Tuesday, November 30, 2004

The party of tolerance and compassion strikes again

When someone follows you for miles as you drive down the road some lonely night, it might be because you have a conservative bumper sticker on your car.

“Did you guys hear?” one of them laughed. “John tailed some idiot with a Bush-Cheney sticker on his car all the way here.” The story got a hearty laugh from my whole group of acquaintances, all liberal. It was a good joke, played on some abstract conservative, retold in the utter certainty that there were no such abstract creatures in the room. I glared straight at John and said something along the lines of “Yeah, that was me, and that was real liberal and accepting of you,” adding a few sailor-approved flourishes worthy of a man who would threaten a young woman with physical harm because of her political beliefs. >snip< Four years later, these are the same people to whom eye-rolling warrants a lawsuit and distributing insensitive Band-Aids is beyond the pale. They belong to a party that prides itself on fighting against political intimidation and laments the sharp political division in this country—both commendable positions. But they didn’t fight against intimidation that night and they didn’t lament the division it might cause between themselves and the only conservative in the room. Why not? I’m pretty sure it’s because they think I deserved it. It wasn’t the first time I got that feeling from liberal acquaintances.

A proposed definition: Tolerance is the belief that conservatives are people.

1 comment:

LX327 said...

This kind of stuff is a big problem. For example, I do not care for the people at LGF:

http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com

But I would not wish harm on any of them.... They have a right to their opinion, and then people can decide whether they want to to business with them or not, which is everyone's right. Karl has the right not to honor a picket line, and I have the right to honor it. If some business offended Karl, he would have the right to organize a boycott of it, this is just part of the tradition of political activity in this country. Although I have problems with "fat cats" of any type, whether Communist, Capitalist, or Zionist, the regular people that follow them have a right to their views and opinion. Those who value the right to dissent have to allow everyone to have their say as well, especially if they disagree. If you do not value freedom of speech for those people who have viewpoints that you find noxious, then you do not believe in it at all... If people politicise their business, then they put their business in the political arena and it is "fair game" for boycotts or other political tactics. If I put up an "anti-Bush site," on the website of any proposed business that I had, I would be looking to have my business adversely affected. Politics is war by other means, and non-violent tactics are all part of it. But where it crosses the line is where threats and violence come into it, or menacing behavior. I have never threatened anyone on the Net, or because they have political views that differ from mine, ever. But I in turn have been threatened. On "Little Green Footballs" for just expressing mild dissent from the existing 'group-think;' I have had people there threaten to "kill me," "knock all my teeth out where I am spitting blood," threaten to track my IP# and do away with me etc. If I were inclined, I could have gone to the FBI with copies of these threats and caused Charles Johnson a lot of trouble, but I do not run to authorities over the least little thing. I am not interested in censoring Charles Johnson. The reason I organized a boycott against him and LGF was 'personal,' in that he got me TOS'ed from Yahoo, for no good reason, just because he was offended by the content of my rants. I lost valuable writings that I could not get back because they were in my e-mail account that I was not able to access again, because of what Charles did. So I evened the score with the boycott for personal reasons, not political. I could care less about censoring Charles, and LGF entertains me, when it does not concern me.... Charles is actually pretty civil and restrained on his blog, it is the "Lizardoids" that are the problem with their threats and mean attitudes over the least little thing. "PC Leftist culture" is a kind of Stalinism too, I agree with that. But if conservatives want to bring in more people, being civil and not "threatening homocide" might help. We all need to move beyond hate or nobody is going to make it. I am committed to trying........