How strict individual rights liberalism leads to group rights and the ruin of society

The title of this entry expresses a main theme of mine, and in my reply to commenter Margaret S. in November 2006 (beginning, “I respectfully disagree with Margaret”), I summed it up in 700 words. Hmm, that’s the length of an op-ed piece. Can anyone think of a mainstream newspaper that would publish my comment as an article? Also, while the whole thread, which is on the subject of “gyneocracy,” is worth reading, highly recommended is Laura W.’s great statement on the role of women in society, which I also quote in the current discussion on Debbie Schlussel.

- end of initial entry -

Lady Lexington writes:

When I read the post in the linked entry by an Indian living in the West where he says,

“I find it difficult to discuss any serious abstract ideas with women because invariably the arguments get emotional and sentimental when women listen or argue. There’s no unemotional and thoroughly rational/logical way of arguing with women. Women, generally speaking, do not think logically, they think through feelings and sentiments. That’s the whole point.”

I find myself thinking this is how I feel when I try to discuss anything with liberals. People don’t know how to think anymore. It is all about feelings.

LA replies:

This is a major fact of our times. And other than self-identified conservatives talking about liberal “nuttiness,” it is not discussed or acknowledged at all. This florid irrationality fits the general pattern of today’s liberalism: an increasingly extreme substance, presenting itself as and seeing itself as “normal” and “mainstream.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 29, 2007 08:11 AM | Send