Post: #1

I was informed on this article this morning from a family member who knows I enjoy this topic.
Here you can read about the lefts thought control on various issues from global warming to gay marriage, any who disagree is a bigot, a denier or any other common leftist insult. Some of you may need a dictionary (I did), but its a very good read, and nice to see some truth out there.

Post: #2

Progressives believe in inclusion until you disagree with them, and that's when the flame war starts.

Post: #3

Yes. And its good more and more will read this and start to wake up as to what's going on. My question is how else or what else can be done to start to get the ball moving to combat the progressive thinking. Usually my answer usually ends in violence, but I know it shouldn't get to that point.

Post: #4

(04-14-2014 01:33 PM)Snowplow Wrote:  Yes. And its good more and more will read this and start to wake up as to what's going on. My question is how else or what else can be done to start to get the ball moving to combat the progressive thinking. Usually my answer usually ends in violence, but I know it shouldn't get to that point.

Keep calling people on their bullshit, and don't allow yourself to be cowed.

Post: #5

(04-14-2014 01:33 PM)Snowplow Wrote:  Yes. And its good more and more will read this and start to wake up as to what's going on. My question is how else or what else can be done to start to get the ball moving to combat the progressive thinking. Usually my answer usually ends in violence, but I know it shouldn't get to that point.

Not calling these leftists "progressives" would be the first step.

Post: #6

What if you're a minority who doesn't agree with them?

Post: #7

Then you must be an uncle Tom or maybe a tio juan Hahaha

Post: #8

Since it's a PLUS article its not letting me read it without registering an account, can you paste it here?

Post: #9

Quote:April 14, 2014

WASHINGTON — Two months ago, a petition bearing more than 110,000 signatures was delivered to The Washington Post demanding a ban on any article questioning global warming. The petition arrived the day before publication of my column, which consisted of precisely that heresy.

The column ran as usual. But I was gratified by the show of intolerance because it perfectly illustrated my argument that the left is entering a new phase of ideological agitation — no longer trying to win the debate but stopping debate altogether, banishing from public discourse any and all opposition.

The proper word for that attitude is totalitarian. It declares certain controversies over and visits serious consequences — from social ostracism to vocational defenestration — upon those who refuse to be silenced.

Sometimes the word comes from on high, as when the president of the United States declares the science of global warming to be "settled." Anyone who disagrees is branded "anti-science." And better still, a "denier" — a brilliantly chosen calumny meant to impute to the climate skeptic the opprobrium normally reserved for the hatemongers and crackpots who deny the Holocaust.

Then last week, another outbreak. The newest closing of the leftist mind is on gay marriage. Just as the science of global warming is settled, so, it seems, are the moral and philosophical merits of gay marriage.

To oppose it is nothing but bigotry, akin to racism. Opponents are to be similarly marginalized and shunned, destroyed personally and professionally.

Like the CEO of Mozilla who resigned under pressure just 10 days into his job when it was disclosed that six years earlier he had donated to California's Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman.

But why stop with Brendan Eich, the victim of this high-tech lynching? Prop 8 passed by half a million votes. Six million Californians joined Eich in the crime of "privileging" traditional marriage. So did Barack Obama. In that same year, he declared that his Christian beliefs made him oppose gay marriage.

Yet under the new dispensation, this is outright bigotry. By that logic, the man whom the left so ecstatically carried to the White House in 2008 was equally a bigot.

The whole thing is so stupid as to be unworthy of exegesis. There is no logic. What's at play is sheer ideological prejudice — and the enforcement of the new totalitarian norm that declares, unilaterally, certain issues to be closed.

To this magic circle of forced conformity, the left would like to add certain other policies, resistance to which is deemed a "war on women." It's a colorful synonym for sexism. Leveling the charge is a crude way to cut off debate.

Thus, to oppose late-term abortion is to make war on women's "reproductive health." Similarly, to question Obamacare's mandate of free contraception for all.

Some oppose the regulation because of its impingement on the free exercise of religion. Others on the simpler (nontheological) grounds of a skewed hierarchy of values. Under the new law, everything is covered, but a few choice things are given away free. To what does contraception owe its exalted status? Why should it rank above, say, antibiotics for a sick child, for which that same mother must co-pay?

Say that, however, and you are accused of denying women "access to contraception."

Or try objecting to the new so-called Paycheck Fairness Act for women, which is little more than a full-employment act for trial lawyers. Sex discrimination is already illegal. What these new laws do is relieve the plaintiffs of proving intentional discrimination. To bring suit, they need only to show that women make less in that workplace.

Like the White House, where women make 88 cents to the men's dollar?

That's called "disparate impact." Does anyone really think Obama consciously discriminates against female employees, rather than the disparity being a reflection of experience, work history, etc.? But just to raise such questions is to betray heretical tendencies.

The good news is that the "war on women" charge is mostly cynicism, fodder for campaign-year demagoguery. But the trend is growing. Oppose the current consensus and you're a denier, a bigot, a homophobe, a sexist, an enemy of the people.

Long a staple of academia, the totalitarian impulse is spreading. What to do? Defend the dissenters, even if — perhaps, especially if — you disagree with their policy. It is — it was? — the American way.

Washington Post Writers Group

Charles Krauthammer is a Washington Post columnist.

[email protected]

Copyright © 2014 Chicago Tribune Company, LLC

Pasted for the lazy.

Post: #10

(04-14-2014 01:33 PM)Snowplow Wrote:  Yes. And its good more and more will read this and start to wake up as to what's going on. My question is how else or what else can be done to start to get the ball moving to combat the progressive thinking. Usually my answer usually ends in violence, but I know it shouldn't get to that point.

You need to start speaking your mind in real life and on platforms where you publish under your real name. As long as all criticism of political correctness is limited to anonymous forums, it's easy to dismiss as "trolling." We need more people speaking up on Facebook and Twitter. I personally have started posting about this stuff on my Facebook account. It's not comfortable to do, especially since so many of my family and friends are liberal, but I have a couple allies who back me up. You need to take action to change what you don't like.

Post: #11

In person I say stuff all the time, but not on a very large platform. I ended up deleting Facebook months ago, mainly sick of attention whoring, but I was always attacked for my beliefs there with no back up, my friends don't wanna get into a flame war online.

My biggest problem now is that if anyone would go to my employer, and try to get me fired. Its extremely liberal here and I'm sure H.R. would love to can a white boy who makes more than them, for reasons we disagree on.

I can drop an argument from someone I disagree with even if they manage to piss me off and get the better of me. But I have humilty. Someone else might as well, but a lot of people are vengeful and would not care if they ruined my life over an argument.

I'm saving up for this event to go down anyway, cause I think one day I'll have enough and eventually make them look stupid and quit.

Post: #12

Strangely enough I have usually been middle-of-the-road (with a slight lean to the left) politically, however recent events have made me realise how frightening the left can be. Any extreme - left or right - is silly in my opinion, but when any ideology wants to quash debate altogether, that is a very, very dangerous step towards a dystopia.

Post: #13

(04-15-2014 11:52 PM)Snowplow Wrote:  Then you must be an uncle Tom or maybe a tio juan Hahaha

I doubt these people would say something like that or even think it. I don't hang with those crowds so I don't know how they would react.

Post: #14

(04-16-2014 05:26 PM)Snowplow Wrote:  ...My biggest problem now is that if anyone would go to my employer, and try to get me fired. Its extremely liberal here and I'm sure H.R. would love to can a white boy who makes more than them, for reasons we disagree on....

It's one of the reasons I post here. I may be far from the ideal "RooshMan", but this forum allows me a rare opportunity to speak my mind. I just don't have the time to engage in online wars with every beta butt boy who has a computer. On Facebook I've taken to deleting or not following anyone who goes on a political rant. It may not be the best way to deal with it, but one only has so many hours in the day.