bail us out. We only have ourselves. We are the ones who must save our country.
I thought of that rather obvious analogy while reading the comments — a number of them unfavorable — about my last column, “Is Liberalism Dead?”
What I had written of liberals for my conclusion is what particularly irritated some readers: “But secretly – I am more than ever convinced — many of them know they are wrong. Our job is to bring them over. To make them comfortable. But we must bring them over soon before it is too late for all of us.”
Those readers were angry that I wanted to give any quarter to liberals. They appeared to despise everything about them and were quick to point out that we shouldn’t waste our time reasoning with liberals. For liberals, their ideology was a religion. It would never change.
Well, I was a liberal once. So were many others I could name and still more I have never met or heard of. People came over to the right from the far left, the near left and the center.
Were they not sufficiently “religious” about their liberal-leftism? I have no idea. I don’t really know why people change. I don’t even fully know why I changed, even though I wrote a book about it. I just know that I did.
I also know that not enough of us have changed yet and, as I said, we are in crunch time.
I thought that most of us assumed that too. And realized the necessity of putting our shoulders to the wheel and helping to effectuate change, as difficult and rare as that may be, one individual at a time, if need be.
In other words, I didn’t think I was writing anything the slightest bit controversial.
Evidently, I was wrong. Many readers disagreed and a few went so far as to suggest we are headed for a shooting war with the left. A couple even seemed as if they wanted one. (These people may, of course, have been trolls — at least I hope so.)
Well, I’ll try. I can’t promise I’ll turn people to our side but I’ll do my best.
I was a liberal once. Holier-than-thou and convinced “my side” was correct and infallible. Then, I woke up to the reality of life. Now I realize that leftists are fundamentally discouraged and sometimes desperate Utopians. They want the best for all on an emotional level, but since they have not logically examined how to achieve the greatest for the mostest, they believe that it can only take the state (tyrannical or totalitarian) to get there. They abdicate their faith in man in an effort for equality-of-results without realizing that equality-in- results is impossible, and against the laws of nature.
I have converted a handful of my friends and neighbors to conservatism. Thank God for our current occupant-in-chief: his policies, actions, and divide-to-conquer rhetoric has convinced hundreds of thousands (millions?) of other moderate leftists to see the corruption endemic in Big Government.
We must welcome the converts with open arms, not sneer at them or hold them in contempt. We are better than that.
I am better than no one. “better than that” is a liberal phrase indicating that man is perfectable. I do not believe it. You do the best you can and move on.
Man may not be perfectable, but he can learn and become better than he was before. You may not believe that. But then, why bother going to school? The adult is better informed and capable than the toddler or the teenager. The adult can make more mature decisions reasoned through the filters of education (formal learning) and life experience (a casual form of learning).
The point that Mr. Simon is making is that we learn and can change our minds. Many conservatives were once well-intentioned but misguided liberals. The old rule is that if you are young and have no heart then you are a Republican, but if you are old and have no *head* then you are a Democrat. Behind that is the implication that political awareness comes about through critical examination of the real world, rather than simply forming some political affiliation based solely upon transitory “feelings” no matter how well-intended they may be.
That is why America is set up as a republic, not a democracy: Republicanism is about the long view, remembering the successes and errors of history to craft a better form of governance, and the reason why the elephant, renowned for its memory and slow but steady gate, is the mascot of Republicans. Democracy is about reaction to the desires of the popular moment without critical thought, and the reason why the temperamental, stubborn donkey is the mascot of the Democrats.
The people that make up the Left aren’t all identical. You have to assume that some on the Left are truly motivated by something greater than Progressive ideology, but confusedly see progressivism as morally superior. Some genuinely have ethics and an innate sense of right and wrong, even if it is skewed by failed ideology and a corrupted social environment. Some, who later become staunch conservatives, are born as red diaper babies, but respect morality and rationality enough to actually apply them to their political beliefs. These are the ones with an integrity that leads them out of the morass of dishonesty.
Many gravitate to the Left because they are emotionally unstable, sociopathic, wracked with envy, rapacious for power, or essentially immoral. The ones who end up in power are frequently evil. The end justifies the means… the perfect anti-ethic. It is a license to, as the Satanic Commandment advocates, “Do As Thou Wilt.” Psychopaths have found in the Left a promised land of immorality.
The rejection of morality is ultimately where the goose steppers and the apostates on the Left part company. Sooner or later, a man of conscience sees the evil inherent in the activities and goals of the Left, so they reject it and become conservative. Hopefully they realize that they didn’t leave entirely because of political ideology, but something much greater.
Once liberated from their mistakes, former Lefties make some of the very best conservatives. Reagan comes to mind. Just as no one understands an alcoholic like a reformed alcoholic, and no one can defeat addictive thinking like a former addict, no one has better insight into the Left than a former member. Leftists who converts to the right breath new energy and perspective into the pool of conservative thinking. it is a necessary refreshment for conservatives who are far too satisfied with “being right.” Reformed Lefties know that isn’t enough.
Some on the far right think that ideological/economic purity are the way to utopia, forgetting that no political ideology can succeed for long without a primarily moral population. Those on the radical right should also consider the truth that unlimited freedom can’t exist without a population that is intrinsically moral. They forget that morality is the human survival code, not rigid political ideology. Conservatism is striving for harmony between moral principles and the means by which a nation can be justly governed. The Left wants to supplant the restrictions of morality with the power to dictate morality.
I was a conservative once. Holier-than-thou and convinced “my side” was correct and infallible. Then, I woke up to the reality of life. Now I realize that conservatives are fundamentally discouraged and sometimes desperate fascists. They want the best for the few on a financial level, but since they have not logically examined how to achieve the greatest for the few, they believe that it can only take Big Corporations (tyrannical or totalitarian) to get there. They abdicate their faith in Democracy in an effort for more-for-the-few without realizing that more-for-the-few is immoral, and against the laws of nature and “We The People.”
I have converted a handful of my friends and neighbors to liberalism. Thank God for our current Commander-in-chief: his policies, actions, have convinced hundreds of thousands (millions?) of other conservatives to see the corruption endemic in conservative philosophy.
We must welcome the converts with open arms, not sneer at them or hold them in contempt. We are better than that.
There, FTFY
Plagiarism: A sign of an unoriginal mind and flacid mental powers.
You may return to your Choom Gang, CW, and fire up another doobie before reporting back to Media Matters for your next assignment.
The irony in your nearly ad hominem reaction came through loud and clear. Cynical Wonder posted that to provide a simple counterpoint to what you said: The individual uses (or doesn’t use) their brain to determine how they vote. Political parties are fantastic (I suppose), but if you choose to swear allegiance then in the long run you are no better than your so-called adversary. I am an independent voter for that very reason. Always claiming to support the conservative (almost universally translated as Republican) is no better than claiming to always support liberals.
I definitely agree with Mr. Simon on this issue. The odds of me voting for a liberal are slim to none, but what if the conservative is worse than the liberal? What if the liberal may have good ideas and suggestions that the conservative doesn’t?
I have fealty to principles of conservatism, not party nor person.
The Republican party has many RINO’s who eschew conservative principles. Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind were travesties of conservative principle, and I lambasted Bush for them at the time.
On the other hand, President Clinton (D) moved forward with Welfare reform, and I supported his work with Newt Gingrich and the Republicans on that.
Conservative principles (that is classical liberalism conjoined with Constitutional governance) have logical coherency that works now and in the future. The problem with statism/liberalism is that it places the state at the zenith of rightness, and the state always metastasizes like a cancer. As government grows, freedom recedes.
Teaching nominal leftists/liberals/progressives about this fact often shows the ignorance of their political affiliation. This is usually so for naive or ill-informed college students and young adults.
I was never a liberal; Goldwater spoke to me early on, resonating with my own understandings and tendencies, so I was a conservative for several years until it became clear to me that many conservatives either wished me dead or at least in a concentration camp (that has perhaps diminished a bit but has certainly not gone away) because of something I had discovered about myself, but most certainly did not choose. Thus I became a libertarian and have been ever since.
@Reasoner:
“No Child Left Behind” was a bipartisan bill the most destructive provisions of which were largely out of Ted Kennedy’s office, signing it was just one of many errors Bush 2 made in trying to appease liberals. Whatever shortcomings it may have are exclusively blamed on Bush because that just what liberals and the press do. Have you EVER met a liberal who took responsibility for the consequences of their actions? The core tenet of progressivism is the use the state to steal from responsible people in order to protect irresponsible people from the consequences of their poor choices.
“Welfare reform” was the product of a Republican congress, Clinton just signed it. Recall that he was pushing for socialized medicine (then called HillaryCare) at the time. Any budget surpluses during this era were also the product of a Republican congress led largely by Newt Gingrich. Again, Clinton is just given credit for these things by a press made up entirely of lying bastards.
I once read a piece by David Horowitz in which he said;
A Liberal is an American with a point of view as to how America should act socially toward her citizens.
A Leftist is an Anti-American with an agenda to which they will subordinate anything and everything.
The trouble lies in the fact that Lefitsts disguise themselves as Liberals and the Liberals cannot tell the difference.
You hit the nail on the head JD. We have completely misidentified the problem in this debate. Those who are destroying our country are not liberals – that would be an insult to liberals. They are leftists. And no Roger, I will give no quarter to leftists. They are enemies of my country. I don’t want them on “our side”. I want them gone. Defeated. Impotent. Curled up in the fetal position, whimpering in the corner.
The quote from David Horowitz is particularly apt. The Popular Front lives, and liberals stood by while New Leftists and Leninists took over the humanities. The HBO biopic on Hemingway and Gellhorn was a travesty on the real history they purported to represent, glorified Communist leader Chou En Lai, and you can read about their real story here: http://clarespark.com/2011/06/30/links-to-review-essay-on-hemingway-spy-mission-to-china/. I have been following the marketing of this movie, and the “liberal” papers love it, while the more conservative publications see it for what it is, but none goes through the actual history of the civil wars in Spain and China.
and if america is lost and too much social capital has been expended?
i recommend emigration from a decadent and lost society.
mr simon, you are higher than your hollywood neighbors.
this country is lost. does not the election of Obama teach you anything?
Bang on, Mike! And succinctly said!
Roger, you didn’t CHANGE. You merely grew up.
The middle-aged to elder Communist/Communitarian/Socialist/you-pick-it indoctrinees now indoctrinating the rest of the land are too old now to grow up. They can’t and won’t change. They’re in permanent religious fits.
Mike: go Galt now!
You aren’t wrong, Roger. You’re very right.
Rather than being so tied up in anger (which is by no means unjustified — but doesn’t, by itself, accomplish anything) — every one of us ought to be thinking about the “how” — and should be doing the best we can to inform and influence.
The most important thing is that we avert having another 4 years — another much more unbridled years — leading to — I don’t even want to say it.
You are right as far as you go. The key to changing minds is not to argue facts and throw their logical fallacies in their faces; it is to engage their imaginations. Remember a book by C. P. Snow called “The Two Cultures?” Those on the left, including “liberals,” imagine themselves to have more creativity than those on the right. They are so convinced of this that they think they can subvert their opponents with obvious and shallow propaganda. They believe that they can pervert science to their ends because the people they need to convince aren’t math-literate either.
How do you combat their strategy and tactics? Be better at it than they are. Infiltrate and subvert their means to our ends. I have heard Tea Partiers called Hobbits pejoratively, but the timing of the release of “The Lord of the Rings” was electoral genius for the right. Perhaps the same thing is going on with “Hunger Games” and “Game of Thrones.” I have seen kids in city parks with their iPhones and Androids turned off, carrying makeshift bows and arrows. That’s not to say that the ubiquity of smartphones shouldn’t be exploited too. Consider “Temple Run” and the Indiana Jones mindset it encourages. Hell, you’re a professional writer. What do you think?
You can’t drive a nail into an empty space. The best you can do is encourage those that are hurting because of Progressivism to seek a better path.
OK, OK, Roger. You were a liberal, and now you are not. so it is possible. And you are not an isolated convert. There are the other two guys. As for the rest, fugettaboudit. Better concentrate on the doable.
I was a liberal and now I’m not……
I once was blind but now I C.
I was a liberal and now I’m not.
me three
was a lifelong Dem voter until I began chatting with conservs & libs on a forum- after 9-11- wanted to hear from fellow citizens- one day a woman asked me why I hated GWB more than Osama- it was a long and winding road- from Dem to REP- one day I saw that GWB was right 100% about the AXIS OF EVIL (after doing my own research into many topics political and historical) and so I am changed and cannot undo it——
I am still not a so-con and never will be, but I could not ignore what I saw, sad as it may be for me to know- about my fellow Americans and the threat we face from old enemies (commies and Islam)
I have had to hide some of my views b/c I do not wish to be blacklisted in my work (in a Hollywoodish industry) I saw how mean and bigoted libs are to others, and I saw I was like that too- I have spoken to many liberals and lefties- my own family has called me names like racist etc. for being a defector- they cannot understand- and it susually devolves into argument.
So I am not sure how to change their mindsfor sake of harmony I had to agree not to discuss any political topics in family situations.
So I vent here and other forums- try to give my views which fall mostly on deaf ears, but I do know people can and do change, defect, switch and leave their religions- so I am not without HOPE, it can or may happen for some of them. However the mainstream culture is so strong and so pervasive, I know many will never be cured of the poison koolaid they drank and are addicted to.
“I am still not a so-con and never will be”
That means you are still a liberal, just a liberal Republican. Or a Libertarian. Just so’s you understand, that means you are either still on the Left, or you have gone way far-Right.
Until you understand that the very key to good government is morality in the people, these problems will continue to afflict us. You are still part of the problem. Can you not see the damage our libertine lifestyle has done, is still doing? You have a long way to go.
Like the author, you are still a liberal. You think we can convert these guys? What, like you are converted? You reject their behaviors, but you do not really reject the liberal thinking. You are just kidding yourself. You have no idea what it is to be right-of-center.
——————————————————————————
This probably won’t post, because like any good liberal, the “former” liberals censor the conservatives here, thinking we are “trolls, hopefully”. Scratch a Liberal, find a Stalinist.
Do I want a shooting war? Maybe. You do not really believe that this next election is actually going to stop the Leftists, do you? Assuming the Republicans win, and the Dems do not steal election after election, of course. You do not actually believe this will be anything but a temporary reprieve, do you?
The thing about it is, if you are not willing to have a shooting war, then these guys will continue to do the most outrageous things, because they see no consequences to themselves.
You think we are still free? You gotta be out of your mind. When you realize we are not free, and that what little freedoms we have are constantly under attack by those in our government and their propaganda media, then you, too, will be considering a shooting war. It is not the most terrible of things. Not even close. “Give me Liberty, or give me death.” “It is better to die on one’s feet, than to live on one’s knees.” Quit thinking that a shooting war is the worst thing. Our Founders did it. It is how we came to be.
It is a serious decision, but not an outrageous thought. Not at all. The Left succeeds, because they have cultivated this belief that a civil war is the worst thing possible. It is “unthinkable”. Thus do they get away with subverting our country, because too many think it wrong to fight. Doing what it will take to finally stop them is “unthinkable”.
So, guys like me get banned on PJM by the “former” liberals. You are not “former” anything. I do not violate the rules. You just do not like what I have to say, so like any illiberal, you block me.
Go ahead, reach out to the Left… and block out the Right. Let me know how that works out for you. Ima stop reading the columns of those who block me. No longer going to give you the page views.
One of the biggest brainwashings we must undo is the one that says Hitler was Right-Wing and a conservative. He was simply to the right of Stalin. He was a capitalism-hating, central planning-loving, socialist through and through.
Point out to Libs this fact and the arguments behind it and you will be planting a little seed which hopefully will grow.
Here are some articles in tweets that you can send to Libs:
Ammo 4 Libs: #1 – Why are the worst mass murderers (like #Hitler) from the Left? http://bit.ly/jErsV #ABO #tiot #tlot #ocra #tcot #bcot
Send 2nd – Timeline #History of #Republicans Fighting #Democrat’s Racism… http://bit.ly/eZORn #p2 #Obama #bcot
Send 3rd – READ about @StopRush, “a free-lancing law student” — is now ‘Commissar Carusone’ of @mmfa – http://bit.ly/GYecw3
Send 4th – Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty http://bit.ly/aOaxzt #Hitler
Send 5th – Pl check out @aRunawaySlave, and tell EVERYONE to see the movie: http://RunawaySlaveMovie.com #NAACP #BCOT #RT
Then, if possible, RT something of theirs. Then they may quickly RT the http://RunawaySlaveMovie.com tweet to their Lib followers.
dat way da Tweet most likely 2 enrage’m, da Hitler tweet, will be lower down their @Connect column,
hopefully they’ll RT RunawaySlaveMovie 1st.
We Freedom Fighters CAN & WILL defeat the Left, one Kool-Aid drinker at a time!
GO FOR IT!
….
I actually don’t know ANY conservatives who weren’t once liberals. That said, the people I know who are still liberals… well, I can’t really imagine them changing over at this point. It takes a radical shift in one’s entire worldview, and maybe some people just can’t make it.
yes, you get it.
Now that there is an alternative media, the people who aren’t committed thieves and power-mad egomaniacs have all become conservatives.
The real point of attack shouldn’t be an effort to persuade a tiny sliver of the 30% who steal for a living to understand why individual freedom is the most powerful force for good the world has ever seen. Our efforts are better utilized in convincing the 70% who do believe in our base values to stop allowing themselves to be influenced by lifelong radicals who spend their every waking hour dreaming up new lies and obfuscations to hide their real intent.
In an ideal world I want the pachyderms to stay the hell out of my bedroom and the jackasses to stay the hell out of my wallet. I also want any adherents to a bizarre totalitarian political ideology dressed up in the trappings of a religion who wish harm to my grandkids to be obliterated from the face of the earth. Unfortunately in the real world I suspect I’m far more likely to see the latter, than either of the former.
Actually, I was never a liberal. I stood up at the kitchen table and told my family that they were for backing Carter against Reagan when I was 10.
When I filed my Selective Service forms on my 18th B-day I left the posr office &went to the local Election Board & registered as a Republican.
Of course I had the advantage of having a grandpa who was a WW2 & Korean vet, who used his G.I Bill to become a history teacher. Most kids here about Washington cutting down a cherry tree. I got stories about Locke & Paine. I knew more about the Revolution & the formation of the political thought that led to than any teacher I ever had all the way through College.
I don’t know why I turned Blue when EVERYBODY else in my family went Red (ok, maybe just pink). I blame my other grandparents, both life long union members and just one step short of being CPUSA members.
I just thank God that I was so close to “Ross”, because he taught me the Ideas that this Country was really founded upon.
And I’m a better man for it.
No, I was never a liberal either (at least not in any sense of the word as it’s commonly used today). Not even at the age when it’s thought heartless to be otherwise.
I’m one conservative who was never a liberal.
I’m 66 now, and have been a conservative since 1956 when, at the age of 10, I became personally acquainted with the bloody repression of the Hungarian Uprising.
The details surrounding this youthful epiphany need not concern us here, but I do remember asking my father what “communists” were — to which he replied: “They’re the same as Nazis, except with lousier uniforms.”
With a half decent system of education (which we emphatically and manifestly do not have) we wouldn’t be condemned to the current situation in which everyone must first endure the period of mental and moral cretinization that is liberalism before being mugged by reality and becoming a conservative. What a colossal waste.
I was a liberal and now I’m not…
I was a liberal and now I’m not. A liberal in a lazy sort of way – just assumed it was right. Then along came Reagan, a stand-up guy, and I saw the lies and demonization and unfair ridicule and I began to take a closer look and saw more lies and demonization. I looked at the Left and saw a zoo. I looked to the right and I saw reason and competence. I’ve never looked back.
I’d like to point out a fundamental difference between Classic Liberalism, that is the small government position adopted by many of today’s ‘Conservatives,’ and Modern Liberalism. Classic Liberalism, as described by the Founders and Montesquieu state that mankind is rational. We are capable of thought, of reason, and, most importantly, of redemption. Modern Liberalism, or Statism, does not share that position. Mankind is not rational. It cannot be reasoned with or convinced, but must rather be order and coerced.
By stating that Liberals are incapable of changing their minds, we are abandoning our fellow man’s ability to reason, and the basis of Classic Liberalism. We cannot have a Democratic Republic without the belief that Man is capable of Reason. Every man. The basis of self-governance falls away without it, leaving us only with survival of the fittest.
Simplified: To argue with a Liberal is to reaffirm your common Humanity. To convince him of the error of his ways is Divine.
Interesting!
By that logic, refusing to reason with Statists/Leftists/Progressives on the grounds that they can’t be reasoned with undermines our own core belief that people are rational.
To put it another way, if we say there’s no point in talking to Leftists because they don’t reason, we are AGREEING with the fundamental point of THEIR beliefs, which state that people are not rational and have to be coerced into doing what is best for them.
That certainly puts the onus on us to reach out to the Left no matter how futile it seems to be for many of the individuals who are Leftists….
The problem is deeper. I have been discussing politics with a number of liberal friends for many many years. In every case I have eventually been able to get each of them to agree with the rational case for conservatism (classic liberalism). In no case have I been able to change how they vote. When it comes time to pull the lever, their emotions and need to “feel like they are voting for helping others” take over and they vote for the Democrat every time. They say, “Even though I know that every point you make is true, I just can’t vote for a Republican.”
Many liberals are very rational when it comes to how they live their lives. Many are personally quite fiscally conservative. When it comes to actually voting they act solely based on emotion.
People are not rational. They are however, very good at rationalizing.
“You can’t get there by trying, but you won’t get there if you don’t try.”
Read the directions and directly you will be directed in the right direction.
Mr. Fernandez blogged about this topic and came to the conclusion that you have three distinct types.
1. The Saints.
Those to whom the cause is a religion and are devout in their beliefs. When assailed by the incongruities and outright lies they turn away and seek the other. This would be you I think Roger.
2. The Players.
Those to whom the cause is a vehicle to further their desires for power and wealth. They know from the outset that this is all a set up and focus on getting theirs. This would be all the publicity whores you see on MSM. They will jump ship when they see a better opportunity somewhere else.
3. The followers.
Those to whom the cause is everything in their life. They do not see themselves as a part of the whole but that the cause is their reason for existence. These folks will jump ship only when they are sitting at the bottom looking up. These folks are the true power of the left. They are the polar opposite of and individual. Incapable of thought outside of the collective mind.
Now how do you propose to save those who would not save themselves?
No fourth type? No group of persons sincerely, if erroneously, convinced of the liberal premise that the State must have plenipotentiary powers to improve what’s unsatisfactory about the lives of Americans?
I know quite a few persons of that fourth type. They argue for their convictions — they’re stubborn about them, just as we are about ours — but they are reachable.
By the way, let’s not forget that we, too, can be wrong. Conservatives have been wrong in the past; no doubt we’re wrong about something today: yea, even as we speak. So let’s keep to some measure of humility.
It sounds like you are describing, in other terms, what he called the “Saints.” If I were to posit a fourth, I’d add “Zealots,” similar to Saints in their honest conviction, but too invested in their identity as righteous to see reason. These are the real aces in the Players’ deck.
In my experience there is a numerous fourth (or fifth) type of liberal. These are those who don’t know any better. Those who were brought up in liberal enclaves and believed all of the stereotypes about those evil conservatives and Republicans. Those who think their professors’ political views must be right because they all have PhDs. Those who vote for the “D” because that’s what their racial/religious/ethnic group does. Those who have never seriously thought about the issues.
This is a group we can reach out to. They need to know that it is OK to vote for the other party. They need to know that they have friends and colleagues – people they respect – who are conservative. They need to know that the stereotypes they grew up believing are false. They need to know that intelligence is more than having a degree and that smart, thoughtful people do vote for the “R”.
Put a crack in their world view, and all of their preconceptions may shatter.
There is a sixth sort: those who adopt liberalism because they are not particularly political, and it is what they are exposed to. People vote with their cohort. And they may believe that being open-minded and accepting of others trumps tried-and-true values and principles.
These can and are converted. They have the smarts to see what works and what doesn’t in the real world. They just need waking up and talking to, then reinforcing them to look beyond their knee-jerk good intentions.
This is a good model, but I would describe them with different terms.
The “saints” have virtually disappeared. They are the old time liberal idealists who genuinely sought to improve the world. They have either gone over to the dark side or become conservatives, so there are virtually none left.
The “players” are hard-core leftist tyrants. Power is their mission in life. Lenin, Stalin, Chavaz, Castro, obama….they are all players. It’s possible to have conservative players, but rare.
The “followers” are thieves. They see an advantage for themselves, in that the early stages of marxism recruit them by stealing from the productive classes to redistribute to the thieves. They are too ignorant to realize that it changes in a flash when the commissars gain power.
There are variations (i.e., liberal lawyers are thieves who want to become commissars), but the three categories effectively describe everybody on the left.
It’s an insurmountable divide that will only be resolved if we destroy them all. Otherwise, the tyrants will destroy us, along with 99.9% of the rest of humanity. They can’t be satisfied with anything less than total control over everything. Just like all but the last 250 years of human history.
There is another type and they are legion – the single-issue pit bulls. They will sacrifice everything on the alter of their chosen poison, your rights, their own rights, their grandchildren’s liberty for their cause. It is womens’ rights, abortion rights; or “civil rights and black grievance; or the union and workers rights; etc. These are the hard core of the Democratic Party, and they will not be moved, they can only be defeated.
Why no category for parasites?
I don’t know that I see it as we need to change people’s minds and help them see the limitations of liberalism, socialism, identity politics, etc. What I hope will happen is that the Republican candidate can appeal to a larger segment, can convey that he wants greater opportunity for all Americans. If people believe that Romney cares about them, they’ll be more likely to listen to his ideas. Particularly with liberals, you gotta appeal to their hearts.
You’re right, but we can help by shattering the preconceived notions that keep people from being open to the Republican candidate’s ideas. I know people who won’t even consider voting for the Republican candidate because, well, um, uh, you know how the Republicans are. Smart, caring people like me don’t vote for them.
You and I need to get them over that hurdle before Romney (or any Republican or conservative candidate) can reach out to them.
I’ll believe the flip-flopping, NDAA, gun-grabber Romney cares about me when he stops walking all over the Constitution like so many big-government fake “conservatives” do.
You are right Roger. There are millions of us baby boomers that were liberal Democrats in our youth that became either Conservatives or Libertarians in our middle age. So yes, keep trying. There is nothing to lose by fighting the good fight and much to lose if we give up. Sure, there are some in the far left, maybe most, that are so hard wired that it is an impossible task but they are a very small minority of the total electorate.
Hey Baby Boomer! How bout you walk the talk and lead the fight to end the entitlement programs your generation is bankrupting us with? I love how my generation is expected to pay for everything…medicare, medicaid, social security, etc. while at the same time, we get it beat into our head not to expect it to be around.
I’m sorry but I cannot take a single person from your generation seriously when you all claim to be conservative. Its the “baby boomer” generation that cares only for themselves and darn the consequences. Your generation…not illegals, the war on Terrorism, or government workers bankrupting this nation…its YOUR GENERATION! While those issues need to be address, they pale in comparison to the entitlement programs your generation wrote into the system to benefit yourselves. Your generation has extended the welfare system to an obscene glut and you expect my generation and later to continue to prop this whole bogus system up until the last of you leaches are finally dead.
Of course I am generalizing an entire generation and clearly, you yourself is not the problem. But if the WWII generation was considered the greatest…the baby boomers have to be considered the generation that destroyed America from the inside. Who needs communist when we got you guys?
conservatives hate to admit that they have been fooled by Repubs even more so than by Dems. At least with the left, you know the goal is more govt, more control, less personal liberty. But Repubs talk about it while doing the exact opposite. Meanwhile, all the newfound Romney supporters hope no one remembers how they trashed the man all over the yard, preferring one more technocrat to a guy who actually put his own money at risk and created some jobs.
People talk the talk about small govt and the like, until they stand to be affected. Principle is something you stand for even when it costs you something. Way too many self-professed conservatives have forgotten that because they, too, like free stuff.
Well, yes an no. Democrats are lying thru their damn teeth when they say they are patriotic Americans. Demcorats are anti-american subversives that want the US constitution to go away.
Repubs may have been lied to but nowhere near what the democrats have and continue to do.
Daddy problems much? Try to broaden your scope of invective, you’ll hit more targets.
Rev Walker: I am one of the oldest Baby Boomers. I didn’t ask to be born in that generation, but since I was born to parents of the Greatest Generation, I’m grateful. I am one of the luckiest human beings on the face of the earth for having been born an American after World War II. My father and all but one of my uncles served in that war, in Europe and in the Pacific (the other uncle being a farmer, and therefore vital on the home front). No less brave were the women who waited for them. I don’t take my inheritance lightly, nor have I let my children and grandchildren forget the debt they owe their ancestors.
You can denigrate Baby Boomers all you like (the entertainment industry and the legacy media have certainly done their part to facilitate that), but we are the generation who took what the Greatest Generation fought for and bequeathed to us, and we created the greatest, most liberated, most prosperous generation of human beings in the history of mankind. You owe all your opportunities for education and advancement, all your work safety rules, all your health research and advancements, all your variety of diet and entertainment, all your access to everyday advanced technology, to us, and the ones who came before us. You live better than mankind ever, ever has in the history of the planet, because of us and the ones who came before us. If we are guilty of excess, it is the product of an unprecedented vitality, and one we can curb through recognition and maturity, not through pessimism and deprivation.
The problem is we have created the current goods you describe by bankrupting future generations. I am a baby boomer and we are the stupidest most unpatriotic and selfish generation ever.
Baby boomers are all about me, me me and the present with never a thought for the future.
Thanks for the reminder. For a second we dared to think it was NOT ALL ABOUT YOU and how great YOU REALLY ARE Ms Baby Boomer. Thanks again for everything. YOU GUYS are really the greatest. Go change your tie dye t shirt. It stinks.
First of all I refer you to RebeccaH’s answer to your post. She pretty much covers it. Then I would like to add that 2 of the so called entitlement programs that many refer to are Social Security and Medicare. We boomers, like everyone else, have been made to pay into those two programs. We had no choice. Lots of us saw the handwriting on the wall years ago, maybe even before you were born, but it was just as politically impossible to get a solution then as now. Reagan tried and it looked like it would work but Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, got their hands back in it and you see the result.
I won’t try and defend all boomers because too many were ensnared by the far left but lots of us saw the light. Jimmy Carter’s greatest legacy is the he made Republicans out of millions of boomers. Reagan wouldn’t have gotten elected without us and the Republicans wouldn’t have gained control of Congress in the elections of 92 without us either.
The worst thing we boomers have left to succeeding generations? Without a question it is drugs and yes, it really is our fault.
Waiting
by Neva Flores
I walked through life with blinders on
Thinking I could see
And many things I thought I knew
I now see differently
I’m in favor of taring and feathering lying, cheating, hypocritical, soul destroying Alinskyites. Marxists should be treated with all the due respect we give fascists.
Speak of the devil…
“this is not Bill Clinton’s Democratic Party (and he knows that even if he can’t say it). If you have read this blog, and taken the time to look for a theme in the thousands of words (or free opposition research) contained in it, you see the imperfect musings of a voter who describes growth as a deeper problem than exaggerated inequality; who wants to radically reform the way we educate our children; who despises identity politics and the practice of speaking for groups and not one national interest; who knows that our current course on entitlements will eventually break our solvency and cause us to break promises to our most vulnerable—that is, if we don’t start the hard work of fixing it.
On the specifics, I have regularly criticized an agenda that would punish businesses and job creators with more taxes just as they are trying to thrive again. I have taken issue with an administration that has lapsed into a bloc by bloc appeal to group grievances when the country is already too fractured: frankly, the symbolism of Barack Obama winning has not given us the substance of a united country. You have also seen me write that faith institutions should not be compelled to violate their teachings because faith is a freedom, too. You’ve read that in my view, the law can’t continue to favor one race over another in offering hard-earned slots in colleges: America has changed, and we are now diverse enough that we don’t need to accommodate a racial spoils system. And you know from these pages that I still think the way we have gone about mending the flaws in our healthcare system is the wrong way—it goes further than we need and costs more than we can bear.”
http://www.officialarturdavis.com/2012/05/a-response-to-political-rumors/
“On May 29, 2012, Artur Davis confirmed that he is in the process of changing his voter registration from Alabama to Virginia and that he would run as a Republican were he to seek political office in the future.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artur_Davis
Here is another version of that from the Weekly Standard: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/artur-davis-democratic-label-no-longer-matches-what-i-know-about-my-country_646288.html
At the end, it also discusses a Pennsylavania women who has become a Republican. She is a Catholic who is opposed to Obamacare’s riding rough-shod over the Catholic Church.
I have less faith in people like the Catholic woman from Pennsylvania. If Obama backs off his anti-Catholic policies, will she go back to him? Or is she seeing beyond her special interest group and getting a bigger picture of leftism?
All I keep thinking is with a second term, Obama would no doubt get another couple Supreme Court appointments. If he can get a 5 to 4 liberal court, he could do ANYTHING he wanted and they would dutifully rubber stamp his actions. At that point, the only thing that could stop Obama declaring himself permanent dictator would be a revolution.
I lived in LA when the Giffords shooting happened. I got to listen to people who I thought knew me parrot back the media line of how are republicans are murdering sociopaths.
How are you supposed to dialog with that?
True leftists don’t want dialog, they want slavish conformity.
Dialog can lead to the truth, and leftists can’t handle that.
Maybe, just maybe, you could sway them by showing them facts.
People like that tend to get their information from TV and tend to believe that things in print are more accurate than things they hear. (Yeah, you and I know that the MSM lies in print too.) But if you can show them things in print that refute what they’ve heard, they MIGHT at least start to be open to the possibility that they aren’t getting the truth from Brian Williams or whoever they are listening to.
I think the key is to focus on facts, not opinions. For instance, no one with even a minimal education is going to accept the claim that “America is the biggest country in Africa”; we all know that America is not in Africa so the original claim is something we can discard effortlessly. We will also be at least suspicious of anyone that makes such a claim, whether it is the New York Times or their local TV station. “America is the best country in the world” is an entirely different situation: that is an opinion and it can be argued. There will certainly be people who feel that America is NOT the best country in the world and some will be Americans. Reasonable arguments can be made to the effect that some other country has a lower crime rate or longer life expectancy or whatever and is therefore a “better” country in some sense of that word. Opinions are much harder to dispute than facts.
If you can find actual factual lies in the media that your Leftist friends use, you can undermine those media. Once they see that the NYT or WaPo or CBS actual tell demonstrable lies, those outlets lose a lot of credibility. That doesn’t turn your friends into immediate conservatives but even they will not appreciate the feeling of having been a dupe. They will be angry about that, even if they don’t show it in front of you. I think they will start to look for other news sources that are more reliable. They may ask you what you read or watch for news. If they do, you may mention PJM or other such sources and they may at least sample those. With a bit of luck, they will realize that the people on more conservative sites are actually reasonable and sensible.
That doesn’t mean they’ll become true conservatives either but perhaps they’ll have at least an open mind and will then be willing to discuss ideas with an open mind. Gradually, I think you may find that they convince themselves that the Right makes more sense than the Left – a LOT more.
Treat them with the contempt they deserve and find some new friends. Your actions will speak louder than anything you try to say to them.
“Those readers were angry that I wanted to give any quarter to liberals.”
Don’t go wobbly on us now Roger. I think the readers were conveying an opinion of the difficulty of getting others off the progressive plantation. Some will be saved, others will not. It’s really up to them to make the jump, as you did yourself, and all we can do is present our case and the facts.
The diehards I’ve tried to engage in argument on the horrors of the current regime (“What have we gotten for our 6 trillion?”) stare at me blankly, cold, steel trap door closes, maybe mutter something about his spending is no more egregious than his predecessor etc.
For this class of diehards, Obama could sell what’s left of the country to the Russians tomorrow and they would instantly offer up some rationale as to how necessary and smart that was.
OTOH, I recently saw a video of two New Yorkers engaging a rather charmingly naive young man in conversation on his misguided and misinformed impressions of capitalism, educating him. The guy (an exception to the Occupier mentality I think) seemed surprised at the alternative to the mush with which he’d been imbued.
But was that exchange a one off ? Did the guy leave that conversation and go on to pursue information on his own or fall back into the facile and simplistic (and really really dumb) arguments of his fellow Occupiers ?
This problem is so deep seated. If we don’t reclaim our schools and if our teachers don’t change back into educators as opposed to indoctrinators, we’re toast.
Have I mentioned I really hate labels and juxtapositions like liberal/conservative ? I much prefer idiots/Americans.
Maybe my style leaves a little something to be desired.
Roger is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT! People are focusing on the Leftists who will never change their beliefs but ignoring the fact that there are a lot of people who lazily identify as “Liberal” who simply aren’t paying attention. These people can be converted to Conservative ideals if someone will take the time to try. It’s can be a long process. But keep in mind, too, that as young people mature and take on more responsibility they often mature politically and realize the truth of Conservative ideals.
I shouldda knowed that there’d be some of that “Zen” BS thrown in ther summ-were!
‘Em munks were problee sittin’ ’round drinkin’ gramma’s cough medicine when they came up with that “sayin” you jus’told us about. Chill Roger … do a little sippey-sippey on the front porch like them monks were doin’ and we’ll step into the future together … confident that there IS a future for the U.S.A.
Mr. Simon, you might want to review the videos of Yuri Bezmenov. Liberals have been “demoralized” (corrupted). “They are programmed to react to certain stimuli. Once they have been corrupted, you are stuck with them.” According to Bezmenoz, the only solution is to raise a new generation of patriots.
To win this election Mr. Romney will have to attract so-called moderates. In my experience this group lacks a coherent ideology or any firm convictions. They tend to be unaware and uninvolved until October. But there you have it. The non-ideological middle will determine the election, swung like a pendulum, moved by clever advertising, shifting from one party to the other, and moving constantly with the ebb and flow of public opinion.
A sad state of affairs, indeed.
I watched this Bezmenov video again yesterday.
This is what we’re up against.
How to brainwash a nation
Here’s the litmus test for judging whether or not a liberal can be converted, Roger: When you’re having a discussion with the liberal and you are winning the debate does he/she resort to calling you a racist and engaging in personal attacks? If not then there is hope. If the name-calling begins however, it’s time to resign yourself to the fact that this one cannot be converted.
You must recognize that the Left is at war with us. They refer to us using terms like ‘the enemy’. They would like nothing better than to wipe us off the face of the earth. Refusal to acknowledge this will result in failure and a destruction of Conservative culture.
You’re correct. I guess I was one of the bad boys, as I disagreed with Roger’s conclusions. Not out of personal animosity towards Roger whose writing talents I admire, or even Leftists – but the conclusion Roger is still behind the curve about truth as he was in his youth.
There is a real battle being waged for the heart and soul of the country that is every bit as much a war as storming beaches and holding forts, only this one isn’t fought with bullets but ideas.
I would remind that our Independence was fought first over a battle of ideas.
In many ways, these Leftists are not terribly different from King George and his minions. Only instead of demands that we bow to the Church of England and King George, they demand we bow to the secular Cult of Benevolent Barack and Big Daddy Government. Not a smidgen of difference between the two – both premised on control and not liberty and freedom.
I’m not sure exactly how you reason with people diametrically opposed and hostile to the basic tenets of our foundation and your most closely held personal beliefs. It has been my experience more often than not trying to reason only reinforces the Left’s delusions and hostility when the facts are presented.
The Left is not only blind and of reprobate mind. They are angry and completely convinced I am the enemy who will either submit or else.
We only have ourselves. We are the ones who must save our country
You know the term “Jehovah Jirreh”? I, like you am hoping for the real change. But I am also praying. And I am willing to state my hopes to G-d and then to leave the direction to him.
If we are to be burdened with 4 1/2 more years of Obama, it will be because he will allow us to do it to ourselves; because it suits his plan; and because it will provide the means by which we will teach ourselves to change (as in: change our minds, which in the Greek is Metanoia, which in the English is Repent.
Amen to that
A good place to start is with humility. Admit failure. I see failure in the enormous amount of blood and dollars spent in Iraq and rest of the ME. Once we admit failure, we invite self-criticism in those we talk with. Meaningful dialog requires us to get on their side on some issue or another.
The script for bringing the liberals over has already been written. It was followed to perfection by Reagan in 1980 and 1984. Sadly, it’s useless for our modern times so it has been shredded.
The liberals that Roger remembers so fondly have a home in the TEA Party. The GOP could easily win them by running an ideological campaign built on much smaller government, personal responsibility, personal freedom, and economic prosperity. But the GOP refuses to engage in an honest ideological debate. It claims that it “doesn’t want to scare the moderates” but, in reality, it doesn’t want to win with the stated goal of reducing the power of government. So the liberals Roger remembers are lost, they’ve voted for a Totalitarian State their entire life and they’ve got no options. They’re just like we Conservatives in that regard.
The liberals that the readers know are the ones that the GOP is trying to capture – they favor Big Government, high taxes, no freedom, no liberty, and economic stagnation. They flutter around the massive neon “The Era of Reagan is OVER!” sign that stands atop GOP Headquarters. If only the GOP would get more reasonable politicians like Richard Lugar, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe then the liberals would head for the open window and fill the GOP to over-flowing. Maybe this year…
The sad truth is that the liberals Roger remembers were Libertarians or Conservatives. They were wary of Big Government but many were seduced by the notion that Big Government run BY THE PEOPLE was somehow different from Big Government run by Bureaucrats. They were sucked in by the “get something for nothing” schemes of the Communists but, at heart, they’re still wary of Big Government. Sadly, they and we have no viable alternative. The TEA Party is uniformly despised by both the Democratic and Republican Establishments (assuming there’s a difference in the two) and we’re told “3rd Parties can’t win”, “pick the lesser of two evils”, “this election is the most important election of our lives” yet it will be an election without a meaningful ideological difference. It will be a repeat of 2008. Romney will point to Obama’s record but his answer will be a smarter application of more of the same. He won’t go full-Reagan with “The government isn’t the solution, the government is the problem” because the lesson of 2001-2007 is that GOP wants the power of massive government.
So, in conclusion, the liberals Roger wants won’t come over but the liberals the readers don’t want will. A big win for the GOP, a bigger loss for the Country.
Chris siad, “The liberals that Roger remembers so fondly have a home in the TEA Party. The GOP could easily win them by running an ideological campaign built on much smaller government, personal responsibility, personal freedom, and economic prosperity.”
That statement summarizes what was so great about the TEA party in the early days, and I believe it’s a winning message. However, it was so disappointing during the primaries to see TEA party people throw their support, one after the other, to social conservatives who were no more conservative on the issues listed above than anyone else, but they spouted the “correct” Christian and social conservative rhetoric. If the TEA party has now become simply one more group focusing solely on abortion, gay marriage and Christian values, they become irrelevant (there are already plenty of other groups focusing on those things) and lose their purpose. And they will also alienate lots of voters who do want smaller government, more personal responsibility and freedcom, but want to make up their own minds about some of the social issues.
Correct. “Conservatives” often look at you funny when you talk about “the hijacked TEA Party,” as if they have had their head in the sand this whole time. The TEA Party was hijacked by big-government neocons who for the most part are happy having big government as long as that big government pushes their agenda.
An obvious example is the Taxed Enough Already Party not getting behind the Republican candidate who wants to cut a trillion dollars of spending his first year, wants to cut five departments, and wants to completely eliminate the income tax and the IRS. Oh yeah, and it’s not hard to argue he’s the most HONEST guy in all of Congress. You’d think the Taxed Enough Already Party would love that stuff.
But nope, they’d rather push for more unconstitutional wars, Paul Ryan budgets that don’t balance the deficit until the year 2040, and indefinitely detaining people and even killing U.S. citizens without transparency or due process.
Sorry, the US doesn’t exist in a vacuum and he who you don’t choose to name is an absolute jackwagon re: foreign policy. Don’t think he can even spell the term.
Like when he said how the U.S. needs to rethink its foreign policy and that being in countries like Afghanistan is probably counterproductive? Oh wait, it’s warhawk Newt Gingrinch who recently said that.
And it’s the CIA and 9/11 commission that talk about blowback.
Did you like the Vietnam War? I don’t think the 58,000 Americans who died during it and the many more who came back broken liked it. All that for a war based on a lie. …sounds familiar.
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid.
Btw, which presidential candidate this election gets by far the most campaign donations from active-duty military? And which presidential candidate was one of the two veterans in the field and is now the only veteran in the field? That’s right: Ron Paul.
I think all those military people who donate to Ron Paul are trying to tell you something. Perhaps you should listen.
Roger Simon, thank you for your wise words and inclusive, as well as incisive, perspective. I am and always will be a “liberal”. Liberals, in the sense of the Enlightenment, are conservative of freedom and open-minded to solving contemporary problems with a commitment to the scientific method. These possibilities were hard won by we humans and the American experiment is the best so far.
However we dedicated Americans label ourselves — liberal, conservative, libertarian, independent — we are not authoritarians. The man in the White House is, as are all the marxist-maoists-islamists he has installed in the executive branch. I watched “authoritarians” take over my university; it was not a pretty sight. There was little about the American experience that was not held up to censure or ridicule.
What I believe I learned from American history is that no one is immune from grabbing after power and wealth and from installing themselves in an earthly form of eternal glory. This is as true for the slave-holders (Civil War), as for the corporatists (Populist-Progressive movement), as for the labor unions (anti-mob and anti-communist investigations), as for government workers/bureaucrats/public-employee unions (today’s TeaParty movement). It is extremely difficult to maintain a free market orientation that provides opportunity for all, a limited government for the purpose of refereeing among competing “powers” and providing a minimal safety net.
Most of this debate today has been inhabiting the Republican Party since the Democratic Party has been taken over by authoritarians. This does not mean that Democrats, those who remain American in their hearts but have misinterpreted “authoritarianism”, will remain enthralled to the greatest liar ever. I believe that 2012 will be a sea-change election if we do not demonize our opposition, but with clear and cogent thinking, hold up the lies for inspection. Thanks again to Pjmedia.
The Tea Party began with the noblest of intentions as a grassroots (there’s that word) effort to restore American (anti-authoritarian) values.
But anything is subject to mortification/modification along the road, and it’s just possible some questionable types have tried and to some extent succeeded in co-opting the tea party.
Nice writing and here’s hoping for the sea change.
re: Tea Party. I can tell none of you went to an early Tea Party Rally. I did, in my mid-size southern city. It was mostly older folks, quiet. Some wore hats showing they’d served in WW II or Korea or Vietnam. It was a somber crowd.
The younger people had signs like “I don’t want to make your mortgage payment.” I am the mother of a veteran and I had just read that the DHS had issued offical DHS warnings to police all over the country to beware of veterans who might turn into terrorists.
That sounded right un-American to me, and right unpatriotic. My sign said “Veterans are heroes, not terrorists. Someone tell Janet Napolitano.
More recently I attended a meeting of the regional “Tea Party”. Once again, a small group. Half a dozen were “up” on issues affecting the local counties, like Agenda 21 affecting local farmers. Several spoke about their research on national or state issues and about how and why they judged these issues would affect ordinary Americans in an unfavorable way.
There was a kooky lady at the meeting with a kooky son & they made several mini speeches and no one listened. When you are an open group, that happens, unless your group is totalitarian.
Here’s how you can classify the folks who came to the early Tea Party rallies. They are your aunts, uncles, cousins, and perhaps grandparents. They think for themselves, they are deeply worried, and they love their country.
You probably already know (as most intelligent people do), addicts cannot get over their particular addiction until they do two things: Admit they have a problem & display a willingness to do something about it. Many addicts realize they have a problem but don’t wish to do anything about it. Likewise, many liberals are smart enough to see that socialism doesn’t work but they don’t care; they are so glued to the “fairness” principle they won’t begin to embrace reason. Obama illustrated this phenomenon quite nicely back when he admitted to a reporter upon being told that lowering cap gains tax rates brings in more revenue that such did not matter because it was a matter of “fairness” that the “rich” pay their “fair” share.
So here you are asking us to try to win such people over. Like the addict who is willing to actually do something about her/his problem, liberals who want to see the light will have to open their minds & shed their arrogance. Meantime, our energies are better spent, IMO, in trying to defeat them. In order for our great country to be saved, we must be the ones who are in charge, not the liberals!
I’ll head the cheering section, Roger! (I’m not American, so I can’t vote in your elections.) “The Amateur” in the White House is not Israel’s friend.
Yo
Apparently nowadays to be considered Israel’s friend you have to pass things like H.R. 4133 that basically have U.S. taxpayers and military give another country a blank check.
You need to read Barry Rubin’s piece “What to Say When You’re Handed the Obama-is-Good-for-Israel Talking Points”, then you will understand why I said what I said.
Yo
Mr. Simon, everything you say is true but too late; The political game is over.
– There is no political solution to an economic problem –
The imminent existential socioeconomic crisis will call up leadership able
to supply the necessities of life to those unfortunate enough to be trapped
in the failed blue states. This is real power, and will confer real authority
on those who wield it; It will make little difference who is in office, and
even less what impossible demands voters make of their elected officials.
This is a worthy longer term cause, but we really don’t need to convert iberals to get Obama out office.
If we can convince the Ron Paulites, the hard core Libertarians, and a portion of disaffected Catholics to all get out and vote for Romney, he will win.
The lefties who call us racist for conservative thoughts are doing us a favor. They are telling us who they are (or as Reynolds calls them “self-identifying rubes”). Don’t waste your time. Move on. We don’t need them.
What we need are the inattentive middle who don’t give politics or economics much thought. They are putatively liberal but are mostly go along-get along types. They will listen if you appeal to their own self-interest.
Back in 2008 my finance-major college educated son back was telling me how great Obama would be. He was very good at parroting what his professors told him (Jesuit college, natch). I told him at my age it didn’t matter much what happened. If the lefties wanted to increase all this social spending it wouldn’t hurt me too much. One, I’m nearing the end of my working life. Two, I’m a boomer and boomer seniors are very good at voting for the goodies that benefit them. I told my son if he wants to pay more taxes for people for like me, well then God bless him. I told him I will vote conservative not for my benefit, but his.
Now, nearly fours later and after an excruciating job hunt he’s mostly come to the light. By itself that’s not important. What’s important is he talks to his friends. In essence, his message to them is “We’re getting screwed!” Then his friends talk to their friends.
So each of us have choice. We can engage others and spread the conservative gospel the best we can. Or, we can swirl the toilet of history while smugly crying “We were right!” before being sucked into irrelevancy.
“we must try to get people to change and must do so unceasingly until we are victorious.”
Something to buck you up Roger.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/284256/re-svetlana-alliluyeva-rip-daniel-foster
“Ms. Peters (aka. Svetlana Alliluyeva– Stalin’s daughter) became a United States citizen in 1978 and later told The Trenton Times that she had registered as a Republican…
People do change. Just hope a relative doesn’t have to murder 10s of millions to get them to achieve it.
Of course we should keep on trying to argue our views. There are so many stark contradictions in what they do and say, and then they change it from one day to the next. It has become entertaining. Just keep track of the things BHO has said. The only conclusion is that he is a highly polished jive artist. How ignorant do people want to let themselves become.
Everyone should keep this in mind: To affect the changes you wish requires political victory, and this is quite doable – the 2010 midterms show that it is very doable. It does not require changing so many minds; just look at the numbers. The hardcore will remain hardcore, but they are relatively few. There are many who hold to their politics as a matter of aesthetics and soft reasoning: they are persuadable. Roger is right to ask the question and set the goal. It’s a goal that can be achieved, but not in anger. If you engage someone in conversation with others present, you may not persuade the person with whom you speak, but you may persuade those who are simply listening.
P.S. In the immediate aftermath of oral arguments on the ACA, many liberal legal elites, particularly those in academia, were shocked. This was addressed by Jonathan Adler in post at the Volokh Conspiracy:
http://volokh.com/2012/03/30/why-did-legal-elites-underestimate-the-case-against-the-mandate/
Note too the citation of Jonathan Haidt’s findings: Read Tom Harris’ post on climate change elsewhere on this site in this context.
The takeaway is this: To be an effective advocate, you must first understand – really understand – your opponent’s argument and point-of-view as well, if not better, than your opponent. Only then do you have a chance of winning.
It’s interesting to look at some of the former Clinton Administration officials and spokespeople when you go by how committed to The Cause people on the left came be. Lanny Davis and Paul Begala were almost joined at the hip as spinners for the administration between 1993 and 2000, but in the ensuing years Davis has remained a liberal, but has pushed back at times against some of his own side’s excesses. Begala, on the other hand, never met an attack against conservatives he didn’t endorse, and as a result has a higher profile on the more left-leaning channels, where throwing red meat to the True Believers is both ego-gratifying and profitable.
It’s hard to get a Yankees fan to root for the Red Sox, or vice-versa, and it’s hard to get someone to change their ideological allegiance and admit that what you believed for years was wrong. But it does happen, especially in stressful economic times like today or the late 1970s, where it’s harder to justify maintaining those beliefs in the face of the real world. We’ll see how many people cross over this November.
Shocking last week to hear Lanny Davis seriously ragging on democrats over the Bain BS. Heretofore, I’d never heard him spew anything but the party line, à la Bob Beckel.
Seriously shocking when someone like Davis goes off the reservation
I love it when democrats eat their own.
Lanny actually stood up for George W. Bush a couple of times from what he saw as the most unfair attacks while Bush was in office. That didn’t mean he still didn’t support some other attacks on Bush that conservatives believed were unfair, but it puts him in the category with a few others of not simply getting their talking point marching orders for the day and then go out and parrot them, no matter what the current economic, social or foreign policy situations are. With someone like Begala, if you keep up with politics each day, you know what he’s going to say before he ever opens his mouth.
If Davis said the sun was going to rise in the East tomorrow, I’d have to get up and look. After watching the way that foul animal blatantly lied for his criminal friend Clinton, I wish him nothing but the absolute worst. If he came to our side I’d have to wonder what we were doing wrong that attracted such scoundrels.
Given how frequently America’s Morning News features Mr Davis as designated talking head to opine on the errors of the GOP I really have to question their claim to conservatism. As an apologist for slick Willie’s slick willie he has nothing to say that I can place any value in. Kinda like Axelrod.
But how to do so?
Many people fall for Leftist propaganda because they are not well educated enough to parse the arguments and refute them. The leftists have a firm lock on the education establishment from pre school and day care to the University system.
Most apolitical people don’t read PJ Media; they still believe CNN is an accurate and unbiased source of news (along with the rest of the Legacy media. How do we reach them?
Leftists will not willingly give up their firm hold on the arteries of American government at any level; they are feeding off the blood of American workers and will do anything to maintain their hold on power.
We are already starting the revolution; groups like the TEA Party movement have invaded the political system; they need to mobilize enough people to unseat liberals and leftists from the smallest town to the White House and take control of the political process and especially the budgets.
We are currently choking the Liberal’s legacy media by leaving them in droves, reducing their advertizing revenues. We need to do more, including organizing boycotts of their advertisers and strengthening and increasing our presence as alternative sources of reliable information.
We need to crush the stranglehold on education. Continue to highlight school misconduct; take your children out of public schools and homeschool or use private schools, support voucher and charter schools for primary and secondary education. Start informing students currently enrolled in University that they are in no way qualified to work for you; boycott university fundraising and challenge “experts” from university faculties in every forum that you can.
Sorry Roger, but we really do have to tear down all the pillars of the Progressive project if we are to save civilization. They may have stocked up on available resources, but they don’t know how to create, and are locked in brittle, authoritarian structures of bureaucracy and thought. We can run rings around them, and probably cause their structures to come crashing down much quicker than we might even guess today.
You raise many good points. Let me address the first few as a group.
My opinion is that you don’t change minds by examining ideologies as they see themselves. Many ideologies actually sound wonderful on paper. For example socialism and Marxism promise fairness and equality, which are surely appealing to anyone who has ever seen unfairness and inequality, which is probably everyone.
What you need to do is show how the REALITY of these ideologies contrasts with their supposed goals. For example, anyone who reads The Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn will be left in no doubt whatever that fairness and equality were NOT what was actually achieved in the Soviet Union. If people insist that they only want socialism, not Marxism, show them the reality of life in countries like those in Western Europe. Show them the tax rates. (A commenter here on PJM told a story last year about running a small business in Germany and being told to report his estimated income to the Finance Ministry. They then assessed a tax payment in a manner that appeared to be completely arbitrary (and very high to boot) and then demanded that he paid those taxes immediately even though he hadn’t actually earned his anticipated income yet!) Tell them about the staggering regulatory burden placed on citizens of those countries.
I think you accomplish a lot more by showing them what is really done in the name of their ideology than by trying to dispute the beauty of the ideals of that ideology. After all, I think we all find fairness and equality attractive on a conceptual level. You need to show them what their ideology actually means by those terms – and what the consequences are – if you want to start to influence them.
I strongly agree with your remarks about abandoning the legacy media, pulling kids out of public schools and trying to elect actual fiscal conservatives.
JFSanders in post #7 gets close to the mark: Left-liberals come in distinct types. I, however, prefer to classify them by the logical fallacy that underpins their thinking. Lack of a sense of scale is the most common (families can operate on authoritarian socialism while nations cannot), a poor understanding of costs nearly as much so (the broken window fallacy, etc.). The toughest cases are what Bill O’Reilly calls “cocktail cred”, those whose beliefs are shaped by seeking approbation from their social circle; the academic world and leadership ranks of many Christian churches are infested with these.
After that, you need to find a way to illustrate the fallacy in terms they will understand. For example, if I have a wildlife lover who cannot consider scale, I tell him that an ant and an elephant are both gregarious land-dwelling herbivores with prehensile appendages to thier mouths, but scale makes their forms radically different. For academics hopped up on cocktial cred, the biting satire of Ayn Rand can be devastatingly effective, but I would be wary of using Rand with Christian leftists. Milton Frie1dman’s “Free to Choose” is a good source for those ignorant of the costs of socialism. And so on.
Lastly, don’t expect immediate results. Friedman famously said that he wouldn’t want to change your mind in 5 minutes, because the next person to come along would change it to something else.
A couple of months ago a liberal was laughing and talking about how bad the Republican contenders were. I told him that he had missed the point, that it was primarily an issue of voting out a failed unqualified incompetent. Nice to see someone else has the issue clearly in hand.
Not to worry, while the leftists will never abandon Obama, the liberals will like Romney, after all, he’s one of them.
Sometimes Romney grabs me, sometimes I feel like a flopping fish listening to him.
The only thing I know about him for sure is that he is a more honorable man than Barack Obama. That’s going to have to suffice, for the moment.
Beyond that, and the fact that we’re screwed if we don’t restore character and statesmanship (and womanship), I know nothing.
(Socrates acknowledged that he knew nothing, so I am in good company)
Roger, here are my groundrules for taking up your challenge. We MUST not be lazy with our language. Words matter. Especially for those who intend to make their living with them and most certainly (perhaps more importantly) for those who intend to make a difference with them.
Liberals are not necessarily leftists and leftists most certainly are not liberal. Nor are they “progressive”, “elite”, “academic”, or “tolerant”. The “mainstream” media is no such thing.
If you are serious about wanting to change hearts and minds the first order of business is to change the way we “adopt and advance” the lexicon of those who mean to destroy us.
Second, we must come to the realization that OWS is NOT liberal. It’s leftist and anarchist. MSNBC is not liberal, it is radical extremism on display. That the Midwest Academy, the Socialist Scholars, the James Cone disciples, the ACORN/SEIU crowd, Bill Ayers, Cloward-Piven, Media Matters and their ilk are not liberal.
We are not going to “convince” them of the error of their ways. Let me reiterate why, in some of my general rules.
I love liberals, Roger…as I suspect you do. Many of them surround my daily life. But I despise leftists. A liberal is ruled by compassion, a leftist by deceit.
A liberal wants to try a different approach, a leftist wants to replace the system.
A liberal believes in fair play and honest disagreement, a leftist believes in hiding the truth and crushing dissent.
A liberal believes you may have a point, a leftist believes there are no points other than his.
A liberal says this country is great, but can be greater through dialogue. A leftist believes some other country is great and this country makes him puke.
A liberal wants equality for all persons regardless of gender, color or creed, a leftist wants class and racial warfare foremost, but will divide people along any suspect class, real or invented.
A liberal wants to take the poor and give them a chance to be rich, a leftist wants to take the rich and make them poor.
A liberal sees the beauty in our Constitution, a leftist sees an old document that needs to be destroyed.
A liberal is willing to play by fair rules, a leftist will break every rule and blame you for it.
A liberal sees violence as a last resort to be avoided at all costs, a leftist abhors only our use of force and openly roots for our enemies, but has not an ounce of reservation about becoming violent themselves.
A liberal wants the system to help the disadvantaged, a leftist wants to disadvantage the system by overloading it until it collapses.
If we can confine ourselves to trying to engage liberals and not leftists in an open dialogue, I am all for your mission.
If, instead…we believe that we can reason with traitors who are intent on destroying us, we would descend into Simon’s Folly. We should expose the former to logic and reason. As for the latter, we should do more than merely expose them. We should try them for treason.
Note to self, use “leftist” not liberal in future diatribes.
check
Given your definitions and the understanding that a liberal still wants to achieve those ends mostly thru the govt, the entire democrat party and the vast majority of the media is leftist and George W Bush is a liberal.
…just so we understand each other.
Yes, nearly the entire Democratic Party has become leftist. There are hardly any liberals any longer. The leftists have swallowed them whole.
And no, George W. Bush is a Republican politician who became caught up in the belief that the Propaganda and Lies Ministry was destroying him and he needed to “soften” his “Republican brand”. He had neither the command of language nor the personal charm of a Reagan to fight it off. Reagan was the Teflon Republican, Bush was the Velcro Republican. Every smear rolled off of Reagan and every smear stuck to Bush.
Joe Lieberman is a liberal. In today’s world, JFK would be a liberal, but not a leftist. Mickey Kaus is a liberal.
It’s important to understand the difference, but not easy sometimes to make the distinction.
CFB. Please explain why it is the leftists ate up the liberals. The fact that liberals have allowed this to happen has done nothing at all to prompt any respect coming from me. As I have stated before, instead of standing their ground, they have infiltrated & taken over the Republican Party establishment, leaving no elbow room for conservatives. In a system that only tolerates two major political parties, this is bad news.
Actually, no. The presence of liberals within the Republican Party goes back to the time when both parties had a liberal branch and a conservative branch. Most (but not all) of the conservatives were driven out or run underground starting with the time that George McGovern and his cronies took over in 1972. The conservatives became dominant in the GOP when Ronald Reagan defeated the older George Bush who was the spearcarrier of the “moderates” in 1980. But the fact is that the moderates handled and still handle the party machinery by virtue of the fact that they like doing the day to day stuff and are good at what they do.
CFB. Please explain why it is the leftists ate up the liberals.
That’s easy. “Americans never took to socialism”, as the old myth goes. That is only true insofar that Americans never took to socialism when openly named as such.
The Enlightenment principle of individualism only “took” in the Anglosphere, and much more so in America than in the British Commonwealth. This is why openly Socialist parties are a regular occurrence on the Continent, where individualism quickly gave way to nationalism, substituting group “self-government” for individual sovereignty. As early as 1793, individuals were already being slaughtered on the new sacrificial altars of what would become the Left.
However, socialism being what it is, it could not gain traction in the Anglosphere, particularly America, where the principle of individual rights was much stronger.
By the 1870′s, this presented the growing Left with a conundrum. How do we get our foot in the door in countries that are fundamentally hostile to us at the cultural level? Actual liberalism stood in their way; the contrast between socialism and genuine liberalism was still widely understood then. The Left knew that they would not be elected if they campaigned openly as they did on the Continent. They needed to be seen as something other than socialists, at least initially.
Fortunately for them, and unfortunately for liberty, American liberalism had one crucial vulnerability: the lack of a solid intellectual foundation for itself. They felt they were right, but did not know why — and didn’t think they needed to care why, either. That was the opening! The Left saw that while America had declared political independence from Europe, they never established their intellectual independence from Europe. American academia and intelligentsia remained trapped in European trends. So they simply rode into American academia on the flow of intellectual fashions out of Europe, and went to work co-opting actual liberalism, eating it out from within.
It wasn’t long before Herbert Croly was deriding the “night watchman” form of limited government, and by the 1960′s it was clear from the hippies that the old guard liberals of the Democratic party would no longer be replaced as they died off. It was the year 2000 when it became clear that the last of them had lost all relevancy in the Democratic party.
Now you know why “liberalism” still means what it should on the Continent (capitalism, small government, liberty etc.); the Left was able to succeed under its own label, pushing liberalism to the fringe, so they had no need to co-opt the label. Here, they did — and that’s why “liberalism” now means “socialism” here.
Unfortunately, most liberals will vote for the leftist, believing him to be a liberal. The MSM will not make the distinction.
The Propaganda and Lies Ministry IS the distinction.
We must come to the realization, finally…finally…that there is no such thing as the “mainstream” media. It does not reflect the “mainstream”, it reflects a poisoned well.
Let me ask it a different way:
1)What “liberal” would stand for an information stream that INTENTIONALLY distorts our reservoir of fact gathering and evidence supply?
2)Would they stand silent, even for a moment…if the conservative media forged documents, photoshopped pictures, staged events…in order to pass along a false narrative to the public?
3)Would they stand silent, even for a moment, if ALL the crimes against women, crimes against religious tolerance, crimes against people of a certain ethnic or racial makeup were covered up and spread with malignance?
4)Would they stand silent, even for a moment, if their candidates were routinely smeared and slandered, while their opponents candidates were championed in a conspiratorial and secret clan of over 450 members of that media empire?
5)Would they stand silent, even for a moment, if Hollywood put out screed after slimy screed about them, lampooned them, degraded them and basically spit in their faces day after day?
6)Would they stand silent, even for a moment, if they were routinely denied jobs in academia, denied promotion, denied tenure…simply because the held liberal beliefs?
They would be marching in the streets, holding candlelight vigils, protesting and shouting from the top of their lungs that such a system was beyond corruption, it was morally bankrupt.
And…they would be right.
Silence in the face of such an atrocity gives lie to the notion that “liberals” care about the underlying principle. Would we be complaining about such a system if all those things were in our favor?
I would.
For this very reason. It isn’t right no matter which direction it faces. And, if we don’t complain when that chill wind blows at our back, we don’t deserve protection when it blows in our faces.
The first step in the process is to destroy the leftist media. They are in the process of bankrupting themselves and we need to stay out of the way.
The next step is to clean house in our educational institutions. Conservative state legislatures need to mandate the teaching of conservative principles and act to eliminate leftist propaganda at state universities. Tenure should be granted based on criteria established by the legislature.
The next step is to stop subsidizing liberal private universities. Starve the beast. Subsidize only science, technology, engineering, mathematics, business, economics or health professional degrees. All other degrees must be paid for entirely by the student. Degrees in socialist ideologies would quickly be starved.
Note that law degrees would definitely NOT be subsidized. In fact, state legislatures should pass laws that would be lawyers have to pay for an engineering students degree before they could pay for a law degree for themselves.
If leftists have any underlying philosophy it is this:
“The end justifies the means”
The only thing liberal about modern liberalism is the casual disposal of other peoples money.
Good post!
I have always thought that Bush was too liberal, while my boyfriend has always throught Obama is too conservative. (And if you want to know someone’s political leanings, tell that “joke” in public. Where they nod and/or look shocked will tell you everything you need to know). I just figured we should avoid talking politics because we shared no common ground there.
Then we went to see the ‘Hunger Games.’ Afterwards, he said to me, “See, that’s what happens when corporations get too much power,” at the same time I was pointing out that bad things happen when government gets out of control. Turns out, our fears were the same, too much power in the hands of too few.
He thinks we need a stronger, bigger government to protect us from overbearing corporate power. In his defense, there is a role for government in this area. I counter that corporations are too busy funding big government types to be terribly scared of them. In my defense, government regulations impair small businesses far more than big ones.
In the end, it doesn’t really matter which of us is correct (I am, by the way), what matters is now we have common ground to start from. I can structure my arguments so that they make sense to him, and vice versa. Facts without context are simply meaningless statistics.
“See, that’s what happens when corporations get too much power,”
Uhh, one of us is an idiot. I read the books and watched the movie. What corporations? It was all the govt.
He thinks we need a stronger, bigger government to protect us from overbearing corporate power. In his defense, there is a role for government in this area
Here’s the scorecard for government. What’s the body count for corporations?
The threat posed by government is not a tinfoil conspiracy theory. It’s dead solid historical fact. The same cannot be said for the “threat” of private corporations. Not even close.
Rational People Fear Big Government, Not Big Business
http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2012/05/22/rational_people_fear_big_government_not_big_business
A lot of people are still worried—despite the results of the Mid-terms—that misfire will get another four years. Some of this is justified—it’s Romney’s election to lose. But Romney’s situation is fair better than McCain’s was because the blank slate that was Obama—one of his greatest ‘assets’—is gone for good. He has already crashed through the floor of what people with commonsense understand as the presidential-awfulness-point-of-no-return and it will be almost impossible for him to recover without a lot of help—which is how he got elected in the first place.
What is always interesting is that facts do not matter to most people on the left. Emotions rule. Changing ones perspective under these circumstances is next to impossible.
Another former ‘Liberal’ here. But that was when Liberals occupied the moderate, middle ground. I think it is safe to say that many like me didn’t so much leave the left as the left left us. The Democrats in the US (and the NDP in Canada) are so dominated by the loonies on the left that it’s not possible to even have a serious conversation. It always degenerates into class warfare, group rights nonsense, econut fanaticism and ad hominem attacks. Childish really. But their weak points are obvious. Ridicule remains the best weapon. Libs can’t stand being made fun of. And then there is also the old trick of turning their arguments against them. Romney’s folks look like they are rapidly mastering this weapon. Love their latest ad on Solyndra.
By the way, has anybody else noticed how similar Romney’s latest line ‘Obama isn’t working’ channels Margaret Thatcher’s brilliant ‘Labour isn’t working’ that she used to great effect against The hapless Neil Kinnock? Truly karmic given how Biden plagiarized Kinnock so blatantly.
“But that was when Liberals occupied the moderate, middle ground”
Dont they still? The democrat party has typically been ruled by leftists (see #42 above) for about 100 years, while the republican party has been ruled by squeemish liberals in conservative clothing aka the Bushs, McCain and Romney.
They are the center judging by their usual big govt policies with some sprinkling of capitalism left in their old bones while democrats are hard leftists judging by how often they call these guys “right wingers” (Puuuuleaz) and their never ending proclivities towards communism and love of lying, cheating and smearing everything they dont agree with.
“I don’t even fully know why I changed, even though I wrote a book about it.” That is not the way to sell a book!
My conservative friends are actively working to change our liberal acquaintances into conservatism. We are finding that when liberals can no longer sustain their belief system, they say they are attracted to “libertarianism”. This is their way to gradually move toward the Republican party without jumping all in at one time. They seem to need a mid-point to stop and take a breather before going the rest of the way. So when a liberal says he is becoming a libertarian, support him, coddle him, he’s on his way!
If “liberalism is dead”, why is Romney the GOP nominee, and why is Obama going hard-Left? Whoever wins in November has a record of nanny-government liberalism, since there is no meaningful difference between RomneyCare and ObamaCare. And for those who think that Romney must somehow automatically be better that Obama, do the names of Arlen Specter, Ahnauld Schwarzenegger, Olympia Snowe, Dick Lugar, Charlie Crist, Susan Collins, and a host of other GOP “moderates” ring a bell? Once a limousine liberal….
I do not fear another four years of Obama, since all the Marxist community organizer could possibly do with another term is stir the rubble of what is left of the USA. But a Romney administration, with his totalitarian Obama-esque itch to “fix” America through government fiat, would destroy conservativism and therefore any political opposition to liberalism. Remember that the rich liberal dolt from Massachusetts barely squeaked into office in 2002, and left in 2006 just ahead of the tar and feathers and with the state’s microscopic GOP in ruins. What on earth makes people think the same thing won’t happen nationally?
That is a feature not a bug. With the Republican party destroyed by their own preferred candidate, perhaps a truly conservative party can arise.
You two nailed it pretty well. If only more “conservatives” would see it and admit it.
How’s that joke go…
“I’ve decided I’m going to vote for the big-government, gun-grabbing, NDAA indefinite detention, Patriot Act, unconstitutional wars, TARP candidate for President!”
“Yeah? Which party?”
If “liberalism is dead”, why is Romney the GOP nominee, and why is Obama going hard-Left?
Because liberalism is dead. (Liberalism is not Leftism. Don’t be confusing the two; please try to keep up.)
It is my belief that most liberals/leftists hold their political views much the same as any religious fundamentalist holds their religion. I seriously doubt any change will come from any of us trying to convince them otherwise. It will have to come from within. The best teacher has always been to experience ones mistakes first hand. Given that premise, I can only hope that the mistakes they must experience don’t come from a “destroyed” nation before they come to their senses. Having said that, I will continue to try my best to convince them to think beyond the date of the election.
Crunch time or not, the strategy is the same. This won’t be a palms up military operation, no broadwaves sent, no reports. To change minds, you have to go at them sideways. But your ammunition must be truth. It must peck away at their deep beliefs. But in a disinterested manner that will avoid throwing up their defenses but rather promote a back of the mind mulling of the new information. The cognitive dissonance if where the mind changing of minds happens. Work it like water, just flowing by, millions of tiny impacts that shape the landscape, on occasion with the large collapse of the undercut bank.
Just a large body of argument for the facts. Nothing by itself will be overwhelming but it will give thought. Don’t do argument, just do discussion. Present an essay not argumentative but as investigative and discovery of the topic. But do, use these methods to negate any of their ideas of refuge. Make it an effort for them to keep their delusions. Provide no quarter for their mental gymnastics.
The Brietbart.com hammering on Obama the brilliant student is along these lines. Small, incremental but as a body growing. This will not hurt Obama directly but it does force many on the Left to face their deep need for Obama to be the smartest guy. They consistently have to set their candidates up as the unimpeachable expert, they value grades, they value the school attended, they value SAT scores. Remember how they had to denigrate Reagan’s college or Bush’s occasional misspeak (in a Texas accent no less) or Palin’s state college from somewhere out West not on the coast. Tear down the “smartest guy in the room” meme in Obama and they must rethink their entire idea of why they voted for Obama. It also, provides a useful scapegoat for Obama being abandoned, they’s were cheated, bamboozled, defrauded.
– saying, always liked: “He who shall, so shall he who.”
I thought the article “Is Liberalism Dead?” made some very good points and I shared it wherever I could. As a liberal-turned-hardcore-conservative myself, I understand what their world view is because I lived it for a long time. 25 years’ worth of it. The bottom line is that people are in the process of choosing sides, and once they do so, they’re tending to go extreme.
On the Right, I’ve noticed a very militant attitude, which I find myself frequently falling into from time to time, especially on certain subjects like racism. The reason I don’t completely give up on trying to reason with Liberals is because I know that it’s a process. The biggest hurdle for me was that I truly believed that all conservatives were racists, and the ones that weren’t were trying to force religious dogma on me that I wasn’t ready to accept at the time. It’s simply not possible to change a person’s mind overnight, it has to be done in stages. When the light finally comes on, though, people get curious and they want to know more.
The information war is so large-scale that it’s overwhelming for some conservatives. They often get to the point where it seems very hopeless and they just want to wash their hands of liberals altogether. It feels like there’s so much information you want to share – to make people understand – but so little time. So, people have to pick their battles. I chose the front of debunking the myth of conservative racism and the lie of Multiculturalism because that’s where the “change” happened for me. Once I understood that all of this was a liberal lie, all the doors of understanding were thrown open at once.
I truly believe that most average-joe liberals are decent people who honestly believe they’re doing the right thing. However, like I was, they are and always have been misled. Conservatives out there in the trenches of the Information War need to pick one aspect of it – a topic they know real well- and stick to it.
JKS (pardon any typos, I have to be at work in like 3 minutes, lol)
I too do not want a shooting war with the Left.
But, recognizing the propensity for violence of many of the core constituencies in The Left, I (like many other conservatives) will be prepared if the SHTF – something about it being better to die on your feet for a cause, than to serve on your knees.
Its because of Romney and his Hedge Fund Kind that has Only chased the Cheapest Productions cost around the world ending in consolidating all parts supply production into Asia killing off our Independent production and self reliance that now we will pay the price for this Dependence on a foreign supplier who is ending the use of our dollar as trade currency !!!!!!
Whats the USA GDP worth if We are Dependent on assembly parts from a foreign supplier who does not want to take our dollar any more ? See how the BRIC nations , ( brazil , russia , india , china , the main foreign suppliers of all worlds Assembly Parts supply , developed by years of out sourcing western nations industrial manufacturing of the parts production all in the name of lowering production costs , but at the expense now of Our Self Reliance and Independence,a huge mistake of economic imbalance that will lead to war no doubt )
Japan, China Currency Deal Symbolic Step
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303552104577435530370406026.html
China slowdown threatens US factory revival
This is why the USA and Europe need to be manufacturing MORE of the Assembly Parts supplies we need to at Least supply the basic Vital Infrastructure needs of our Nations !!!!! Being too Dependent on Asian Parts supplies is a National Security Threat !!!
http://economywatch.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/30/11942682-china-slowdown-threatens-us-factory-revival?lite
Mr. Simon –
Thanks for your personal openess, and honesty on this subject. It takes balls to willingly invite it in when it is so much easier to be and remain comfortable.
Hello, hello, hello…
Perhaps they can be changed by being “whirled away on a current of warm air.”
Mr. Simon, you are absolutely correct in calling for more communication. I see this as something that could go to a shooting war, but not in this generation and maybe not the next. Instead, I believe that grim, determined, directed pressure will win out. Using good examples in our actions no matter how the left tries to demean or deter them will win out more converts for our side.
Ah-ha moments usually don’t happen in crowds, they happen alone. However these moments need to be fueled with witnessed actions that speak louder than words. After all, what false words can be backed up by actions?
A shooting war is not in our interests. See what the Civil War did to state’s rights? Good ideas might end up on the wrong side and get stained with blood.
The distinction between liberals and leftists needs to be vigorously enforced. Unfortunately, many of the former can’t recognize the latter, so they end up picking up traits of the latter, which makes differentiation ever more hard. It used to be easy to identify centrist liberals (e.g. Cold Warriors like Henry Jackson and, today, Joe Lieberman) as opposed to nutjob leftist (e.g. Noam Chomsky), but I find it’s becoming harder.
It’s a nice exercise but almost useless for Roger’s purpose to categorize and describe various stripes of liberal/left/progressives. What’s important is the people around you, your family, your co-workers. People you know are easier to reach than the abstractions spoken of here.
“…we must try to get people to change and must do so unceasingly until we are victorious.”
Can’t understand why this is controversial in the real world. In blog land, where people go to get than endorphin hit from blasting the unlikable leftists I can see where it might not go over so well.
Obviously, the end game for the pro-liberty folks is to re-establish a non marxist culture which encourages engagement in a rational way – the rest follows automatically as the evil witch’s spell dissipates and the orcs find they’re human again.
Bingo.
And yes it is “obvious”, but it is not an easy job because it implies a lot of knowledge.
As other Readers here often say, the subversives have subverted the very language we use every day, and I notice that when I try to disentangle the discussions (with family and friends) from the marxist traps…people tend to get a little startled.
“but I am not wrong about this: we must try to get people to change and must do so unceasingly until we are victorious. As Churchill famously said, “Never, never, never give up.””
Roger and others will be happy to know I will not stop fighting the unconstitutional, country-destroying hypocrisy of the big-government fake conservatives who have hijacked the Republican Party in recent years.
The ones who push for “conservative” budgets that won’t balance the deficit until the year 2040. The ones who want to make a flip-flopper gun-grabber President. The ones who don’t trust government to oversee health care but do trust government to wiretap, indefinitely detain, and even kill U.S. citizens without transparency or due process.
“Roger and others will be happy to know I will not stop fighting the unconstitutional, country-destroying hypocrisy of the big-government fake conservatives who have hijacked the Republican Party in recent years.”
I certainly hope you’re planning on going after the big-government Real Leftists who have hijacked the Nation in recent years, too!
Of course I do that. It can be hard to make headway on such things though when the Republican Party itself is full of big-government hypocrites who have no problem with big government as long as it furthers their agenda.
I mean, really, forget all the more controversial issues for a moment… if the “conservative” party is actually happy with a Paul Ryan budget that doesn’t cut any actual spending and doesn’t balance the deficit until the year 2040, that’s simply pathetic.
Neo-neocon also writes about changing.
Clearly, there are some who change. Most don’t. It is an interesting topic.
My experience with leftists is that they don’t change. That is, the ones I argue and debate with remain leftists. The ones I engage in debate can’t argue the facts well, and don’t like debating me, but they don’t change. I note that you can convince them on this fact or that, but they are still going to vote for Obama and next debate they have reset and you have to start over.
I think ego and tribal identity play into it. I suspect the “changers” are less tied up by ego or tribal identity and are more inclined to accept facts.
The big thing to understand about liberalism or “leftyism” is that it’s fundamentally about self-esteem, about wanting to feel superior, about needing to count onself among the “better people.” This is why it seems so childish at times, with its tantrums and “I can’t hear you!” ignorance. It’s about unmet emotional needs.
Because liberalism fares so badly against reality (ObamaCare, anyone? Cap ‘n’ Trade?), it also must see its opponents not only as stupid but evil. Thus we get the “linkage” whereby any dissent from the leftward agenda stigmatizes one as “racist, sexist, homophobic, gynophobic, oppressor of the poor,psychopath,” etc., etc. In order to sustain the leftist’s pretensions, everyone who might dissent from “truth and social justice” must be reduced to a slavering caricature of evil.
But hey, good luck! I keep trying, and I’ve noticed that some of my liberal friends are not nearly so enthusiastic about Obama this year. That, of course, is why the O campaign will go all out to portray Romney — RINO Romney, of all people! — as a knuckle-dragging troglodyte of the fascist night. And, with the help of the media, it might even work.
Try to find something in common with the liberal you are trying to change — ethnicity, religion, same High School, profession, favortite food, bitter divorce,…
They compare us to Nazis, vultures, cock roaches, storm troopers, religious fanatics for a reason. They wish to dehumanize us and intill terror in deomocratic voters.
When I tell people I am a republican some liberals go into brain freeze. Others blurt out a cheap shot.
In any case, you have started the process of wearing them down and conveting them. Sometimes they fall easy. Sometimes they fall hard. We only need to win over 5%. Obama has done the hard work for us by screwing up the country.
You get more by being being nice than by being mean.
If you work in the entertainment business you get special dispensaton to remain in the closet and donate through a relative to the Romney campaign.
Those interested in persuasion might do well to read the Tom Harris piece about climate change elsewhere on PJM. It says a lot about why we tend to talk past each other.
Uncle FRed said it best when liberals agree with him but can’t vote for an R. I’m no liberal and I loathe to only vote against somebody- but i’ve only one argument to vote for Romney – he ain’t BHO. The Tea Party has shown to me the problem isn’t with liberals, it’s with Repubs. I mean John McCain said he was proud to be Roosevelt man- a Progressive. Ugh! Or look at Alan Simpson’s recent rant- guys like him fooled me for years- no more. Convince Rhinos to actually be FOR and do something about limited govt the issue of liberals will take care of itself. But if the Tea Party is forced to turn their backs on Repubs… the 2nd term of BHO will be replaced by the failed first term of Romney and we’ll be in deeper trouble.
I understand why you are concerned, Mr. Simon, but I also understand why many others think that dialogue with liberals is useless.
Both sides are right, because the two sides are also looking at slightly different landscapes.
Mr. Simon is looking at the shrinking set of old-time liberals who do indeed have the ability to reason. He was one. There are some left who, because they are busy with other things or just gosh-darn-it optimistic about their ability to fix anything, still have the opportunity to learn and in some cases the willingness to change. A shrinking set.
The other set is the hard-core committed thieves and idealogues who aren’t changing no matter what. Theft and/or the pursuit of power is their mission in life and what is good for the country, or the poor, or the disadvantaged, or the ignorant, or the innocent, doesn’t enter the equation in any way. For them, reason isn’t a factor. Period.
obama is their leader. They won. And they aren’t changing. Ever.
Unfortunately, the obama cult is about 20 times larger than the tiny number of liberals remaining who care to learn.
When people say it’s a war, they are right. At the moment it’s a war of ideas, but don’t doubt for a second that it will become a real war.
It always has before. Why should it be any different now.
I don’t want to argue with liberals, I just want them to have to live with the consequences of their decisions without pulling conservatives into the same progressive vortex. Natural consequences are the best form of education, worth more then any argument I can make.
I propose that states (or maybe even counties) should vote and define themselves as “liberal” or “conservative”. There would be a certain set of principles/laws associated with each classification. Those within the state or county who are of the opposite persuation would be able to remain as residents, but would not be able to vote or hold political office (unless they moved to an appropriately designated area). This would eliminate the liberal tendency to flee to conservative areas and remake them into their own image.
Little to no income redistribution among the states, each would have to support its own policies from the pockets of its own citizens.
Then sit back and watch things evolve. It would be fascinating-for example if the evil conservatives are removed from power in liberal states, and most financial decisions are the responsibility of the state and not the feds, what would liberal professional grievance groups find to complain about?
And life in conservative states would be much more peaceful.
Try to avoid using the S word–”should.”
Your ideal solution will not work.
Our options in the real world are either (1) they kill all of us, or (2) we kill all of them.
They say that a conservative is a liberal that has been mugged. Either that, or what Winston Churchill said is true. If you’re a young man and are not a liberal, then you don’t have a heart. If you’re an old man and are not a conservative, then you don’t have a brain. Roger, I think you just grew up, or were mugged.
Unfortunately, most of the far left will never vote Republican. Why? because they would have to admit that they were wrong. The only time you will get a good group of Democrats voting Republican is if the economy really tanks. Just look at how many “Reagan Democrats” there were in 1980. So unless the economy gets even worse (which it most certainly could, and soon), most of the Democrats will probably vote for Obama.
Mr. Simon, you seem to have a misconception about what drives conservatives. While it’s true that we are more patriotic–as well as more moral, more giving (of charity), more intelligent, more decent, more intelligent, better looking, more normal, kinder, funnier, less violent, less perverted, less pedophilic, and more HUMAN–than our enemies, that is not what drives our opposition to them. We are driven by the fact that we are actively VICTIMIZED by them. Not victimized in some abstract sense, but directly and personally targeted by them for destruction.
We don’t fight the Devil’s Party because we want to create Heaven. We fight them to avoid Hell. We are literally days away from the death camps.
You, Ken, are precisely the sort of person who saved me from being a conservative. I became a libertarian when it was clear to me many conservatives wished me dead or placed in a concentration camp (That was 40+ years ago, but things haven’t changed much). You try to imply that your sort of conservative is decent, but I don’t think it is true.
I detest leftists as much as anyone here, but your use of “more perverted” clearly labels you as a hater. You are no better than the leftists. And I say that even though we probably agree on many more issues than we disagree.
Sorry, Simon, I couldn’t let that pass without comment.
Ken;
I am aware of options (1) and (2). To put it simply, they both suck and I would prefer to avoid them. Why add yet another pile of bodies to those already piled high and deep throughout history?
I don’t want to kill liberals/leftists, I just want them to leave me and mine the h($# alone. That is possible given separation and a big stick deterrent. Let them try their theories, and let THEM suffer the consequences. That will make me happy and I will sleep well at night.
I’m curious as to why you would go straight to the death struggle without considering/trying other options first.
It’s always fun bringing this up as an option when talking to leftists here in the Golden State. They are always shocked that conservatives would consider such an idea.
That’s just it Beth. They will NOT leave you and yours the h($# alone. They will beat you over the head with their idol, the almighty state. They will party and you will pay the bill!
The state is god, and Marx is his profit (spelling intentional).
I’m curious as to why you would go straight to the death struggle without considering/trying other options first.
Two reasons:
First, they’ve destroyed my own life by negating my military service, by their claim that all Republicans are “chicken hawks” while all Democrats, such as DRAFT-DODGER HARRY REID, are war heroes.
Second, they have already said, again and again and again, that they INTEND TO EXTERMINATE US. So why should I let the Republican leaders such as David Frum, who are knowingly cooperating in our EXTERMINATION, to persuade me to walk into the death camps?
Andrew Klavan has summed up the mindset we have to work on changing>/a>:
But mostly what they think is that leftism is still liberal, that it is a bulwark against the sort of government oppression, censorship, racism and undeclared warfare that — well, that only leftists actually support.
It’s the ordinary misinformed people we need to reach, not the ideologues. They will never be converted, but the ordinary citizen, given reliable information, can be.
Vic-
They will leave us alone IF there are enough conservatives who are organized and determined. It’s when we are scattered and divided that we are vulnerable.
I also believe that there are enough liberals who will want to live in the liberal states described above that will desire to do it peacefully, especially if it means they are in charge. Like my brother in law, poor sod. I don’t think he will like his liberal utopia once he gets it, but that is not my problem.
We don’t have to live with them. It’s time to start laying the groundwork for peaceful separation.
4 legs of the liberal/leftist stool. (The medical and the sitting kind.)
1. Greed. They constantly talk about money.
2. Jealousy. People of greater talent.
3. Hypocrisy . Obvious.
4. A quite amusing belief in their own intellectual acuity.
The only solution is a guillotine on the mall. How many art history majors and hairdressers do we really need?
Don’t so much care about them, as (fill-in blank) (grievance) studies majors. Any subject area that only prepares the studier to teach in said subject area is absolutely not worthy of being funded on the public dime. Why do we allow the one most unqualified to make the decision (the student)the choice of how our tax dollars are spent on post-secondary education? I’mna thinking if it isn’t a STEM degree, you’re on your own boopy.
And I’ll throw in my negligible support for the instadude’s idea of a) allow student debt to be dis-chargeable in bankruptcy and b) put the granting institution on the hook for some portion of said debt in that event. That ought to slow those sanctimonious thieves down a bit.
From Roger’s previous column: “Liberalism may not exist, but the lust for power does. And their need to cling to this power is so great they are willing to ignore reality and to forget their children, the ones who will suffer most from the economic cataclysm of their own ideology. They will literally do anything or say anything to maintain control. They will even contradict everything they stand for to survive. But secretly – I am more than ever convinced — many of them know they are wrong.”
For some, it’s the lust for power. For some, as that last sentence states, it’s the horrible realization that they cannot face: that the supposedly righteous cause they’ve dedicated themselves to is not only wrong, but making things worse, and even evil. It’s a lot like a cult, and some of them will even have to undergo some kind of de-programming.
Everyone should read Mao’s “Where Do Correct Ideas Come From?” http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-9/mswv9_01.htm and note this excerpt: “Generally speaking, [ideas] that succeed are correct and those that fail are incorrect, and this is especially true of man’s struggle with nature. In social struggle, the forces representing the advanced class sometimes suffer defeat not because their ideas are incorrect ! but because, in the balance of forces engaged in struggle, they are not as powerful for the time being as the forces of reaction; they are therefore temporarily defeated, but they are bound to triumph sooner or later.”
EVERYTHING is ALWAYS about religion.
A liberal is a conservative who hasn’t been mugged, yet. O’blamo’s economy will mug a lot of folks (his word, not mine). “Fair share” (spreading misery around) along with “fundamental transformation” (killing capitalism) will tank this country (if it hasn’t already).
For those bitterly clinging to his radical Marxism, soon will come the time when putting food on the table or gas in the tank will exceed their ability. Markets don’t mess around. Destroy the profit incentive at your own risk. Bare shelves will follow another round of O’blamo. Even the Chinese want a ‘market’ to sell their wares.
O’flappy-ears and his minions are playing fast and loose in this regard. Lots of people will get hurt. If any leftists fail to see this, screw’em. Besides, nobody wins re-election with his boot on the people’s neck while holding a golf club in his hand.
Should I be wrong and this bum wins again with the vote fraud meter stuck in the red-zone, THAT’s when you need to worry. This guy hasn’t been America’s greatest gun salesman for no reason. Stealing an election has consequences.
When I was about 13 years old I saw Ricardo Montalban in a commercial for Chrysler talking about “European styling” on some car. I will never forget that a thought along these lines came to me; Who the hell cares about European this or that – TO HELL WITH EUROPE!
My parents were apolitical and so confused about everything (now divorced of course – as good little baby boomers) that they could not have had a good opinion about anything. I am a mix of Jewish,German,Mexican and Irish.
I have NEVER liked the left or any of their stupid ass ideas. As Limbaugh says, they must simply be defeated. Buchanan wrote a book called “Right from the beginning”. I am happy to say that I was too.
In any case you are right Roger and we must work to bring more people over.
Two arguments which resonate with me: Unsustainable US Debt and fiscal catastrophe (Greece).
GREECE. Greece is bankrupt. The country has had a potpourri of anarchists and frustrated citizens in the streets for several years. Unless something changes, Greece is going to run out of money within 30 days to pay its army, police, teachers, power plant workers, water treatment, etc.
What thoughtful Americans ought to be wondering about is: how can you tell if our country gets near the tipping point? Are we close? Can we prevent a fiscal crisis?
According to a US TREASURY website page, “HISTORY OF THE PUBLIC DEBT”, the public debt is $15,692,368,000, and your share and mine runs to $50,000 and change, and is growing by $5,000 a year. Mr. Geitner is kind enough to provide us with an official peek at the last 20 years of Public Debt.
See: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd_debtposactrpt_0412.pdf
If you had calculus in college, run a regression curve on debt growth since 2006 . The debt-growth curve is looking perpendicular, indicating that the US deficit train may already be in runaway mode. Did this happen to Greece too?
Things are really out of control and it is all Bush’s fault! But wait, until 2006, when the Dems won both houses, public debt was $8 trillion. It is now $15+ trillion. That’s a lot of debt accumulation in six years. In fact, it is historic. Which Greek political parties did Nancy and Harry take lessons from? Answer: All of them!
If you read the English language version of Athens’ newspaper: Kathimerini, the mood in Greece today is of profound disbelief, regret, frustration, anger, and, for some, denial. Over 20% of little businesses have gone bankrupt in recent years, due to more government taxes and regulation and fewer customers. The public-run hospitals don’t have the necessary medicines because the country’s pharmacies hold hundreds of millions of IOUs from the Greek government who won’t or can’t reimburse them. Seniors with government insurance are told by pharmacists with empty shelves to pay with cash if they want their medicines ordered. It’s become a downward cycle to an outcome no one wants.
Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidate with a serious plan to stop the runaway spending and debt. Things the old Taxed Enough Already Party would love, the new, big-government hijacked one dismisses.
Cut actual spending and balance the budget in three years? Eliminate the entire income tax and IRS? “No thanks!” says the “new and improved” Taxed Enough Already Party.
This election isn’t really about Democrats vs. Republicans. It’s about who controls the Republican Party — big-government fake conservatives, or people who are truly for the Constitution and smaller government.
Agreed, Mr. Simon. The President does not deserve a second term based on the merits–or demerits–of his first. But let us not forget that the most serious problem that the country faces is its almost insurmountable national debt, the source of which is a careerist and irresponsible Congress, including members of both parties, who have bribed Americans with ‘free stuff’ in exchange for our votes. Until we the beloved people decide that the composition of the U.S. Congress must be changed, our national decline will continue, no matter who sits in the White House.
GREECE. Greece is having riots every week. Unless something changes, Greece is going to run out of money within 30 days to pay its army, police, teachers, power plant workers, water treatment, etc.
What thoughtful Americans ought to be wondering about is: how can you tell if our country gets near the tipping point? Are we close? Can we prevent a fiscal crisis?
According to a US TREASURY website page, “HISTORY OF THE PUBLIC DEBT”, the public debt is $15,692,368,000, and your share and mine runs to $50,000 and change, and is growing by $5,000 a year. Mr. Geitner is kind enough to provide us with an official peek at the last 20 years of Public Debt.
GOOGLE: treasurydirect.gov govt/reports/pd/pd_debtposactrpt_0412.pdf
The Treasury is borrowing 100 billion dollars a month; month after month after month. If you had calculus in college, run a regression curve on this debt growth since 2006 . Is the US deficit train already be in runaway mode. Did this happen to Greece too?
Things are really out of control and it is all Bush’s fault! But wait, until 2006, when the Dems won both houses, public debt was $8 trillion. It is now $15+ trillion. That’s a lot of debt accumulation in six years. In fact, it is historic. Which Greek political parties did Nancy and Harry take lessons from? Answer: All of them!
If you read the English language version of Athens’ newspaper: Kathimerini, the mood in Greece today is of profound disbelief, regret, frustration, anger, and, for some, denial. Over 20% of little businesses have gone bankrupt in recent years, due to more government taxes and regulation and fewer customers.
The public-run hospitals don’t have the necessary medicines because the country’s pharmacies hold hundreds of millions of IOUs from the Greek government who won’t or can’t reimburse them.
Seniors with government insurance are told by pharmacists with empty shelves to pay with cash if they want their medicines ordered. It’s become a downward cycle to an outcome no one wants.
The Greeks have a serious problem with illegal immigrants who wish to use Greece as a portal to western Europe, and a job or welfare. Greece follows exhaustive EU rules which take years to have a hearing & deport one stealth migrant. But they have wisely not deliberately invited a 25% population increase of peoples of non-Greek values and cultures.
Unfortunately, we don’t have Kobe or Lebron to bail us out.
There’s someone who would beg to differ, Roger:
“I’m Lebron, baby. I can play on this level. I got game.”
–Barack Obama, 2004
How can they be changed? Good question. My answer? Beats me. When history doesn’t persuade, when facts don’t persuade, when logic doesn’t persuade, what remains to appeal to? Their good natures and innate sense of fairness?? I’ll admit it, I’m stumped and have pretty much concluded we’ll have to “get there” without them (we may even have to do it with no quarter given and no mercy shown). Doesn’t mean we should stop trying to persuade, though, and who better to present the case to a practicing liberal than a recovered one.
Winston Churchhill said while try we must, it’s not enough to try, nor even to do one’s best; when there’s something necessary to be done, we must succeed in doing it. That’s what I think the monks are getting at. And I would add a bit of Chinese wisdom to their’s: When it is obvious that the goals cannot be reached, don’t adjust the goals, adjust the action steps.
First of all, some commentators here need to get real. There is not going to be shooting war with the Left. The left can raise mobs, but outside of left-wing strongholds, they are going to get no traction. Mobs go against public order, and people will turn against them when they show up. Not to mention that the police and military will be against them, and we are the ones who believe in self-defense. Even a left-wing government is going to face serious problems if they try to start a civil war. Quite bluntly, when you have an anti-military ideology, you should not expect the military to support you in violating the Constitution, which they swore to defend.
This is not to deny the potential for abuses of power and thuggery, but such acts go against the carefully constructed image the left has set up. Seeing that kind of thuggery outrages people. The rest of the movement might just decide to disown you for PR purposes. Welcome to the underside of the bus!
All that said, persuading people of left is difficult because of their different paradigm. In our paradigm, certain news sources are viewed as trustworthy and others are less trustworthy. If told you that Paul Krugman or MSNBC or DailyKos presented an argument, sure you might check it out, but there’s going to be a certain sense of suspicion there. I’ve argued with liberals who quite seriously argue that government healthcare is one of the best ways to balance the budget and improve the economy. The problem with the stimulus is that it was too small. That kind of thing, combined with the backing of liberal academics, gives us a serious uphill battle.
You know, it absolutely amazes me that every argument that is being presented about converting a Liberal to a Conservative can be used to convert either one to a Ron Paul supporter! The only difference between a Conservative and a Liberal is their blindness to what the problem is. The problem with America is we have fallen off of our Foundation. As any builder knows, it doesn’t matter if the house has slipped off of the foundation to the left or the right, IT’S OFF THE FOUNDATION!!!! Ron Paul is the only guy out there who is bothering to point this out. The Media and both parties totally ignore him because he can put an end to the SHOW that they love so much, (it’s his fault,no it’s his fault). We don’t have four more years to play this game! We certainly don’t have THIRTY more! Every person I know of who has listened to him talk and not hear what the political pundits have said about him have come to realize that we need to go back to a Constitutional form of government, kill the KING that we elect every four years, and elect a man who isn’t pandering to whatever the latest sound bite is. Ron Paul hasn’t changed his view for the last thirty years, everybody else changes theirs every thirty minutes depending on which group they’re talking to. Listen to the man and decide for yourself!
RONPAUL2012.com
One of the biggest brainwashings we must undo is the one that says Hitler was Right-Wing and a conservative. He was simply to the right of Stalin. He was a capitalism-hating, central planning-loving, socialist through and through.
Point out to Libs this fact and the arguments behind it and you will be planting a little seed which hopefully will grow.
We Freedom Fighters CAN & WILL defeat the Left, one Kool-Aid drinker at a time!
GO FOR IT!
….
Simon is right, some liberals are convertable. I voted for Humphrey, then McGovern, then Carter in my 1st 3 elections, but changed with Reagan and am now a Tea Party conservative. Young people can be attracted to leftism because of their idealism and their lack of experience with the real world, because they are used to others taking care of them rather than taking care of themselves, and also because of indoctrinization from leftist teachers and professors. But once they enter the working world, they start to see leftisms flaws, and are ripe for conversion. Some people can also be dems because of family tradition, or fond memories of JFK. And many older dems may feel that modern leftist dems have betrayed the working class values that the dem party suported in the 50′s and early 60′s. If we continue to look down at them and refuse to engage, we are ceding them to the dems forever.
The key is realizing there are different kinds of dems. Committed leftists like Paul Krugman, Van Jones, Pelosi, or Bill Ayers are not worth engaging, they should be marginalized or crushed. But there are many center leaning dems now, especially blue collar types that liked Bill Clinton, that are pretty disgusted with Obamas hard leftism. There are also libertarian leaning sauburban dems that are dems for social reasons, but still beleive in the free market. If we engage them they are convertable.
One thing though, opening a dialog does not mean compromising any of our conservative beleifs, it just means giving them some respect and admitting they might be worth talking to. It also means that you dont excommunicate people that agree with you on 60% of the issues because they wont move on the other 40%. It also means being a little more flexible on RHINOS. To me, it depends on where they are from. I agree that a RHINO in a repub leaning state should not be tolerated, since full conservatives can win anyway. But in a strong dem leaning state, any politician that actually wants to win is going to have to be a RHINO on at least some things. I think Reagan (or some other priminent conservative, not sure which) had a rule on that, support the most conservative candidate that has a chance to win in the state where they are running.
Mr. Simon, please tell us about Artur Davis. If his change from Insider Democrat to Republican is real, that clinches your argument that Liberal minds can be changed. Wow! Who will he bring with him to our side?
There are so many reasons to try to change a liberals mind, but they have to participate. Otherwise its a frustrating waste of time. They’re too entrenched in liberal dogma, and when constantly exposed to MSM misinformation, they can’t be changed. It is a nice thought, should be endeavored, BUT….