"Conservatives only use hate & fear while Liberals use logic & reason."

[Oerdin]

In one of Boddington's recent threads Tinkai contended that no soldier was ever spit on, harrased, or attacked by any by any anti-war protester during the Vietnam period. I called BS and sighted several cases of where these vary things did occur and asked Tinkai what he was basing his claims upon.

so any ways as evidience I was given a book written by a left wing ideology named Jerry Lembcke in which Mr. Lembcke made claims such as that liberals always use reason & logic while conservatives only use fear & hate to arrive at their point of view. Naturally, I felt that anyone who'd write things such as this is too politically driven to be trusted to make an objective piece of historical review. Elijah however has said he can prove that liberals only use logic and reason where as conservatives only use fear and hate to arrive at their mutual view points. Elijah then claimed that he just didn't want to spam up the other thread.

Ok, Elijah. Here's your chance. We have a thread just for you so you can prove your contention that liberals only use logic and reason to arrive at their political stances where as all conservatives only use hate and fear to arrive at there points. So back it up... unless of course you were talking out of your ass again.

[MichaeltheGreat]

This should be entertaining, so I'll do you the favor of editing the title to keep it within the rules, rather than deleting it.

[Oerdin]

Thank you.

[Odin]

Not all conservatives use hate and fear, it is only populists that do, hence Ashcroft's attack on our liberties.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Odin
Not all conservatives use hate and fear, it is only populists that do, hence Ashcroft's attack on our liberties.

I disagree but I respect that you are atleast honest enough to say that not everyone uses hate and fear. Thank you Odin.

[Nubclear]

Oerdin, I support your position. It was a sweeping generalization that should never have been made.
However, starting a thread for the sole purpose of a petty vendetta is stupid and makes you look like an ass.

This thread needs to be closed.

[Ming]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
This should be entertaining

Maybe... but if it turns into another liberal vs conservative flame war... Some people will get restricted and the thread will be deleted...

[Oerdin]

Please don't turn it into a flame war. I don't want a flame war but I do want to give Elijah the chance to back up what he said.

[Q Classic]

liberals and conservatives both use logic, reason, fear, and hatred. it's nothing new.

you have idiots on both sides, extremists on both sides, who bring nothing but evil under a guise of progress or morality.

maybe if the hatemongers and the terrorizers, those who like coulter, moore, and savage bring nothing but noxious vitriol would shut the hell up, and let those who used logic form the discussion, america wouldn't be in such a fix.

but gee, i guess us sane middle of the roaders just masochists who like getting sore sitting on the fence.

[Goingonit]

It's not a liberal/conservative divide, it's an orthodox/progressive divide.

Those who take moral authority from a religion or other unchanging authority don't base their position upon logic in the first place, and thus don't rely on logic as a tool to defend their beliefs. Their views, while in many cases just as valid, don't originate from a logical though process, but from (say) the bible, which they trust instinctively. Most of these people also tend to be Conservative, but not all; Marxists fall into this category.

Those who believe that moral authority originates from humanity and society, on the other hand, have viewpoints based entirely upon logic, and thus have no trouble defending their beliefs logically. Though these people can be either Conservative or Liberal, they are almost entirely secular; thus, this category includes most Liberals but only some Conservatives.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar


Oerdin, I support your position. It was a sweeping generalization that should never have been made.
However, starting a thread for the sole purpose of a petty vendetta is stupid and makes you look like an ass.

This thread needs to be closed.

I don't see this thread as being part of a vendetta. I see it as an opportunity for some people on here to put up or shut up. Since Ming and MTG are watching, I'll refrain from saying who those people are though Seriously though, only those lacking facts should have reason to start a flame war.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
liberals and conservatives both use logic, reason, fear, and hatred. it's nothing new.

you have idiots on both sides, extremists on both sides, who bring nothing but evil under a guise of progress or morality.

maybe if the hatemongers and the terrorizers, those who like coulter, moore, and savage bring nothing but noxious vitriol would shut the hell up, and let those who used logic form the discussion, america wouldn't be in such a fix.

Exactly my point, Q.

Goingonit, Communism dosn't = Marxism, Marxism is a subset of Communism. I am a Communist, but I think the rise of social democracy has made some of Marx's ideas not relavent in today's world. I wish to expand the communist cause by educating people, not spilling blood.

[Goingonit]

I said and meant Marxism; i.e. a political doctorine based on the writings of Karl Marx. Most Communists attempt to adapt themselves to the situations at hand; thus, they don't fit my first description.

[Q Classic]

odin, sorry, but... marxism is hardly centrist. communism is hardly moderate.

now, if you meant by calm and reasonable discussion using logic... then by all means, go ahead.

[mrmitchell]

Both sides have extremists. However, it's a terrible generalisation to say that one side has only extremists and the other side doesn't.

Although it probably has a good reason, I tend to find more "liberals hate America" conservatives than I do "conservatives hate America" liberals (though Elijah seems an example of the latter )

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Oerdin
so any ways as evidience I was given a book written by a left wing ideology named Jerry Lembcke in which Mr. Lembcke made claims such as that liberals always use reason & logic while conservatives only use fear & hate to arrive at their point of view.

Point of order... please cite where Mr. Lembke makes such a claim. You stated this in the previous thread, but I don't see anywhere in the sites linked to in the other thread that has him stating this.

It'd be a shame to begin a debate with an instant strawman.

Another point is that elijah didn't say he agreed with that phrase entirely. What he said was:

My position is somewhat similar, see my sig, a position I have backed up numerous times (and would be happy to repeat if necessary, though I dont want to spam this to complete death so PM me), so the owness [sic] is on you to refute this position.

The quote in elijah's sig is thus:

To hell with political correctness, I might as well admit it. Only the intellectual are capable of liberalism, the vast majority of the intellectually challenged default to conservatism, because its requires less thought.

That is what he proferred to defend, not the quote (or is it even a quote?) given above.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
liberals and conservatives both use logic, reason, fear, and hatred. it's nothing new.

you have idiots on both sides, extremists on both sides, who bring nothing but evil under a guise of progress or morality.

I can totally agree with this. It's the ignorant people who make bigoted claims about the other side being the spawn of Satan that I can't stand. Is it really so hard to say "Politician "X" did "Y" therefor I believe he is wrong"?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Oerdin
In one of Boddington's recent threads Tinkai contended that no soldier was ever spit on, harrased, or attacked by any by any anti-war protester during the Vietnam period. I called BS and sighted several cases of where these vary things did occur and asked Tinkai what he was basing his claims upon.

so any ways as evidience I was given a book written by a left wing ideology named Jerry Lembcke in which Mr. Lembcke made claims such as that liberals always use reason & logic while conservatives only use fear & hate to arrive at their point of view. Naturally, I felt that anyone who'd write things such as this is too politically driven to be trusted to make an objective piece of historical review. Elijah however has said he can prove that liberals only use logic and reason where as conservatives only use fear and hate to arrive at their mutual view points. Elijah then claimed that he just didn't want to spam up the other thread.

Ok, Elijah. Here's your chance. We have a thread just for you so you can prove your contention that liberals only use logic and reason to arrive at their political stances where as all conservatives only use hate and fear to arrive at there points. So back it up... unless of course you were talking out of your ass again.

I know this is directed at Elijah, but since this is a public thread, I wanted to add my two and half cents.

Any liberal who generalizes conservatives as being bigoted and narrow-minded are not doing other liberals any favor -- rather, they're just dragging mainstream liberals who are capabable of intelligent political discourse into the mud they're (they're = liberals who are making bigoted statements of conservatives) stuck in.

So, really any one with common sense should realize that over-generalizing any political group/ideological group is prejudiced and unfair.

[Oerdin]

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...97#post2303297

The first post in that link will lead people to the thread in question.

First I said:

Anyone who writes crap claiming that Liberals always use logic and reason while Conservatives use fear and hate. Sorry, but when someone writes crap like that then they can't be taken seriously.

to which Elijah replied:

Why not? Thats not a rhetorical question. My position is somewhat similar, see my sig, a position I have backed up numerous times (and would be happy to repeat if necessary, though I dont want to spam this to complete death so PM me), so the owness is on you to refute this position.

There is no straw man here. He asked "Why not" and then said his position is similiar and he had backed it up numerous times.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
Although it probably has a good reason, I tend to find more "liberals hate America" conservatives than I do "conservatives hate America" liberals (though Elijah seems an example of the latter )

Sadly, I'd have to agree with this statement too.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Oerdin
There is no straw man here. He asked "Why not" and then said his position is similiar and he had backed it up numerous times.

Yes, and you'll note, as he says, he referred to defending the quote in his sig, which is similar, and which he was offering to discuss. Not the exact statement you made.

You still haven't shown where the supposed Lembcke quote came from. I want a cite. Where did he say such a thing? That was the strawman to which I was referring, because I'd hate to think you were attributing a false quote to someone.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Point of order... please cite where Mr. Lembke makes such a claim. You stated this in the previous thread, but I don't see anywhere in the sites linked to in the other thread that has him stating this.

Ok, Boris. For you I will go down to the book store and pull out the page from his book where he said that. Until then you can go to amazon.com and read the very first reader review in which Mr. Lembcke is quoted making the quote in question. I promise I will get you a page number tomorrow when the bookstore opens.

[MrFun]

Don't pay any attention to my posts . . . . .

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Ok, Boris. For you I will go down to the book store and pull out the page from his book where he said that. Until then you can go to amazon.com and read the very first reader review in which Mr. Lembcke is quoted making the quote in question. I promise I will get you a page number tomorrow when the bookstore opens.

Done. Very first reader review is thus:

Ideologues generally make poor historians. This book is proof of this maxim. Written by a leftist college professor, (redundant, I know), the author attempts to disprove the myth that anti-war radicals treated veterans returning from Vietnam like plague-bearing rats. This thesis will elicit guffaws from any honest person who had the misfortune of living through the sixties. Vets were routinely called racists, fascists, rednecks, babykillers, and a multitude of obscene insults by radicals who considered themselves the enlightened and anyone who disagreed with them scum. Chants in support of the forces killing American troops, "Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh! The NLF is sure to win!", were a staple at "anti-war", actually pro-communist, rallies. With a laughable argument and turgidly written, this book is a prime example of the type of politicized junk history produced by academics today. A true time waster except for aging members of the SDS and other radical groups nostalgic for the days of their youth.

While I now see where you plagiarized your line about idealogues, I don't see the quote you mentioned. Not a particularly enlightened critique, either.

Regardless, a reader review (from a hostile one, no less) on Amazon.com is hardly a fair and accurate way to assess a statement, or even if the author really said it. Unless you can cite the passage and the context, it's a lot of hot air.

[Oerdin]

Boris don't be daft. The one you quoted was an editorial review not a reader review. I did however make one mistake. It wasn't the first but the second reader review and the exact quote was thus:

For one thing, Lembcke is himself a rabid leftist who refuses to acknowledge the possibility of any other viewpoint. At one point, he says, outrageously, that the left always argues a point by using reason, logic, and empirical evidence whereas the right uses myth and legend and appeals to emotion. A person of wider reading and more profound learning would not say such a thing. You're going to tell me that writers like David Hume, Edmund Burke, Thomas Jefferson, and T.S. Eliot (all rabid conservatives by today's standards) were a bunch of dummies who didn't know how to argue. And hell, I think George Will is a lot more witty and lively than all the dime-a-dozen academic morons trying to sound like Lacan and Foucault.

I made sure the whole paragraph was included just so no one could claim it was taken out of context.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Boris don't be daft. The one you quoted was an editorial review not a reader review. I did however make one mistake. It wasn't the first but the second reader review and the exact quote was thus:

No, it was the first reader review, which you pointed to, I quoted, so don't call me "daft."

Second, I already addressed the validity of citing a hostile reader review as an authoritative quote--it's nonsense. Get the passage and context from the book if you want to honestly ascribe such sentiments to Lembcke.

Oh, and Jefferson, at least, was certainly not a conservative by the standards of his generation. Now that's a daft statement.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ming
Some people will get restricted and the thread will be deleted...

Sounds like fine entertainment to me, Wyatt.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Sprayber



I don't see this thread as being part of a vendetta. I see it as an opportunity for some people on here to put up or shut up. Since Ming and MTG are watching, I'll refrain from saying who those people are though Seriously though, only those lacking facts should have reason to start a flame war.

I see this thread as nothing more than a troll targeted at one person. AKA: A flame.
Elijah will not be able to prove his position because it is completly false. It's just that simple. Oerdin knows this and is trying to discredit Elijah because of that.

Thats just how I see it.

[MrFun]

Any idiot SHOULD know you can't make over-generalizations of any political/ideological group.

DUH

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Elijah will not be able to prove his position because it is completly false. It's just that simple. Oerdin knows this and is trying to discredit Elijah because of that.

I agree Elijah will not be able to prove his position but he is most certainly the person who got himself into that position. Now, it is put up or shut up time and it appears he's going to shut up.