Tag: liberal

Posted on

On Liberty

Back in the day when there were liberals on The Left, liberty was a concept that was much-valued by those who called themselves liberals. When I was but a lad, as the expression used to go, I exposed myself to John Stuart Mill’s essay On Liberty, which dealt not so much with liberty of conscience or of will but liberty as exercised by individuals within the civil realm, in the social order. Of course liberty of conscience and social liberty are closely related, but Mill made clear that freedom to express oneself in the marketplace of ideas was a different thing to liberty of conscience.

Those who call themselves liberals nowadays seem to have forgotten any kind of liberty in their pursuit of extirpating all discourse that challenges their dogma in the areas of

homosexual behavior/priviledges

pseudo-scientific dogma in everything from Darwinism to anthropogenic global warming

economic suppositions

statist control of private matters

property rights

education

religion

and just about all other areas that touch our lives.

Of several things that Mill said in his famous essay that influenced much of my behavior during my formative years, two stand out: his comment that truth need not fear debate and that we must always be wary of the tyranny of prevailing opinion stifling debate.

A simple example to demonstrate that the typical soi-disant “liberal” of today is no such critter is Algore’s response to those who would challenge his AGW position with… facts.

“There’s no more debate. We face a planetary emergency. . . . There is no more scientific debate among serious people who’ve looked at the evidence.”

Funny thing, that “no more debate” meme he seems intent, along with other AGW dogmatists, on making fact: real scientists (as opposed to AGW dogmatists) are debating it, examining the facts and the hypotheses. You can find links to quite a few real scientists (AGW dogmatists simply dismiss real scientists as “deniers”) who have some inconvenient facts to discuss with Mr. Gore here, although anyone who can type “google” can find many, many more references (including this one–pdf, and do note the creds the interviewee has that Algore lacks).

Cutting off (or shouting down) debate on an issue to avoid having to deal with facts is the mark of a weak argument, which says a lot about most fake liberals’ arguments.

I do encourage you to track down (there, that wasn’t so hard, was it?) and read a copy of Mill’s essay, On Liberty. I have my copy, first read as a wee lad *heh*, within reach of my right hand, as I have had for many years. You might find it useful to purchase a hardcopy for marking and note-taking (it’s interesting to me to go back and read my “arguments” with Mill and see how they have changed over the years).

BTW, Mill’s arguments concerning liberty bear very closely on an upcoming post on authority, one I keep deferring but need to write soon.

Trackposted to Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Faultline USA, Nuke Gingrich, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Cao’s Blog, Wolf Pangloss, Democrat=Socialist, A Newt One, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted on

Words to Avoid Using

Following on my mini-rant against the sub-literate use of the word “liberal” (Liberals? Not) to refer to reactionary pseudo-communist/socialist tyrannical statist control freaks, here is a short list of terms that should be avoided, or used only with great care, by any rational person:

conservative–when used by or to refer to any reactionary pseudo-communist/socialist tyrannical statist control freak who does not actively practice the ethos of “the government that governs least, governs best” by seeking to reduce the scope and power of government, reduce the enormous burdens of taxation upon citizens, guard our borders, our rights (including our property rights), etc. IOW, about 99% of the current crop of lying, self-styled “conservative” politicians–aren’t. Don’t call such folks “conservatives”; call ’em liars.

gay–when used to refer to angry, neurotic, deeply troubled homosexual self-styled “victims”. Use the word to refer to happy, carefree people, instead.

black–when used to refer to a person (unless you are talking about a black-hearted villain of some sort). I have yet to meet ANY so-called “black” person who is black, even guys from Nigeria I knew in college.

Afro-American–another B.S. term. Also, ban any other hyphenated-American term. What? Am I a hyphenated-American because a couple of hundred years ago my ancestors came from elsewhere? By that measure, Eskimos, Cree, Sioux and all the other so-called “native Americans” ought to be called “Asian-Americans” cos that’s where they came from. We’re either Americans or something else entirely.

Update: I thought it good to include the following from a comment made by Theodore Roosevelt in 1915:

“There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. … The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans… There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.”

green–used to refer to eco-prop (ecological propagandist), an eco-propagandist or a supposedly “eco-friendly” technology. It’s become either a nearly meaningless shiboleth for leftist goons to use to ostracize people who simply want to live civilized existences or else a stupid-happy brainwashing tool. Use “green” to refer to the color, OK?

global warming–the proper term is “anthropogenic global warming hogwash”. Get it right, folks.

climate change–when used as an escape for AGW loonies, liars, fellow travelers and useful idiots who are confronted with inescapable proof that their AGW hypothesis is hogwash. When used in the context of, “Climate change? Sure, that’s the nature of climate; it changes all the time, whether we do anything about it or not,” it’s a perfectly good term. Just be careful how you use it, or you may be (justly) lumped in with the AGW loonies, liars, fellow travelers and useful idiots who use it improperly.

There, that’s a short list. Add to it in comments.

Trackposted to Nuke Gingrich, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, Right Truth, Adam’s Blog, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, The Amboy Times, Cao’s Blog, , Rant It Up, The Yankee Sailor, and D equals S, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.