"You liberals are clueless"- funny rant or trenchant analysis?

Great piece by this ostensible conservative at Daily Kos; I was curious what you good folks thought of some of the guy’s points. (It’s kinda long but worth the read.)

Liberals function because of a strong sense of empathy. You do; pat yourselves on the back. Conservatives don’t function. Seriously, we don’t. We are driven by a powerful litany of antipathies. We are driven because we hate; we hate the poor, the damaged, the turned-out, the dirty, the alien. We hate them for many reasons, but all the reasons stem from power. Make no mistake, there is power in equality- equality is utter power over the oppressor. Yes, equality is jewel at the top of our hate list. If you suspected this was true, take 5 points off your score- unless you can articulate why it’s at the top. . .

And soon we will crush the Rebellion, and then ultimate power will be ours!

Seriously, this is just conservative bashing. It’s like David Brock-lite. He was a conserservative republican, had a sort of “conversion experience” and now he has to demonize conservativism to justify to himself his new views.

I have always maintained that one of the basic differences between left and right is that the left seems to value idealism over pragmatism and with the right, the opposite is true.

Libertarians are idealistic. Thus the above isn’t true for the economic far right that opposes authoritarianism.

When I read it earlier today, I couldn’t help but think that it sounded an awful lot like a liberal writing a piece of fiction from the perspective of a conservative. Too much cariacture, too much evil mustache-twirling. It just didn’t sound real to me; it sounded a lot like what most liberals would like to hear.

(Full disclosure: I’m liberal)

I absolutely don’t think that’s true. Liberals tend to value conservation of energy more than conservatives, whereas conservatives tend to talk about how it’s none of my business what energy they use. Who’s the idealist here? Liberals tend to talk about treatment programs for nonviolent drug offenders, whereas conservatives say, “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.” Who’s the idealist here?

There’s plenty of areas in which liberals are very pragmatic, and conservative adopt a highly individualistic idealism. Drives me craze sometimes.

Daniel

Do you think? I would file it under simple bashing if it weren’t so intelligently assembled.

quixotic, I became convinced just a few paragraphs into it that I was reading straight satire, but, I dunno. For some reason, I believe this guy is just what he says he is.

This is the same type of GD fodder that got december in trouble.

The linked article was an unusual work. That kind of venom seems to be more common among ex-liberals who’ve become conservative rather than the other way around. But I take this type of “confession of a former sinner” with a grain of salt regardless of which way the transformation went. A lot of converts seem to feel the need to demonize their own former position in order to demonstrate the depths of their conversion.

Both sides are half an ethos. Neither is more idealistic or more pragmatic than the other. Where one is pragmatic the other is idealistic and vice versa. I went to the Alexander Hamilton exhibit at the New York Historical Society the other day, and it made so much more sense. I could see Jefferson as the hippy liberal douche railing against the system, and I could see Hamilton as the conniving politician. I went in hating Hamilton for creating the federal system we have now, but I came out realizing that he’d probably retch if I told him about Monsanto Terminator seeds. It really made the division between the two parties so much clearer to me.

If the writer of that piece was ‘conservative’, then I am Lucille Ball. Besides, do I need a secret decoder ring to find the debate here, or is this one of those ‘OMG LOOK A BLOG!!!’ posts?

Evil One: I have always maintained that one of the basic differences between left and right is that the left seems to value idealism over pragmatism and with the right, the opposite is true.

I used to more or less agree with this, but now I think it’s much more of a toss-up. Liberals are idealistic about some things, true, sometimes to the point of impracticality, but so are conservatives.

Who argues that invading Iraq was definitely worth it, even if the alleged casus belli was completely unsubstantiated, even if the Iraqis wind up in the end with a theocratic government allied with hostile Iran (or worse, a prolonged civil insurgency and instability), just because we overthrew a tyrannical dictator and tried to encourage freedom? Conservatives. (Not all of them, of course, maybe not even most of them, but you can definitely find plenty who do.)

Who argues that we need to cut taxes, or pile up massive Social Security privatization costs, even when it produces tremendous budget deficits, just because there’s something “unfair” about the current system? Conservatives.

Who argues that the death penalty or the war on drugs is a moral necessity, even if it’s financially more expensive than the alternative, because the importance of punishment outweighs the practical disadvantages? Conservatives.

I used to think that conservatives really did have an advantage in the hard-headed pragmatism department, but we have seen over the past several years that many conservatives can be just as ideologically blinded and impractical as the starriest-eyed liberal ever minted.

(IMO, though, most of what the OP’s linked article has to say about them as a group is just inchoate blather. Somebody owes me the five minutes it took to read that thing.)

You’ve got to be kidding!

Bush: “We will spread freedom and democracy to the Middle East”.

Is this pragmatism or idealistic mumbo jumbo?

I think we’re spreading the concept of idealism a little too widely. Politicans of all ideological camps will say their motives are idealistic - there’s very few times when a politician will come out and say “I’m just doing this because it benefits me personally.”

Ms. Ball: I’ve seen much murkier start-off points for debate than this in GD. If you’re not impressed, kindly leave me to my loss of sleep over the thought and take your wankish 'tude to the Pit.

I’ve previously commented upon the vituperation of non-leftists by the Left here and else where. It seems to me that not only do many on the Left not respect the opinions of others, which is fine; they do not respect the right of others to hold those opinions, which is most certainly not fine.

From now on whenever someone mentions the “liberals are idealistic but conservatives are not” line, just remember three words: abstinence only education. The standard dogma among leading conservatives is that if schools no longer teach students that sex exists, then the very concept of sex will largely disappear. You can’t get any more idealistic than that.

Other people have posted silly ‘Look at this website!’ OPs in the past, so that justifies yours? Strive for more than mediocrity, Moody Bastard.

All I know is that in politics, names mean squat. A lot of the issues that are typically associated with “liberals” would fall more in line with a technical, strict definition of conservative, in my opinion.

There are a lot of really stupid conservatives. There are also a lot of really stupid liberals. The problem arises when the stupid ones make the smart ones wish they weren’t there.