Liberal attacks on Free Speech are inexcusable. But in some ways Liberals have very legitimate causes: Supporting people who can not support themselves is very important. In USA many people with mental disabilities get prison rather then help: Limiting or banning firearms would save the lives of many people. In USA, about 20,000 people per year commit suicide with firearms and 12,000 people kill others using guns. Once upon a time when Liberals were Liberal, they supported Free Speech.
Yep. Nothing wrong with that. Also don't forget that attacking free speech is only the lesser evil. The greater evil is attacking equality of opportunity by wanting special treatment for "oppressed" groups and discriminating against "oppressors". Liberalism these days is literally just communism.
I prefer to call it Progressivism (because some conservatives are liberal), and I regard it as authoritarianism. There is nothing liberal about Progressives. They are ideologues, and carry all the baggage that comes with ideology. They have zero interest in progress .. because progress is necessarily going to come in a variety of flavours, not all to our liking. They are interested ONLY in a fixed ideology. They are exactly as bad as religious fundamentalists, for this reason.
Definitely Liberals defend reverse discrimination to a great degree. One Liberals were for Equality. All Humans are Created Equal.
Communism also had many shortfalls. But Socialism in Scandinavia is a much more humane system then US Capitalism.
That's social democracy, traditional French system is the same : a significant public service run by the state, and redistribution of wealth through healthcare, retirement etc. It's a good system, but it's dying. The reason is that it's completely incompatible with globalism. It can only work in a nationalistic framework : economic protectionism + closed borders. The EU is cracking down on it completely in France, Sweden and Finland. Norway is that only one who can keep it because it's not in the EU. Besides Scandinavia is fully embracing SJW ideology, which is its own downfall. I don't think there's a serious left-wing anywhere these days tbh. Nope, I think US style capitalism is the way of the future for everybody whether we like it or not.
And they can still kill each other without guns. In the great majority of those cases. Just wanted to point that out out. The issue is a bit more complicated than any blanket number you can throw out. Suicide shouldn't be a reason to ban anything, imo. However, thanks for expressing your opinion.
They don't believe in equality anymore. They hate equality, in fact. Equality is racist, islamophobic, homophobic, sexist, and transphobic.
They believe in forced equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. That's why I call them communists. They substituted the class struggle by the race struggle.
I'm conservative, but I do strongly believe that those of us who can afford it have an obligation to take care of our most vulnerable - children, the elderly, and the mentally and physically disabled. Actually, I think that is a conservative value. I am a big believer in giving a "hand up" rather than a "hand out". Of course, the obligation of the one receiving the "hand up" is to not squander it. With regard to gun crimes, it is worthwhile to remember that national statistics are skewed by a relatively few high crime areas. For example, in my state of Oregon there were only 103 willful murders in the entire state in 2016 (using all methods of killing). By contrast, there were 751 murders in Chicago alone in 2016 - 7 times as many as in my whole state. Chicago and Oregon have fairly close population sizes. Chicago's population is 2.7 million, and the population of Oregon is 3.5 million. Oregon actually has more people but only 1/7th the number of murders as Chicago. Those statistics should lead us to the conclusion that there is a "people problem" in Chicago that needs to be addressed, rather than a gun problem. It also points to the fact that the vast majority of gun owners in this country are law-abiding and will never harm anyone with a gun. The other thing to think about is that we have the freedom to possess firearms for self defense, hunting, and shooting sports. Granted there is gun crime that the presence of guns in our society is related to. It is a choice that we make to have this freedom, knowing that there is a down side. But it is not the only choice we make that leads to death. In 2016, 37,461 Americans lost their lives in car crashes. By contrast, there were only about 10,000 murders by firearms in the U.S. in 2016. Now, we could virtually eliminate that car crash statistic altogether if we put governors on all motor vehicles that slowed them to 25 MPH max. But we don't want to. It's a choice that we make, knowing the downside to it. And I agree with you about the freedom of speech. All Americans should support and protect the right to the freedom of speech, especially offensive speech. For when we protect the right of offensive speech, we are protecting the right of freedom of speech for all of us. Seth
Banning cars is absolute nonsense, but I would support banning motorcycles. They are much more dangerous.
How many years did you live in Scandinavia that you would know the superiority of Scandinavian Socialism over the other socialisms? By the way, which Scandinavia did you live in?
1. In the U.S., an overbearing, self-interested mental health/social work industry part of the gov-edu-union-contractor-grantee-trial lawyer-MSM Complex shirks off personal responsibility and the character degradation inherent in their Nanny State onto "mental illness." After all, it could be argued that the commission of violent crimes is in itself a mental illness. But all we really need is... do violent crimes, go to jail. No further analysis as to mental health is needed for justice to be served. 2. We have too many safety nets in this country, including subsidy and encouragement of the cottage industry of illegitimacy, that creates an ever-increasing permanently dependent underclass of a vote factory. That kind of safety net needs to end. 90% of safety nets should be funded and administered at a local level, not by a central government hundreds of miles away from the community in question. 3. People will still commit suicide whether they have guns or not. Misplaced focus. Defensive Gun Use (DGU) is a hotly debated topic. Do your own research and draw your own conclusions. My conclusion is that an armed populace prevents more crimes than a populace where only criminals and police have guns. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use
Really? So all the miracles given to the world by U.S. capitalism are "less humane" than whatever innovations, if any, Scandinavia has produced over the last century? It's easy for tiny countries to sit back and enjoy the benefit of U.S. innovation and defense, "Oh we are successful socialism!" Not. Those itty bitty Scandinavian countries could usually fit into many single U.S. states. They are tiny, overwhelmingly homogenous (in race and culture), and some so rich in oil they could govern by Magic 8 Ball and do just fine. Invalid comparison with the far different, larger, more diverse economy of the U.S. Anyone making the comparison needs to evidence why the comparison is valid, else they haven't made their case.