Think about it. People with unmanly professions such as artist, professor, dancer, actor or mime are more likely to be liberal. Liberals are typically lack the manliness do to the necessary stuff like invade Iraq, Iran or France and want the state to take care of them and burdensome minorities such as chinks, niggers, mexicants.

I think there will be a link between estrogen levels and liberalness.

I laughed. No, really, I did. I swear.

And smoking pot made W a queer cheerleader that bunked with that other queer. I think he is mayor of Nashville and his name is Ash.

Might i recommend http://www.amazon.com/Liberalism-Men...1101742&sr=8-1 it is far better at getting the point across than you could ever accomplish.

...but seriously though there is a proven correlation between sociopathic behavior and conservative voting habits.

I remember reading a study about Boston men having high estrogen levels which was supposed to link them with liberality.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM
6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.

7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)

8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th century.

9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.

FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY
10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.

11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)

12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families.

13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology).

14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.

16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.

18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.

19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.

20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.

21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.

22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.

23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.

OVERSOCIALIZATION
24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.

25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]

26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another.

27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals (3) constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most left-wing segment.

28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes (4) for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.

29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.

30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.

31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.

32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.

The Psychology of Modern Leftism

That was written by Theodore Kaczynski, who is better knpown as the UNABOBMBER. Starnge you failed to supply that bit of information.

So what do you call a person that will crawl into bed with any criminal or skank or criminal to further their ideas?

Answer:

A CONSERVATIVE

fixed

__________________
455FE10422CA29C4933F95052B792AB2

...I thought it sounded more intelligent than "official conservatism," despite its flaws... (specifically, it has one flaw, "begging the question")

Hmm. 'splain's it.

Come on now. Think about that. You know what flaw in logic you're making. Most sociopaths may be conservatives,(does that fact really surprise anyone?) but they are a minority of them. Besides, sociopathic democrats are the truly scary ones. Atleast the conservative ones are somewhat honest about their intentions and beliefs.

But congressmen usually resort to prostitution for money - they could care less about ideas.

But then there was Tom Delay.

So fucking what ?

"high" is a relativ term. I assume you mean "higher than normal" implying that these men aren't normal. Ok, it's true. But estrogen does cause leftism, beeing different in an intolerant society will give you liberalistic views.
The right says :"We're all born in this world with the tools we have, let us all be free to do what we want in order to strive"
The left says: "We are all different, so for justice to be, we need to pu everybody at the same level"
That's more or less the idea behind these philosophical ideas. I insist on the "more or less"!

If you're "inferior" you'll want things to be "lefty".
If you're advantaged you'll like rightism.
The big problem is that society make beeing different inferiorising, through culture, laws and such.
I'm pretty sure there wasn't a lot a tall, blond guys whos disagreed the Nazi philosophy, in germany, during WW2.
If Bush were a gai black guy, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't think what he thinks now!

So of course there will be a correlation with excentricity and liberalism becaus rightism wrongly promots conformity. And to associate quality of thought with such a broad political stance is just retarded.

by the way, when you say something like that:
you sound like a fucking braindead redneck!


So what ?
If you disagree attack the arguments, not the guy.
If a rapist says that it's bad to rape does it make it false ?
If it's a recording machin that says so, is it false becaus it can't understand what it's saying ?

Kaczynski was a mathmatics professor at Berkeley, he was no moron. I don't see how the fact that he was also crazy makes his ideas any less worthy of discussion. His psychoanalysis of leftists is the best that I have read. It's not like the PETA types arrived at their views by rational discussion...

Whats so unmanly about those occupations? Theyre probably making ten times the money youre making at the tire shop you fuckin dope. You probably think Larry the Cable guy is funny too. Trashy fat greedy prideful americans. Talking like that you must have a three inch pecker. Yea invading iraq on false terms is a great idea. People like you have helped ruin our reputation around the world. And tell me einstein, what positive things have we accomplished by invading iraq? We have spent over 400 billion dollars, lost over 3,000 troops, and pissed off every other intelligent country. You got a lot to prove. Get R done stoopid.

Wait wait!
Don't get me wrong!

I'm not saying all conservatives are sociopaths. Far from it. I'm just saying that most sociopaths tend to be "conservative" in their voting habits.

Don't forget about the civilian casualties.

B2 > *

__________________
455FE10422CA29C4933F95052B792AB2

Kaczynski was an assistant professor of mathematics at Berkley where he was withdrawn and aloof. He was rated poorly by the students there.

He was hired in 1967 and quit in 1969. He then moved into squalor and never held any worthwhile employment after that point. That was when he wrote the essay. His credentials as a math wiz does not seem to me to be relevant to do a psychoanalysis of a group of people that he had never had any real contact with at all.

I mean how could he be objective as he was living a hateful, murderous, self righteous, reclusive life and all. I wonder why he is not writing now?

His writing (drivel) was only an attempt to justify his murdering, self righteous, criminal activity. It is amusing to read the fallacies of an insane individual but not worthy of praise.

If he had any sense at all, he would have posted his drivel on PLR&C but he didn't even own a computer, you know? He is and was just nuts.

".............the best that I have read."
Is not a basis for commending Ted..... and I will refrain from finishing my thought concerning that.

And the true name for that essay is the Unabomber's Manifesto.

Thanks for spewing a bunch of shit that I already knew (probably ripped off from wikipedia).

Again, you fail to comment on the ideas and instead attack the source. If you can make a case that leftism as categorized by Kaczynski is not psychological in root, then go for it. This isn't a thread about the Unabomber, this is a thread about the psychology of leftism, stay on topic.

And the true name for that essay is Industrial Society and Its Future.

First define "Leftism".
If we do not have a concrete definition of what leftism is we can not say whether or not it is "psychological" in nature."

dream of sucking european dick much?

show me where the iraq thing pissed off south korea, japan, israel, and taiwan. i suppose you mean 'intellgient' countries like bangladesh, gambia, guinea, kenya, and pakistan then? fucking idiot.

a prime example of eurocentric racist thought. this jackass thinks only white europeans are intelligent.

"
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM

6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.

7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)

8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th century.

9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.
FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY

10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.

11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)

12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families.

13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology).

14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.

16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.

18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.

19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.

20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.

21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.

22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.

23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.
OVERSOCIALIZATION

24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.

25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]

26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another.

27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals (3) constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most left-wing segment.

28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes (4) for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.

29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.

30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.

31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.

32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth."

http://www.thecourier.com/manifest.htm

There's a word for happy stories about happy people who live happy lives with happy families, who all live happily ever after.
That word is propaganda.
Leftism doesn't stand for weakness. It stands for utility.

What like insurance? Why mandate that through government other than to get everyone else to pay for it? Using government as a free money tree is retarded. You're stealing from your neighbors and your children.

Where the fuck did you come up with insurance? Stealing it from your children by giving it to them I suppose, and giving it to your neighbors as well, but wait, I forgot, you're in the top 5, huh?

WTF are you talking about? You were talking about the utility of what I can only assume is welfare and social programs. Debating their merits in terms of utility to you, they are essentially insurance against hard times paid for by tax dollars through a middle man.

If you're talking about the top 5% wealthiest, who gives a shit where you draw the line? I don't feel entitled to Paris Hilton's, or anyone else's money for that matter.

It's not yours to give, and you children will never see it. Where the fuck do you think this money is going to come from? If you're willing to pay for it, do it yourself and leave me out of it. If neither of us pay for it, our children will, and they won't see a dime themselves. We're paying for our parents generation's decadence as we speak.

Nooooo... I'm stealing from the budget of the po-lice. Cut back your bloated fascist government and we'll talk...

Police is local government funded... And I really couldn't give a flying fuck even if that trade made sense. I have no interest in retroactive "justice" to try to make me feel better. I have no interest in protection. I'll protect myself. All the unemployed cops can get hired as body guards in the ensuing demand for private protection for women, children, and nancy boys.

And I'm a libertarian. I'm not a neocon. Cutting social programs is the LAST of my priorities. It just makes me want to kill myself when I see babies crying at the tit of government because they've developed a tolerance for milk.

If you give a mouse a cookie.

No, you started with giving money to others, through which I assumed welfare. I did not understand a single bit of that last part. Utility to me? What a laughable concept, utility applies to everyone, and I would only lose from more social programs seeing as I'm a perfectly healthy worker in a middle class family of 2 who has yet to receive a social benefit in the first place.
I don't draw the line anywhere, I support utility for all. I don't feel entitled to other people's money either, in fact, I think other people's money should be entitled to me, but not in the anarcho-fascist sense, merely as an analogy.
Money is not mine to give? Let's think about that one for a second.
It only works if everyone is included, if I the world voluntarily threw itself into poverty to help its fellow men or towards a nobler cause, would you do it? According to your rhetoric, no. I was referring to social programs in general, and don't bring in kids because we all know this shit can be reformed without having to leave a debt for the future. Look up France's welfare system, I was referring to Euro-socialist principles rather than American SS bullshit.

/thread

Classical liberals were never opposed to a welfare state, even today, the most radical liberal is a communist (welfare), while the most radical conservative is a fascist (capitalism to its logical extreme), political liberals have been pro-welfare state ever since the concept was invented.

No they have not. A classical liberal is in fact, hostile to the idea of a welfare state. What you are thinking of is social liberalism. A social liberal supports the idea of a welfare state. When you think of classical liberalism in America, think of the libertarians and the Libertarian Party.

You have a very narrow mindset, liberalism has been around far longer than America. It actually began with Napoleon who provided the Napoleonic code, which was a set of laws that gave power to the common man (while still maintaining the authority of the Emperor). The defenition I was thinking of was that used after the Napoleonic period, where ideas like socialism, utilitarianism, and the idea of welfare were being put into view, American liberalism is a bastardization of traditional liberalism.

Liberalism has been around even longer than the Napoleon. A lot of modern classical liberalism can be traced to ancient Greek and medieval thought. Many modern classical liberalists look to the School of Salamanca as a precursor, with its emphasis on human rights and popular sovereignty, its belief that morality need not be grounded in religion, and its moral defense of commerce. The School of Salamanca was written in the 16th century in Spain. However, for the most part many classical liberals see The Age of Enlightenment as when classical liberalism was defined.

I do not have a very narrow mindset but I do see where that can be perceived as having such. I wasn't clear on what I was talking about in my previous post, which was modern liberalism in America. I do apologize for not being clear on that matter.

It is interesting though to compare and contrast European and American liberalism. American liberalism overall is even more leftist than European liberalism, though for the most part they have the same origins with the New Liberals in Britain of the late 19th century. Liberalism in the American usage has little in common with the word as used in the politics of any European country, save possibly Britain. But even then I consider that a stretch.

European social liberals are often against affirmative action, heavy government subsides and heavy government regulation of labor, something that is a very strong issue with modern American liberals. European social liberals are supportive of the idea of open markets and free trade as part of their ideology. European social liberals also have a tradition of anti-clericalism, which does not exist with the American Democrats, who even use on some of their most important internal documents the words "under God".

In America, modern liberalism has come to mean support for freedom of speech and freedom of religion, reproductive rights for women, a progressive income tax, the right to privacy, equal rights for homosexuals, equal rights for the disabled, affirmative action, the reduction of poverty by government intervention, affordable quality health care for all as provided by government intervention, and the protection of the environment and of endangered species. In many European countries, some of these are considered by European liberals as non-issues. European liberals share many positions in common with Christian Democrats and Social Democrats.

Leftism is basically liberalism, so from that standpoint, I present you with this:

http://members.cox.net/jayc1832/The%...l%20Circle.jpg

as well as this:

http://tinyurl.com/2d7kt3

My defenition of leftism (and hence liberalism) is progressiveness, utility, hedonism, modernism, and anti-clericalism... As you can tell by the second link, liberals prefer maximum control over property (Marx said that communists were anti-property), and minimum control over civil rights, so yes, leftists are anti-capitalism.

Libertarians, on the other hand, have a radically conservative outlook on economics, so they prefer radical capitalism to traditional liberal principles.

I think even the most liberal of Americans in the public eye are not socialists, while there was a whole election based on economic philosophies in France (where socialists are common), where the key figures included a capitalist, and a socialist. I'm sure statistics about the American Communist Society would back this up, but alas, it's two in the morning and I have class tomorrow.

I have yet to see someone sucking on the government tit that needed it, benefitted from it, or it otherwise helped, that wouldn't have been better off with lower taxes, no inflation, and a better economy with more jobs.

The people who "need it" are pathetic wastes of life that the world would be better off if they died. The people who will benefit from universal health care will be the 80 year old smoker, and the morbidly obese diabetic fat sweaty chick who downs pills like candy.

You want to see the result of liberalism: hang out in low income housing. The people are disgusting wastes of life. All it's done is replace pride and dignity with a sense of childish entitlement and lack of ambition. These people are the product of drug prohibition, and I see no reason to steal from the pockets of hardworking people to make drug addicts more comfortable as they spread STDs, and kill themselves one high at a time.

Social programs are putting wastes of life on a 60 year hospice program.

Better they should be provided the dignity of sink or swim, and the honor of having swam if they are capable, than keeping them alive as a disgrace to humanity.

6.5 billion people. We don't need to save the helpless. Illusions of the sanctity of human life, and human dignity are relics from a time when human life was forced by threat of drowning to perform admirably. Social programs bring out the worst in people and are a disgrace to human dignity. Nothing gets beggars off the street and in to work clothes like a cold shoulder and a refusal to dignify them with eye contact.

That's exactly why I have no problem giving them money. I'll always spare a quarter for a beggar. I want them to think what they are doing is a good idea.

i knew it was the scrawlings of a madman after the first few paragraphs. i didn't need to know anything about the author to discredit the work; it discredits itself.



besides, this whole thread is nothing but a rush talking point. it's nothing but ad hom and argument ad nauseum.

shame on you.