More Questions for My Leftist Friends

I actually listen to you, and to your arguments (especially those coming from your leaders and leading “thinkers”). Unfortunately, I doubt you actually return the favor. In fact, it’s hard to even get you to give me a direct answer to any of the questions I ask to help me clarify the apparent contradictions in your ideas. So, once again, here I am offering an open hand and seeking to understand how it is that you can:

Claim you are fighting racism with racism? You argue that minorities suffer from racism in this nation, yet the laws prohibit discrimination against all races except Caucasians. Affirmative action programs represent racism. They are a matter of government policy, they discriminate based on race, and therefore, they represent racism – pure and simple. So why should I believe that you really oppose racism? Why shouldn’t I believe that you just want to turn the tables instead?

You claim you are fighting inequality, yet you advocate policies of inequality. How does that work? How is it “fair” to tax different groups of people based on their income alone? That is – by definition – discrimination. I thought you are against discrimination.

You also claim to be fighting against greed, yet your policies are based on greed. Any time you value “equality” strictly by monetary measures, you are admitting to greed. It’s either greed for other peoples’ property, or greed for the power to “distribute” their property as you see fit, but it is all based on your greed. So how could I, a rational person, ever accept your arguments? Why shouldn’t I see they are intended to justify your theft in a manner designed to let you feel good about yourself while you are stealing from others?

You claim that I just want to “keep mine” and not let others “get theirs,” yet I and my allies on the Right have never advocated anything that would prevent you from earning more money than I will ever have. In fact, if I am defending the individual right to property and personal income, how am I not defending you, too? So how – exactly – am I “keeping you down?” Why should I accept your argument and not decide that what you really mean is you want what I have earned, you just don’t want to have to work for it yourself?

You claim you are for “equal rights,” especially for gays, and you argue for affirmative programs that force others to affirm a lifestyle with which they may not agree. So how are you arguing for “equal rights” when you are not only trampling the rights of the person you are using governmental coercion against, you are forcing your agenda on the majority of the nation? But even if it were a minority of Americans opposed to homosexuality, the smallest minority is the individual, so where is your defense of the individual’s “equal rights?”  I guess you don’t really care about “tolerance” after all; that’s just a rhetorical hammer you beat people over the head with when they don’t let you have your way.

You claim you believe in “science,” yet you have a visceral reaction to anyone who points out that evolution is not a fact but a theory, and a theory with massive flaws.  You argue that the “scientific consensus” is that the earth is suffering from man-made warming even though science does not work that way, the data does not support the claim, and you can’t even tell me what the earth’s normal historic temperature should be.  The scientific method tells me that what you do is a better indicator of intention than what you say, and my observations of what you do as opposed to what you say would seem to suggest that you do not believe what you’re saying, you just want to say it to prevent people from opposing your real agenda.  So, why shouldn’t I conclude that you are claiming “science” to shield a hidden political agenda?

You claim you are fighting for universal healthcare because it is a right, but you never explain how you can claim a right to force other people to work for you and not call yourself a slave master. You see, the only way universal healthcare is going to work is if the government controls everything about it, including telling doctors where they have to practice, how long they have to work every day, who they have to see and how much they will be allowed to charge. By any measure of the concept, this is slavery, yet you claim you have a “right” to force this on other people. Are you sure you are opposed to slavery, or are you just opposed to you being the slave?

You claim you want gun control to make things safer, yet all available evidence indicates that the wide-spread availability to otherwise law abiding citizens dramatically reduces violent crime rates.  So why should I accept your assertions?  Why shouldn’t I conclude that you really just want to disarm people?  And given that no people in the history of the world who have been disarmed has remained free, why shouldn’t I suspect that your desire to disarm Americans is somehow connected to your desire to control us all?

Can you not see that everything you advocate is based on forcing others to do something you want, not on protecting their right to be left alone? So how is it you also believe it is the Right who wants to control how you live? And how can you claim you are for freedom when everything you want is about your ability to control others?

About these ads

2 thoughts on “More Questions for My Leftist Friends

  1. Evolution theory has more scientific evidence than creationism. What are the major flaws in Evolution theory?
    Anytime you measure equality and don’t count property and income, you are ignoring reality.
    Most of these question are for liberals, who are reformist capitalist and not true socialist.
    Marxist don’t claim healthcare is a right, they just want universal healthcare because the people want universal healthcare. Marxist don’t reall care about gay issues or affirmative action. Most people think people are socialist, because they want to redistribute income equally to everyone the truth is people become socialist when the want to concentrate power to the working class. Why would anyone do that? Because they are working class and want their class to have all the power and the control over the means of production. So, income re-distribution is meaningless as long as the means of production remain in private hands. private hands will always corrupt the few capitalist reforms some liberals try to push through.

    I believe that the working class is not greedy enough, and needs to wake up and see that the world is made by their hands, and it is time they seize it.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s