Originally posted by Psychic Missile
View Post
I found the articles pretty interesting. I've always thought the foundation of conservative though is narcissistic, so the idea that it is based on altruism is laughable. I also found the examples in the "Does it do good?' article silly. A higher minimum wage is assumed not to work, misuse of affirmative action is cited as evidence it doesn't work, and his point about war concerns pacifism, which is a fringe view and thus a straw man. After all, it's important that these views not work, because he can't really complain about people advocating the right policy for the wrong reason. That's another thing I found silly. He presumes to know what is going on inside other people's heads. Also, Iraq and ISIS are poor examples of the good of military intervention, since those problems came about due to the US interfering with international conflicts. The self-esteem movement is also a bad target since it had bipartisan support.
The Differences Between Left and Right articles are also unintelligently written. Part 1 advocates the view common to conservatives that there is no cause and effect, that people are tabula rasa, and neuroscience is bunk. Ironically it reminds me of parents telling children "you can be anything you want to be when you grow up", which goes hand-in-hand with the self-esteem movement. He doesn't even make a case in Part 2. If there are major problems with American society, why shouldn't liberals want a cultural revolution?
The Differences Between Left and Right articles are also unintelligently written. Part 1 advocates the view common to conservatives that there is no cause and effect, that people are tabula rasa, and neuroscience is bunk. Ironically it reminds me of parents telling children "you can be anything you want to be when you grow up", which goes hand-in-hand with the self-esteem movement. He doesn't even make a case in Part 2. If there are major problems with American society, why shouldn't liberals want a cultural revolution?
Comment