Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #136 - I Am Monkey (07/06/2013) [-]
I go to an incredibly liberal college in New York that's obsessed with Occupy Wallstreet and not a single one of them would even acknowledge the homeless on our subway platform. They're all massive hypocrites. When they say "spread the wealth" they really mean "someone pay for my student loans".
#180 to #136 - larknok (07/06/2013) [-]
I don't see an inherent problem with a sort of partially good philosophy. Yes, hypocrisy is always to some extent reprehensible. But let's imagine that you've got two choices of drug addicts: drug addicts who tell others not to use drugs, or drug addicts that tell others to use drugs. The first is a hypocrite, while the second is not. But who would you rather have in your neighborhood?

People have been excusing other people from having opinions for a very long time solely on the fallback that "they are only thinking of themselves." If a man pushes politically for the ability to feed thousands of starving children, but profits from it in a way, who cares? Good on the larger scale is not canceled by personal failure or shortcomings, and if it was, we'd all be damned.

Pyschoanalysis, at least when it boils down to someone really trying to talk to you about something serious, is a terrible, terrible thing. (Commonly this might be referred to as an ad-hominem logical fallacy) -> a person's own shortcomings does not invalidate their arguments.
#194 to #180 - comradewinter ONLINE (07/06/2013) [-]
Lead by example. I don't listen to anything a blatantly obvious hypocrite says unless it's something very clear. When a supporter of something is not willing to sacrifice their wealth, why should I? It's like telling someone to convert to Christianity while being a Jew because "it's more likely that Judaism is the true religion".
#141 to #136 - Rascal (07/06/2013) [-]
Those aren't liberals. They're dumb asses.

I live in the South, their are plenty of Republicans who do the same thing down here. Stop giving labels to a party for the hypocrisy of a few.
#139 to #136 - Rascal (07/06/2013) [-]
These liberals are not liberals; they're statist social democrats
Real liberals would be more along the lines of libertarians but the term has been so bastardized that libertarians would be outrageously insulted if you called them liberal.
 Friends (0)