Why Civil Rights?

Some Sort of Protest Using The Trappings Of The Civil Rights MovementHave you ever wondered why the Liberals couch each and every one of their arguments and demands as a Civil Rights issue irrespective of the specifics of their agenda of the moment?

The answer to that is simple; the Civil Rights Movement and resultant changes to America was the Liberals’ one great victory over the perceived will of the majority of Americans.

Given that fact, it makes logical sense that the Liberals would claim everything and anything that flies in the face of the will, beliefs, and sensibilities of the American people was a civil rights issue.

So why Civil Rights? Because it’s the only argument that they have that they think might work to force their agenda upon we, the People.

Related Reading:

The Liberal Redneck Manifesto: Draggin' Dixie Outta the Dark
Society: The Basics (13th Edition)
America: A Narrative History (Brief Tenth Edition)  (Vol. 1)
Nomadland: Surviving America in the Twenty-First Century
The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left

Tags: | | | | |

7 Responses to “Why Civil Rights?”

  1. Zarathustra Says:

    Dear Jonolan………. Your mother must have had a terrible case of Diarehhea, on the day SHE SHIT YOU OUT!!!!!

  2. jonolan Says:

    The above is what happens when one “strikes a nerve” with the Liberals; all of their vaunted education and “reasoned debate” goes right out the window, leaving nothing behind but the truth of their nature.

  3. Zhann Says:

    jonolan, i don’t know about you, but i have never heard that insult before. i will have to use that at a later time.

    anyway, you sure that civil rights is the only thing that liberal minds have accomplished? … only? … really? so, the rest of society has conservative minds to thank for everything else?

    … a bit of a stretch, no?

  4. jonolan Says:

    Zhann,

    When it comes to politics I have to say that the Civil Rights Movement was the Liberals’ singular honest success. Most other “Liberal” successes were strongly affected by other factors beyond their political efforts and were non-partisan – as opposed to bipartisan – efforts often based on factors well outside of true politics.

  5. Flotsam, Jetsam, and Lagan Says:

    The above is what happens when one “strikes a nerve” with the Liberals; all of their vaunted education and “reasoned debate” goes right out the window, leaving nothing behind but the truth of their nature.

    I am tempted to point out that the “truth” of the conservative nature is evident in the above quote – namely the infuriating (and dangerous) tendency to generalize and stereotype a large group of people based upon experience with only a few. The problem is – if I point that out I’ll be doing the exact thing which infuriates me so much. So, since I’ve not met or talked to ALL conservatives, I cannot reasonably make that statement. However, it has been my experience that SOME conservatives (mostly the ones who tend to make blanket statements about all liberals) are a little too quick to judge what they believe is the “truth” of the liberal nature.

    Why is “liberal” such a dirty word anyway? As I understand its meaning, it’s pretty tame.

    LIBERAL – adjective: favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection

    For that matter, what’s so terrible about centering one’s political philosophy around “civil” rights?

    CIVIL – adective: applying to or pertaining to ordinary citizens

    If liberty is still the prevailing concept around which our country operates (as it supposedly was at the time of our founding) and the “will, beliefs, and sensibilities of the American people” are in contradiction to liberty, then what’s the point? We might as well pack it in.

  6. jonolan Says:

    Gods above and below, that’s a tired old argument from the left; you’re being too general is a lame argument from people who have nothing else to use. At least you didn’t go beyond “dogwhistling” the claim of racism though. That’s a step up from the average Liberal filth.

    Following it up with sophistry though was ridiculous. All Americans know that Liberals and the ideology of Liberalism have only the most tenuous and corrupted connection to the dictionary definition of “liberal.”

    And finally – centering one’s political philosophy around “civil” rights is quite laudable. Cynically mislabeling issues as “civil rights” issues is intrinsically wrong.

  7. Flotsam, Jetsam, and Lagan Says:

    I wasn’t attempting to argue; merely calling it as I saw it. However, your reply should make a very effective mirror for you. I hope you’ll find it in yourself to gaze into it with eyes wide open as the image it displays is quite clear.

    By the way, I’m puzzled by your emphasis on the word Americans in the second sentence of your second paragraph. I am an American and very proud to be one. It is safe to say that there are millions of others like me. I hope they, like I, can engage in a constructive dialogue such as this with other Americans like you whose views are different. It seems to me that may be the only hope for all of us – as opposed to pointless bickering, name calling, and so on.

    With a view towards just such a constructive dialogue, I’d be interested to know to which issues you refer in your final sentence.

Leave a Reply