• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which most concerns Libs? The Black condition or Liberal ideology?

Which most concerns Libs? The Black condition or Liberal ideology?

  • Blacks

    Votes: 1 16.7%
  • Liberal ideology

    Votes: 3 50.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 2 33.3%

  • Total voters
    6

marsden

Banned
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
1,036
Reaction score
256
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Which most concerns Libs? The Black condition or Liberal ideology?


...liberals' devotion to their ideology greatly exceeds their concern about what actually happens to flesh and blood human beings as a result of their ideology.

Housing. Minimum wage laws and unemployment. The welfare system and the family. Affirmative action. School busing and education. Gun control.

In all these cases, and many others, liberals take positions that make them look good and feel good -- and show very little interest in the actual consequences for others, even when liberal policies are leaving havoc in their wake.

Liberalism Versus Blacks - Thomas Sowell

It is columns like this one I've cited that illustrates why Thomas Sowell is considered one of America's greatest columnists.
 
Last edited:
Obvious bait thread is obvious.
 
I don't know about housing or unemployment but its common knowledge that many democratic senators at the time of the passing of minimum wage where in support of it because they believed it would push blacks out the market. The idea was that blacks where taking jobs away from their white counterparts for less money and according to these senators this was something that needed to be stopped. If you look at the results of minimum wage when talking about unemployment numbers in the black population you will notice they are higher than they were at the passing of minimum wage. If anyone cares the trend of black unemployment before the passing of minimum wage was that it was getting lower every year which hasn't happened since regardless of what people think. How minimum wage works is that it destories the chance to give rates lower than the one mandated and as such it becomes apparent to anyone that knows a damn thing about capitalism that it acts to lower employment of lower skilled individuals and will shift employment to those that are worth the new mandated rate. People enjoy denying this but black unemployment before and after minimum wage shows they are wrong.
 
Last edited:
Obvious bait thread is obvious.

See, that's why nothing ever gets done on this stuff. Instead of addressing the issue it's easier to say that the other guy is baiting or, if you want to get political, he's a racist or hate monger or conservative nut job.......anything to deflect and avoid talking about a very real problem.


Why not start by answering a simple question....we have a number of rather blighted communities in many of our urban centers where crime, poverty and violence are far more prevalent than in other areas. Do those areas tend to be inhabited primarily by minorities or not? Then, once you answer that, tell me why, after decades of liberal policies directing money, material and personnel into those areas to "help", why do those areas still exist and what problems have those policies solved?
 
[ TITLE: 11pm, JULY 25th 1967 ]

PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON: Law and order have broken down in Detroit, Michigan. Pillage, looting, murder…

VO: Only a few years before, President Johnson had promised policies that would create a new and a better world in America. He had called it "the Great Society."

[ TITLE: President LYNDON JOHNSON, 1964 ]

JOHNSON: The Great Society is in place where every child can find knowledge to enrich his mind. It is a place where the City of Man…

VO: But now, in the wake of some of the worst riots ever seen in America, that dream seemed to have ended in violence and hatred. One prominent liberal journalist called Irving Kristol began to question whether it might actually be the policies themselves that were causing social breakdown.

IRVING KRISTOL: If you had asked any liberal in 1960, we are going to pass these laws, these laws, these laws, and these laws, mentioning all the laws that in fact were passed in the 1960s and ‘70s, would you say crime will go up, drug addiction will go up, illegitimacy will go up, or will they get down? Obviously, everyone would have said, they will get down. And everyone would have been wrong. Now, that's not something that the
liberals have been able to face up to. They've had their reforms, and they have led to consequences that they
did not expect and they don't know what to do about.


Power of Nightmares



They've had their reforms, and they have led to consequences that they did not expect and they don't know
what to do about.



What they've done is to make use of their mistakes to better their own fortunes!
 
Last edited:
See, that's why nothing ever gets done on this stuff. Instead of addressing the issue it's easier to say that the other guy is baiting or, if you want to get political, he's a racist or hate monger or conservative nut job.......anything to deflect and avoid talking about a very real problem.


Why not start by answering a simple question....we have a number of rather blighted communities in many of our urban centers where crime, poverty and violence are far more prevalent than in other areas. Do those areas tend to be inhabited primarily by minorities or not? Then, once you answer that, tell me why, after decades of liberal policies directing money, material and personnel into those areas to "help", why do those areas still exist and what problems have those policies solved?

Because I'm smart enough not to take the bait. It's a circular question -- damned if you do, damned if you don't.
 
3. Baiting/Flaming/Trolling - To bait someone in a general sense is to make a comment with a purposeful intent to coerce some form of response from the individual

That's in the forum rules. But I guess the mods are blind.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Do not play moderator. If you feel a post or thread breaks the rules, report it and then leave it be.
 
That's in the forum rules. But I guess the mods are blind.

I guess to some people's way of thinking ANY thread dealing with race or with the Liberal's way of dealing with race is against the rules.

If this thread is ruled to be against the rules what kind of thread would be allowed which would get to the heart of Liberal ideology?

I say that this is exactly the kind of question that needs to be addressed.

The protests against this thread are an indication of some folks' inability to come up with a way of answering the question which makes them look good.

Well, that is not against the rules.

That is what a forum is for.

To point out the flaws in the other side's positions.


Isn't it?
 
Which most concerns Libs? The Black condition or Liberal ideology?




Housing. Minimum wage laws and unemployment. The welfare system and the family. Affirmative action. School busing and education. Gun control.



Liberalism Versus Blacks - Thomas Sowell

It is columns like this one I've cited that illustrates why Thomas Sowell is considered one of America's greatest columnists.

Thomas Sowell is an idiot who has no clue what liberals believe(or is willing to misrepresent that belief). Your poll is based on a straw man with no bearing in reality. The beauty of liberalism as an ideology is that it benefits every one, white, black, hispanic, asian, rich, poor, urban or rural.
 
Thomas Sowell is an idiot who has no clue what liberals believe(or is willing to misrepresent that belief). Your poll is based on a straw man with no bearing in reality. The beauty of liberalism as an ideology is that it benefits every one, white, black, hispanic, asian, rich, poor, urban or rural.

I have no doubt that sincere concern is what draws many to the Liberal philosophy. However, the actual results of the actions based on Liberal ideology have not measured up to the sincere concerns felt by many who subscribe to the Liberal philosophy.

Basically, the results don't warrant the loyalty many feel for Liberalism.

I know this is a prickly question but, what if Liberal ideology isn't working?

Would a blind allegience to it and another trillion (or whatever) dollars and another twenty years make it more effective?

Haven't we seen enough since 1967?

As Irving Crystal said, "They've had their reforms, and they have led to consequences that they did not expect and they don't know what to do about."
 
That's in the forum rules. But I guess the mods are blind.

Funny but I saw no attempt to bait you or anyone else. A poll like any other thread does not require any reply. Forum rules also state exactly how to report a post for review. You may either contribute to the discussion or not, totally your choice.
 
Wait...this was a legitimate thread? Oh ok. I guess I can throw out a response.

I would lean toward blacks. I don't think the "liberal ideology" can be necessarily viewed as bad, but I think it's prone to corruption, entitlement, and shirking of responsibility in most levels. However, I think that can be overcome. I think black culture plays a big part in perpetuating what I said above, but the main thing is that I don't think they want that to change or be overcome.

Blacks are their own worst enemies, and their culture if self-destructive and designed to keep them at the bottom.
 
I have no doubt that sincere concern is what draws many to the Liberal philosophy. However, the actual results of the actions based on Liberal ideology have not measured up to the sincere concerns felt by many who subscribe to the Liberal philosophy.

Basically, the results don't warrant the loyalty many feel for Liberalism.

I know this is a prickly question but, what if Liberal ideology isn't working?

Would a blind allegience to it and another trillion (or whatever) dollars and another twenty years make it more effective?

Haven't we seen enough since 1967?

As Irving Crystal said, "They've had their reforms, and they have led to consequences that they did not expect and they don't know what to do about."

No one has implemented a truly liberal government. Those failures could just as easily be blamed on having to make compromises with conservatives.
 
No one has implemented a truly liberal government. Those failures could just as easily be blamed on having to make compromises with conservatives.

Scandanavian countries have it incredibly damn close.
 
Thomas Sowell is an idiot who has no clue what liberals believe(or is willing to misrepresent that belief). Your poll is based on a straw man with no bearing in reality. The beauty of liberalism as an ideology is that it benefits every one, white, black, hispanic, asian, rich, poor, urban or rural.

Just how do social policies/programs that reward HS dropouts having children out of wedlock "advance" or "benefit" anyone? I fully support the idea of granting all an opportunity to succeed, however any attempt to guarantee a particular outcome regardless of personal decisions made, counter to that desire, should not be rewarded. All carrot and no stick, does not work. Pretending it is a mere coincidence that out of wedlock childbirth rates, a primary "qualification" for public assistance being a minor child in the "household", rose signifanctly as the "great society" programs took off, is rediculous.
 
What concerns me is liberal ideology.

I just wish more people who self-identify as liberal would follow it.
 
Scandanavian countries have it incredibly damn close.

They are in an entirely different situation and are not liberal as the US liberal sees the term.
 
Wait...this was a legitimate thread? Oh ok. I guess I can throw out a response.

I would lean toward blacks. I don't think the "liberal ideology" can be necessarily viewed as bad, but I think it's prone to corruption, entitlement, and shirking of responsibility in most levels. However, I think that can be overcome. I think black culture plays a big part in perpetuating what I said above, but the main thing is that I don't think they want that to change or be overcome.

Blacks are their own worst enemies, and their culture if self-destructive and designed to keep them at the bottom.

Your substitution of blacks, for many participants in welfare programs (that are mostly not black), makes race appear to be a deciding factor as to whether to jump aboard the welfare gravy train and ride it as long as possible. That is a rediculous and false assertion. Many strikes are against those stuck in "the hood", the biggest are crime (mostly drug/gang driven), poor educational facilities and lack of any decent job prospects. The best social program improvement, that I can think of, is simply removing folks, on a strictly volunteer basis, similar to the witness protection program and giving them a shot at life outside of "the hood"; a simple hand up, not an endless subsidy in the worst possible place.
 
They are in an entirely different situation and are not liberal as the US liberal sees the term.

Yeah that's true. Because of oil, they can get away with some raging liberal stuff. I do think that most American liberals, if they saw their system, would give it a "thumbs up" though.
 
Yeah that's true. Because of oil, they can get away with some raging liberal stuff. I do think that most American liberals, if they saw their system, would give it a "thumbs up" though.

I don't think so. They have restrictions on personal liberty we would not accept.
 
The beauty of liberalism as an ideology is that it benefits every one, white, black, hispanic, asian, rich, poor, urban or rural.

Doesn't almost every ideology say this?
 
Your substitution of blacks, for many participants in welfare programs (that are mostly not black), makes race appear to be a deciding factor as to whether to jump aboard the welfare gravy train and ride it as long as possible. That is a rediculous and false assertion. Many strikes are against those stuck in "the hood", the biggest are crime (mostly drug/gang driven), poor educational facilities and lack of any decent job prospects. The best social program improvement, that I can think of. is simply removing folks, on a strictly volunteer basis, similar to the witness protection program and giving them a shot at life outside of "the hood".

Do they want that though? I don't see much in white culture that revels in living within the confines of poverty and violence. In white culture, I don't think "thug" and "gangsta" and "pimp" are compliments like they are amongst blacks.

Is the system I described not racial? Absolutely not. You see poverty-stricken whites all over the place. I guess I just see a larger effort for them to get "out of the trailer parks" than I do blacks for getting "out of the hood". Could I be wrong? Absolutely. It's still what I see though.

To me, it's just about who's willing to pull themselves up and out by the bootstraps. Anyone willing to do that, I'm more than willing to see them halfway.
 
Back
Top Bottom