Why the Left Can't Be Reasoned With

[Donnadogsoth]

Tom Woods draws and jaws on the possibility that the Left aren't hypocrites because they never said they believed in freedom, instead relying on the worship of "our great institutions" to whip up hysteria against President Trump, when, as Woods says, the US government has done far worse things than Trump has ever countenanced.  He also needles virtue-signalling libertarians who appear oblivious to, or cowed before, the Left menace.

Why The Left Can't Be Reasoned With

[plato85]

The thing is the Left call themselves Liberals because in a previous generation they did say they believed in liberty. Their liberty meant something different from it's classical meaning. Roosevelt defended Europe from Tyranny (reluctantly). He lifted the prohibition. He started a rights movement, he wanted everyone to have equal rights. He wanted people to have more rights. That movement continued up till the 80s or 90s, but then it was more or less finished. The left morphed into what ever it is now since then.

[Jsbrads]

Combination of key influential players who suppress important news.

The short memory of people: I watched Bob Beckel on The Five (on Fox) admit every time that Leftist policies have not only failed but done so spectacularly and destructively, but he comes back the next day to fight for those same policies. 

[Spenc]

I have a very vivid memory of a Facebook encounter I had many years ago when Ann Coulter was scheduled to appear at the University of Ottawa but protestors were causing a stink, and then the Human RIghts Council of the federal government issued a warning that if she said certain things she would be in trouble.  She ended up cancelling her appearance and some liberal girl on facebook was all high and mighty about it and how "free speech doesn't allow for the types of hateful things COulter says".  I have no memory of what Coulter was saying at the time, nor did I care at all about her, but I defended the principle of free speech rights successfully.  The liberal's response was to accept that she did not care for rights then, because it was better to deny people rights and not have Ann COulter speak than to support real free speech.

 

I was both impressed with her honesty and disgusted that she could flip so quickly on a fundamental principle she had just been advocating (incorrectly, but nonetheless....)

[Brainwright]

Because they lie.  You can't treat these people like they are arguing in good faith.

The degree to which even the highest levels of the Democratic Party exploit leftist violence leaves none of them in good standing.

[spartacus2017]

You cannot reason a person out of a position which they did not REASON themselves into in the first place...

[Magnetic Synthesizer]

Well guys. The answer has already been found scientifically, mostly. I am reading the bestseller '' thinking fast and slow'' of applied psychology. It is clear that cognitive faculties that we associate with ''reason'' involve a different mental process that we get tired form using it (and averse to using it). It is very possible to live without using it. Perhaps some people completely forget about it and it is simply a learned habit of their mind to not use it.

Please read that book. I sincerely think these people either need some emotional manipulation to want to reason or they have a too deeply ingrained habit to be worth engaging with (which is where I'm at).

In fact this is so logical, it's like seeing a ball roll on the floor: WHY WOULD YOU EXPECT ANYTHING DIFFERENT? The process by which they FAIL TO ANSWER THE QUESTION and seem OBLIVIOUS TO IT is blatantly obvious. It is a huge act of uncaring to whoever or whatever they engaged to give these bs quick automatic response processes. This is the kind of artifact that comes out of it, especially if you're stupid.

r/physical_removal