Woman sentenced to 20+ years for supposedly performing abortion

[Ultimate Paragon]

It should also be noted, UP, that higher levels of education tend to make people more liberal.

You would probably say that it's because of the influence of liberal professors in academia. While that's undoubtedly a factor, I'd argue that a much larger one would be the fact that higher levels of education tend to expose people to other worldviews and ways of thinking. While that doesn't immunize them against groupthink and "my side is always correct," it does tend to foster a greater concern for the rights of others. American conservatism, on the other hand, has strong anti-intellectual tendencies even in their mainstream...if something is too complicated to explain in ten minutes or less, it's not worth knowing, "real men always follow their gut," the glorification of unquestioning faith over critical thought, etc.

Add in the fact that you need a certain degree of higher education in order to qualify to TEACH higher education, and you get a situation where most of the people applying for higher-education jobs are already predisposed toward a liberal worldview. That's not some vast conspiracy on the Left's part; that's just how it shakes out.

I'm still waiting for you to give any examples of how liberal idiots are anywhere near as dangerous as conservative idiots.

The conservative anti-intellectual strain is more recent than most people imagine.  Really, it only started to take root during the 1970s, and only sprouted in earnest even later.  I honestly don't know if this developed as a result of liberal bias in academia or helped to cause it (my research is vague and contradictory), but we cannot ignore the fact that it's a recent development.

You claim that college makes people more liberal.  Do you have sources?  Were the studies peer-reviewed?  When were they taken?

And as for "liberal idiots are less harmful": who has a higher body count, the Westboro Baptist Church or the Peoples Temple?

Postmodernists are typically leftists. Anti-vaxxer/anti-gmo/alternative medicine types are typically leftists. The crazy wing of the Social Justice movement is more or less entirely leftist. I think 9/11 truthers skew leftist as well, though I'm not sure.

The left has plenty of idiots to go around.

I would like to point out anti-vaxxers don't slant towards any one side http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/conservatives_and_liberals_hold_anti_science_views_anti_vaxxers_are_a_bipartisan.html

And yes, it's true their is liberal idiots, it's just that they don't cause even a fraction the damage right-wing extremists have,

That's really debatable.

Are you going to tell us why, or are we just supposed to take your word for it?

You're an Aussie, right?  Maybe something from your own country would hit closer to home.  Australia's biggest feminist website recently published an article literally defending female genital mutilation on the grounds that it's done in Africa and therefore criticizing it is "racist".

But don't take my word for it:

https://archive.today/IffrZ

[SCarpelan]

Re: leftism in academia.

This is actually something I noticed when I studied ethnology. It's a discipline that requires a capability to analyze and understand cultural phenomena without being judgemental about them, being able to see things in a greater context and the ability to tolerate a certain amount of relativism (which, of course, when taken too far can definitely be harmful). A person for whom this kind of thinking comes easily is also usually going to view the world in a more liberal way. This does produce a situation where overwhelming majority of the students and scholars are more liberal but it's questionable if it distorts the scientific process. If a person's way of thinking doesn't allow them to use a discipline's methodology properly it's better that they find a discipline that allows them to better use their personal resources.

The best way to correct possible intellectual distortions are IMO interdisciplinary projects and studies that take advantage of different perspectives to provide as nuanced a picture as possible and prevent individual disciplines from becoming echo chambers.

[R. U. Sirius]

It should also be noted, UP, that higher levels of education tend to make people more liberal.

You would probably say that it's because of the influence of liberal professors in academia. While that's undoubtedly a factor, I'd argue that a much larger one would be the fact that higher levels of education tend to expose people to other worldviews and ways of thinking. While that doesn't immunize them against groupthink and "my side is always correct," it does tend to foster a greater concern for the rights of others. American conservatism, on the other hand, has strong anti-intellectual tendencies even in their mainstream...if something is too complicated to explain in ten minutes or less, it's not worth knowing, "real men always follow their gut," the glorification of unquestioning faith over critical thought, etc.

Add in the fact that you need a certain degree of higher education in order to qualify to TEACH higher education, and you get a situation where most of the people applying for higher-education jobs are already predisposed toward a liberal worldview. That's not some vast conspiracy on the Left's part; that's just how it shakes out.

I'm still waiting for you to give any examples of how liberal idiots are anywhere near as dangerous as conservative idiots.

The conservative anti-intellectual strain is more recent than most people imagine.  Really, it only started to take root during the 1970s, and only sprouted in earnest even later.  I honestly don't know if this developed as a result of liberal bias in academia or helped to cause it (my research is vague and contradictory), but we cannot ignore the fact that it's a recent development.

You claim that college makes people more liberal.  Do you have sources?  Were the studies peer-reviewed?  When were they taken?

And as for "liberal idiots are less harmful": who has a higher body count, the Westboro Baptist Church or the Peoples Temple?

I'll see your false equivalence of a modern conservative social terrorism cult to a 1970s socialist suicide cult and raise you some relevant facts:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/terror-from-the-right
http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/whatever-happened-left-wing-domestic-terrorism

[ironbite]

Is UP really arguing that this is a recent phenomenon?  Excuse me while I giggle with Plato and Socrates.

[Sigmaleph]

Postmodernists are typically leftists. Anti-vaxxer/anti-gmo/alternative medicine types are typically leftists. The crazy wing of the Social Justice movement is more or less entirely leftist. I think 9/11 truthers skew leftist as well, though I'm not sure.

The left has plenty of idiots to go around.

I would like to point out anti-vaxxers don't slant towards any one side http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/conservatives_and_liberals_hold_anti_science_views_anti_vaxxers_are_a_bipartisan.html

Interesting. Thanks for the link.

[Barbarella]

Paragon, what happened? You went from sane to inflammatory. You've always been the one guy I could count on to be a friend on this board but now even I think you're being kind of reactionary.

Now, if there's a Feminist who's defending FGM, then I agree with you that she is crazy.

Yes, I agree with you that there are Left-Wingers who go too far. They're "Moonbats" aka "Extreme Militant Leftist Kookballs". I also agree that while "P.C." is a good thing, it can be taken too far. Yes, I too think that RadFems and SJW-types are annoying.

The problem is that you're confusing normal Leftists with the Moonbats. Frankly, you're alienating even me.....and I see you as a friend, here. I still do. However, you're getting weird.

There's Good & Bad Conservatives.
There's Good & Bad Liberals.

Perhaps we need to ditch this label nonsense and think in terms of "Progressive vs. Regressive" and "Authoritarian vs. Egalitarian". Both of these can be found in both Left & Right.

Granted, Left tends to favor "Progressive/Egalitarian" more often but there are exceptions, like Soviet-Style Communism (even if it was a perversion of Marx's ideas). Heck, "Communist" countries tend to be as oppressive as Right-Wing Fascist ones.

Political/Social alignment is very complex and multifaceted.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Paragon, what happened? You went from sane to inflammatory. You've always been the one guy I could count on to be a friend on this board but now even I think you're being kind of reactionary.

Now, if there's a Feminist who's defending FGM, then I agree with you that she is crazy.

Yes, I agree with you that there are Left-Wingers who go too far. They're "Moonbats" aka "Extreme Militant Leftist Kookballs". I also agree that while "P.C." is a good thing, it can be taken too far. Yes, I too think that RadFems and SJW-types are annoying.

The problem is that you're confusing normal Leftists with the Moonbats. Frankly, you're alienating even me.....and I see you as a friend, here. I still do. However, you're getting weird.

There's Good & Bad Conservatives.
There's Good & Bad Liberals.

Perhaps we need to ditch this label nonsense and think in terms of "Progressive vs. Regressive" and "Authoritarian vs. Egalitarian". Both of these can be found in both Left & Right.

Granted, Left tends to favor "Progressive/Egalitarian" more often but there are exceptions, like Soviet-Style Communism (even if it was a perversion of Marx's ideas). Heck, "Communist" countries tend to be as oppressive as Right-Wing Fascist ones.

Political/Social alignment is very complex and multifaceted.

I agree, most leftists are not moonbats.  Just as most rightists aren't wingnuts.  I'm a moderate, so maybe I can see the flaws in the American Left more clearly than most on this board.  And in my opinion, the left's biggest flaw is the same as the right's: their inability to properly deal with extremists.

Now, with the Democrats, the inmates aren't running the asylum... yet.  But there are worrying signs that they might be making their move. 

My big fear is that the Democratic Party will suffer the same fate as the GOP: a focus on ideological purity turning it into a caricature of its former self.  It's already happened with the Occupy Movement.  I understand resentment at the fact that the Democrats have been pulled to the right, and I agree with a lot of it.  But giving in to radicalism is not the solution.  Or do you want to see Democratic politicians being labelled "DINOS" for the "crime" of not being liberal enough to satisfy the moonbats?

[Art Vandelay]

You're an Aussie, right?  Maybe something from your own country would hit closer to home.  Australia's biggest feminist website recently published an article literally defending female genital mutilation on the grounds that it's done in Africa and therefore criticizing it is "racist".

But don't take my word for it:

https://archive.today/IffrZ

There you go, that's something. Why didn't you post something like that in the first place?

[I am lizard]

You're an Aussie, right?  Maybe something from your own country would hit closer to home.  Australia's biggest feminist website recently published an article literally defending female genital mutilation on the grounds that it's done in Africa and therefore criticizing it is "racist".

But don't take my word for it:

https://archive.today/IffrZ

There you go, that's something. Why didn't you post something like that in the first place?

Did she cause any real world harm or did she just say stupid things.

[Ultimate Paragon]

You're an Aussie, right?  Maybe something from your own country would hit closer to home.  Australia's biggest feminist website recently published an article literally defending female genital mutilation on the grounds that it's done in Africa and therefore criticizing it is "racist".

But don't take my word for it:

https://archive.today/IffrZ

There you go, that's something. Why didn't you post something like that in the first place?

Did she cause any real world harm or did she just say stupid things.

One could ask the same question of Stormfront.  They talk a big game, but the most proactive thing they ever did was hijack a Fox News poll.

But since you asked, here's a more clear-cut case of real world harm: in the early 2000s, Zambia was hit by a devastating famine, so America sent food aid.  But the food was genetically modified, which unfortunately led Zambia's president to reject it on the "advice" of Greenpeace.

[I am lizard]

You're an Aussie, right?  Maybe something from your own country would hit closer to home.  Australia's biggest feminist website recently published an article literally defending female genital mutilation on the grounds that it's done in Africa and therefore criticizing it is "racist".

But don't take my word for it:

https://archive.today/IffrZ

There you go, that's something. Why didn't you post something like that in the first place?

Did she cause any real world harm or did she just say stupid things.

One could ask the same question of Stormfront.  They talk a big game, but the most proactive thing they ever did was hijack a Fox News poll.

But since you asked, here's a more clear-cut case of real world harm: in the early 2000s, Zambia was hit by a devastating famine, so America sent food aid.  But the food was genetically modified, which unfortunately led Zambia's president to reject it on the "advice" of Greenpeace.

Thanks you, that works.
Also, fuck you Greenpeace, you motherfuckers.

[Barbarella]

You're an Aussie, right?  Maybe something from your own country would hit closer to home.  Australia's biggest feminist website recently published an article literally defending female genital mutilation on the grounds that it's done in Africa and therefore criticizing it is "racist".

But don't take my word for it:

https://archive.today/IffrZ

There you go, that's something. Why didn't you post something like that in the first place?

Did she cause any real world harm or did she just say stupid things.

One could ask the same question of Stormfront.  They talk a big game, but the most proactive thing they ever did was hijack a Fox News poll.

But since you asked, here's a more clear-cut case of real world harm: in the early 2000s, Zambia was hit by a devastating famine, so America sent food aid.  But the food was genetically modified, which unfortunately led Zambia's president to reject it on the "advice" of Greenpeace.

Thanks you, that works.
Also, fuck you Greenpeace, you motherfuckers.

Now that's a good example. Greenpeace were boobs on that one!

[Lt. Fred]

Postmodernists are typically leftists.

This is sort of true. Most philosophy is either liberal or radical. This says more about conservatism than it does philosophers.

Anti-vaxxer/anti-gmo/alternative medicine types are typically leftists.

Half/half, with virtually no left politician and a good deal of right politicians onside.

I think 9/11 truthers skew leftist as well, though I'm not sure.

Not even they.

Postmodernists are typically leftists. Anti-vaxxer/anti-gmo/alternative medicine types are typically leftists. The crazy wing of the Social Justice movement is more or less entirely leftist. I think 9/11 truthers skew leftist as well, though I'm not sure.

The left has plenty of idiots to go around.

I would like to point out anti-vaxxers don't slant towards any one side http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/conservatives_and_liberals_hold_anti_science_views_anti_vaxxers_are_a_bipartisan.html

And yes, it's true their is liberal idiots, it's just that they don't cause even a fraction the damage right-wing extremists have,

That's really debatable.

Go ahead then. Which liberal group has caused as much harm to the environment as, say, the Republican Party. Make sure they're elected.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Postmodernists are typically leftists.

This is sort of true. Most philosophy is either liberal or radical. This says more about conservatism than it does philosophers.

Anti-vaxxer/anti-gmo/alternative medicine types are typically leftists.

Half/half, with virtually no left politician and a good deal of right politicians onside.

I think 9/11 truthers skew leftist as well, though I'm not sure.

Not even they.

Anti-Semitism can be found on the left, even though most people think of it as a far-right thing.  Same with sex negativity.  And a lot of radical feminists are transphobic.  Your point?

Postmodernists are typically leftists. Anti-vaxxer/anti-gmo/alternative medicine types are typically leftists. The crazy wing of the Social Justice movement is more or less entirely leftist. I think 9/11 truthers skew leftist as well, though I'm not sure.

The left has plenty of idiots to go around.

I would like to point out anti-vaxxers don't slant towards any one side http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/conservatives_and_liberals_hold_anti_science_views_anti_vaxxers_are_a_bipartisan.html

And yes, it's true their is liberal idiots, it's just that they don't cause even a fraction the damage right-wing extremists have,

That's really debatable.

Go ahead then. Which liberal group has caused as much harm to the environment as, say, the Republican Party. Make sure they're elected.

What exactly do you mean by "the environment"?  I just want to make sure I understand where you're coming from.

[Lt. Fred]

Postmodernists are typically leftists.

This is sort of true. Most philosophy is either liberal or radical. This says more about conservatism than it does philosophers.

Anti-vaxxer/anti-gmo/alternative medicine types are typically leftists.

Half/half, with virtually no left politician and a good deal of right politicians onside.

I think 9/11 truthers skew leftist as well, though I'm not sure.

Not even they.

Anti-Semitism can be found on the left, even though most people think of it as a far-right thing. 

There's a reasonable amount of 'anti-semitism' - that is, disagreement with the policy of the Likud and Labour parties of Israel. I'm not sure how much anti-semitism there is on the left, though. Can you think of a single elected anti-semite, that is a person who hates Jews?

Same with sex negativity.

I think we can treat this as a legitimate opinion.

And a lot of radical feminists are transphobic.

As is everyone on the right.

My point is that you're treating the two sides of politics differently, which is the only way you can sustain the comforting fiction that "both sides do it", to quote TV hackdom. No actually. Conservative politics disregards science and reason. Liberal politics does not, except on the extreme margins.

Postmodernists are typically leftists. Anti-vaxxer/anti-gmo/alternative medicine types are typically leftists. The crazy wing of the Social Justice movement is more or less entirely leftist. I think 9/11 truthers skew leftist as well, though I'm not sure.

The left has plenty of idiots to go around.

I would like to point out anti-vaxxers don't slant towards any one side http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/conservatives_and_liberals_hold_anti_science_views_anti_vaxxers_are_a_bipartisan.html

And yes, it's true their is liberal idiots, it's just that they don't cause even a fraction the damage right-wing extremists have,

That's really debatable.

Go ahead then. Which liberal group has caused as much harm to the environment as, say, the Republican Party. Make sure they're elected.

What exactly do you mean by "the environment"?  I just want to make sure I understand where you're coming from.

Say, climate change. The Republican Party has really helped climate change along a lot; Bush's clean air act, refusal to countenance a carbon tax, etc. Please point to a left politician that has refused to accept the science on climate change and whose policy has thereby done environmental harm.