The Great Liberal Hypocrisy, Part II

I recently posted a brilliantly reasoned criticism of liberals and what I call The Great Liberal Hypocrisy known as diversity. This is the hypocrisy in which they pretend to be tolerant, open, and welcoming to all people and all ideas while in fact embracing a very narrowly defined set of ideals and people. Namely, those who precisely share their views. As evidence of this hypocrisy, I posted some tweets in reaction to African American actress Stacey Dash’s pronouncement that she planned to vote for, GASP, Mitt Romney. When I  wrote this piece, I anticipated 3 reactions from my liberal friends and family. Predictably, I got all 3. In no particular order:

1. C’mon Bruce, those tweets were posted by nutty liberals way way way out there on the lefty fringe. Don’t judge us all by a few crazies.

3.  Not me! You know me. I’m not like that.

3. There’s hypocrisy on the right too.

I won’t address #3 because I agree with it. There’s hypocrisy throughout the world and I challenge anyone who read the original post to point out where I said liberals had cornered the market on hypocrisy. Please feel free to go to www.wordpress.com, start your own blog, and blog till you’re blue in the keyboard about conservative hypocrisy. I promise I’ll post comments about how it’s just a fringe group on the far right and definitely doesn’t include me! But, until and even after you do that, this response is specious.

On a more serious note, while I can think of examples of right wing hypocrisy, I know of no examples where institutions far and wide have been forced to build entire infrastructures to enforce their hypocrisy on everyone else.

#1 and #2 are more troubling in one sense and yet they make my point for me. The Great Liberal Hypocrisy is characterized most acutely by its close cousin, The Great Liberal Blind Spot. I actually do not believe that liberals sit around in coffee houses saying to each other, “Hey, let’s pretend to embrace diversity while in fact being completely exclusive of huge swaths of people and thought.” It’s not nearly that contrived nor conniving. So, to my liberal friends who commented, publicly or privately, on my piece last week, I don’t think you’re deliberately hypocritical.

I debated long and hard about whether I should use the Stacey Dash example and whether I should post the incredibly inflammatory tweets in response to her decision. I knew full well when I did so that I was opening myself up to the “hey those are just the lefty wingnuts; they don’t speak for all of us” argument. But, I decided to set the trap so we could have the discussion about the blind spot.

And, that’s why I included my personal story about my experience as a lone conservative parent at a very liberal school and the hurtful derision I had to constantly endure from mainstream suburban liberals as a result of this. I did this to give my liberal commentariat an out. Surely they would see in that example that The Great Liberal Hypocrisy is NOT limited to the nose ring and body art crowd tweeting about Stacey Dash. Amazingly, it didn’t seem to bring much clarity at all. In fact, one of the public comments on my story suggests, incredibly, that not only are the Stacey Dash tweeters out on the fringe, but so were all of the 80 or so parents I interacted with at my kids’ school over a 15 year period. It’s just impossible that any “normal” liberal could think and act that way.

Thus, the blind spot. This is just how liberals think. Their beliefs are the right ones, we should all hold them, and anyone who doesn’t is racist, homophobic, stupid, or worse. Before I close, I do want to assuage my liberal fans with the notion that while hypocrisy is a tough word, and I recognize that, I don’t think this makes them bad people. I think they believe in their heart of hearts that their ideals are the best ones, to the exclusion of all others. And, thus, any notion of diversity or tolerance need only include all the diverse liberal values. And, that we should build a massive national infrastructure to make sure everyone else thinks like them and holds their values. It’s a blind spot, not an evil spot.

In closing, for those of you who are still not convinced (given my cogent writings, I imagine that to be a vanishingly small number of people), I offer you the following clip from the Jon Stewart Show. When Jon Stewart and I agree on something, there’s simply gotta be something to it!

 

Advertisements

About Bruce Robertson

Bruce Robertson is an amateur writer and professional provocateur
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to The Great Liberal Hypocrisy, Part II

  1. Bill Miller says:

    All I want to know is, are you actually getting a weekly check from Google for those nice rehab ads on your blog?

    • Ha! I think Google pulls up ads based on what the particular user/Googler’s history suggests he/she might be interested in. So, Bill, if Google is singling you out for rehab ads, then, well, maybe there’s something you want to talk about?

      • Bill Miller says:

        You must be channeling Obama as you avoided the question and turned the issue on me personally!! Your buying beers next time with your $4.37 check from Google.

  2. Bruce, From the left of center… Yes, yes, yes. I agree with you on this. Keep up the good work. We need more of a voice for the “middle” and the problem of hypocrisy you write about on both sides that is a major hurdle that we face as a country in bringing about enough concensus and compromise to get things done.

  3. Here’s what I consider to be the salient part of your message: “This is just how liberals think. Their beliefs are the right ones, we should all hold them, and anyone who doesn’t is racist, homophobic, stupid, or worse.” I think there is some merit to your charge. It is very tempting to file people who disagree with you into a group with a label, and if that label has “…ist” on the end, so much the better. Let’s be frank: both sides pull this kind of nonsense.

    Looked at from the other angle, you see the passion behind the beliefs, on both sides. You, for instance, think (I’m guessing) that I and my cohorts have no understanding of the power of markets, that our bleeding-heart views actually would do more damage than good if we had our way, that the notion of how profits work as the engine of society simply escapes us (perhaps we’re a little dumb?), that, in short, we are members of a group of baffling people who hold beliefs that mystify you. Indeed, many of your blog entries point out just this sort of stuff. I’m guessing that when you are gathered with other like minded people, you discuss this kind of thing. You consider your party to be a “big tent,” but it’s obviously not all-inclusive (otherwise it wouldn’t be a political party).

    I assume that you hold your beliefs because you honestly think you see a better way to make a better country. That’s why I frequently argue against you: because I think you are wrong. So, when I get together with my liberal friends, we also discuss such matters, and we are as mystified by you as you are by us.

    Name calling is never nice, and both groups do it.

    It is not surprising that your fellow parents at your kids’ uber-liberal school assume that every other parent is liberal, since it’s an uber-liberal school. If for some reason I sent my son to a Christian school even though he is Jewish, I would not be surprised if there was an assumption among the parents that he was Christian. You do have a point that there is an assumption in certain places that everybody is of like mind. When I lived in Park Slope, Brooklyn, during the Bush-Kerry election, the neighborhood voted 96% for Kerry. Our reaction? “Who the hell are those 4%????” At a hockey game, you can assume everyone is a hockey fan. If you aren’t, and you are just there because your wife dragged you out, don’t be surprised to hear a lot of hockey talk at the rink. And even some derision at your hockey ignorance.

    Now, if your real complaint is that the Democratic party (note the final “-ic” on the word; many Republicans like to say “Democrat party,” because it sounds blunt and ugly) claims to have a monopoly on truth, good values, and the American way, I think you have a point. I do think the other side does, too, but that is a different discussion. The real problem is that you live in a place surrounded by liberals, and that’s got to be uncomfortable for a guy with your views. Look on the bright side: at least you don’t live in Madison. Or Park Slope.

  4. Dan, I agree with you that probably most people who hold fast to strong beliefs have trouble fathoming how others could hold the opposite belief. But, that’s really not at all what I’m addressing here. I’m addressing the fact that liberals hold their beliefs very strongly, exclude all other beliefs as not only silly, but often amoral, and the pretend to be accepting of all people and all ideas. Thus, the big hypocrisy. With all due respect, the fact that you’re having trouble with this further exemplifies the blind spot I wrote of in this second piece.

    The fact that I live in a deeply liberal neighborhood is not the cause of this phenomenon. It just gives me a chance to experience it firsthand.

    Finally, we don’t refer to y’all as the democrat party to be mean or ugly. We do it because we believe that your party is, at best, the second most democratic party in the US!

    As always, thanks for taking the time to read and comment.

  5. Pingback: Liberal Hypocrisy, Part III (Vote No on Question 7) | Bruce's Blog (til I come up with a catchier name)

  6. B. Love says:

    Wow, Bruce, I am so relieved that you watch the Daily Show. You haven’t gone completely off the deep end! My urge to respond to your every political musing just subsided a bit. I will say that your critique in this group of posts is equally valid for your party. Republicans like to believe that they include everyone, but the supply side / trickle down theory was debunked decades ago. Here’s your blind spot: the reality is that the few policy agendas put forth by the Party of No really only benefit a limited group that is mostly white and wealthy.

    So, on this of all days (fast track the approval on this one!) I give you another Daily Show clip. This is why Romney is not a serious candidate:

    http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-july-16-2012/democalypse-2012—bain-damage—romney-s-blind-trust

  7. B, first of all, I approve all comments unless they are nasty or use more bad words than the original post.

    for the most part your comment centers on my #3 above. Please re-read. THere are no doubt inconsistencies and hypocrisies amongst right wingers, but very few (none I can think of) have been so embedded in our national fabric as the bullshit the liberals spew on diversity. Second, your statement on supply side economics is puzzling to me. I know liberals still try to claim it didn’t work, but data just ain’t on your side. Finallly, the odds that I will click on a daily show link is zero. He’s a friggin liberal hack. That was my point – he’s completely in the tank for liberals, but STILL acknowledged the immense hypocrisy in the left wing claims of inclusiveness. The fact that he has 915 other posts that are anti conservative make MY point, not yours. Thanks for the help.

    • B. Love says:

      Tensions are running high on election day. I don’t need to reread your post and I don’t really disagree with your general point. That’s why the Jon Stewart link you posted (it’s a bit hypocritical that you won’t click the link I posted, but…) is funny. If you watched the show you’d know that Stewart rips the left and the right almost equally because they both present him with juicy targets. He’s a comedian, Bruce. Yours is a critique one could make of most groups. But your blind spot is just at big when you give the right a pass and say “but very few (none I can think of) have been so embedded in our national fabric as the bullshit the liberals spew on diversity.”

      Well, I can think of one: bootstraps. Republicans love the idea that if we only eliminated taxes and cut government programs to the bone, then this wondrous meritocracy of ours would sort out the worthy citizens and shower them with justly deserved rewards and leave the unworthy layabouts and incompetents rotting in the projects. Do you really think that every child in America has the same odds of success that you and I had? I think this is a central difference between the left and right, and I say no they don’t. Government is the only thing that can level the playing field. And that cuts across most policy areas…finance, the environment, education, you name it.

      Don’t be a hypocrite and watch my clip. It’ll be more fun. We only have a few more hours to go back and forth. And you have yet to address Romney’s glaring reversals on just about every major issue…how can you accept all his u-turns and have any confidence in what he actually believes?

  8. Nope, no tension here. I wasn’t trying to be snippy (well maybe a little) with my “re-read it…” comment. It’s just that this is the second time you have attempted to refute my argument by saying, “yeah, but you guys do it too.” I conceded that point already so it’s not worth debating. It also doesn’t change the fact that liberals are huge hypocrites on the single most important part of their agenda.

    You lost me totally on bootstrapping because you have characterized a position of the Republican Party that simply doesn’t exist. I don’t think you’re trying to be disingenuous, but this is the only (I mean ONLY) defense Obama had in the debates. He would simply make up positions that Romney did not hold, ascribe those positions to him, then criticize him for these not-held positions. I give him credit for a brilliant strategy that works a little only because of a complicit media, but it certainly wouldn’t give me any confidence in his ability to lead (not that he’s ever given us any reason to have any such confidence).

    My confidence in Mitt Romney is drawn from the fact that literally everything he has ever touched in his life has been a success. He knows how the world actually works as opposed to Obama who only knows how he’d like it to work in some socialist utopia that exists only in text books. The proof for that is in his dismal record.

    We will know a lot more this time tomorrow!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s