I’ve been looking for a way to summarize my political beliefs in one neat sentence but couldn’t come up with anything.
Until I found the following statement on somebody else’s blog:
Conservatives may be jerks, but liberals are useless.
This says it perfectly.
Conservatives are only useful at being jerks, mind.
LikeLike
Conservatives generally feel very threatened by spontaneity and give it all sorts of labels and go on the war path against. Liberals have the whole of reality tied up into nice neat packages and labeled with various degrees of sin. Liberals are, on the whole, more intelligent. They’re not necessarily more tolerant, but are much less aggressive.
LikeLike
I think that it’s more correct to say that liberals (warning: generalization ahead) are rarely openly aggressive. But they’re great at being passive-aggressive. Confrontation makes them “uncomfortable” so instead of just telling you what their problem is they go behind your back to the nearest person in authority and make a complaint. Note: they didn’t used to be this way; back in the Seventies liberals were against things like governments forcing people to behave nicely to one another. But then the Berlin Wall was taken down and liberals seemed to lose all sense of direction. (Conservatives too, but they’re another problem.)
As for intelligence, I really don’t think you can measure that of conservatives versus liberals that way. I’ve met plenty of dim people who called themselves “liberal.” Being more “open to new ideas,” which is how I’ve heard people describe liberals, isn’t always a sign of intelligence — it’s often just a sign that you lack the power of discernment.
LikeLike
The complaint making thing is super huge over here. People who try to use this form of power have none of my respect. I find such people very indecent and very bad mannered.
LikeLike
In fact, immediately somebody behaves in a passive-aggressive manner towards me, I move them from the category of “subject” to “thing”. That is, there is no longer any room for a personal relationship. I will watch and observe them like an insect, and if need be, mechanically conform to their requests, but I have no interest in them as a human being any longer.
LikeLike
<blockquote…immediately somebody behaves in a passive-aggressive manner towards me, I move them from the category of “subject” to “thing”.
Mmmyeah…no. Not really into the dehumanizing of people into objects. I find that makes the problem even worse. People are passive-aggressive (i.e., backstabby) because they don’t fully recognize the humanity of the person they’re backstabbing. They are not in a state of mind to recognize a “back at ya” treatment, they’ll just be shocked and think themselves justified for avoiding treating you like a person in the first place. The lesson you’ve taught them is the wrong one, in the service of petty revenge.
The proper thing to do, of course (though by this time you’ll probably have to have a person of authority like your boss or parent with you, but only for balance-resetting and witnessing purposes) is to break through the passive-aggressive game by confronting your persecuter. You refuse to play: you treat them like a human being with responsibilities, and demand to know what their damage is. The point is never to get drawn into their game; screw the game.
LikeLike
Twisted Spinster 8:57
Much of what you said has been my experience too, although one might quibble with you about the dates.
LikeLike
Liberals might be useless, but conservatives are jerks?
LikeLike
No, no, no, I don’t play a game when I treat them objectively. I give them what they are asking for — a simpler, more-straightforward world, where humans don’t need to interact in any way that seems worrisome or intimate.
LikeLike
A conservative literary critic and college professor
Clarissa's Blog 
Leave a comment