Too Pugnacious?

I got carried away with answering an ill-thought out post by a die-hard conservative on a thread titled "Liberalism is a mental disorder." To which I took offense, though in retrospect the authors of both thread and post are probably too juvenile to merit much antagonism.

Conservative guy:

"Conservatives, like I, do not claim our current President, he is socially liberal. He does nothing but to try and appease the Democrats, which blows my mind because no matter what he is going to do they will hate him. All he has done with his current policies is push both conservatives and liberals both away. Why do you think his ratings are so low? If CNN were to call and ask me today if I like President Bush, I would of course say no, but that would be because I feel like he deserted his conservative principles a long time ago, unlike the common Liberal who would say some miss-informed statement like "He lied" or "He is stupid". Also cursing? If you want someone to take your political opinions seriously do not end your statement in profanity, nothing is less classy.



I would not view Liberalism as a mental disorder, rather a marker for how wrongfully informed that person (a Liberal) is. I have observed that Liberals tend lack knowledge of history, workings of US government, and how a Democracy functions. Often they don’t understand tax systems, and the checks and balances systems. Liberals only do what feels good, but is often wrong, Conservatives do what is right but it often is not the easiest."

My reply:

"President Bush is socially liberal? I'd like to see you justify that statement. He is opposed to abortion, gay marriage, stem cell research, etc. and he denied global warming until his 2007 State of the Union Address. Granted, he leans towards the Democrats on health care and immigration policies, but those are only two issues out of many.

Please do not assume that you are some psychic who can predict what liberals will say in response to the question of why his ratings are so low. Undoubtedly there are a variety of reasons for that, but in response to your suppositions, I will contend that "He lied" is not a misinformed statement. His efforts to convince not only the people of the US, but also the international community that the primary reason for starting a preemptive war with Iraq was the presence of WMDs certainly construes misinformation to me. A lack of transparency, withholding knowledge from the public, also equals lying in my view. And Bush has kept certain unsavory matters secret, including secret -domestic- prisons, unauthorized surveillance, and the use of torture.

Additionally, though you have "observed" that liberals tend to lack the sort of knowledge you have listed, your general stereotypical statement reveals your own ignorance. Obviously there are intelligent as well as wrongfully informed individuals of both political alignments. As a political science major, I am quite familiar with the topics you have listed.

Furthermore, I would say that conservatives have even less knowledge of the way our democracy functions as they are constantly trying to turn it into a theocracy. Where is your support that conservatives do "what is right"? Some of the policies conservatives support directly oppose the principles of our Constitution. Take gay marriage. Conservatives want to ban it, but the First Amendment explicitly states that our government shall "make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Gay marriage is mainly wrong in the eyes of the religious (excluding some sects, of course) so to ban it would be violating the separation of state and church."

In short, I respect intellectual, well-reasoned arguments, but I dislike mindless mudslinging, ad hominem antagonism on both sides of the political spectrum and I wish there was less of it among our public discourse. Which brings to mind Al Gore's compelling argument in his Assault on Reason, which I shall blog about when I am done reading it.



Shameless advertising, but it's a worthy book. Deplores the lack of rational, respectful discourse in the public sphere. Identifies the sources of this intellectual depreciation, including the uncanny influence of television. Also identifies a solution, for not all hope is lost.