Vernon North wrote:
> In article <1130356487.206787.153940@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> richasiankid@hotmail.com says...
> > Vernon North wrote:
> > > In article <1130120245.750948.190930@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> > > richasiankid@hotmail.com says...
> > > > Vernon North wrote:
> > > > > In article <1130035777.399444.145860@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > richasiankid@hotmail.com says...
> > > > > > You just don't understand the psychology of liberalism.
> > > > > >
> > > > > OK, what IS "liberalism" and what is its psychology?
> > > > >
> > > > > Verno
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3020
> > > >
> > > > "My basic proposal, then, is that most (but not all) Leftists/liberals
> > > > are motivated by strong ego needs - needs for power, attention,
> > > > praise and fame. And in the USA and other developed countries they
> > > > satisfy this need by advocating large changes in the society around
> > > > them - thus drawing attention to themselves and hopefully causing
> > > > themselves to be seen as wise, innovative, caring etc. Rightists by
> > > > contrast have no need either for change or its opposite and may oppose
> > > > change if they see it as destructive or favour change if they see it as
> > > > constructive."
> > > >
> > > > "The appeal of Leftism to the average person is simple: The Leftist
> > > > offers something for nothing. And that is always hard to resist -
> > > > fraudulent though it usually is. If the Leftist offers to redistribute
> > > > somebody else's wealth into your pocket, that is one hell of an
> > > > appealling scam to those who stand to benefit from it."
> > > >
> > > > "The undoubted fact that Left activists and agitators (from the
> > > > Bolsheviks on) tend to come from affluent families does not to me point
> > > > to guilt as their motive at all. Rather the "limousine liberal"
> > > > phenomenon shows me that those who have all that they want materially
> > > > then seek other luxuries: such as self-righteousness, praise, power and
> > > > excitement - particularly the excitement of being demonstrators in
> > > > the case of "rich kid" Leftists. And if the young limousine liberal can
> > > > have praise and self-righteousness along with his/her excitement what a
> > > > good deal it is! It is much the same motivation that causes self-made
> > > > rich men (such as Bill Gates) to become highly philanthropic. Bill
> > > > Gates has power and wealth so he now seeks praise and righteousness."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----
> > > > I can easily be that 'rich kid' of course - actually they're often only
> > > > middle class with family incomes <$200k. I just think that the other
> > > > side can be valid too though.
> > > >
> > > > Think of it as my unique form of charity - i.e. championing for the
> > > > masses at the expense of my self-interest. When I feel like it.  :)
> > > >
> > > > Don't forget to read those paragraphs on religion too. AGain, wow, he
> > > > spoke my mind.
> > > >
> > > > In any case, this guy has a nice website. Everyone, check out these
> > > > pics before reading the above essay!
> > > > http://geocities.com/jonjayray/
> > >
> > > It looks to me that by Ray's definition, there are few of them around.
> > > Ray himself says:
> > >
> > > "MOST ORDINARY PEOPLE do not fit very neatly into any political category
> > > and may hold to a mix of views that include what would usually be seen
> > > as both Leftist and Rightist ideas."
> > >
> > > http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1226
> > >
> > > It looks to me as though a lot is lost in this debate by reducing
> > > "leftists" to . . . . surprise . . . . a stereotype.
> > >
> > > Verno
> >
> > And therefore most people would not label themselves ideological
> > liberals, not in the US anyway. It's a pejorative term for many. After
> > reading the article, I wonder, however, if it is really a compliment in
> > disguise.
> >
> > And read past the first sentence of any article please - you should
> > have a longer time horizon: "MOST ORDINARY PEOPLE do not fit very
> > neatly into any political category and may hold to a mix of views that
> > include what would usually be seen as both Leftist and Rightist ideas.
>
> Of course, I did.  I found it to be full of stereotypes.
>
> Among Canadians, I line up on the right.  But some of my work brings me
> into contact with those on the left.  (To Americans, they would be on
> the FAR left.)  Some of them are knee-jerk doctrinaire leftists who hew
> the party line on everything.  But others are open to practical ideas
> that don't bear the ideological stamp of "the party".  If I didn't
> listen for the subtleties, I would never have got anywhere with them.
> Yet, I managed to get their support for practical ideas that most people
> would consider to be conservative. It all depends on how well you
> listen, and whether you can empathize with "your enemy".
>
>
> Aside:
> I watched "The Fog of War" last night -- a series of interviews with
> former US Sec. of Defense, Robert McNamara.  One of McNamara's lessons
> in life is "empathize with your enemy". (I'm sure he got it from Sun Tzu
> -- "know your enemy . . ".)  He explained how it wasn't until 1995 that
> he learned what the Vietnamese were REALLY after in the 60s and 70s.
> The stereotypes that the US military and political community applied to
> the Vietnamese was a major factor in the US's difficulties in Vietnam,
> as it is in Iraq.  Don't fall for labels.  Look deeper.
>
> > Among professional politicians and academics, however, there is
> > generally a clearer polarization. So what is it that makes any given
> > view "Rightist" or "Leftist"? In contemporary North American terms,
> > what is it that makes one an archetypical "liberal" or an archetypical
> > "conservative"? What is a Leftist or a Rightist position on any issue?"
> >
> >
> > I don't think he was talking about 'ordinary people'.
> >
> > Besides remember that saying religion is true to the stupid, false to
> > the wise,  useful for the elite? I'm gone through the transition from
> > stage I to II. Now I'm trying to embark on stage III. Maybe the older
> > generation is right in a way. Ray's articles have done more than any
> > liberal evanlegist could do to resurrect its appeal. To me, anyway.
> >
> My point is to avoid falling for stereotypes.  They obscure truth.  Most
> people hold a mix of political and philosophical views.  Don't assume
> that a believer in an idea that falls on the left or right side of the
> political spectrum will consistently line up on the same side of the
> line on other issues.  Listen . . . .
>
> Verno

Did you read what I penned? If I were really so ideologically committed
to whatever side, I would not have reacted so positively to Ray. He
wrote for a Jewish neoconservative magazine, from a distinctly
conservative viewpoint lambasting liberalism. Yet I said that he made
me look at liberalism in a new, *positive* light. He made me see that
liberalism and its set of beliefs - however stupid, however
stereotypical - can now be a pragmatic tool. Being an opportunist is
really the key to survival in the modern world....you should agree with
that.....hear me out...