Where did the Liberal Moral/Intellectual Superiority Complex Come From?

Lighten up, fella. Did you notice this?

 

Nothing which isn't voluntary can be called charity, but - regardless - all are subject to the same rules wrt taxes. I'm not sure why you brought it up.

 

I have yet to see that liberals have any more of a superiority complex then conservatives. Conservatives think their morals are superior, liberals think their morals are superior.

 

Many times... and with similiar result. Now I understand that not everyone is EXACTLY the same, there are certain traits that I have noticed that seem to be in common. Perhaps me labeling them as "liberal" is incorrect. Perhaps what I have seen would be called "hyper liberalism" for lack of some better term.

I have written about my uncle many times on the forum. Just the closest, and most glaring example of some of the things I have talked about, but I have seen this sort of behavior many times before. I have asked him many questions on what he believes and why, and more often than not, he has a really hard time answering me without any "pre-canned" responses. As if he had never really considered why he believes what he does, and is groping around trying to figure it out as he is telling me about it. As a result his answers are always a bit incoherant, wonder around quite a bit, and never really do seem to reach a point. I could show him many facts that contradict what he believes is true.... but his thinking will not be altered in any way.

I am convinced this is because he really does not have a very developed sense of "self". I believe that he measures his self worth against what other people think of him (or have told him to think), rather than what he thinks of himself. Or more preceisly, in the absence of him thinking of himself. This is why he... and people like him are so pre-occupied with the latest status signs of wealth for example. Not that they really WANT or even like the new BMW in the driveway, but for them... it is important that OTHERS see that BMW in the driveway.

 

Simple thoughts from simple minds. Thanks for the demonstration.

Did Rachel Maddow tell you that, by the way?

 

This reminds me, the left is very hypocritical as well. When it's convenient for them, they like to believe they are above their own partisanship for a while.

 

I am anarchist, from your point view the extremist vision of a liberal. Pro-abortion, defender of human rights, real equality, feminist, pro homosexual rights like marriage, abolition of the private property as it is known, abolition of the religion, abolition of the state. And more informed I am about the conservative ideology, more anarchist I become. The staying in this forums for example, that I am viewing mainly opposite opinions to the mine, only make stronger my affirmation of my anarchism. I am getting more sure that I am right.

Ah, and I've travelled.

 

I think that you're defining perfectly the christians LOL. The ones that believe in a book of 2.000 years old and don't try to question it xD. Yeah.

You can find a fanatic in every ideology, but for every liberal fanatic that you can find you will find 20 fanatics of some religion, mainly Christianism and islamism.

 

I am leftist, and I am not partisan in any way. If you read my posts, I never will defend neither democrats neither republicans, for me are the same (*)(*)(*)(*). And in Spanish level PSOE and PP for me are the same. The same big party, the PPSOE.

 

There's a lot of pseudo-Psychology going on here

 

Lots of hypocrisy in your beliefs. You are a "defender of human rights", yet you want to abolish religion and their rights to private property. Oops?

Yeah, anarchism isn't a viable political model, and it never will be. It's just one of those leftist utopian ideas that people believe in long enough that they start thinking it might actually work. Socialism and communism are in the same boat.

 

Yeah, the same level of utopian that free market system, well it is more utopian.

And, no, there isn't hipocresy in my beliefs. Anarchism means anti-authoritarism. And anti-authoritarism means the abolition of all authority, and authorities or what creat authorities are:

- State
- Religion
- Private property.

There isn't any hipocresy.

 

Well, if it makes you feel any better, your country will be an Islamic society in less than 50 years. You have one of the lowest child birth rates in the world (1.1 per couple), which means native Spanish people will have their population halved every 35 years. Combine that with an influx of Muslim immigrants, who have between 6-8 children per couple, and you're doomed.

Have fun arguing politics with your new neighbors

 

Obvious language barrier aside, you won't have any worthwhile examples or history to show that your ideology will benefit society. Capitalism has a long history of producing healthy, functioning economies.

Keep daydreaming, though. The world needs daydreamers.

 

Yes, there is. If you want to defend people's human rights, you will need to defend their right to practice religion. Abolishing that right is not defending their human rights. You can't have it both ways.

 

Still in school, or just graduated, one feels one knows everything. Happened to the best of us...until life came along.
Just think of it that way. Liberals (most) represent those who can't get anywhere anytime soon, so in a way, intellectual superiority keeps the masses down. Quite an accomplishment, isn't it? Well, that and blaming it on hard working folks who don't have time to use fancy words and phrases.
On the other hand, good and bad ones come from both sides of the aisle. Lots of superioritive complexed ( I know, but it sounds pretty) among Cons as well.

 

I HAVE to hold onto hope (I and mine live here); but you are not 'wrong'.

 

It's funny to me that the #1 piece of evidence that liberals use to support their supposed "intellectual superiority" is the fact that most students in universities identify as liberal. People in Academia don't need to confront the real world until after they graduate. Until then, they keep their teenage naivety and add healthy doses of sex and drugs into the mix. It's not until they have to get a job and pay off their school debts that they realize the value of hard work, and see their hard earned money get sucked away by an inefficient, wasteful government, and see others lazily sponging off the system, etc. They become more conservative the longer they live in the real world. Either that, or they just stay in Academia as college professors. In that case, they'll keep their liberalism.

The old saying is true "If you're not a liberal when you're young, you don't have a heart. If you're a liberal when you are old, you don't have a brain."

 

It is complicate to explain, but I am not banning religion, just abolishing it. Fomenting culture, education, and the kind of society that would born the religion would abolish by nature. Religion would not have any kind of sense.

Point: When I say religion I refer to church, to the piramidal and authoritarian structures of organized religions. Each person will be able to believe what they want. But in a society teaching to think for yourself and not accepting any authority, accept a moral coming from a god is an hipocresy.

 

That is a very good point, and has been discussed before, elsewhere.
When it comes down to it, liberal profs feed off each other, without having much of a link to the world outside academia, so they remain in their make-belief world, creating a new generation of academics who will go outside their comfort zone. It is what is feeding so many of our young minds, without letting them know that theory isn't life, and it sets them up for disillusionment, if not worse.
But lets not forget, too many are living their lives in their little world, outside academia, and do just the same. The wake, work, eat and sleep, never considering that something is beyond their horizon.
Life has so much more to offer, both outside academia and one's own self erected walls.

 

While I understand your frustration that the intelligentsia doesn't share your beliefs, I think the liberal slant at universities is pretty much in the social sciences and law. Having 2 engineering degrees and a MBA, I never recognized a whit of liberal leanings in any of my professors. One doesn't have time to question the politics of a thermodynamics or differential equations professor.

I think a lot of the antipathy on the right towards intellectuals is a result of the right being frustrated by the strength of the arguments being made against their demagoguery. Gotta shoot the messenger, you know?

 

Do you get paid for philosophizing or do you do it for free?

 

You're talking about Spain, right? So wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the country may be Islamic again?

 

Where do you live? An "intellectually superior being" says our media is controlled by the RIGHT!
That is now the dumbest post of the day.

 

The idea that "liberals" are somehow superior is coming from your own mind; like the idea that I'm a liberal. You are so insecure with you own opinion that you have to invent the thinking of others.