Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

This article reveals more then the author intended, methinks.

https://newrepublic.com/article/142372/elitism-liberalisms-biggest-problem

Talk of "fair trade" coffee, feeling self conscious saluting the flag, serving..

The thing is, if you need to write an article about this, you're just proving the right, right. They say this all the time, the left denies it, and this joker confirms it.

Yes, they really ARE that sheltered from the real world.

Conservatives complaining about "elites," yet voted for one for president. Delicious.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Conservatives complaining about "elites," yet voted for one for president. Delicious.

1. I didn't vote for Trump, and am a registered Democrat.

2. The person complaining in this article is self discribed "liberal elite".

My issue with this, is for a so called "elite" to complain about things like insular partisanship, a cult like mentality of shunning anything and anyone with a hint of opposition, a lifestyle that only the well off or wealthy can afford, a "smug" attiude against anything remotely christian (Yet tolerant of other religions)


He's complaining of things the left deny is a problem, if the right talks about it.

That proves they care more about pr, then about inclusiveness.. Deny as they might, they aren't exactly any more representative of joe average's" like you or I, then the elite rights are (Like Trump)

Originally posted by cdtm
1. I didn't vote for Trump, and am a registered Democrat.

2. The person complaining in this article is self discribed "liberal elite".

My issue with this, is for a so called "elite" to complain about things like insular partisanship, a cult like mentality of shunning anything and anyone with a hint of opposition, a lifestyle that only the well off or wealthy can afford, a "smug" attiude against anything remotely christian (Yet tolerant of other religions)


He's complaining of things the left deny is a problem, if the right talks about it.

That proves they care more about pr, then about inclusiveness.. Deny as they might, they aren't exactly any more representative of joe average's" like you or I, then the elite rights are (Like Trump)

We can't talk about or criticize the left. Cuz reasons. For some reason it's never okay for someone who voted for Trump to deflect, but it is always okay for a leftist to deflect to Trump.

Now we just sit back and enjoy how they spin this observation.

Actually Surt, I just realized he wasn't talking to me.

Not saying you're wrong, but sorry Adam.

Surtur voted for Hillary though

Ahh Even Cartoons know better then Leftists Elites.

-4TCbK6ZOhg

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Conservatives complaining about "elites," yet voted for one for president. Delicious.


This seems like a relevant place for this quote

Originally posted by Robtard
Thread topic: The Alt-Right and their shit-lord delusions
Surtur: "But what bout the Leftist!!!1!"



Equalization tactics and whataboutism deflections. Well, it is Friday.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Conservatives complaining about "elites," yet voted for one for president. Delicious. Exactly, delicious and disgusting.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Conservatives complaining about "elites," yet voted for one for president. Delicious.

delicious is hardly the word I'd choose.

half-bingo

Let me give my own spin on this:

Liberalism used to be about class equity. Now, it is about tribal warfare.

They are NOT attacking the elites. They are NOT putting forward a "rich vs poor" narrative. They are strictly about attacking the right, and dangling a carrot of "equity" to rally around, in the sense that they pretend to promote a certain percentage of every identity group to join the ranks of the affluent.

Liberals used to support the underclass revolting against the upper class. Real Arab Spring stuff.

No longer.. A lot will say "Good", but that sure isn't what the left is supposed to be.. They're not anti establishment, they ARE the establishment.

Originally posted by cdtm
Actually Surt, I just realized he wasn't talking to me.

Not saying you're wrong, but sorry Adam.

Oh he definitely deflected. This isn't about Trump. Yet he mentioned Trump. They'd whine like babies if the roles were reversed.

Originally posted by Silent Master
This seems like a relevant place for this quote

Bingo.

I can't help it that most rightists are retards, I know that sounds intellectually elitist but it's true.

Originally posted by cdtm
Let me give my own spin on this:

Liberalism used to be about class equity. Now, it is about tribal warfare.

They are NOT attacking the elites. They are NOT putting forward a "rich vs poor" narrative. They are strictly about attacking the right, and dangling a carrot of "equity" to rally around, in the sense that they pretend to promote a certain percentage of every identity group to join the ranks of the affluent.

Liberals used to support the underclass revolting against the upper class. Real Arab Spring stuff.

No longer.. A lot will say "Good", but that sure isn't what the left is supposed to be.. They're not anti establishment, they ARE the establishment. List policies pushed for by liberals on a federal level that hurt the poor.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
List policies pushed for by liberals on a federal level that hurt the poor.

Pretty much every welfare law.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
List policies pushed for by liberals on a federal level that hurt the poor. They can't, because none exist.

The Great Society Act devastated the black communities. Do you guys still care about blacks or have you officially moved on to illegals?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
List policies pushed for by liberals on a federal level that hurt the poor.

Why?

Because when you make an assertion it's standard procedure to back it up?

Your claim is that democrats no longer support the lower class. What policies have they pushed that substantiates that claim?
Originally posted by Surtur
The Great Society Act devastated the black communities. Do you guys still care about blacks or have you officially moved on to illegals? If 1964 was the last time democrats signed into existence a law that hurt the poor, that's a pretty amazing track record.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Because when you make an assertion it's standard procedure to back it up?

Your claim is that democrats no longer support the lower class. What policies have they pushed that substantiates that claim?


That isn't what I said, though..

Originally posted by Tzeentch
List policies pushed for by liberals on a federal level that hurt the poor.

Unless you're going to claim that the government is only run by Republicans, you really do need to explain this graph:

https://i.imgur.com/xE11AHm.gif



Let's not pretend that our liberal representatives (mostly Democrats) actually represent most of us.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Because when you make an assertion it's standard procedure to back it up?

Your claim is that democrats no longer support the lower class. What policies have they pushed that substantiates that claim?
If 1964 was the last time democrats signed into existence a law that hurt the poor, that's a pretty amazing track record.


That's easy. Literally any laws that liberals favored and got passed that caused basic necessities to increase in cost. Usually regulations.




https://www.mercatus.org/publications/regulation-and-poverty


This is why you see some people, who are advocates for consumer goods and poor, talking about no-nonsense regulations. "No asbestos in homes but don't require 10 year assessments for pharmaceuticals."


I'll post more later. Have to go to a dinner party and pretend to like strangers.

Originally posted by Surtur
The Great Society Act devastated the black communities. Do you guys still care about blacks or have you officially moved on to illegals?
That one is hotly debated though, since it did a lot of good.

I think a more clear cut example would be better.

On a side note, " black" and "poor" are not the same thing.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Because when you make an assertion it's standard procedure to back it up?

Your claim is that democrats no longer support the lower class. What policies have they pushed that substantiates that claim?
If 1964 was the last time democrats signed into existence a law that hurt the poor, that's a pretty amazing track record.

Hey, it is pretty amazing how that one act caused issues for DECADES that continue to reverberate today yeah. Damn amazing. I agree with you, it's one colossal f*ck up we're still paying for.

Originally posted by StyleTime
That one is hotly debated though, since it did a lot of good.

I think a more clear cut example would be better.

On a side note, " black" and "poor" are not the same thing.

Doing a lot of good doesn't negate how it devastated the black communities. And no black is not the same as poor, but they were hit harder than anyone else. And the leftists claim they love the minorities.

I guess the type of minority changes. They seem to prioritize illegals now over blacks. See them whining about the census citizenship question like babies:

A census that counts citizens will help African Americans

The Cult of Trump be like:

-Hates elitism
-Voted for and supports an elitist billionaire

Originally posted by Robtard
The Cult of Trump be like:

-Hates elitism
-Voted for and supports an elitist billionaire

Leftist cultists be like:

-other people are the cultists
-behave like cultists

Originally posted by Robtard
The Cult of Trump be like:

-Hates elitism
-Voted for and supports an elitist billionaire

We certainly drained the swamp by putting in top .01% non-swampers in cabinet positions.

Originally posted by Surtur
Doing a lot of good doesn't negate how it devastated the black communities. And no black is not the same as poor, but they were hit harder than anyone else. And the leftists claim they love the minorities.

I guess the type of minority changes. They seem to prioritize illegals now over blacks. See them whining about the census citizenship question like babies:

A census that counts citizens will help African Americans
Like I said though, debatable. The "devastated black communities" idea came from the family values conservatives type(not all conservatives) and they failed to prove any substantial link from what I've seen. They cite stastistics, often incorrect or misrepresented, from a 40-50 year gap specifically to help their brand of identity politics.

Dadudemon, even though he was referencing something else, actually addressed part of the problem with this in his post. We'd have to pretend that Democrats and the Great Society were basically the only social/political things to happen in the country for the past 40-50 years to really support this claim. Barring some direct link, which again, I haven't seen.

Originally posted by Surtur
Doing a lot of good doesn't negate how it devastated the black communities. And no black is not the same as poor, but they were hit harder than anyone else. And the leftists claim they love the minorities.

I guess the type of minority changes. They seem to prioritize illegals now over blacks. See them whining about the census citizenship question like babies:

A census that counts citizens will help African Americans
Couldn't edit this in in time, and forgot to respond to the census thing.

Mostly during LBJ's time and his Great Society stuff, median black family income rose 53%, and the poverty rate for blacks dropped from 55% to 27%. Cutting the black poverty rate in half just seems like such a major good, that saying "devastating black communites" seems like a stretch, even if you think it had harmful elements elsewhere. If you want to argue it's complex, then cool.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090116143323/http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=372

The census thing is interesting, but still a long discussion. Historically black focused social groups are opposed to it as well, like the Black Alliance for Just Immigration and NAACP. This isn't one minority group vs other minority groups.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Dadudemon, even though he was referencing something else, actually addressed part of the problem with this in his post. We'd have to pretend that Democrats and the Great Society were basically the only social/political things to happen in the country for the past 40-50 years to really support this claim. Barring some direct link, which again, I haven't seen.




And creating multi-generational wealth in the black community is DEFINITELY a win. But I am not too sure you can legislate wealth very effectively.

Where poor people are always hit the most is on basic living necessitates: staple foods, housing, insurance, and healthcare.

Where to live, what to in where you live, and live healthy. If anything the government does makes any of that more expensive, that is a negative impact on the poor.

Democrats didn't do it all. Republican didn't do it all. However, I would bet that in the last 20 year, the GOP is more responsible for increasing the costs of those basic necessities I mentioned. Surely a conservative think-tank has thought something like this through and has a rebuttal. I'd be happy to be wrong.

Originally posted by dadudemon
This is largely my perspective, as well. Same with Robtard. Centrists get shit on by both sides and it is not quite fair.


Also, I got accused for getting Trump elected by a Democrat because I didn't vote for Hillary. Sorry, didn't want either in office.

You did good, Hillary needed to be kept out.

Guarantee you Hillary wouldn't have tossed Angela Merkel some starbursts and then said "don't say I never gave you anything". Guarantee.

Think about living a world where that didn't happen. That sounds like a horrible place.

Ben pretty much lays it out.

-Th5tilR3F8

All I will say on this is Liberals, Progressives etc. Don't believe blowhards on youtube have all the answers... Fortunately they retain that level of dignity!

Originally posted by Putinbot1
All I will say on this is Liberals, Progressives etc. Don't believe blowhards on youtube have all the answers... Fortunately they retain that level of dignity!

So you admit to being both a racist and an anti-Semite?

Originally posted by Putinbot1
All I will say on this is Liberals, Progressives etc. Don't believe blowhards on youtube have all the answers... Fortunately they retain that level of dignity!

There is no real dignity among those who believe the US is a rape culture, there is a gender wage gap, a man can be a woman cuz fee fee's, there are a billion different genders, black people can't be racist, it's racist to clean up poop with a hose, it's racist to put "It's okay to be white" posters up, Trump is Hitler, etc.

The fact that such bullshit is peddled to the left by those meant to educate and prepare them for the world is actually worse than them picking up that bullshit on youtube.

Originally posted by Surtur
There is no real dignity among those who believe the US is a rape culture, there is a gender wage gap, a man can be a woman cuz fee fee's, there are a billion different genders, black people can't be racist, it's racist to clean up poop with a hose, it's racist to put "It's okay to be white" posters up, Trump is Hitler, etc.

The fact that such bullshit is peddled to the left by those meant to educate and prepare them for the world is actually worse than them picking up that bullshit on youtube.

You tolerate these people because you have too, am I right?

Originally posted by Putinbot1
You tolerate these people because you have too, am I right?

It's not like we can force all leftists to move to California.

Would be nice, though.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's not like we can force all leftists to move to California.

Would be nice, though.

I'd visit if that was a thing.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's not like we can force all leftists to move to California.

Would be nice, though. I don't see that as your final solution.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I don't see that as your final solution.

I did nazi this response coming anne frankly I don't think anyone else did either.

Originally posted by Surtur
I did nazi this response coming anne frankly I don't think anyone else did either. Actually made me laugh.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's not like we can force all leftists to move to California.

Would be nice, though.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd visit if that was a thing.
Would be fun to visit, like a zoo.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Would be fun to visit, like a zoo.

It'd be like going to a carnival freak show, so it might be cool. It probably would even have the bearded ladies(feminists who choose not to shave).

"Step right up folks, see the amazing rainbow colored armpit haired girl!"

https://i.imgur.com/AS3kN9q.jpg

^Specimen A

"Ladies and gentlemen have no fear! While scientists have yet to discover the true origins of this mysterious creature we DO know that it will not harm you."

https://i.imgur.com/5GQne3F.jpg

Originally posted by Surtur
"Ladies and gentlemen have no fear! While scientists have yet to discover the true origins of this mysterious creature we DO know that it will not harm you."

https://i.imgur.com/5GQne3F.jpg

Meanwhile outside California

Lots of pictures of Nazis!

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Meanwhile outside California

Lots of pictures of Nazis!

Meanwhile inside California: lots of people too stupid to know what nazis are.

Meanwhile outside the U.S. The Real Nazis help the Califunny Commies do all they can to Erase Freedom from the face of the Earth.


THANKS POOTY!

Originally posted by dadudemon
Where poor people are always hit the most is on basic living necessitates: staple foods, housing, insurance, and healthcare.

Where to live, what to in where you live, and live healthy. If anything the government does makes any of that more expensive, that is a negative impact on the poor.



I would throw education in there too, although that depends on how strict we're being with "basic living necessities." Obviously, your body won't shut down if you don't read.

Originally posted by StyleTime


I would throw education in there too, although that depends on how strict we're being with "basic living necessities." Obviously, your body won't shut down if you don't read.

Nice, I got a thumbs up from StyleTime.





But, yeah, education does seem legit. It equips you to function as a basic member of society at a slightly better than the poor quintile of income if you graduate from high school.



Works Cited:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/203247/shares-of-household-income-of-quintiles-in-the-us/

https://smartasset.com/retirement/the-average-salary-by-education-level

Originally posted by dadudemon
Nice, I got a thumbs up from StyleTime.





But, yeah, education does seem legit. It equips you to function as a basic member of society at a slightly better than the poor quintile of income if you graduate from high school.



Works Cited:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/203247/shares-of-household-income-of-quintiles-in-the-us/

https://smartasset.com/retirement/the-average-salary-by-education-level


That second link is interesting. I wonder why the unemployment rate is slightly higher for PhD than a Professional degree?

Who is the beneficiary of a P.H.D.?

A common theme, is that the fruits of research are not for the general public. If research is not done for the enlightenment of the public, then who?