“One definition of a liberal, is someone who doesn’t understand the problem, or the history behind it, or the concept of consequences, but is arrogant enough to think that his off-the-cuff solution should be enforced with as much violence and as much of other peoples’ money as might be required.” — dustydog on August 30, 2015
Many years ago I heard that the definition of a “liberal” is “someone who’ll give you the shirt off of someone else’s back”, but this one is much better. It sums up all the horror and mass death of the 20th century in one, concise sentence. Collectivists (Progressives, Fascists, communists, et al) are either extremely evil or blind, or both. In any case they must be kept as far away from government positions as possible.
True. On the other hand, the “shirt” quote is short and memorable even if it only captures one aspect of the problem.
There’s also the famous one from the Iron Lady: “the trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money”. Same point, different words.
It is important to get the point across that all collectivists favor coercion. Giving the shirt off of someone else’s back could in theory be via will cooperation all around, but the posed quote makes clear that it’s all about coercion.
I’ve come to the conclusion that collectivists worship coercion, or more specifically the power structure which makes coercion possible on a national scale. They’ll come up with rationalizations for it as necessary, but the institution of wholesale coercion is the main inspiration, impetus, goal and purpose.
Thus, going back a couple of posts; the collectivist god, which is named We, is the god of the institution of wholesale coercion.
That is what is meant by “We should do this” or “We should do that”. All of We’s children shall serve We alone, and all things that they do shall be for the purpose of serving We. There shall be no other gods before We, and no person shall be tolerated, but that he serve We.
Yes, the coercion part is key.
So the challenge is: can we take that excellent statement by dustydog and come up with something significantly shorter, while still capturing that essential aspect?
“Leftists favor coercion over cooperation.”
That pretty well boils it down to its simplest form. One could expound on that at great length, but it all comes down to those few words in the end.
So, for example, when socialists tell us the Jesus was a socialist because he advocated service to others, they corrupt his message of cooperation into one of coercion. Jesus never lobbied the Roman government to institute confiscation and redictribution programs, for that would have missed his point entirely. Rather he sought simply to open people’s eyes, such that they would serve others willingly out of love and respect.
The two versions of “service” (or cooperation) are opposites – one seeks to overcome the other.
We could say then, that “leftists favor theft over charity”, and while that is entirely true, I don’t believe it is as all-encompassing.
“Leftists favor coercion in all things” would be another decent one, but even that doesn’t quite ring the bell – it doesn’t point out the spitting hatred that leftists have, automatically, for anything that thinks or lives on its own, without their direction or involvement.
When it comes right down to it then, I suppose, leftists are jealous of God, prefering to play that role themselves. Think about it. Take any issue. Anthropogenic Global Warming– Leftists see themselves as in charge of our very climate. “You didn’t build that!”– You must give thanks to leftist gods, and worship then, for what you think you accomplished on your own you could not have done without them. “Why call your works good; there is none good but (leftist) god”, etc. Try it with any issue; It’s consistent all around, I bet.
We have know violence (coercion) is their “currency” for a long time. They riot, they vandalize, they loot, they intimidate voters, etc.
Pingback: Quote of the day—Harrison Finzel | The View From North Central Idaho