5 Ways Liberalism Destroys Virtue
The more completely a person, group, or organization embraces liberalism, the less virtuous it becomes. It’s almost like a mental sickness in that respect. People or groups who are lightly infected can soldier on without having it eat them alive. However, the deeper the sickness goes, the more it changes them. Eventually the liberal disease inside of people can grow so much that it warps their morals, their religious beliefs, and their way of thinking until they can no longer tell right and wrong. This destruction of virtue is a natural consequence of the fundamental beliefs that go along with liberalism.
5) “When one becomes a liberal, he or she pretends to advocate tolerance, equality and peace, but hilariously, they’re doing so for purely selfish reasons. It’s the human equivalent of a puppy dog’s face: an evolutionary tool designed to enhance survival, reproductive value and status. In short, liberalism is based on one central desire: to look cool in front of others in order to get love. Preaching tolerance makes you look cooler, than saying something like, ‘please lower my taxes.’” — Greg Gutfeld
Doing the right thing is often tough. It’s hard to take money you could use yourself and give it to charity. It’s difficult to hold to a position that you think is best for the country even though some people will think it’s “mean.” It takes self-denial to ask that the government spend less today so that future generations will still be able to enjoy the American Dream.
Liberals don’t have that sort of moral courage. They advocate giving away other people’s money and call it being charitable. They take positions that are terrible for the country because they’re afraid of criticism and call it bravery. They’re willing to sell future generations of Americans into debt bondage so they can have a little more comfort now and they pat themselves on the back for their compassionate “investments.”
Liberals aren’t actually charitable, courageous, or compassionate; they just claim to be those things by virtue of the fact that they’re liberal. In fact, that’s one of the major selling points of liberalism: being able to think of yourself as moral and good without the trials and sacrifice that go along with actually being moral and good.
4) “There are no bad guys on the left. There are only people who’ve been driven to desperation by conservative evil.” — Allahpundit
Liberals begin with the proposition that conservatives are unwitting dupes at best and evil at worst while other liberals are on the side of the angels. This leads them to excuse just about any and every behavior from killing cops (Muhammad Abdul Jamal), to terrorist bombings (Bill Ayers), to treason (Jane Fonda) as long as the perpetrator has the right beliefs and is useful to the movement. When you think that the only real crime is disagreeing with your ideology, you can make a hero out of a drunken, disreputable coward who left a woman to die in a tidal pool or even come up with justifications for why it’s fine for the Department of Justice to help Mexican cartels get weapons they used to kill more than 300 people as part of some misguided political stunt to encourage gun control.
3) “Liberals have created, and the minority leadership has exploited, a community of dependent people, unaware of the true route to prosperity and happiness: self-reliance and self-investment. Instead, people are told that America is unjust, unfair, and full of disadvantages. They are told that their only hope is for government to fix their problems. What has happened is that generations of people have bought into this nonsense and as a result have remained hopelessly mired in poverty and despair – because the promised solutions don’t work. And they will never work – they never have.” — Rush Limbaugh
Individuality is a necessary condition of morality. When you embrace tribalism based on race, gender, and sexual orientation as the Left does, you inevitably end up embracing a tribal mentality as well. Everyone in your tribe is on “your side” and other people are viewed as “enemies.” Most people don’t apply the same ethical standards to their enemies as they do to their tribe. That’s why we’re fine with sending Predator Drones to kill terrorists in Pakistan, but we would riot in the street if the same policy were put in place to target people accused of murder in New Jersey. The more liberals split us into groups, the more hatred and situational ethics inevitably occur as a result.
2) “Indiscriminateness of thought does not lead to indiscriminateness of policy. It leads the modern liberal to invariably side with evil over good, wrong over right and the behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success. Why? Very simply if nothing is to be recognized as better or worse than anything else then success is de facto unjust.
There is no explanation for success if nothing is better than anything else and the greater the success the greater the injustice. Conversely and for the same reason, failure is de facto proof of victimization and the greater the failure, the greater the proof of the victim is, or the greater the victimization.” — Evan Sayet
For the most part, success isn’t random. Most rich people deserve their wealth just as poor people deserve their poverty. There’s a reason a bank CEO is where he is and a dirty hippy with empty pockets is impotently protesting him in the street. Most people who fail deserve to be failing just as most people who succeed deserve to be succeeding. There is such a thing as right and wrong and, no, there isn’t a different standard depending on whether you’re white or black, Israeli or Palestinian, straight or gay, liberal or conservative. Liberals can’t bear to be “mean” to people who are losing at life by telling them that truth; so they’d rather pretend there are no rules, no standards, and no morals that matter. Once you embrace that kind of indiscriminateness, there is no degeneracy from Palestinian suicide bombers to Occupy Movement rapes that you will not excuse under the right circumstances.
1) “That is one reason ‘feelings’ and ‘compassion’ are two of the most often used liberal terms. ‘Character’ is no longer a liberal word because it implies self-restraint. ‘Good and evil’ are not liberal words either as they imply a moral standard beyond one’s feelings. In assessing what position to take on moral or social questions, the liberal asks him or herself, ‘How do I feel about it?’ or ‘How do I show the most compassion?’ – not ‘What is right?’ or ‘What is wrong?’ For the liberal, right and wrong are dismissed as unknowable, and every person chooses his or her own morality.” — Dennis Prager
Liberals are completely indifferent to whether the programs they advocate work or not. It’s all about how they make them feel. A liberal will prefer a completely non-functional government program that makes them feel good about themselves over a program that works, but doesn’t inflate their egos, 10 times out of 10. The same goes for morality. The standard isn’t, “Is it right or is it wrong?” — it’s whether it makes them feel nice or mean. “Nice and wrong” is always preferable to “right and mean.” As most non-liberals over the age of 12 have long since discovered, feelings are an extremely poor replacement for logic, decency, and common sense.
In 31 years of broadcasting, and 40 years of writing, I have never advocated a boycott of a product. Quite
Last week, I caught up with Mark Levin and we discussed his new book, The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American
When I read that President Obama refused to comment on the murder trial of abortion butcher Kermit Gosnell “because it’s