Thursday, August 2, 2012

Bad Person Spotlight: 'Liberals'


I’ve always known liberals were bad people, but I wasn’t aware of the depth of their badness until recently.

I had a nice piece written up highlighting Gore Vidal as the inaugural entry into the Good Person List, but having been privy to the spectacular bullshit liberals have been championing lately, I realized that the mainstream American ‘left’ (and my use of that term is generous) doesn’t know or really care about Gore Vidal, or even leftist politics in general. No—if liberals had any sense of history they might have recognized the loss of the man who came out in support of gay rights a full 60 years before our yuppie president gave his cop-out remarks (but more on that later). But it’s ok: they have Lawrence O’Donnell and Rachel Maddow to inspire them to take up arms in protest of the egregious practices of a fast-food company that sells chicken sandwiches.

At first I, too, was angry: those monsters at Chick-Fil-A had gone all ‘Soylent Green’ and started grinding up gay people to make their delicious chicken products! But then I stopped watching MSNBC and discovered that their CEO donated to organizations that lobby against gay marriage. Wow, imagine that. A very rich, southern evangelical white man spends money in opposition to gay marriage—that is unprecedented to the POINT. OF. OUTRAGE. Snore. Liberals are so concerned with this fast-food company that they have organized boycotts and even tried to deny it operating licenses in their cities. However, when faced with issues like the extension of the Bush tax cuts, staggering wealth inequality, or draconian expansions of state police power, liberals always make themselves scarce. Huh. I wonder why that might be.

Maybe it’s because liberals suck. Yeah, that must be it.

Oh liberals, you suck so much—let’s discuss some particulars.

If liberals truly cared about marriage equality, why did they applaud Obama’s incredibly vacuous statement that he supports allowing gay men and women to marry…but agreed it is ultimately up to the states to decide for themselves?

Ah, but no one paid attention to that part of Obama’s interview. It’s up the states huh, Mr. President, the same jurisdictions that up until the National Guard forced them to stop, systematically denied black men and women access to any substantive form of political or economic power? These, the same despotic mini-nations that allowed husbands to rape their wives for over two centuries, who refused to prosecute the murders of racial and sexual minorities are supposed to decide fairly whether or not GAY men and women (emphasis on the GAY part) are to have equal access to publically-sanctioned marriage? Does ‘Jim Crow’ mean ANYTHING to you? Good GOD, Obama is a bad man. But even worse are those who fawned over him after he ‘came out’ in favor of gay marriage—it was almost as if they actually thought he was going to DO something about it. Silly liberals.

Why didn’t liberals notice Obama’s double-speak? Because they don’t listen—they’re too busy sorting plastics to realize recycling is actually bad for the environment and environmentalism, too self-righteousness to learn that fair-trade further entrenches corporate power and exploitation, and too self-absorbed with their eco-friendly business plans to come to terms with how fake and vacuous they have become. Liberals are consumers of the worst variety; they’ve been buying shit for so long that the only resistance they can mount to the bad things going on in the world is TO BUY DIFFERENT SHIT. Fake, fake, fakery—bullshit, shit, shittery: the creed of the liberal.

I would rather entertain the Phelps family over dinner FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE than have to sit at breakfast with yuppie liberals and discuss marketing strategies for their INCREDIBLY NOVEL organic food products. At least the Phelps family is real—they’re following through with the whole hating gays thing. I can’t say the same for liberals who will drink from Obama’s hypocritical Kool-aid into the drone-bombed sunset.

Liberals are the sort who would rather prattle on about atheism, mocking and ridiculing religious folk than find common ground to resist the exploitation to which they are both subjected. Liberals critique religion only to REAPPROPRIATE THE SAME EPISTEMOLOGICAL PARADIGM and subject good people to CONTEMPT AND DERISION. Liberals are so convinced of the centrality of their own ideas that they become fascist enablers of violence and exploitation.

Liberals killed Jesus, assassinated Gandhi, canceled Arrested Development, cut down the ocean, polluted the rainforests, murdered Christmas, exonerated Hitler, and freed the Titans. But worst of all, they hate America. 

4 comments:

  1. When are you guys going to write the piece about yourselves? Next week maybe? It will surely be a good one, in fact it will probably be the only one worth reading (or writing) because anybody can sit around and bitch and moan from some dingy basement somewhere in the Appalachians, in fact it's been done so many times it's pretty much like breathing now. It's when that nihilistic asshole turns it around and takes a good look at himself and the obvious talent he is wasting on a blog that nobody reads but himself that real progress is made. So keep writing if you must, I'm sure society (I know, society is on the bad person list, haha clever!) will great appreciate it.. I will be waiting for the post when the spotlight is on "people who could be so much more than they are but blog about how bad everything else is in order to
    Perhaps make himself feel better by comparison"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comment, John. I suspect you're writing under a pseudonym as I cannot allow myself to believe that the greatest actor of our time concerns himself with the content of a blog as vulgar as ours. I also think the real John Malkovich would be more through with his reading so as to be made sensitive to the obvious irony at the heart of our blog. Oh, you missed that part. Well, here's a link (http://listparexcellence.blogspot.com/2012/08/bad-person-spotlight-liberals.html) to our first Bad Person Spotlight which identifies ourselves as bad people. Of course we at the List Par Excellence are bad people - you should catch up on your reading.

      As for our location, you are over a thousand miles off but, even then, what do you have against the fine people of the Appalachians? Sure, the region includes some of the more-culturally backward states in the Union, but they have feelings, too. At least we indict people of certain political persuasions in our criticism, unlike yourself, John, who seem keen on dismissing people purely on the geographical region in which they live. You are quickly revealing yourself to be a master of the art of irony, John.

      I find the part about nihilism interesting - you claim we're 'nihilistic' in our approach, but what about criticism, itself, induces political apathy? To the contrary, my loyal reader, criticism is the first essential step in spurring people to action. If it this were not the case, then we would have people up in arms about...well...nothing. In fact, they would have no idea what they're angry about and how to channel that anger productively without criticism illuminating key problems and possible alternatives. Also, I hope you wouldn't take offense to a suggestion of reading Nietzsche again, as your use of nihilism is a bit problematic. Certainly if we were nihilists we likely wouldn't take the time to criticize liberals for being 'bad' leftists if we thought leftism itself was just another meaningless political signifier now would we?

      As for blogging to make ourselves feel better, that certainly could be part of the purpose of the List. I suppose there is catharsis to be found in criticism, but that wouldn't be unique to the List. In fact, John, I'm worried that you may be trying to tell us something about yourself - you don't need to tiptoe around it. If you really need a way to, as you say 'make yourself feel better', you should learn from the list and focus on a form of criticism that is at least responsive to the arguments of its subject. For example, you criticize the List for being cliche and unproductive: maybe you could have been more specific by, oh I don't know, addressing anything we've said? Or, maybe you could work on your use of logical fallacies or your grammar and punctuation so you are more clear. In fact, you may want to start by actually forming arguments in your responses - this comment is, well, a bit deficient in that area. The most I could get was 'you're bad because you aren't productive' - but then you fail to say why. I don't quite understand what makes you think that all we do with our lives is write the List. That fallacy is called 'Begging the Question' - check out Aristotle to learn more.

      While I don't understand how 'I' could be the only reader of the List when you, yourself, have obviously been such a devout reader, I still accept your pledge of continued readership. I hope we won't disappoint in fulfilling your wish to learn more about us, the authors (or keepers, as we refer to ourselves) of the List. We may let slip now and then (perhaps even in the content of the List itself!) about ourselves and our political persuasions. In the mean time, while Jordan and I are both fascinating individuals, I think you'll find the List itself to be quite interesting on its own.

      Delete
  2. Dear John:

    We here at The List would like to thank you for your insightful comment and would invite you to keep generating precious site traffic.

    hugs and kisses, Jordan.

    ReplyDelete