Liberal World-view leads to a Corrupted Soul

by Shining One 23 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Forscher
    Liberal: broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; " tolerant of his opponent's opinions "...

    If liberalism really did meet the definition Sceptic, then I would apologise and eat my words.

    However, it's representatives over on my side of the pond are anything but "tolerant" of their opponent's oppinions. Just go on almost any university campus over here where the majority of professors and administrators proudly claim to be liberal. Expression of conservative and moderate opinions are ruthlessly suppressed. Speech codes punish speech which does not conform to the percieved "liberal" view. Conservative professors are not only rare, but often have to watch what they say and teach for fear of reprisals. Any school journals which have the courage to print anything not percieved as freindly to liberals or their views find their entire printing runs stolen off the rack before the student poulation even wakes up. And the rare invited speaker who is known to be conservative will often find his/her speech rudely interrupted by mobs of "liberal" students, often egged on by self-confessed "liberal" professors, intent on intimidating him or her.

    In the last presidential election it wasn't the "liberal", or who found their campaign offices mobbed and their workers assaulted and intimidated by screaming mobs. It was the "conservatives" who found themselves targeted.

    Ironically, conservatives on my side of the pond are the champions of free speech. I do realise that over on your side of the pond conservatism, with its roots in royal authority and state churches, does not place a high value on freedom of expression. But over here freedom of expression, of religion, freedom from state churches, are all enshrined in our Constitution and, therefore, the conservative position. Even more ironic is the fact that conservatives over here would go to war and die to preserve the rights of the very liberals who spew their venemous hatred of conservatives over here, and elswhere to do so.

    One thing you and Simon both can take to the bank is this, that I may disagree your opinion, but if our positions on this forum were reversed this "right-winger" would never, ever, punish you for expressing it. My "right-wing" principles would forbid it.


  • Forscher
    I dont think Liberals and Conservatives are as far apart as people make out.

    If by liberalism you mean the definition you earlier posted sceptic, I agree. However, the growing power of extremists of both sides in American politics is the reason behind the perception otherwise.


  • Terry
    Well Terry, nothing against you personally; but I respectfully disagree somewhat. First of all, I think that the "liberal" and "conservative" labels are a little bit limited in scope. I don't think that the liberal world view always means a wealth redistribution toward societies and individuals who have no intention of working or earning. A case in point: U.S. aid to Africa. I think that the U.S. aid to Africa (particularly AIDS funding) can and has done much good in improving international relations, as well as helping to jump start local economies, where there would not otherwise be any investment capital pumped into that region. I think that millions in Africa are at the mercy of their regions geo-political ineptitude, corruption, and inability to maintain stability. I don't care how hard working a person is.

    Here is my problem with fixing other people, tribes and nations using the earnings (tax money) of citizens without their specific permission: tax payers (we who pay taxes) need help too. We need help first.

    I could use my credit cards to go out into poor neighborhoods and buy poor kids food and clothing until I max out my debt limit. Sure I could. The kids would benefit. But, I'd become a victim of insurmountable debt and plunge my own life and surrounding family (who depend on me) into chaos.

    This isn't charity and it merely trades one disaster for another. This is pretend charity. It is pretend aid. It is lunacy.

    Spending America's tax dollars (which haven't even yet been collected!) means debt and more debt which burdens each taxpaying citizen in the U.S. and cripples future generations with the interest and penalties. But, unlike maxing out a personal credit card; the U.S. government HAS NO MAXIMUM SPENDING LIMIT!! That is how trillions accrue!!

    The idea that you don't have to help yourself FIRST before you help others is irrational, wrong-headed and plain dumb intellectually. You don't eat the family milk-cow and expect to have milk and butter next week.

    Whether Africa or any other nation: people must learn to regulate their own lives.

    I agree with you that Africa is in terrible shape due to governmental malfeasance, but; SO IS AMERICA!! The number one cause of this malfeasance is MISAPPROPRIATING OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY under a banner of "helping those less fortunate". It is a bunko scheme dressed up in a pink ribbon.

    Liberal ideology has a good-hearted frame of helpfulness surrounding a core of spending other people's money to solve unsolvable problems for strangers who end up hating us for our intrusion into their idiocy!

    The only answer to life's problems is PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Conservative ideology "resembles" this, but; does not (in fact) practice what they preach.

    So, as far as this country (U.S.A.) is concerned--we talk out of both sides of our ideological mouth.

    I'm not bashing America, you understand---I'm lamenting the corrupt philosophy on both sides of the spectrum.

    The current Republican party and office-holders are a flimsy shadow of what Conservativism represents. Bill Clinton's policies were closer to actual Conservativism than President Bush's minions at this juncture!!! And we all know what a pragon of virtue he was.

    Until each of us realizes that our philosophical structure of governance is important enough to hold office-holders accountable, nothing will change and things will grow worse and worse.

    Philosophy matters.

    Look at how wonderful the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society's core philosophy is in appearnace and how rotten to the core the practice of it becomes in people's miserable lives. There is no holding the people at the top accountable for the destructive policies and practices which weild the power to intrude.

    Telling people how to live is not what personal responsibility is about. It happens in the mind of individuals; never in a collective of true believers in anything.

  • jstalin

    Unfortunately, the terms liberal and liberalism have been co-opted by today's socialists. Liberal, in the classical sense, used to mean support of individualism, limited government, and a "hands off" attitude toward others. People link Peter Singer and today's American (and European) "liberals" prefer to sacrifice the individual for the benefit of the collective. Singer, in particular, espouses utilitarianism, which means that the individual is just about meaningless as long as the maximum amount of positive outcome is felt by the majority of people. His is the vilest form of collectivism.

    So, Shining One, you misunderstand the terms you are using. Liberalism doesn't necessarily lead to infanticide - disregard for individuals does. It is the moral relativism of philosophers like Singer that implicetly accepts that individual people are not as important as the collective good. The classical liberal view is that the individual is of prime importance and that no government or individual has the right to violate individual rights.

    However, the conservative Christian view is that god makes up the rules and the individual is subject to the whim of a divine power's mood.

    As for Simon, et el, who like to generalize that Americans don't care about anyone but themselves - well, you are wrong. There's nothing like a bigoted generalization to make you feel better about yourself - but perhaps that's just a little JW-think still creeping through.

Share this