Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Can We Please Stop Praising The Enemies Of Liberty On The Left With The Term ‘Liberal’?

Published

on

Here are the top 5 reasons to stop applauding the Left with a word that implies they defend Liberty when they clearly do not.

Recent events have clearly demonstrated the Left is no longer Liberal. Perhaps that was never the case in the first place, but at present the evidence is quite clear. The Left is no longer a champion of Liberty.

We’ve all heard the rationale for this incorrect usage, such as words have changed meanings over the years. Well, words haven’t really changed, the fact is the root word for Liberal is the same as Liberty – this why they sound very similar and convey the same idea. So why compliment deceptive people who have turned their back on freedom?

So here are the Top 5 reasons – in order of importance – to stop participating in Leftist propaganda efforts.

5. Leftist and Liberal are easily interchangeable.

Old habits die-hard, many of us are just used to referring to Leftists as Liberals. Well, it’s very important to get out of that habit. Both start with the letter ‘L’ and have the same number of characters, so why not use the correct word?

4. Leftism [Socialism] and Liberalism are based on two entirely different concepts.

The Oxford English dictionary defines the term left in part as:

2 (often the Left) [treated as singular or plural] A group or party favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views:
Origin Old English lyft, left ‘weak’ (the left-hand side being regarded as the weaker side of the body), of West Germanic origin.

The Oxford English dictionary defines the term Liberal in part as:

Favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms
1.2(In a political context) favouring individual liberty, free trade
Origin Middle English: via Old French from Latin liberalis, from liber ‘free (man)’.

Leftists are of a collectivist ideology while Liberals are individualists. These are two entirely different concepts that should not be confused with each other. Contradictory phrases such as ‘Far-Left Liberals’ do not make any sense because they refer to ideologies in opposition to each other. This would be akin to describing something as being Ice-Fire or Gas-solid.

Incorrect usage of these words not only confuses the issue, but this dangerously uniformed habit also reflects also badly on the Conservative cause.

3. Collectivism clearly belongs on the Socialist-Left while the word closely related to Liberty belongs on the Conservative-Right.

Again, Leftists are collectivists, while Liberals (favouring individual liberty) are individualists. They have much more in common with Conservatarians than Leftists.

Consider this quote for the Washington Post piece on Justice John Paul Stevens’ call to repeal the second amendment:

A party that was once afraid of being saddled with supporting “government-run” health care is increasingly okay with the word “liberal” and even voted in droves for a self-described socialist in 2016.

This highlights the contradictory nature of the Socialist-Left’s exploitation of the word Liberal. Collectivist [socialist] ideologies require the application of force for the implementation of their national agenda. This quite adverse to the cause of Liberty and illustrates the sheer hypocrisy in their use of this label.

Conservatives, Libertarians and Liberals are on the Right side of the political spectrum, while the authoritarian Socialists are of the Left, using the wrong word blurs this distinction.

2. Before the word was hijacked by the Left, Liberal ideals were essentially Conservative ideals.

This goes back to the ‘words have changed meaning’ rationale, except that they haven’t.

The defining principles of the word Liberal of being “favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms and (In a political context) favouring individual liberty, free trade” are very much in line with Conservative principles. The word really hasn’t changed in meaning and it is closely associated with freedom. Liberty still has the same definition, so why wouldn’t that apply to a word with the same origins and a similar meaning?

Dr. Everett Piper wrote a book awhile back entitled: “Why I Am A Liberal, and Other Conservative Ideas” demonstrating that Conservatives and Liberals are essentially one in the same.

1. Using the wrong ‘L’ word undeserving praises the Left while insulting true Liberals who are potential allies in the cause of Conserving Liberty.

Conservatives derogatorily referring to Liberals is an insult to those who are true to the word. These are potential allies in the cause, so what is the point in attacking them? As mentioned before , it’s just a matter of using one ‘L’ word of the same length for another, but it will make a world of difference.

Mislabelling Leftists as a Liberals is undeservingly complimentary to them. The Left has turned their back to the cause of Liberty, so why congratulate them with a label that implies the opposite?

The Bottom Line.

In his superb video Dennis Prager pointed out that: We are fighting the Left, not Liberals.  He also asserted that we are in a non-violent civil war with the Left. It is imperative that we at least adopt some message discipline beginning with the words we use. There is absolutely no reason to confuse the issue and praise the enemies of Liberty on the Left with the undeserved label of Liberal. So for the sake of truly preserving Liberty, please stop doing so.
Please refer to some of these fine dissertations and videos on the subject. These illustrate the point that Leftist do not deserve the praise garnered from being labelled as Liberals.

Video: You’re Not A Liberal!

Video: We are fighting the Left, not Liberals – Dennis Prager.

PragerU Video: Why I Left the Left

Leftism Is Not Liberalism

Leftists are not Liberal Despite Common Misconceptions

 

Advertisement

1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Gar

    April 8, 2018 at 9:01 pm

    I think that the appropriate term is Libertine, but we’ve allowed Democrats to distort the word liberal and then we hung it around their necks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.

Culture and Religion

The complete fraud that is socialism

Published

on

By

The complete fraud that is socialism

Once again we are witness to the age-old scam of socialism with Leftists making promises to attain power that can never be fulfilled.

Long before Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago exposed the systematic oppression, torture, incarceration and deliberate mass murder that are the hallmarks of socialistic slavery. James A. Michener documented the 1956 Hungarian uprising against communism in his book ‘The Bridge at Andau’. While both are great literary works, ‘The Bridge at Andau’ laid bare the complete fraud that is the collectivist ideologies in creating a ‘Heaven on Earth’ or ‘worker’s paradise’ that never comes to fruition.

The selling of socialistic slavery to a new generation tends to follow a certain type of ‘progress’. Promises are made for all kinds of largess ranging from Free Healthcare, Free Housing, Free College, Free food to even Free income. All paid for with other people’s money. Never mind that It’s impossible to fulfill all of these wondrous asseverations. Appearances must be made to at least begin the process, so the ever-present task of wealth redistribution begins at the point of a gun.

This is also why the Socialist-Left obsesses over gun confiscation and the suppression of free speech. It is imperative for the Leftists to disarm the people since they generally object to having their property stolen from them. However, we are getting ahead of ourselves, this is to document how this exploitation of the people has ‘progressed’ in other collectivist enclaves to better understand how this crime against the people is perpetrated.

Why do collectivist regimes always require secret police apparatus and the suppression of Liberty?

This question was detailed in The Bridge at Andau in the chapters on the ‘AVO man’. In which he discusses the secret police organisation of the Hungarian Communists, the AVO (Allamvedelmi Osztaly). He bluntly asked and answered the question:

Why must communism depend on such dregs of society?

No matter on what elevated plane communism begins its program of total dictatorship. it sooner or later runs into such economic and social problems that some strong-arm force is required to keep the civil population under control.

As is the case now as it was then, a nation’s Socialist-Left will promise just about anything to attain power over the people:

When communism is wooing the workers in Csepel, all kinds of exaggerated promises are made if they seem likely to awaken men’s aspirations and their cupidity. These promises are couched in such simple terms and such effective symbols that they become immediate goals of the revolution.

Review briefly what communist agitators had once promised the Hungarians who appear in this book: consumer goods such as they had never known before, increased wages. increased social benefits, shorter hours of work, improved education for everyone, a greater social freedom, and a government directly responsible to the working classes. Under communism such promises were never even remotely capable of attainment.

[Our Emphasis]
If all of that sounds eerily familiar, it’s because that’s part of a very old song and dance that has deceived many a generation into enslaving themselves under socialism. Consider this recent story from the Associated Press:

Democrats lurch left on top policies as 2020 primary begins

NEW YORK (AP) — Democratic presidential contender Julian Castro launched his campaign by pledging support for “Medicare for All,” free universal preschool, a large public investment in renewable energy and two years of free college for all Americans.
….

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, who is expected to launch his presidential campaign soon, has sponsored legislation to create a federal jobs guarantee program in several communities across America.

The pilot program… could ultimately transform the U.S. labor market by providing well-paid government employment with benefits for anyone who wants it.

[Our Emphasis]

As Margaret Thatcher so aptly surmised, eventually they will run out of other people’s money. In our case in the states, that is already the situation given the enormous debt and unfunded liabilities reaching into the stratosphere of trillions of dollars. Of course, this hasn’t deterred committed collectivists such as Democratic mayor Bill de Blasio who recently stated that ‘There’s plenty of money in the world… It’s just in the wrong hands!’ Never mind that it is morally wrong to steal the property of others or that once a society turns down the dead-end of socialism there will always be more people wanting more money from those who have it.

Wealth redistribution scams will always wreck the economy. A socialist regime that nationalizes the economy can never function better than one of economic Liberty. Soon enough everything breaks down, the people see through the lies and the government has to start breaking heads. Thus it is imperative that they have previously confiscated the people’s guns and made it illegal to defend themselves.

The Takeaway

Socialistic schemes always run contrary to basic human nature. Rewarding someone for not working will always result in less work. Conversely, punishing someone for working will also result in less work.

This basic logic of human nature seems to be lost on Leftists. But perhaps it is not. They have to know their schemes have never and will never work. And yet they still try to impose them on everyone else. Perhaps they know of the epic fraud they are continually perpetrating on society, but they don’t care. That will be the subject of our next installment.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

The real story here is that a radical activist took on high school kids

Published

on

The real story here is that a radical activist took on high school kids

The Covington Catholic School story has taken on a life of its own. What started as an attack against MAGA hat-wearing teens who supposedly went after a Native American Vietnam War veteran has turned into a witch hunt by leftist mainstream media to prove their righteous indignation towards the kids was justified.

But at the core of the story is something that most seem to be missing. Nathan Phillips isn’t a random activist. He’s an outspoken radical who intentionally inserts himself into situations to draw attention to his cause. We saw this clearly the day after the viral video was shot (but before it went viral) when he tried to storm a Catholic church to disrupt worship services. Those are not the actions of a peace-seeking, mild-mannered activist for Native American rights. They’re the actions of someone seeking trouble for the sake of attention.

Then, there’s the question of claims that he was a combat veteran who fought during the Vietnam War. To be fair, these are not necessarily his assertions, though I haven’t read everything he’s said about that period in his life. But mainstream media has painted him on multiple occasions as essentially a war hero. His claims have been that he was a “Vietnam times veteran,” which is obviously meant to insinuate he participated.

Thankfully, many of the publications that painted this picture of Phillips have since started editing their stories. Nevertheless, the damage is done. His reputation as a Vietnam War hero is still prominent in the eyes of those who read the initial stories and haven’t gone back to reread them since the corrections were made. We can assume that means nearly none of them have learned of the correction. That’s why he’s still being widely labeled as such on social media.

One of his claims to fame is that he starred in a Skrillex video that depicted armed opposition against law enforcement as a potential solution for those who are being forced from their homes by a land developer.

The sum of the parts of this story paint a very strange picture of Phillips. There is absolutely nothing wrong with activism for the sake of Native American rights. The cause is a righteous one and most activists are doing their part to properly bring awareness to the American people while working with governments in their plight.

Phillips doesn’t fall into that category. His stories keep changing, but the truth is still a mystery.

As our EIC noted yesterday, he claims to be a hero but he’s not.

Nathan Phillips claims to be a hero, but he’s the reason “MAGA kids” are now being demonized

http://noqreport.com/2019/01/22/nathan-phillips-claims-hero-hes-reason-maga-kids-now-demonized/There have been multiple shifts of the narrative being pushed by mainstream media about the Covington Catholic School “MAGA kids” since it first went viral. Each shift further demonstrates the far-left’s unhinged nature and mainstream media’s desire to attack conservative Christians no matter what the facts of the matter say.

All of this goes back to Nathan Phillips, the Native American who sparked the incident by trying to march through the group of kids. It wasn’t necessarily his actions that should be condemned, but how he portrayed the whole situation and his role in it have perpetuated the falsehoods that are being reported by mainstream media even today.

This all brings us back to his “opposition,” or at least the people he apparently opposes. By no means do I believe these kids are innocent. They’re kids. They were thrown into a situation they didn’t know how to handle, but even in those circumstances they handled it fairly well. Nick Sandmann, the “smirking MAGA kid” who was literally at the center of the initial controversy, is having to go on air to defend himself, his school, and to try to prevent the threats that have hit their community.

It’s a disgrace that these kids couldn’t just go to the March for Life unscathed. The trashy people who continue to dig into their pasts, shame them, and threaten their lives are being driven by the progressive worldview that is intolerant of the hats they wore.


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Before you assume young earth creationists are anti-science, watch this video

Published

on

Before you assume young earth creationists are anti-science watch this video

Even in Judeo-Christian circles, young earth creationists are often considered on the fringe of faith. Most scientists have concluded that the universe and planet Earth are billions of years old, life is millions of years old, and the Biblical account of the creation is either allegorical or jibes with scientific understanding of the universe through creative interpretation such as the gap theory.

But here’s the thing. Since nobody can know for sure how old any of it really is since absolute certainty is only possible through observation, we all must rely on evidence, or more accurately, interpretation of the evidence. Those on both sides of the debate are looking at the same evidence but come to greatly contradictory conclusions.

Educators, mainstream media, and scientists have been pushing the old universe concept for decades. At this point, most consider it to be “settled science” that the earth and universe are old. What if I were to tell you the same evidence they base their conclusions on also establishes a scientific premise that supports a literal Biblical worldview? Many would point to dinosaurs, stars, and other pieces of evidence that are contrary to the Bible, but even these have scientific explanations that fit perfectly within a Biblical worldview.

As I stipulated earlier, nobody can know for sure, but that doesn’t mean they can’t agree to a likelihood. To me, the evidence favors a young earth concept. Before you balk, watch this short video.


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report