Liberalism is a sign of weakness - The slaves revolt!

[nnmartin]

There are various types of Liberal and many seem to focus on championing the rights of minorities - I see this as a sign of weakness.

Why would anyone care so much about supposedly oppressed groups that they are not even a member of?

groups such as, ethnic minorities, feminists, gays, the whales, badgers and rainforests - for example.

(ok, the rainforests aren't exactly a group as such , but you know what I mean).

Now this is slave mentality, a la Nietzsche, in full operation mode.

We tend to relate to the weak oppressed groups here as it gives us a sense of power in which to hide our own weakness, but secretly yearn to be the powerful ones ourselves.

Political Correctness tends to be one of the choice weapons for these type of people - and hence should be done away with.

PC = Oppression.

Liberalism = Oppression and leadership of the weak.

who agrees that most liberals and PC activists are only this way inclined because they secretly desire what they are opposing?

 

[freethinker44]

BOOOOO!! Two thumbs down.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm weak....& proud of it.

 

[nnmartin]

are you a liberal though, Mr Gest?

 

[Revoltingest]

are you a liberal though, Mr Gest?

I am a classical liberal, aka Jeffersonian) liberal, aka libertarian.
'Modern liberals' in the USA really aren't all that liberal, since they're big on government regulation of some aspects of our lives.
I prefer to call them "leftists".

 

[averageJOE]

I like peanut butter.

 

[Revoltingest]

I like peanut butter.

Especially the natural krunchy kind.

 

[Sir Doom]

There are various types of Liberal and many seem to focus on championing the rights of minorities - I see this as a sign of weakness.

Do you see the opposite as a sign of strength?

Why would anyone care so much about supposedly oppressed groups that they are not even a member of?

I think mainly because I view those groups as part of a larger group. The human species. We're all part of that, aren't we?

groups such as, ethnic minorities, feminists, gays, the whales, badgers and rainforests - for example.

(ok, the rainforests aren't exactly a group as such , but you know what I mean).

I thought I knew what you meant, until you mentioned badgers and whales and rain forests. Now I think you don't even know what you mean.

Now this is slave mentality, a la Nietzsche, in full operation mode.

I think you mean "slave morality". There is a reason people are so highly critical of Nietzsche. He said a lot of things that weren't necessarily true. Like, "Man that looks like a fiiiiiiiine piece of horse." nowudameen?

We tend to relate to the weak oppressed groups here as it gives us a sense of power in which to hide our own weakness, but secretly yearn to be the powerful ones ourselves.

The problem with Nietzsche's view on the subject is that he had a very dim view of what power was. Liberation is power. Equality is power. Just as two people are more powerful than one, so are all humans more powerful than less than all humans. Get it?

Political Correctness tends to be one of the choice weapons for these type of people - and hence should be done away with.

PC = Oppression.

I will agree that PC is stupid and should be disregarded as a weak distraction from the truth. It perpetuates the very ideal it seeks to destroy. Counterproductive.

Liberalism = Oppression and leadership of the weak.

Not all liberals agree with political correctness. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that people who do believe it is good are less liberal than those that don't. It's an oppression in and of itself, like you say. That's not liberal at all. Remember, just because you say you are something doesn't mean you are.

who agrees that most liberals and PC activists are only this way inclined because they secretly desire what they are opposing?

So you think that liberalism is secretly attempting to oppress minorities through the liberal application of anti-oppression? You're going to have to run that by me one more time.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Being concerned with signs and social signalling is a sign of, if not weakness, stupidity.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

So let me get this right. Being liberal means we secretly desire to be racist, sexist, homophobic, and all that? Plus our protecting the environment and animals means we secretly want to pollute the environment and abuse animals?

Um... I'm not sure how to address your logic without making it personal.

I'm bowing out of this discussion.

 

[averageJOE]

Especially the natural krunchy kind.

Mmmm...peanut butter and spam...:drool:

 

[nnmartin]

Do you see the opposite as a sign of strength?

Cherishing the strong attributes of man is a sign of strength - as opposed to championing the hard done by of society.

I think mainly because I view those groups as part of a larger group. The human species. We're all part of that, aren't we?

yes, but we are all different too - the very essence of liberality methinks.

So we should not push the weak to the top, just because they are weak.

 

[nnmartin]

y
So you think that liberalism is secretly attempting to oppress minorities through the liberal application of anti-oppression? You're going to have to run that by me one more time.

So let me get this right. Being liberal means we secretly desire to be racist, sexist, homophobic, and all that? Plus our protecting the environment and animals means we secretly want to pollute the environment and abuse animals?

The point I am making here is that many liberals wish to be powerful.

Because they are not , they tend to support the weak and oppressed as a kind of group power extension of themselves.

Thus the weak man covers his own failures with women by attacking the sexist, successful man.

The same principle can be applied to those who regularly play the race and orientation card.

 

[Kerr]

There are various types of Liberal and many seem to focus on championing the rights of minorities - I see this as a sign of weakness.

Why would anyone care so much about supposedly oppressed groups that they are not even a member of?

groups such as, ethnic minorities, feminists, gays, the whales, badgers and rainforests - for example.

(ok, the rainforests aren't exactly a group as such , but you know what I mean).

Now this is slave mentality, a la Nietzsche, in full operation mode.

We tend to relate to the weak oppressed groups here as it gives us a sense of power in which to hide our own weakness, but secretly yearn to be the powerful ones ourselves.

Political Correctness tends to be one of the choice weapons for these type of people - and hence should be done away with.

PC = Oppression.

Liberalism = Oppression and leadership of the weak.

who agrees that most liberals and PC activists are only this way inclined because they secretly desire what they are opposing?

Ever heard of compassion?

 

[nnmartin]

compassion is a good thing in reasonable doses, but too much of it indicates an inferiority complex and lack of self-esteem.

 

[Mister_T]

compassion is a good thing in reasonable doses, but too much of it indicates an inferiority complex and lack of self-esteem.

Inferiority complex and lack of self-esteem? More like an indication of a caring person who's not self-absorbed and chooses to extend their own kindness via helping others that are less fortunate, lesser stature, etc. outside of their own personal bubble when they don't have to.

 

[Kerr]

compassion is a good thing in reasonable doses, but too much of it indicates an inferiority complex and lack of self-esteem.

Would you kindly show how the ability to identify yourself with someone in a tough situation is an indication of an inferiority complex and lack of self-esteem?

Also, when you suffer from an inferiority complex or lack self esteem its easy to get self-absorbed. I know, because I have those issues. My compassion actually helps me since it can act as a guiding light away from my own demons.

 

[methylatedghosts]

The point I am making here is that many liberals wish to be powerful.

Because they are not , they tend to support the weak and oppressed as a kind of group power extension of themselves.

Thus the weak man covers his own failures with women by attacking the sexist, successful man.

The same principle can be applied to those who regularly play the race and orientation card.

I find it more accurate to say that PEOPLE, not just liberals, wish to be powerful. Not in the sense that they hold power over others, mind. More that they have power over their own lives, that they hold a position where they can make changes, and influence others for the betterment of themselves, their situations and for others. They support the "weak" and oppressed because they recognise that to help someone gain their own place of power is beneficial to themselves and others. To recognise one's own personal power is to recognise the power in all others, and to validate one's own is to validate another's.

... I had more, but as momma always said "If you can't say anything nice..."

Um... I'm not sure how to address your logic without making it personal.

I'm bowing out of this discussion.

I'm going along with this.

 

[Jacksnyte]

There are various types of Liberal and many seem to focus on championing the rights of minorities - I see this as a sign of weakness.

Why would anyone care so much about supposedly oppressed groups that they are not even a member of?

groups such as, ethnic minorities, feminists, gays, the whales, badgers and rainforests - for example.

(ok, the rainforests aren't exactly a group as such , but you know what I mean).

Now this is slave mentality, a la Nietzsche, in full operation mode.

We tend to relate to the weak oppressed groups here as it gives us a sense of power in which to hide our own weakness, but secretly yearn to be the powerful ones ourselves.

Political Correctness tends to be one of the choice weapons for these type of people - and hence should be done away with.

PC = Oppression.

Liberalism = Oppression and leadership of the weak.

who agrees that most liberals and PC activists are only this way inclined because they secretly desire what they are opposing?

I used to work with Anti-Racist Action. I believe we all deserve to be treated as equals until one party disrespects the other. My right to swing my fist ends at your nose unless you swing your fist and deliberately connect with my nose. I am not PC, but I am beyond liberal. I am a Voluntarist, aka Libertarian, aka Anarchist. I have known too many brilliant people from many different ethnic backgrounds and skin colors to ever subscribe to any ideology that attempts to claim that one group is better than, or more human than any other group. Individuals of all types make dumb decisions and do stupid things, even, and especially, the white power skins we used to face off against on a daily basis back in the day. Everyone gets down on their luck from time to time, and not everyone has the opportunity and/or knowledge to improve their lot. We all need help occasionally regardless of who we are or where we live. The propaganda of the various racist movements in the U.S.A. has become much more subtle and insidious(with the exception of the old KKK, still spouting on about "mud races" and some skinhead groups going on about RaHoWa and all that). My point with that last sentence is that many of your posts remind me of some of the aforementioned propaganda. So, my question again is: Are you a Nazi/White Supremacist?

 

[nnmartin]

Would you kindly show how the ability to identify yourself with someone in a tough situation is an indication of an inferiority complex and lack of self-esteem?

Identifying with, and showing compassion to those less fortunate is fine, but joining the camp of the activists avidly campaigning for minority rights is not the same thing.

To join this camp, when you are not one of them, shows a lack of moral fibre - something must be missing in your life when you need the artificial stimulus of someone else's struggle.

A person of power will not join with a person of weakness unless they are either weak themselves or wish to dominate them.