Essay:Liberal Intellectualism Parody

(Ed. Note: Hoji copied the assfly version over here, and I copied the Bayes version from CP. I like seeing them presented like this so I made this essay space piece. I did not actually write any of it. A side by side full blown RW refutation piece will end up here, and is being worked on here. Thank you, human^{be in}.)

What follows is the complete text of Andrew Schlafly's essay, Liberal Intellectualism, the original of which can be found here:

It is interesting to observe how the liberal ideology, and liberal arguments, appeal most to educated, informed persons who are short on intellectual achievements of their own. Put another way, the biggest advocates of liberal arguments are the intellectual wannabees or pseudo-intellectuals. Examples of not-quite-intellectuals who promote liberal arguments include: John Kerry Al Gore Bill Clinton Richard Dawkins Stephen Jay Gould Laurence Tribe Robert McNamara Henry Kissinger J. Robert Oppenheimer Jon Stewart Noam Chomsky John Maynard Keynes Please add other examples. Motivation There are two primary motivations for the liberal advocacy by pseudo-intellectuals: it is easier for them to obtain acclaim from the liberal press than from real intellectuals they genuinely fail to understand certain abstractions, such as: how cutting taxes often increases government revenue (Laffer Curve) how guns save more lives through deterrence and prevention than they harm how childbirth has a positive effect on health, and thus abortion harms health how cease-fires always help a determined opponent in war how arms limitations treaties always helps a dishonest adversary they expect superficial, flawed logic to persuade others, such as: claiming that inequality in outcome implies discrimination demanding equal treatment for genders in all situations claiming that the gay agenda is like the civil rights struggle by African Americans insisting that government can reduce poverty with more programs Please add to these lists. What follows is the complete text of Bayes' counter-essay posted on Conservapedia (the last version before it was wiped by TK). NOTE: The author of this essay does not endorse the views portrayed in it, or its method of argument. This work is intended to demonstrate the fallacy of the content at Essay:Liberal Intellectualism It is interesting to observe how the conservative ideology, and conservative arguments, appeal most to educated, informed persons who are short on intellectual achievements of their own. Put another way, the biggest advocates of conservative arguments are the intellectual wannabees or pseudo-intellectuals. Examples of not-quite-intellectuals who promote conservative arguments include: George W. Bush privileged youth, weak student at Yale, no original work Rush Limbaugh dropped out of SE Missouri State University after receiving many poor grades Ann Coulter frequent low-brow attacks on Democrats Ronald Reagan obscure actor before entering politics Please add other examples. Motivation There are three primary motivations for the conservative advocacy by pseudo-intellectuals: it is easier for them to obtain acclaim from the conservative press than from real intellectuals they genuinely fail to understand certain abstractions, such as: how cutting taxes often decreases government revenue how guns jeopardize more lives than they save how abortion can be a reasonable decision in some circumstances how diplomacy is often better than war how arms limitations treaties reduce the chances of a devastating nuclear exchange they expect superficial, flawed logic to persuade others, such as: claiming discrimination does not exist demanding that institutional discrimination against women be sustained claiming that homosexuals deserve fewer civil rights insisting government programs have no effect on poverty Please add to these lists. See Also Essay:Liberal Intellectualism (shown above)