Free Markets, Free People

The problem(s) with the left

This article has been making the rounds.  It’s a list of 10 reasons a person who was firmly ensconced on the left decided they could no longer abide on the left.  You see that on the other side as well. Just think Little Green Footballs and you’re there.

Usually these sorts of articles are all about self-justification as the person tries very hard to justify to themselves and their erstwhile friends on whichever side they’re deserting the reasons for their departure.

But the person who wrote this article does more than that. She manages to actually touch on and articulate things I’ve observed over the years as well. You might say that due to a certain amount of introspection, the scales suddenly fell away from her eyes.

What struck me as genuine was her description of someone we see show up here often and pretty much do exactly this:

Straw men and “In order to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs.”

It astounds me now to reflect on it, but never, in all my years of leftist activism, did I ever hear anyone articulate accurately the position of anyone to our right. In fact, I did not even know those positions when I was a leftist.

“Truth is that which serves the party.” The capital-R revolution was such a good, it could eliminate all that was bad, that manipulating facts was not even a venial sin; it was a good. If you want to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs. One of those eggs was objective truth.

Ron Kuby is a left-wing radio talk show host on New York’s WABC. He plays the straw man card hourly. If someone phones in to question affirmative action – shouldn’t such programs benefit recipients by income, rather than by skin color? – Kuby opens the fire hydrant. He is shrill. He is bombastic. He accuses the caller of being a member of the KKK. He paints graphic word pictures of the horrors of lynching and the death of Emmett Till and asks, “And you support that?”

Well of course THE CALLER did not support that, but it is easier to orchestrate a mob in a familiar rendition of righteous rage against a sensationalized straw man than it is to produce a reasoned argument against a reasonable opponent.

On June 16, 2014, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank published a column alleging that a peaceful Muslim was nearly verbally lynched by violent Islamophobes at a Heritage Foundation-hosted panel. What Milbank described was despicable. Unfortunately for Milbank and the Washington Post’s credibility, someone filmed the event and posted the film on YouTube. Panel discussants, including Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel, made important points in a courteous manner. Saba Ahmed, the peaceful Muslim, is a “family friend” of a bombing plotter who expressed a specific desire to murder children. It soon became clear that Milbank was, as one blogger put it, “making stuff up.”

Milbank slanders anyone who might attempt analysis of jihad, a force that is currently cited in the murder of innocents — including Muslims — from Nigeria to the Philippines. The leftist strategy of slandering those who speak uncomfortable facts suppresses discourse and has a devastating impact on confrontations with truth in journalism and on college campuses.

Ironic chuckle bubbling up?  The “omelet/eggs” metaphor is a favorite of whom?  And who is the Don Quixote of straw men, constantly putting them up and whacking them a good one.

Read the whole thing … it’s worth it.  It’s just that particular one of the ten listed reasons hit right on the spot we’ve all witness any number of times right here at QandO with our “visiting professor”.   It’s like she knows him personally down to one of his favorite sayings.

~McQ

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

13 Responses to The problem(s) with the left

  • ZOMG…!!!  Is SHE gonna be in trouble…!!!  They don’t hate anybody like they hate thinkers who wake up one day and say what this lady said.
     
    I give her great props for guts.

    • Progressive people love everyone!  Always!
      Well, except for the right wing ex military type war mongering tea baggers who don’t believe in climate change and should die horrible flaming deaths for wanting children fleeing from Central America to all be murdered or drown in the Rio Grande!
       
       

    • Section 6 is jam packed full of good lines, but I’ll pick a paragraph …

      Smearing us is not enough. Liberal policies sabotage us. Affirmative action benefits recipients by color, not by income. Even this limited focus fails. In his 2004 Yale University Press study, Thomas Sowell insists that affirmative action helps only wealthier African Americans. Poor blacks do not benefit. In 2009, Princeton sociologists Thomas Espenshade and Alexandria Radford demonstrated that poor, white Christians are underrepresented on elite college campuses. Leftists add insult to injury. A blue-collar white kid, who feels lost and friendless on the alien terrain of a university campus, a campus he has to leave immediately after class so he can get to his fulltime job at MacDonald’s, must accept that he is a recipient of “white privilege” – if he wants to get good grades in mandatory classes on racism.

  • http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/383280/israel-now-sees-egypt-more-reliable-ally-us-mario-loyola
     
    Well, THAT is just a crying shame. Good grief. I never thought I’d see such a disgraceful development.

     

    • Any second the foreign policy genius will show up and tell us that is all part of Obama’s brilliant plan.
      Throw in a good an necessary and a watch and see wherever you like.

    • I’d see such a disgraceful development.

      Stick around and watch.

  • People on the right, they avow, are only perceived as “funny” because they make racist jokes.

    … Of course, people on the right make jokes about racists on the left

  • So much ground to cover, but she did it well.
    In a nutshell, it is the hate that fuels the leftist fire.
    When have you ever had a serious political discussion with a committed leftist and not felt the need to shower afterwards?

    • Generally a ‘serious’ discussion results in them rushing to some Reductio ad absurdum which involves my “desire” to see people die from hunger, cold, lack of medical treatment, global warming, or my desire to see women be forced to have babies, or poor people to become even more poor.
      For example if I say I prefer dogs to cats, then we must discuss why I hate cats and want to murder them.

      If they’re being generous and will concede it’s not specifically ME who is evil then we discuss why conservatives, Christians, “Tea partiers”, Republicans, want those things.  

      And facts do not get in their way, nor are they willing to consider that their grasp of the topic may need to be reviewed in light of new info come to light or actual info beyond what they got from their first read of a headline from an approved source.

      Which is all not to say I don’t have conservative acquaintances who have an ‘interesting’ misapprehension of fact sometimes.    And I have been known to stray into the weeds as well.

  • http://www.timesofisrael.com/turkeys-erdogan-i-no-longer-talk-to-obama/
     
    And who can blame the Turks?  Who seeks to “talk to Obama” any longer?  I mean, unless they want some $$$.
     

  • The problem with the left is that they’re oblivious

  • For example – a Politico based leftist ‘being rational’ on Twitter.
    ah, if only I could be this clever!
    Perry is sending the National Guard to the border to shoot small children.
    oh, ha ha!
     
    https://twitter.com/politicoroger?original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2FInstaBlog%2F2014%2F07%2F22%2FPolitico-Columnist-Rick-Perry-Sends-National-Guard-to-Shoot-Border-Children&tw_i=491398644940419072&tw_p=tweetembed