James, I really don’t have a bone in this fight, but I will say this to you… liberalism is being tormented as a caracas in all media… and you espouse that the media is monopolized by malevolence.
Cognitive dissonance anyone?
K: look at your “charges”… “obvious lying, thieving, con games, oppression and willingness
to do absolutely anything to usurp power and FORCE all people to obey the proper, liberalism
ordained moral behavior” and yet, not the slightest bit of anything resembling evidence…
once again trying to convict by use of the big lie… WHERE is your proof?
for example, if I say, A did X, I must somehow show that A did in fact do X…
If you say, he murder his friend… you must then show us either the dead body or
some other evidence that he did in fact, murder his friend…you are hoping no one
would notice that you are just throwing out random charges in hopes something sounds
good and no one will notice you haven’t provided anything resembling evidence…
you will say of course, it is self evident… the cop out of the lazy and inept.
but the truth is, you have nothing and have no evidence of any kind…
but like Christians, you have faith even if the evidence isn’t there…
in fact, faith is the thing, not the proof and so you have your FAITH, that
liberal and liberalism what you claim it to be…but proof!!!
who needs proof when you have faith…faith that liberals are X
and liberalism is Y…but nothing like proof or evidence…
because to get to proof or evidence, you need to actually
try, make some effort and god forbid that conservatives actually
do anything like make some effort to get proof or evidence because,
because all you have is faith…and according to conservatives,
faith trumps proof or evidence… in fact, why have trials or the legal system
or philosophy or science or history or economic when we can just figure
out any answer by faith… in fact, according to your feeling,
(calling it thought, really stretches the matter)
we don’t need anything beside faith to answer any question…
faith is more important then evidence and more important then
any fact, more important then life itself… and that is what you and your ilk
depend on, faith, certainly not facts or truth or evidence or proof…
you have faith of your “feelings” of liberals and liberalism and that is enough
for you…I hope faith is enough for you…but don’t pretend to be a philosopher
if all you depend on is faith…for that is theology… you are on the wrong site…
this is a philosophy site… go to a theology site is that is all you have… faith…
Kropotkin
Classical and neo liberalism are not the same so when one is talking about liberalism they should specify the one they mean
In this thread both types being discussed as if they were actually the same when they are entirely different from each other
Jakob and James are talking about neo liberalism while WW III and Peter are talking about classical liberalism
I am a classical liberal not a neo liberal and see nothing in common between them at all hence the distinction
As I said:
Of course the mode of operation of the hypnotic subterfuge of the masses has been that of staying hidden, far out of eye sight while pretending, scapegoating, that all is that other guy’s fault, “We are here only to protect the innocent from those evil men”. But despite attempts to be totally hidden and quite, unavoidably blatant evidence eventually rises;
“Hate Speech” laws to protect your freedom of speech. “Hate Crime” laws to protect your freedom to act. Forced racial bias hiring policies to protect against racial bias. Media and films maximally inundated with racist and gender propaganda in order to prevent racist and gender propaganda.
“We are here to liberate you from your freedoms.”
The mentally ill cannot detect their own arrogant rational fallacies. They are too busy blindly hating.
And that is what actually, really does qualify them as truly mentally incompetent, disturbed, delusional, and true sociopaths.
Except that they can’t see the distinction and thus bow to their own hatred of what is themselves = “psychotic”.
It’s too bad that they won’t be able to understand what you just wrote, JSS, due to their illness.
Why do you think that I don’t say much on this Psy forum. 
So is conservatism… conserve one man owning more than half the population.
Let’s be real here.
Every being wants the universe to be benevolent towards them, they know it when they experience it.
Every being, not just one
“Alas,” said my mentor in the late "60s, “I can remember when a liberal education was considered a good thing to have!”
Well, if liberalism is a proven mental illness then it is beyond their control.
Objectivism, on the other hand [think VO or RM/AO], is only a mental illness if it can be proven that those who embrace it [as a psychological defense mechanism] are also mentally ill.
Though, sure, I’m not saying that they’re not.
Are you challenging JSS and Jakob, biggie?
Conservatives are no better than liberals. Both groups politically have more in common than both would care to admit as the world order each supports is practically the same.
That is a distinctively liberal view.
How is articulating the self destructive tendencies of both political liberals and conservatives constitute a liberal worldview? Do you think before posting things?
You have done no such thing.
I see through thoughtless pedantry easy enough.
Not in-depth but I made a basic statement that both are equally destructive of which you haven’t tried to refute. Perhaps you can articulate the opposite if that is what you’re suggesting.
You may be right or wrong but what’s the point if you don’t have one yourself?
You have no standard to measure “left” or “right” .
Im sick and tired of people referring to categories instead of postulating powerful ideas when it comes to politics.
Oh, Dora is kind of like Minou… and yet they argue… aint I clever.
The endless corruption of all political affiliations and identities is enough for me to quantify evidence. No standard of measure? I use their own standards of measure to make my own judgement.
What powerful ideas would you suggest?
Ill get to that in time.
What do you propose to see against left/right – and especially, why? What is anything worth at all? How does that work, that things are worthy anything - to you, and in general - ? All this is what drives the whole possibility of a value-dichotomy.
You say the dichotomy is bloated and empty. But is there a fullness somewhere?
Wherever this fullness is, there is power and the potential for ideas of power.
Left/Right is an idea. It commands power over all those that think in its terms. This of itself gives it a substance. But if you can see through artificial distinctions and drill into deeper layers, you need to disregard what you look down on and engage your power directly.