Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Are you a liberal?

I've said many times that we have moved so far into a radical, Marxist worldview, that most people don't even realize it and believe that normal, healthy ideas are in fact Nazi cave-man ideas (nevermind that the Nazis were, of course, thoroughly left-wing socialists...)  It's going to snap back, but it won't do so until it reaches a breaking point (although lots of signs point to that being relatively imminent) which will be extremely ugly for everyone to have to go through.

But a lot of people don't believe me, of course.  Let's go through a little exercise.  Vox Day posted this survey or test from James Burnham, who devised this test in 1965.  What you'll find is that conservatives are not, in fact conservative.  What they are is yesterday's radical progressives. Today's radical progressives are merely insane.

In any case, here's the questions, with my answers to them.  What may surprise many, who think that I'm an ultra-reactionary hardline right-winger is that I'm actually more moderate than my grandparents probably would have been, and my grandparents were not necessarily particularly hardline right-wingers back in the 50s and early 60s either.  As the survey says, the more Agrees, the more liberal—a liberal would have 85+% Agrees, and not even unusually, 100% agree.  I've allowed myself to score some as "halves" where I mostly agree with the sentiment, but recognize some really important contextual exceptions or caveats.  I've marked Agrees with A, Disagrees with D and halves with ½.

1. All forms of racial segregation and discrimination are wrong. — Naturally not.  Are you going to be the one who goes to the tribal elders and tells them that they need to give their reservations back because racial segregation and discrimination makes you feel bad?  I didn't think so.  No, most likely what you mean by this is that white people of Western Civilization are somehow uniquely unable to have their own institutions, countries and homes.  Which is, of course, a ridiculous bit of cultural Marxist bigotry.  D

2. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. — This is more a statement of fact than ideology.  There's very little you can do to stop everyone from having their own opinions in any case.  A

3. Everyone has a right to free, public education. — I don't know about the right to it.  But no; there's no such thing as free, and public education has been plague on our people and our culture for far too long, because it's nothing more than an excuse to indoctrinate and abuse and socialize in all of the wrong ways our children.  D

4. Political, economic or social discrimination based on religious belief is wrong. — No, it's not.  Especially when you throw in social.  What does that even mean?  Is it wrong, for instance, for me to teach my children that they should only date and marry people of our own religion?  Of course not, so social discrimination is right there.  The Right of Free Association is a freedom that the Constitution protects, but which "conservatives" are proud to have destroyed.  If you value the right of free association, then you have to accept that people may not want to do business with, be friends with, or otherwise deal with people of a different religious bent.  In reality, most people of course prefer to be with people of their own religion, and any protestations to the contrary are usually vacuous, Pharisee-like virtue-signaling.  D

5. In political or military conflict it is wrong to use methods of torture and physical terror. — I disagree with using torture, but the rest of this is kind of ridiculous; physical terror is how you break the morale of your opponent without having to kill them all.  Many people who would say agree to this would also approve of our use of nuclear weapons on Japan because it brought an early end to the war and saved many lives.  Most of them wouldn't even notice the obvious contradiction.  Most people aren't very bright.  D

6. A popular movement or revolt against a tyranny or dictatorship is right, and deserves approval. — It's really none of our business what government type any other country has.  When America revolted against the tyranny of King George and asserted her rights, we did not suggest that we should support or approve of any other such movements.  While I agree with this in very broad terms, it gets really thorny in the specifics to the point where you have to actually disagree with it after all, I think.  D

7. The government has a duty to provide for the ill, aged, unemployed and poor if they cannot take care of themselves. — Absolutely not.  The government does not have that duty at all.  The friends, neighbors and especially family of the ill, aged, unemployed and poor have that duty, as do churches and other organizations dedicated to charitable activity.  The government has a duty to stay out of it, as a point of fact.  Farmer Bunce, baby!  D

8. Progressive income and inheritance taxes are the fairest form of taxation. — Both are actually unconstitutional, and were only rammed through based on deceit and lies and deliberate misinterpretation of the Constitution by treasonous justices.  Both should be totally abolished.  Tariffs are the fairest form of taxation.  D

9. If reasonable compensation is made, the government of a nation has the legal and moral right to expropriate private property within its borders, whether owned by citizens or foreigners. — No, absolutely not.  D

10. We have a duty to mankind; that is, to men in general. — Yes, we do.  I don't think that this means what most progressives think that it means, but we do in fact have a duty to our neighbor.  But our first duty is to our own people and the only duty that the government has is to its citizens.  ½

11. The United Nations, even if limited in accomplishment, is a step in the right direction. — Completely disagree.  The United Nations is a step towards Trotskyite tyranny and should be immediately defunded by the US.  Who should also immediately issue an eviction notice for its offices in NYC and end of visa notices to all of its foreign staff who should make immediate plans to return home.  D

12. Any interference with free speech and free assembly, except for cases of immediate public danger or juvenile corruption, is wrong. — While I mostly agree, it's again in the details where it turns out that I don't.  In spite of the early and better adherence to the principles of limited government and the Bill of Rights that the Founding Fathers had, they certainly had no problem with protecting their people from lewdness, for example, and today our foolish and quixotic pursuit of the idealized version of free speech has brought us the scourge of pornography, for instance.  In private, people can assemble on their own property and say what they like to each other, for the most part, but that isn't really the same thing as saying that any interference is wrong.  D

13. Wealthy nations, like the United States, have a duty to aid the less privileged portions of mankind. — Absolutely not.  We do not have any duty to give our money to anyone else.  That's communism.  D

14. Colonialism and imperialism are wrong. — Mostly, yeah.  But given that my nation was founded by Colonists, I can't say that it's always true.  Curiously, it's a question of semantics.  If a liberal, for instance, believes that colonialism is wrong, does he have a consistent approach to the colonists from the Third World who are settling in our country?  Of course not.  Mostly, I'd suggest however that colonialism and imperialism are almost always strategically unsound and disastrous in the long term to the imperialists.  ½

15. Hotels, motels, stores and restaurants in the Southern United States ought to be obliged by law to allow Negroes to use all of their facilities on the same basis as whites. — Naturally not.  Freedom of association.  It is not the law's job or duty to tell anyone who they have to do business with, for any reason whatsoever.  D

16. The chief sources of delinquency and crime are ignorance, discrimination, poverty and exploitation. — This sounds great, but it turns out that it doesn't hold up to scientific investigation.  It's not true, and only those who are ignorant of decades of sociological study still believe this.  D

17. Communists have a right to express their opinions. — I'm a bit iffy on this one.  Communism is a profoundly anti-American ideology that, even under the various other labels its gained since the 60s, represents an immediate and dangerous threat to the whole concept of America.  So, although I'm hesitant to disagree for many reasons, I think I actually have to.  Sedition and blasphemy should not be protected by a foolish blind-spot with regards to free speech.  D

18. We should always be ready to negotiate with the Soviet Union and other communist nations. — Trump style negotiations with North Korea?  Sure.  Neville Chamberlain style appeasement with the Nazis, or FDR style collusion with Stalin?  Absolutely not.  I agree, but I would of course disagree very strongly with the type of negotiations that liberals would propose.  A

19. Corporal punishment, except possibly for small children, is wrong. — I don't know why this is something that people care about.  No, of course its not wrong in principle.  Why would this be worse than years of prison, for example?  Better chance of reform at greatly reduced cost.  Especially if its public, so it carries with it community-scale deterrence along with it.  In fact, I think the ending of the tradition of the ducking stool is one of the worst things that we've done in Western Civilization.  D

20. All nations and peoples, including the nations and peoples of Asia and Africa, have a right to political independence when a majority of the population wants it. — I tend to agree.  But I'm not sure what that statement means, exactly.  Does it mean, for example, that we should support the Free Tibet movement? No, I think Tibet can and should handle themselves, for instance.Agreeing with the sentiment doesn't mean that I think we should necessary do anything.  (I'm not ignorant.  I know that at the time this was written colonial holdings like French Indochina, were still a thing.  But I'm trying to update the question to today.)  A

21. We always ought to respect the religious beliefs of others. — Should I respect the religious belief that my people only exist to be exploited (as by the Jews) or dominated (as by the Moslems?)  Did Elijah respect the religious beliefs of the priests of Baal?  While I agree that in general we should be respectful of others if we want to have peace, in reality, we have to be careful that this doesn't get distorted into a bizarre parody of what it really means.  ½

22. The primary goal of international policy in the nuclear age ought to be peace. — The primary goal of international policy should be peace anyway.  But again, I completely disagree with the methods that liberals think will bring peace, because they are r-selected rabbits who don't understand human behavior.  As we've seen just in the last two years, the appeasement of the Obama administration destroyed peace.  The harder, "we won't be bullied, and you bad actors need to knock it off" approach of the Trump administration brings peace.  So this is one where although I agree with the statement, the specifics, of course, mean that I'm in complete disagreement with the liberal on what it means.  Plus; bringing peace to some people who are fighting halfway around the world is none of our business.  D

23. Except in cases of a clear threat to national security or, possibly, to juvenile morals, censorship is wrong. — No it isn't.  Again; free speech doesn't mean that sedition, blasphemy or lewdness have to be tolerated.  D

24. Congressional investigating committees are dangerous institutions, and need to be watched and curbed if they are not to become a serious threat to freedom. — I tend to have a dim view of Congress and their committees, but this is clearly based on Joseph McCarthy, who it turns out, was completely right and justified in his investigation.  In general, it's the lack of Congressional investigating committees, and the lack of action based on the few that we do have that tends to be the serious threat to freedom.  D

25. The money amount of school and university scholarships ought to be decided primarily by need. — The money amount of school and university scholarships should be privately funded, and as such, the private funder can put forward whatever decision factors he pleases.  If the government is involved in this, they need to get out.  All that that has done is cause the runaway inflation of higher education costs.  D

26. Qualified teachers, at least at the university level, are entitled to academic freedom: that is, the right to express their own beliefs and opinions, in or out of the classroom, without interference from administrators, trustees, parents or public bodies. — Absolutely not.  Nobody has that level of lack of oversight.  D

27. In determining who is to be admitted to schools and universities, quota systems based on color, religion, family or similar factors are wrong. — Wrong.  Should a Catholic school be unable to prioritize the acceptance of Catholics?  What a ridiculous idea.  Public schools shouldn't use any such quota, but then again, publicly funded schools shouldn't exist in the first place and need to be torn down as they are a grave threat to American culture and the American economy.  D

28. The national government should guarantee that all adult citizens, except for criminals and the insane, should have the right to vote. — The national government should guarantee that only those with skin in the game have the right to vote.  That's almost the complete opposite approach, and one of the relatively few encroachments on states' rights that I enthusiastically support.  D

29. Joseph McCarthy was probably the most dangerous man in American public life during the fifteen years following the Second World War. — Joseph McCarthy was a patriot, he was right, and he's been completely vindicated by the Venona Papers, among others.  Absolutely wrong.  D

30. There are no significant differences in intellectual, moral or civilizing capacity among human races and ethnic types. — This is of course false.  It takes almost no time at all to look at the average IQ by country, for instance, to see that this is nothing but delusional wishful thinking.  Let other people from other cultures structure their society in the way that suits them, protect our ability to do the same, and leave each other alone.  That's the way to peace and mutual respect.  Nothing else is.  D

31. Steps toward world disarmament would be a good thing. — Wrong.  An armed world is a peaceful and polite world, in general.  D

32. Everyone is entitled to political and social rights without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. — No, of course not.  What the devil is this even trying to say; that non-citizens have the same political and social rights as citizens?  How absurd!  D

33. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and expression. — Yes, mostly, although once you get to expression, you're starting to step into iffy territory.  You don't have unlimited rights to express your thoughts and conscience anywhere and to anyone.  ½

34. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. — This is indistinguishable from the above question, so it has the same answer.  ½

35. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government. — Yes, I agree.  But the will of the people should have checks and balances on it as well, hence the wisdom of the Founding Fathers who curbed the mob rule tendencies of "pure" democracy.  ½

36. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security. — Social security is not a right.  D

37. Everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work. — Every employer has the right to pay their employees whatever amount they've mutually agreed to.  D

38. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions. — Even public employees?  No.  D

39. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. — Everyone has a right to pursue such; they do not have a right to have it given to them, no.  D

Total: 6 agrees (although many of those were "halves".  Out of 39 questions; that gives me an 85%  conservative.  Kinda moderate, actually.

No comments: