(06-12-2019 09:46 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 09:04 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 08:26 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(06-11-2019 10:54 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(06-11-2019 02:52 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  George - you seem to be trying to argue what the motivations of people are and those those motivations are uniform and ulterior. If anything, trying to argue for the uniformity of a large group is questionable, let alone that the entire group has an ulterior motive. If you were arguing that Dems mostly advocate for more, rather than less, I would agree.

But your screed is quickly put to bed by pointing out positions that Dems hold that reduce the amount of government intervention in private matters (abortion, marijuana legalization, etc.).

Sheesh!

I didn't say that the desire to control others is the only motive that leftists ever have, in all cases.
- A fundamental motive is not necessarily the only motive; a person may have secondary motives on any given topic, and these may vary from person to person.
- A person who is leftist or "progressive" on most topics might be conservative or classically liberal or centrist or otherwise non-leftist on a particular subject. That happens all the time. More generally, it would be absurd to say that everything espoused by a Democrat is necessarily leftist. And on those non-leftist issues, their fundamental motive might be something quite different from controlling others.

But when it comes to "progressivism"/leftism, the fundamental motive behind it is absolutely the desire to control others. 93's "reasonable gun laws" and "legislation to combat climate change" are good examples: at the end of the day, most leftists care less about whether the proposed laws or legislation will ACTUALLY save lives or protect the environment than they do about whether the proposed laws will increase control over others.

How are those good examples? Most leftists don't actually care about the things that they supposedly support?

I didn't say that don't care at all about results. I said that at the end of the day they care more about increasing control than they do about results. The history of most leftist policy on most issues bears that out.

(06-12-2019 08:26 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  They are just interested in controlling people?

Again: not "just", but "fundamentally."

(06-12-2019 08:26 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  That is a massive leap.

Again: not massive, and not a leap, but borne out by experience.

Of course it's a leap. A massive one. You are defending the notion that you have better insight into a certain group of people's motivations than they themselves do.

Again, not a leap and not massive. Again, people do not necessarily have good insight into their own motivations. That disconnect is perhaps particularly true when their stated (as opposed to actual) motivations are so closely bound up in self-identification as virtuous. Yes, on this particular topic my insight, based on observation and experience, is better.

What is a massive leap is to contend that because "progressives" say that their motivations are not sinister, their motivations must not be sinister.