1. Because the bikes were paid for with my money.
2. Please tell me your joking.
3. Yes they are. Of the commie rat bastard variety.
4. Nope. but it always comes close.
5. I don’t think so, but i have my doubts.
6. Nope, your a moron.

Liberalism in a nutshell: Hey, it’s not OUR money!

I’m just doubt that it can be done without some cliched putdown.

Oh ye of little faith. All you have to do is read Robs and other conservative posts to understand the nuances of socialism. A psychiatrist put it quite plainly when he wrote.

Human nature is not conducive to socialism, Rossiter warned. Imposition of a collectivist system and policies encouraging citizens to seek help through government intervention and social programs may prove to be a death blow to the nation’s spirit and liberties.

“If you keep trying to do it, you are going to destroy the character of the people,” he said. “You may be able to subjugate them and get them into this dependent state, but, ultimately, society collapses because it’s conceptually flawed.”

In other words, socialism destroys ones drive to achieve since it allegedly provides everything at a constant level so one does not have to earn it.

I hope that answers some of your questions. If not fire back a response. I will not call you stupid or a moron although those that are label thusly often deserve it.

It’s common knowledge you can’t be liberal and rational at the same time.

It’s common knowledge you can’t be liberal and rational at the same time.

bill-tb on February 27, 2009 at 01:35 pm

It’s also common knowledge, that you are full of manure.

Why Can’t Socialists Just Learn From Their Mistakes?

Excellent, excellent question.

The answer is critical in understanding the Left:

They are not sane.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

– Albert Einstein

and

With the failure of socialism to achieve what the intellectual Left believed it would, radicals were faced with two choices: Change their views in the face of the data, or deny the importance of data and reality. They have chosen the latter in alarming numbers.

– Professor Alan Kors of U. Penn.

and

A coercive utopian explains all our societal (and lately also environmental) problems and injustices in terms of conflict between groups or classes of people having unequal economic power and social status. The coercive utopian believes that absolutely perfect collectivistic solutions exist for all problems. The solutions are arrived at by constructive rational reasoning and must be implemented – by coercive means, if necessary (and it always is necessary!) – to create the perfect egalitarian society. The belief is akin to faith in a religious dogma, strongly held and mostly impervious to counter- argument. The coercive utopian feels that by participating in some active capacity in the ‘struggle’ (whatever that may be) he/she earns the right, once victory is attained, to be ‘in charge’: to have authority, status and influence.

– George Irbe, “LEFTISTS”

and

Self-deception, delusion and denial

What is self-DDD?

When we deceive, delude or deny to our self, we mislead our self, we misrepresent or disown what we know to be true, we lie to our self, we refuse to acknowledge that which we know. In Vital Lies, Simple Truths, Daniel Goleman notes that we do not see what it is that we do not see, because:

The mind can protect itself against anxiety by diminishing awareness. This mechanism produces a blind spot: a zone of blocked attention and self-deception. Such blind spots occur at each major level of behaviour from the psychological to the social. (p. 22)

Blind spots create a not-knowing about something. However, in order for a system to recognise what to avoid, deny or mislead, it has to maintain knowledge of what it knows to be true. In other words, deceiving our self requires that we both know and not-know something. This apparent paradox is one of the keys to understanding how self-DDD operates.

and

Ideologues are attracted to intellectual fashion – to “the Ideologues are attracted to intellectual fashion – to “the revolutionary cause” – to the utopian left – to the egoistic desire to believe that they are part of the avant-garde. They become “traitors to the human mind, to thought itself.”

They suffer from parochialism – the inability to believe that certain unfamiliar lands or groups could be so different as to accommodate such evil. (Yes, indeed, it is still a very dangerous world.)

They have an intellectual temperament that welcomes Potemkin Village propaganda and determinedly remains in denial concerning even the worst horrors.

They automatically reject all information coming from their own government’s official sources. This is understandable under a totalitarian state, but is utterly ridiculous in an open democracy.

Ultimately, the worst of them suffer from intentional self deception. They suffer “a selfish refusal to face disillusionment.”

– Reflections on a Ravaged Century by Robert Conquest

and

As it became apparent that everything that progressives had put their hearts into was a monster lie, the move became obvious. Deconstruct the truth and say there is no truth. That’s when they became relativists.

– David Horowitz

I’m sure someone has a copy of Orwell’s 1984 lying around, and can perhaps quote to us his passage explaining how DOUBLETHINK works. Same thing.

Why is bike sharing socialism?

Why does a person need an incentive not to commit a crime?

Are the UND students socialists?

Is anything that isn’t totally for the individual, socialism?

Is George Bush a socialist, since the public bought him a baseball stadium?

Is there any way for these questions to be answered,
without calling a moron and changing the subject? I don’t care if I’m called amoron. I’m just doubt that it can be done without some cliched putdown.

Good luck!