I would love to get a liberal's answer to that in an actual, give and take discussion, without the usual misdirection and smears.

I don't read Prager regularly, but this one struck a nerve and I love how he has framed this question because it cuts to the heart of dem tactics.

Why is Class Hatred Morally Superior to Race Hatred?

Quote:The democratic left believes in democracy, and, before the 1970s, some of its adherents were fierce anti-Communists. But while the decent and the indecent left differ on democracy versus tyranny and on non-violence versus violence, the nicest leftists in the world agree with the indecent left about who the enemy is.

Being on the left means that you divide the world between rich and poor much more than you divide it between good and evil. For the leftist, the existence of rich and poor -- (SET ITAL) inequality (END ITAL) -- is what constitutes evil. More than tyranny, inequality disturbs the left, including the non-Communist left. That is why so many on the left fell in love with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and, at other times, with every left-wing dictator. Non-leftists see these men as thugs; much of the left sees them as fighters for equality. Yes, leftist dictators extinguish freedom and steal land and businesses from the rich -- but none of this disturbs most of the left.

It does seem to be a mental disorder. For all of recorded history, there has always been inequality of incomes. Always will be. I just wish these brain dead morons would be forced to live in those utopias where everybody's outcome was the same. They might just wake up to the reality of what they are pushing. Everybody equally miserable and dependent on the state, while those "more equal than others" (the elite) enjoy the perks on the backs of the sheep. I truly believe that most of these fools think that they themselves will be part of the privileged group, not realizing that they are the useful fools that brought about their own demise.

Quote:Non-leftists who cherish the American value of liberty over the left-wing value of socioeconomic equality, as well as those who adhere to Judeo-Christian values, do not regard the existence of economic classes as inherently morally problematic. If the poor are treated equally before the law, are given the chance and the liberty to raise their socioeconomic status and have their basic material needs met, the gap between rich and poor is not a major moral problem. Of course, if the rich got rich through deceitful or violent means, they must be prosecuted.

Helluva good question!!!!!!!!!

It's not who you hate, it's the agenda.

(10-26-2011 03:26 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I would love to get a liberal's answer to that in an actual, give and take discussion, without the usual misdirection and smears.

I don't read Prager regularly, but this one struck a nerve and I love how he has framed this question because it cuts to the heart of dem tactics.

Why is Class Hatred Morally Superior to Race Hatred?

Quote:The democratic left believes in democracy, and, before the 1970s, some of its adherents were fierce anti-Communists. But while the decent and the indecent left differ on democracy versus tyranny and on non-violence versus violence, the nicest leftists in the world agree with the indecent left about who the enemy is.

Being on the left means that you divide the world between rich and poor much more than you divide it between good and evil. For the leftist, the existence of rich and poor -- (SET ITAL) inequality (END ITAL) -- is what constitutes evil. More than tyranny, inequality disturbs the left, including the non-Communist left. That is why so many on the left fell in love with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and, at other times, with every left-wing dictator. Non-leftists see these men as thugs; much of the left sees them as fighters for equality. Yes, leftist dictators extinguish freedom and steal land and businesses from the rich -- but none of this disturbs most of the left.

It does seem to be a mental disorder. For all of recorded history, there has always been inequality of incomes. Always will be. I just wish these brain dead morons would be forced to live in those utopias where everybody's outcome was the same. They might just wake up to the reality of what they are pushing. Everybody equally miserable and dependent on the state, while those "more equal than others" (the elite) enjoy the perks on the backs of the sheep. I truly believe that most of these fools think that they themselves will be part of the privileged group, not realizing that they are the useful fools that brought about their own demise.

Quote:Non-leftists who cherish the American value of liberty over the left-wing value of socioeconomic equality, as well as those who adhere to Judeo-Christian values, do not regard the existence of economic classes as inherently morally problematic. If the poor are treated equally before the law, are given the chance and the liberty to raise their socioeconomic status and have their basic material needs met, the gap between rich and poor is not a major moral problem. Of course, if the rich got rich through deceitful or violent means, they must be prosecuted.

First person and third parties.

(10-26-2011 09:48 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  [/b]

(10-26-2011 03:26 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I would love to get a liberal's answer to that in an actual, give and take discussion, without the usual misdirection and smears.

I don't read Prager regularly, but this one struck a nerve and I love how he has framed this question because it cuts to the heart of dem tactics.

Why is Class Hatred Morally Superior to Race Hatred?

Quote:The democratic left believes in democracy, and, before the 1970s, some of its adherents were fierce anti-Communists. But while the decent and the indecent left differ on democracy versus tyranny and on non-violence versus violence, the nicest leftists in the world agree with the indecent left about who the enemy is.

Being on the left means that you divide the world between rich and poor much more than you divide it between good and evil. For the leftist, the existence of rich and poor -- (SET ITAL) inequality (END ITAL) -- is what constitutes evil. More than tyranny, inequality disturbs the left, including the non-Communist left. That is why so many on the left fell in love with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and, at other times, with every left-wing dictator. Non-leftists see these men as thugs; much of the left sees them as fighters for equality. Yes, leftist dictators extinguish freedom and steal land and businesses from the rich -- but none of this disturbs most of the left.

It does seem to be a mental disorder. For all of recorded history, there has always been inequality of incomes. Always will be. I just wish these brain dead morons would be forced to live in those utopias where everybody's outcome was the same. They might just wake up to the reality of what they are pushing. Everybody equally miserable and dependent on the state, while those "more equal than others" (the elite) enjoy the perks on the backs of the sheep. I truly believe that most of these fools think that they themselves will be part of the privileged group, not realizing that they are the useful fools that brought about their own demise.

Quote:Non-leftists who cherish the American value of liberty over the left-wing value of socioeconomic equality, as well as those who adhere to Judeo-Christian values, do not regard the existence of economic classes as inherently morally problematic. If the poor are treated equally before the law, are given the chance and the liberty to raise their socioeconomic status and have their basic material needs met, the gap between rich and poor is not a major moral problem. Of course, if the rich got rich through deceitful or violent means, they must be prosecuted.

We didn't say anything about your homosexuality, Tom.