Liberals Worried That Without Cancel Culture They'd Actually Have To Defend Their Ideas

submitted by scrubking from (babylonbee.com)

all 38 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 22 insightful - 3 fun22 insightful - 2 fun23 insightful - 3 fun -  (16 children)

Their ideas are indefensible. The only way the left wins any argument is censorship. If they can't censor, they jump ship. If they engage in good faith debate, they are eventually converted. It's why every uncensored space becomes over time increasingly right wing until there are no other voices left willing to debate. Doesn't mean they'll all end up third position, but they'll at least end up realizing 3 key things; all stemming from biology.

  • Forced diversity makes for unstable shitty societies
  • Ethnic groups are like dog breeds. On average some can jump higher than others, some are smarter than others, and some are more aggressive. If you breed them all into a supermutt you won't end up with a better world.
  • Men and women are not the same

If someone doesn't embrace some third position politics at the very least they begin to view freedom of association with the same importance the US founders did. This is the bane of leftism, which is to force everyone into the same area and then force them to all be deferential to the most defective individuals in the lot. After all, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". The left realizes many of these people are defective (by their definition of success), at least subconsciously, but can not accept that there are biological reasons. They reject nature. Having rejected biology, all that is left as an answer is every ism (bigotry/racism/etc) you can shake a stick at.

That is not to say 'isms can't and don't exist, they certainly do - just that in a perfect egalitarian society you have vastly unequal outcomes between groups and genders because all humans are not the same. If you are to have a multicultural society, everyone must be equal under the law - but government interference should end there.

As an example, "There aren't as many women in STEM! Sexism"... No, most women aren't that interested in technical or mechanical things, they are more social. "There aren't as many black doctors! Racism"... No, in spite of many advantages blacks have in pursing that education like SAT bonus points based on race and affirmative action placement, most aren't mentally equipped to be doctors, and aren't interested often even when they are.

[–]liberty_primer 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

I'm a half Jew. The other half is anglo Germanic.

This makes me, by any coherent genetic definition, White ... at least as White as the average Italian is. However, a lot of folks don't see it that way. Whatever, that's cool.

I actually support your ability to freely choose not to associate with me. Hell if you want to secede and make your own ethnostate that excludes me that's fine. Just don't outright evict me from where I'm at and we good.

If you put in "freedom of association" terms, I think that could go a long way to convincing normies to give you some space. If you put it in imperialistic "take over everything" terms, that's gonna turn a lot of general public off because ... most people don't want to see all non Whites (and in my case ... even some Whites) thrown out of the only nation/home they've known.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'd say the only hope of things not ending in oceans of blood is somehow returning to mainstream acceptance of ethnic biodiversity and sexual dimorphism as it relates to the brain and emotions. Until that occurs we have no foundation for a just society; as every time a 70 IQ inbred goat herder or housewife from the third world isn't successful in the West, it must be because those awful ists' and isms were holding them back. This flies in the face of all common sense, but it's still accepted dogma. No sane society would willingly accept such people to begin with, because they have nothing to offer.

I don't see that happening unfortunately / we're too far down the rabbit hole of insanity and hubris. Also, it's not like you can deport these people once they're here. In the US currently, only white, jewish, and asian men are net tax contributors. Everyone else is a tax burden. The average black american costs the country upwards of 700k over their lifetime. Offering them 500k to renounce citizenship and move elsewhere would result in savings. Even if we got freedom of association back - I have no desire to subsidize dysgenic breeding.

[–]liberty_primer 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I wish it were politically possible to offer such a deal. If even half took it, we’d be better off.

I think they would better off too actually. I’m not one of those people that fully buy into the notion that black people cant create functional societies at all. Nigeria, for example, has actually done decently well for themselves. Not great, but not an unmitigated disaster ... at least not most of the time. Don’t get me wrong, I think the lower IQ is at least partly genetic for blacks, but not everything they touch turns to shit. Especially when they form nuclear family units and don’t have another race to blame their problems on.

The main reason I prefer to live apart is that I just can’t see how black people wouldn’t resent a nation that once enslaved them, especially with a media that seems hell bent on stoking this resentment. At this point, I just don’t want to deal with it. I don’t want them forcibly deported, but I’m more than happy to incentivize them to leave of their own free will.

Too bad it’s probably not politically possible.

Also: Spics are based to me. I wanna keep them. We can just live apart if need be in my anarcho “no voice free exit” utopian pipe dream.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wow. Honestly this is much higher iq conversation than the ones on voat...

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I wish it were politically possible to offer such a deal. If even half took it, we’d be better off.

Stuff could be organized privately if it's not popular enough to use gov't funds to do it yet.

[–]MuricaPersonified 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Have you ever seen how hard it is for actually productive people to emigrate to the US? It takes tens of thousands of dollars, notarized witnesses and sponsors, detailed background checks, work history and proof of worth; years of wading through a mire of bureaucracy to get your citizenship- and that's if you're lucky.

It's fucking insulting to those people how we will import low IQ savages by full boats and planes who have no traceable identity, low IQ, lack of skill, and completely incompatible cultures, all willy-nilly with no oversight.

[–]MuricaPersonified 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

The problem with Ashkenazis with similar ancestry to you is they will shapeshift back and forth from white and jew, depending on what's most convenient for them at the time. The reason I think anyone with a shred of jewish blood should be separated is chiefly because of their inherently nepotistic social structure and that they will employ subterfuge and sow discord to keep their cover.

[–]liberty_primer 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

A.) Ashkenazi Jews are basically the same as southern Italians and Greeks on a genetic level. Shall we ban southern meds while we’re at it?

B.) Well over half of American Jews intermarry. 77% for Jews that aren’t religious. If they were that inclined toward nepotism and in group preference, that wouldnt happen. It may have been the case in the past, but it is not now.

C.) By all means separate yourself out, but don’t act like you have any legitimate claim on how I live my life. I didn’t do anything to you.

D.) I’m not shapeshifting into anything. I don’t bullshit anyone into thinking I’m anything I’m not.

[–]MuricaPersonified 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Italians aren't honkeys, and I have Greek family that is insufferable, so sure.

They're don't have to be religious to support the zionist agendas; they're actually some of the worst SJWs.

Depends on what you support. If you advocate for policies that affect my rights, then that is a hypocritical statement. Live and let live was a failed experiment.

Ok, glad to hear that you don't play that card.

[–]liberty_primer 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I literally support your right to start an ethnostate as long as you minimize the number of people you displace.

Yes. It’s okay to exclude me.

So no, I’m not a threat to your rights.

[–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

What if we want our ethnostate, the USA, to be an ethnostate as the founders intended it to be.

Why would we give up our ethnostate, the USA?

[–]liberty_primer 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Nah. That would displace me a lot of other people. I’d oppose that and fight you on it.

If you’re gonna go with “birthright” arguments then you don’t have an ethical leg to stand on in the USA. The USA isn’t some ethnic homeland. It was stolen through conquest.

I also care about individual freedom of choice. I don’t care about mega corporate or ethic empires existing. Hell, big empires shouldn’t be a thing at all. Empire was a mistake.

[–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Right. This means you're taking part in the genocide of whites. The US was founded by whites and for whites. This only changed in 1965 with the promise that it would not change the mark up of the demographics.
If you're non-white, then you're in the US and residing in the US as a conqueror and colonizer and actively fighting whites who does not want to be colonized. In this sense, you're no different than those who slaughtered the indians. We might be descendants of colonizers but you are part of the colonizing and the ongoing genocide.

If you're fighting us if we resist the colonization of our lands, then you are a conqueror. However you feel justified in this is up to you, but I feel justified in defending myself and my own.

[–]liberty_primer 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Fair enough. That makes us enemies then. Just know, I’d be more than happy to live and let live.

You’re creating the issue, not me.

PS: Genocide involves actually actively killing people. If the colonists left the Amerindians alone or attempted to coexist with them, it wouldn’t have been genocide.

[–]GConly 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

After all, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

Is Marxism not liberalism.

[–]GConly 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

liberals have begun to grow worried that it might get canceled.

Liberals don't do cancel culture.

The regressive intersectional Marxist left is what is at play here. RIMSs hate liberals because they can't stand up to scrutiny and liberals demand free speech.

Any one trying to kill free speech is not a liberal. They are an authoritarian.

[–]redditisacommie 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This have been bugging me for a while, does the US have their own definition of a liberal position? Or is it just a false lable but on woke people, the expression "libtard" never made sense to me.

[–]SaidOverRed 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes. Classical liberalism was a well understood notion when America declared its independence and defeated the most powerful Empire on the planet at the time. An American conservative is a person who still believes all those things. Thus American conservatives are European classical liberals. They would cheer on the president taking months of his time to make sure an edition of the Holy Bible is available to be used by the federal government to convert native peoples to Christianity: just like Thomas Jefferson actually did. No one should (or did) find this at all strange.

There were always two poles of US political debate, but their squabbles were small. It was often about coinage or how quickly to end slavery (yes, end. None in power actually thought it would go on forever). But after, say 1885 contact with Europe introduced an entirely foreign political pole: Leftism. Within a generation suffragettes would form the first 'coalitions' in this new ideology that increasingly left the previous consensus of US conservationism in the dust. They called themselves liberals and conservatives didn't fight the labeling.

Then came Socialism, FDR and the Civil Rights acts (which allow Trans to sue for gender discrimination now by the way, thanks to the Supreme Court). Race riots, skyrocketing divorce, criminalizing self defense, it all came be seen in infantile forms if you trace the history back far enough. That's why "liberalism" as two different uses but Leftist and Conservative don't. Something similar happened with the Red vs Blue coloring in the 1970s with the big 3 Mainstream Media outlets deciding to just swap whether Democrats were Reds or not. They didn't like voters realizing Democrats and Socialists/Communists shared the same color. That was considered a slur or something that needed to be hidden. You know, standard 1984 double-think.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You'll never get that word back, just like those on the right will never be able to claw conservative away from the Zionist corporate dick sucking neocons that expropriated it. I don't think we'll get fag (cigarette) or gay (happy) back either... Best to just get over it and move on.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

There are plenty of intelligent liberals and leftists with well-considered ideas. And plenty of echo-chambered people who haven't really had their ideas challenged, who repeat talking points of particular political narratives, who aren't liberals.

That's why SaidIt is great! It's supposed to help us all talk to each other and share information that's been kept in echo chambers lately.

[–]mathiasprime 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yup. I frequent both reddit and voat and arguing with liberals or conservatives who only stay within their echo chambers is like arguing with a broken CD. They don't actually address your points and repeat the same cliche things they hear without fully understanding it.

It's actually sad, they've depended on people in talk shows to think for them that they have lost their ability to process information properly.

[–]proc0 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Liberals are scared of a world where everyone is able to think for themselves. Ironic double talk is their most used strategy -- abusing authority while accusing others of abusing authority; labeling racists only people of a certain skin color; destroying lives with a slogan that says lives matter; almost everything they do and say is ironic. It's a very strange phenomenon.

[–]GConly 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Liberals are scared of a world where everyone is able to think for themselves

Yet again, liberals are essential free speech supporters.

This article is using the word liberal when it should be saying something like authoritarian left, or intersectional Marxists.

[–]Southbound06 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The article uses Liberal so that it can get easy clicks. If you've patrolled the_donald on reddit before it was banned, pretty much every post was "liburals taking our rights!1!" If they used the right terms they wouldn't get as many clicks. Most of the people who want to read these sorts of articles aren't the people who want to actually learn about what the far left is doing, but instead they want to hear about what they think it's doing.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, it's basicalluy American liberals.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sure, liberals in America. Agreed the word is misused here.

[–]IRONICALLY_A_NAZI 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Inverted. Upside down. It's not a phenomenon, it's a religion. I'll leave you to guess which religion promotes inversion of natural law.

[–]Spazzing247 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't really understand this political stuff its really confusing. I find i have left views but also right views and believe everyone has a right to freedom of speech but also the responsibility of concequences for what they say. Canceling someone or completely dismissing them because you don't like their opinion is counterproductive. Id rather be challenged when im wrong and learn from it than live in denial that im always right. Shit is wacked.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is what partisianship does people. George Washington was right, and political parties are abominations.

[–]Southbound06 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Liberals bad, Christians good. Now where's my insight points?

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Liberal Christian catholics? Anything revolutionary, perhaps what Saint Francis did or Yeshua was probably co sidered at that time by Rome and Jewish high priests to be a radical, if modernism existed back then they probably would have been called commies.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Homosexual activities are okay as long as they are done conservatively, fucking around the place is okay as long as it is done conservatively, pedophilic activities are okay as long as they are done conservatively, eating other people is okay as long as it is done conservatively, stealing is okay as long as it is done conservatively, murdering is okay as long as it is done conservatively.

[–]Newmug 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not.... nut none of those things are ok, no matter how they are done. That's not what conservatism means.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Our ideals indefensible. This coming from an electorate who has likely never read a book - just like their omnipotent leader, Donald J. Trump. He and his followers could learn a few things about how authoritarianism, totalitarianism, tyranny, and iron fist dictatorship means to their freedoms. But hey, when you read about the number of electorate in this country who support iron-fisted rule and willing to sacrifice their rights under the Constitution, well, I recommend the Biden administration provide free transportation of these electorate to the country of their choice - Russia or China. I'm sure they will feel welcomed and their ideals supported wholeheartedly.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Liberals are cool. Our country was founded on the liberalist ideology. These people are not liberals and anyone in the GOP is a traitor to the constitution as well.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm a rightist Chabad, Netanyahu and Trump supporter. All liberals are commies and they will destroy our country via china through muslims. /s

Also, Arabs own the FED, China owns Hollywood!