Most intelligent, thinking people know what evil is. Adolph Hitler was evil. Almost No one doubts or argues this. ((Unless you are a follower of Hitler, then you might disagree)) Hitler and his followers murdered 12 million people and started a World War that killed, conservatively, 60 million people. Hitler\u2019s philosophy, National Socialism, or as it is generally known, Nazism, was and is considered an evil belief. So, most people consider Hitler and the Nazi Party to be evil.<\/p>\n
Now, what about the philosophy known as Communism? Is this evil? Surprisingly, you will get a large group of people who will say no, Communism and its followers, Communists, is not evil. However, Communism has killed over 150 million people in the 100 years of its existence. The Nazi\u2019s only managed to kill about 20 million, between combat and the death camps. However, Nazism was far more efficient in its evil. They slaughtered all those people in only 12 years. ((1933-1945))<\/p>\n
The followers of Communism will say that their philosophy is not evil that it is good. There were just a few people who were a bit \u201cover exuberant\u201d in their attempts to create a communist state.<\/p>\n
Let\u2019s take a look at those \u201cfew people\u201d shall we? First we shall start with\u2026<\/p>\n
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. ((Lenin, Vladimir))<\/p>\n
A real sweetheart this one.<\/p>\n
It was under his leadership that the body count in the new USSR started to climb. However, he was a piker to his successor Josef Stalin.<\/p>\n
Stalin is conservatively estimated to have butchered 20 million people and may have killed as many as 40 million. ((Stalin’s Purges))<\/p>\n
After World War 2, other truly evil people continued the butchery under Communism, Marxism and Socialism.<\/p>\n
- \n
- Mao \tZedong 49-78,000,000<\/li>\n
- Hideki \tTojo 5,000,000<\/li>\n
- Pol \tPot 1.6 million.<\/li>\n
- Kim \tIl Sung 1.6 million<\/li>\n
- Etc, \tetc, etc. ((The worst genocides of the 20th Century<\/a>))<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
So, we can all pretty much agree that genocidal mass murders are evil. Now that we have a baseline of true evil, we now have to determine if Liberalism and it’s followers, Liberals are also evil. Before we can state that \u201cYes they are\u201d or \u201cNo, they aren’t\u201d we must first determine what is liberalism and what does it stand for. Now for the first question, What is liberalism?<\/p>\n
From The Free Dictionary, ((The Free Dictionary<\/a><\/a>))<\/p>\n
liberalism<\/strong> ((lib\u00b7er\u00b7al\u00b7ism<\/a>))<\/p>\n
- \n
- a political or social philosophy \tadvocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary \tlegislatures, governmental assurances of civil liberties and \tindividual rights, and nonviolent modification of institutions to \tpermit continued individual and social progress.<\/li>\n
- the principles and practice of a \tliberal political party. \u2014 liberalist,<\/strong> n., adj.<\/em> \u2014 \tliberalistic,<\/strong> adj.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Hmm, that seems fairly straightforward and not at all evil. Protect individual rights and civil liberties. I can’t see anything wrong with that at all. Now how does this compare to what is considered to be liberalism in the United States today.<\/p>\n
Well, by the above definition, not even close. In America, Liberals tend to be extremely intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them. They do not believe in free enterprise, equal rights, free speech, private property…Hmm, sounds suspiciously like one of the totalitarian political organizations I mentioned earlier. ((Nazi’s and Communists))<\/p>\n
Recently, there was a shooting in Arizona by a flaming lunatic the gravely wounded a sitting United States Representative and killed a sitting Federal Judge, a 9 year old girl and several other people. Within minutes the followers of liberalism began accusing conservatives, Tea Party members, Gov. Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and basically anyone who wasn’t a follower of liberalism of accessory to murder.<\/p>\n
This was the most recent line of slander and personal attacks by modern liberals. These people have also stated they would like to round up all those who disagree with them and put them in camps. Hmm, that sounds an awful lot like what Hitler and Stalin used to do with people they didn’t like.<\/p>\n
Over the last 70 years, and especially in the last 30 years, liberals in America have grown more and more intolerant, vicious and frankly dangerous. The levels of hate and anger directed at people who don’t subscribe to their beliefs has in some cases resulted in physical attacks. ((Kenneth Gladney<\/a>)), ((Woman assaulted by Obama Fanatic)), ((Man bites off man’s finger at Obama healthcare rally<\/a>))<\/p>\n
Liberals have tried to suppress speech that they don’t like. To begin with, they have persisted in their attempts to reenact the Fairness Doctrine ((What Is The Fairness Doctrine<\/a>?)), ((The Fairness Doctrine, Wikipedia<\/a>)), which forced broadcasters to give equal time to opposing viewpoints. Because of this, most broadcasters simply stopped talking about political issues. Recent attempts to bring back the Fairness Doctrine began with the rise of Talk Radio in general and the massive popularity of Conservative talk radio personality Rush Limbaugh.<\/p>\n
Rush Limbaugh and others like him broke the modern liberals hold on the media. Now there were other points of view and the liberals could not tolerate this. There have been attempts to have a counterpart to the conservative viewpoint, most notably Air America. ((History of Air America<\/a>)) All these attempts have failed simply due to lack of interest. No one wanted to hear the liberals point of view since it generally broke down to the following:<\/p>\n
Republicans are evil.
\nConservatives are evil
\nBusiness is evil
\nWhite people are evil.
\nAmerica is evil.<\/p>\nWash, rinse, repeat.<\/p>\n
The other problem was that the liberal hosts literally have no true sense of humor. Rush Limbaugh has a good, self deprecating sense of humor. In other words, he, and most conservatives, could laugh at themselves. Liberals, when a joke was made at their expense, would instantly attack the person who made fun of them. We aren’t talking about a vicious mean spirited attack, just general biting humor. Air America soon went bankrupt under rather odd circumstances.<\/p>\n
Another thing modern liberalism believes in is something called \u201cSocial Justice.\u201d ((What is Social Justice?<\/a>)) Social justice has absolutely nothing to do with actual justice. By and large, (Although not totally), People who demand social justice tend to be the same sorts who also believe in Socialism. ((Socialism defined<\/a>))<\/p>\n
Social Justice has been used by Liberals to force people and private business to support their agenda. When they have control of the organs of government, they have the ability to use the force of law, (Not that they care about the rule of law overly much), to extract concessions and money from those who have produced it. They then give it to those they, (Liberals), have determined are worthy of it.<\/p>\n
Some justice that!<\/p>\n
Another item that modern liberals profess to care about is stamping out racism and other forms of discrimination. Again, in general, this isn’t a bad idea. Judging someone simply by the color of their skin, shape of their eyes, or their gender is just plain stupid. What the average person should, and generally does is judge someone by their abilities. Most people don’t give a damn where someone came from or what the look like. (Unless they’re looking for a date that is.*grin*)<\/p>\n
Alas, this isn’t how modern liberalism and liberals think. In their minds, all Caucasians are evil racist, sexist scum determined to oppress anyone who doesn’t look like or believe as they do. It is their belief that they, and only they are the ones who are above racist views, and that they must redress what they see as racial imbalance in favor of the Oppressed minorities.<\/p>\n
In order to do this, the modern liberal will grant special rights and access to the perceived minorities who they have decided have been oppressed, and they will do this by taking from those they think are the oppressors. Of course, anyone who disagrees with modern liberals is automatically attacked as a racist, sexist oppressor who should be punished.<\/p>\n
Hmm, sounds like a form of either the old South African Apartheid ((South Africa under apartheid<\/a>)) system or perhaps the old Nazi Nuremberg Laws. ((Nuremberg Laws<\/a>))<\/p>\n
Granted, the United States had it’s problems, We had the old Jim Crow laws ((Jim Crow Laws<\/a>)) which were almost as bad as the South African Apartheid system. However, people in the United States decided to put an end to these injustices, (Old style Liberalism), and have pretty much succeeded. Organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan ((Ku Klux Klan<\/a>)) are completely discredited and when they rear their ugly hateful heads, get slammed on by everyone. Today we have a president who is black, (Discussions on Obama’s competence to be held elsewhere), Military officers who hold flag rank who are not Caucasians and many political office holders ate the federal, state and local level. By and large, no one gives a damn about a persons skin color as long as he or she can do the job.<\/p>\n
So why won’t modern liberals acknowledge their success in ending racism? Frankly, it is simple. Good old fashioned cash and power. Organizations and people who fought the good fight 50 years ago to end discrimination now find themselves with nothing to do. If their donors should wake up to the fact that discrimination is by and large a thing of the past, they’re going to stop sending in those checks and people like Jesse Jackson, The Southern Poverty Law Center and the NAACP will either have to go out of business or get real jobs.<\/p>\n
Rather then admit victory, these people and organizations instead keep accusing anyone who disagrees with their philosophy that they are \u201cEvil racists\u201d and basically attack them. Because people will do anything to avoid being tagged as a hateful racist, they keep sending in all those checks. Nice scam, don’t you think?<\/p>\n
So far, it isn’t looking good for Liberalism. Liberals aren’t coming across as very nice people. Perhaps liberalism is respectful of individuals, liberty, the Constitution and private property.<\/p>\n
Umm, no.<\/p>\n
In the mind of most modern liberals, people are to stupid to run their own lives, raise their children or make any major decisions without the guidance of the liberal government. In the eyes of the modern liberal, the individual isn’t responsible, it’s society, primarily western society that is the cause of all problems. It wasn’t the individual who molested those children, it was society’s fault. Because western society is at fault, we must make allowances for the depraved child molester.<\/p>\n
So, Modern liberalism doesn’t believe the individual is responsible for his or her actions. This must mean that they support liberty.<\/p>\n
Not really, no.<\/p>\n
Liberals will say they believe in liberty, but they only believe in liberty for other liberals. There are many cases in point. Modern Liberals have for decades worked to undermine the United States and support those who oppress their own people. A case in point would be Hugo Chavez, the dictator of Venezuela. Before Chavez took power, Venezuela was a reasonably free nation. It’s economy had issues but was slowly growing. Chavez came in and as of this post had essentially made himself dictator the same way Hitler did it in 1933. Rather then denounce Chavez, modern liberals welcome him and support him.<\/p>\n
Well then what about the United States Constitution? Surly, things like free speech, being secure on your homes, all that neat stuff must have the support of Modern Liberals?<\/p>\n
*SNORT*<\/p>\n
Liberals believe in only those parts of the constitution that supports their views. All the rest? They just ignore it. Free speech? Of course they support free speech, except speech that is hateful. Then it must be suppressed. The Second Amendment, the one that says you have the right to keep and bear arms? That one only pertains to the military and the national guard. The individual has no right to own a gun for any reason. If people have guns, then they might use them to actually shoot criminals and fight back against their betters who know what’s good for them.<\/p>\n
Being secure in your home and possessions? Of course not! Liberals know far better how to manage property. ((Kelo v. City of New London<\/a>)) In fact, the current administration essentially nationalized two of the three automobile manufacturers in the United States ((General Motors and Chrysler)), when they should have been allowed to go into bankruptcy. In fact, the current administration appears to have violated the rights of certain creditors in order to protect their union supporters. ((The Economist: An offer you can’t refuse<\/a>))<\/p>\n
Religion? They must support a persons right to follow their faith surely? Oh sure they do, unless you happen to be a Christian or a Jew. Modern Liberalism detests religion in all forms…except Islam. Islam is just fine in their world view, along with other nontraditional religions. ((Those that do not follow monotheism)) Islam is the exception for one simple reason. Muslims are known to kill anyone who they perceive as an infidel. This pretty much describes anyone who isn’t a follower of Islam.<\/p>\n
So just what is a modern liberal then? They don’t seem to match the definition that I provided earlier on. In fact, modern liberalism and liberals seem to follow beliefs that are the dead opposite of traditional liberalism. Modern Liberalism tends to support a large central government run by highly educated elites who will make all decisions regarding how people live and business operates.<\/p>\n
There are a few names for this belief:<\/p>\n
- \n
- Socialism ((Definition of SOCIALISM<\/a>))<\/li>\n
- Fascism ((Definition \tof FASCISM<\/a>))<\/li>\n
- Marxism ((Definition of MARXISM<\/a>))<\/li>\n
- Communism ((Definition of COMMUNISM<\/a>))<\/li>\n
- National \tSocialism ((Definition of NATIONAL SOCIALISM<\/a>))<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
This is NOT a nice bunch of people then. They are ascribing themselves as caring about the rights of people when they mimic the worst institutions of the 20th<\/sup> century. So, it is time to answer the question.<\/p>\n
Is Liberalism and the people who follow it, Liberals evil?<\/p>\n
I would say…No.<\/p>\n
\u201cExcuse me? No? After all that and you are saying that Liberals and Liberalism isn’t evil?\u201d<\/p>\n
Yes, I am. You see, traditional Liberalism is vastly different from what it has become. Traditional Liberalism believes in freedom, liberty and justice. The founders of the United States and the writers of the Constitution were traditional liberals. They would be appalled at what their basic philosophy has mutated into. Modern Liberalism is evil, but the only common link between Modern Liberalism and traditional Liberalism is the name.<\/p>\n
In my opinion, the true liberals today are what most people consider to be conservatives. They believe in conserving the rights of individuals, but they also believe in personal, individual responsibility for one’s actions.<\/p>\n
So there you have it. My thoughts on whether Liberalism is an evil philosophy and the followers are evil people. Please feel free to debate this on the discussion forum, but don’t be liberal. Keep it civil and watch your language. Also, take our poll and let others know what you think.<\/p>\n
Thank you.<\/p>\n
~The Angry Webmaster~<\/p>\n
![\"1](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/plugins\/wp-postratings\/images\/stars_crystal\/rating_half.gif?w=640&ssl=1\" "\\"1")
![\"2](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/plugins\/wp-postratings\/images\/stars_crystal\/rating_off.gif?w=640&ssl=1\" "\\"2")
(10<\/strong> votes, average: 0.80<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>![](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/plugins\/wp-postratings\/images\/loading.gif?resize=16%2C16&ssl=1\")
Loading...<\/span>\n\n\t - Fascism ((Definition \tof FASCISM<\/a>))<\/li>\n
- Socialism ((Definition of SOCIALISM<\/a>))<\/li>\n