As far as why I would believe that the Left is incapable of understanding complex ideas, let's try something: why don't you try to figure out why I think that way? It's really pretty easy, but it takes some thinking.
Because you refuse to associate with leftists and liberals, so your only knowledge of 'the Left' comes via the strawmen arguments of other conservatives? I've certainly seen no indication that you actually understand any point of view that might be held by someone who calls themself a liberal or leftist, nor have you provided any references to anyone articulating the positions you attack.
For example, I'm not big on Target, either. I prefer to shop local -- the farmer's market, the local grocery and hardware chains, goodwill, that sort of thing. Given that the economy of the region I live in is already so denuded, though, a lot of the time it's hard to find locally-owned stores that have what I'm looking for. Until I have some reason to think Target's business practices are as abhorrent as Wal-Mart's, I'll choose the former over the latter if that's what things come down to.
You know, Nuoema, even if you hadn’t told me that you’re a college educated liberal, I would have guessed in a second. The first required course in Liberal Arts is apparently “Strawman 101”. It’s impossible to have a discussion with one of you without having your arguments dismissed as strawmen. Why? It’s just a cheap way of dismissing an argument as irrelevant so that you don’t have to argue a point for which you are have no good answer.
As far as “refusing” to associate with Leftists and Liberals, how do you know whom I associate with? Hint: the comment that you’re referring to wasn’t mine. You really need to pay attention. That is part of the reason that I believe that liberals can’t grasp complex ideas: lack of attention span. I call it Liberal Attention Deficit Disorder (LADD) and I posted on it not long ago.
Quite frankly, living in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area of Minnesota, it’s impossible not to be hammered over the head with the liberal viewpoint all day every day. Every media outlet in this area is far-left. Hugh Hewitt regularly cites the Minneapolis Star Tribune as the only major newspaper in the country that is actually farther to the Left than The New York Times. Most people wouldn’t believe that is possible. I assure you that it is.
Having grown up in this atmosphere, it’s impossible not to understand the Left’s point of view. Besides, it’s not very hard to understand, because it’s so simplistic. We’ll get to that in a minute.
You say that I don’t provide references to anyone articulating the positions I attack? OK, let’s take the Left’s hatred of Wal-Mart. Now where could I go to find a reference from someone who hates Wal-Mart? Hey! I know! How about this?
Until I have some reason to think Target's business practices are as abhorrent as Wal-Mart's…
Now, unless a company is skinning puppies alive, don’t you think that the word “abhorrent” is a trifle strong when referring to a company’s business practices? I mean, if Wal-Mart’s business practices are “abhorrent”, what would we call “Uncle Joe” Stalin’s murder of 50 million people? We’d have to make up new words to get to that extreme. Oh, wait. I guess we wouldn’t. We could just call it Communism, or Socialism, or Leftism.
OK. Now let’s get to the heart of the matter: why I believe that those on the Left can’t grasp complicated ideas. Man, this is going to be a long post! I hope I didn't offend you by saying "man".
I’ve posted about most of these things over the months, but this is a good place to put them together in one spot.
It’s been said many times that the people on the Left “think with their emotions”, and it’s true. But it’s even worse than that. They have no logic whatsoever. They can’t see cause and effect. The logical progression of events stemming from their ideas is beyond them. They are simplistic.
Well, I guess I’d better give a few examples. Where to start?
The View of the Left (TVL):
A) Union workers make better wages and have better benefits than the average worker. That is good.
B) Unions protect workers from bad working conditions. That is good.
Further thinking is unecessary, because arrogantly standing up for these "little guys" makes me feel good about myself, even if it harms "the little guy" in the long run, as we shall see.
The View from the Right (TVR):
A) When companies have to pay for higher wages and benefits for their employees, that cost is passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices.
When prices get high, not as many people buy the product. They’ll buy a less expensive product from overseas.
When the company making the product is selling fewer products, they don’t need as many workers, so Americans lose their jobs.
B) 100 years ago, when companies really were abusing their employees and making them work in unsafe conditions, unions were a good idea. Now, however, the government takes care of keeping employees safe. The mere mention of OSHA sends waves of panic through companies.
Companies are so heavy regulated in regard to employee safety, hours and working conditions that unions have nothing to do with working conditions anymore.
From there, we can jump directly to:
TVL: Higher wages for low-level, unskilled employees are good.
TVR: When an employer has to pay higher wages, they have less money to hire more people and/or give better benefits. They also have less money to put back into the company so that they can grow and hire even more employees.
Minimum wage jobs are a place for people to start out and gain skills, which they can use to command higher wages. That’s where I started when I was a kid at $3.35/hour.
The vast, vast majority of people don't stay at minimum wage for long. Most of the people with minimum wage jobs are kids just starting out. If you're at minimum wage for more than a year, you're just not trying. Period.
Regardless of what the Left will tell you, the economy is humming along. Minimum wage jobs are hard to come by only because they're not very common. Most positions pay more than minimum wage to start, because employers are competing for even relatively unskilled workers.
Which brings us to our next point:
TVL: Competition is bad because it hurts people's self-esteem if they don't have the skills to compete. That's bad.
TVR: Competition amongst people is as old as the human race. Hell, it's older than the dinosaurs. If the Left truly believes in Evolution, you'd think that they'd encourage competition. After all, what is "survival of the fittest" if not competition at it's most basic level?
The Neandertal died out because he couldn't compete with Homo Sapiens. If there were a Liberal around back then, we would have heard screams of "discrimination!" and "bigotry!".
When one's self-esteem is harmed, it makes most people work harder to make sure that it doesn't happen again. Unless you're a Lefty. Then it just makes you a victim.
There are countless other examples, but I need my beauty sleep, so let's wrap it up by going back to where we started.
TVL: Wal-Mart pays low wages, doesn't treat its employees well and kills small businesses. That's bad.
TVR: Wal-Mart pays what it can and gives what benefits it can, while still keeping its prices low.
Nobody is forced to work at Wal-Mart. If they don't like it, they can go out and find another job. That's the beauty of Capitalism. See "Competition" above.
As far as "Killing Main Street" is concerned, there hasn't been much of a "Main Street" for many years before Wal-Mart reared its "ugly head". As I've posted before, it's the romanticism of the Left. "Main Street" is what a bunch of people a bunch of people who hardly ever get out of the inner city envision as "small town America".
Simple concepts? Yes.
At least to people who think logically and can reason beyond the point where they feel good.
To Liberals who don't like themselves very much, who are insecure, who just want to feel good about themselves, thinking beyond their simplistic points is counterproductive. Hence they have trained themselves not to think beyond that point.
Why do you think that they hate Conservatives so much? It's because we're confident, we're self-assured. To coin a phrase, "We don't need no stinkin' village!"
All that they want is to feel that they are helping "the little guy". Whether their efforts are helpful or not is immaterial. It's all about how their efforts make them feel. More often than not, their policies hurt the very people whom they're trying to help. But do they rescind those policies?
Because that would mean that they were wrong. And to admit they were wrong would hurt their self-esteem, which is what their so-called causes were all about in the first place.
Anyone see the vicious circle here?
So, Nuomena, there's your answer. The simplistic views of the Left can be summed up in a soundbite. The views of the Right take some explaining.
At first glance, the views of the Left look good. If you delve deeper, which the Left never does, they are obviously flawed.
And now, this is the point where you take one, or if you feel daring, two of my points and obsess over them, instead of responding to my larger point.
Let me help you. I know that it's difficult, especially for one who thinks that they are so "terribly" educated such as yourself. Blather.
The real point is, the Left never thinks beyond the point that it makes the individual feel good about themselves.