Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Culture

Color Me Shocked: “Liberals” Are The True Authoritarians

In what is being called “the mother of all corrections,” the American Journal of Political Science has admitted that the results of a study it published were unintentionally misrepresented.

Published

on

In what is being called “the mother of all corrections,” the American Journal of Political Science has  admitted that the results of a study it published were unintentionally misrepresented. The study, “Correlation not Causation: The Relationship between Personality Traits and Political Ideologies,” purported to show that conservatives are marked by an authoritarian streak. After the study had garnered much scholarly attention, Steven Ludeke and Stig H. R. Rasmussen of the University of Southern Denmark noticed that the data did not support the published results. The correct conclusion is that liberals, particularly economic liberals, lean toward authoritarianism.

This study, which was found worthy enough to be cited 45 times before the correction, will probably disappear down the old memory hole. It doesn’t fit the narrative—and for that it must die.

Not that I put much stock in the study; not now and not before the erroneous conclusion was noticed and corrected. Social sciences are the softest of all scientific disciplines and this study seems downright squishy. It’s not a physics experiment conducted in a laboratory but the very subjective exploration of a political and sociological question, fraught with gray areas and malleable definitions. Take “authoritarianism,” for example. While such a thing certainly exists, it is nonetheless an intangible commodity that cannot be measured in the same way we measure newtons or watts. And what exactly do “conservative” and “liberal” mean? Those words describe attitudes found on the left/right political spectrum, a useful but imperfect mental model created by humans to better understand political philosophies.

Study or no study, people on the Left clearly exhibit symptoms of authoritarianism. Did we really need the American Journal of Political Science to tell us that? I certainly didn’t. To know the Left’s true nature just listen to their words and, more importantly, watch their actions. As columnist George Will once wrote:  “[S]ince the 1960s, liberalism has been concerned with who thinks what, who acts when, who lives where and who feels how.” Brilliant!

If you want to observe authoritarian liberals in their natural habitat just visit New York City. The government there has tried, and in many cases succeeded, in clamping down on everything from Big Gulps to baby formula. Exercising your Second Amendment right is laborious and expensive. It’s illegal to donate prepared food to homeless shelters because the city government can’t determine the salt, fat, and fiber content. Smoking is illegal almost everywhere, cigarettes cost more than $13 a pack, and e-cigarettes, which have no harmful externalities, are also banned in many public places. You can be slapped with a $250,000 fine for “misgendering” someone. It’s illegal to refuse to serve alcohol to a pregnant woman. Urinating in public, on the other hand, has been decriminalized because laws against it are, you guessed it, racist.

Now do you believe the results of the study?

The question remains of how the study’s conclusions could have been so badly blundered. The answer, I believe, is confirmation bias. The authors admitted that they expected “P” scores (measuring psychoticism) to be associated with “conservative political attitudes, particularly for militarism and social conservatism.” Seek and ye shall find!

Nor did anyone else notice this ginormous error, which might again be attributable to confirmation bias. Assuming that most of the academics citing the study (but apparently not reading it) were political lefties, it would only have made sense to them that conservatives are controlling and liberals are open-minded and tolerant. Isn’t that what “liberal” means? Yes, but it’s an ill-fitting adjective, one that I stopped using for a little while because the thugs who claim it don’t deserve it. I dropped my boycott of the word “liberal” after realizing that, in order to communicate effectively, I had to use words as they are commonly understood. It’s just another example of how our lexicon has been perverted to portray people on the Left in a positive light.

Language is often deliberately altered to avoid associating authoritarianism with the Left. Ever wonder why the Nazis are so rarely referred to by their full name—the National Socialist German Workers’ Party? Whether or not the Nazis were a left-wing party is a debate for another day but the fact remains that that was their name. People on the Left avoid using it because they wouldn’t want any of the Nazis’ hard-earned toxicity to rub off on two of their most beloved words—socialist and worker. They dismiss the party’s name with the help of the No True Scotsman fallacy—it’s literally impossible for authoritarians to be on the Left, you see, because people on the Left can’t be authoritarian. Authoritarians are always and everywhere right-wingers.

The notion (or misconception, really) that conservatives are little Gestapo agents at heart emerged not long after the end of World War II. The Frankfurt School’s Theodor Adorno (et al) wrote about the “authoritarian personality” in their 1950 book of the same name, which was cited in the footnotes of the aforementioned study. Adorno’s thesis was that most people harbor fascistic tendencies even if they are completely unaware of them. The only people who weren’t crypto-Nazis were people like himself on the far Left. Adorno, whose communist politics and partial Jewish heritage drove him to flee Nazi Germany for America, spoke with authority when he smeared regular Americans as closeted brownshirts. Prevailing wisdom held that if Adorno, himself a refugee from Nazism, diagnosed the American mainstream with latent authoritarianism then it had to be true.

How it must disconcert some people to have a new study conclude that liberals are the real authoritarians. Anyone who thought the study had value before is now stuck with the revised conclusion. It’s science!

The study tells us, for example, that economic liberals—those most obsessed with banishing economic inequality—tend to exhibit authoritarian tendencies. That doesn’t surprise me at all. Class warriors like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders aren’t heroic. Their policies are wrong-headed and they don’t care how many eggs they have to crack to make their elusive omelet.

What’s so wrong with economic equality? Besides the fact that it not nearly as fair as it sounds, it also has an adversarial relationship to freedom. Whenever free people are allowed to tend to their own lives, inequality naturally arises. The guy who takes a year off to “find himself” will probably fall behind on the seniority scale at work. The guy who starts his own business out of his garage might strike it rich—but more likely his startup will fail within five years. And so on.

The brutal and endless process of economic leveling cannot be achieved without the heavy hand of the state to act as its enforcement mechanism. Economic equality requires a perpetual policing of people’s decisions, mandating nearly as much as it prohibits. This person must hire that person and must pay her this hourly wage. This person must pay for that person’s birth control pills. That person must lend this person this much money at this interest rate. This person must not earn more than this sum of money in a given year or else pay exorbitant taxes. This person must pay for his own college education but also that person’s college education because that person can’t afford it.

And let’s not get started on groups! This group has had it too good for too long. They must be held down so that others can be lifted up. This group is “overrepresented” (I hate that word) in this field. Other members of this group, by no fault of their own, will have to be punished as a result. Members of another “underrepresented” group will be hired instead, whether or not those people are the best candidates for the job.

This is what authoritarianism looks like. It’s petty, it’s suffocating, and it’s done by people who consider themselves to be a force for good.

Crime

Everyone In U.S. Who Has Illegals Employed Right Now Just Got The WORST News Of Their Lives

It’s happening!

Published

on

One of the huge problems that Americans face today is what to do about the illegals. Even though many have integrated into society, blending in as if they belong, many are still hopping the fence or swimming the river just to drain the taxpayers’ coffers and enjoy the land of the free and home of the brave without standing in line.

While there have been many plans floated as to how to deal with the problem, the one that makes the most sense is to stop incentivizing the lawbreakers and those who facilitate them. In order to do that, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement have to make sure that business owners aren’t taking advantage of an illegal’s undocumented status and paying them under the table for jobs that they would have to pay others more for.

According to The Washington Examiner, that’s exactly what they’re planning to do. ICE will be investigating employers and making sure that our illegal population starts to have less incentive to break the law by living here and getting a job on the down low:

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is prepared to criminally prosecute illegal immigrants in the workplace, as well as those employers who hire them.

‘While we focus on the criminal prosecution of employers who knowingly hire illegal workers, under the current administration’s enforcement priorities, workers encountered during these investigations who are unauthorized to remain in the United States are also subject to administrative arrest and removal from the country,’ ICE spokeswoman Danielle Bennett said in an email to the Washington Examiner.

Basically, they’re saying that they know people make mistakes, and it’s hard to spot forged papers, but some people are doing this knowingly and intentionally. No doubt ICE has had their eye on some businesses that were aiding illegals but were forced to wait on a law enforcement friendly political climate in order to act on their intel.

“This week, acting ICE Director Thomas Homan said his agency will increase workplace immigration enforcement effort four to five times the level current.

According to Bennett, that includes pursing more investigations and ‘conducting more I-9 audits.’

An I-9 form is used for verifying the identity and employment authorization for someone to be hired to work in the U.S.

Data provided to the Washington Examiner shows that from Feb. 9, 2016, to June 24, 2017, ICE arrested 42 people in management and 55 people in non-management for criminal immigration violations, and all but 15 were indicted and convicted. The highest amount in the past few years was in fiscal 2011 under former President Barack Obama, when ICE arrested 221 people in management and 492 in non-management, for a total of 713 — there has been a relatively steady decline in the years following.

On ICE’s website, it still has policy posted from 2013, which was revised and instituted in 2009 under Obama. That policy aims to target employers that use illegal immigrants as a business model, mistreat their workers, engaged in human smuggling or trafficking, commit identity and benefit fraud, launder money or engage in other criminal activity.

Regardless of the online policy, ICE under the Trump administration said it’s ready to go forward with continued crackdowns on illegal immigration — which was a cornerstone of the president’s campaign.

ICE officials were not able to describe what industries commit the most violations or what states have more violations than others.

‘All businesses, regardless of size, industry or geographic location, are expected to comply with the law,’ Bennett said.”

It’s ludicrous that this was an issue that was ever up for debate, considering that it’s just the simple act of enforcing the law. The United States has laws for the purpose of keeping its citizens safe, but some of those on the liberal side of the spectrum seem to be more interested in importing new voters than protecting the people already here.

These problems are especially prevalent in notoriously liberal states, where everyone is considered a monster if they don’t have a profusely bleeding heart. Downtrend reports that the problem is massive in California especially:

“This isn’t going to go over well in California where cheap illegal alien labor is rampant from produce pickers to Silicon Valley and cries of racism and Nazism will soon be emanating from the Chamber of Commerce and Democrat politicians who run the state with an iron fist.

ICE’s efforts will be a big help in improving the employment prospects of Americans but they also must be coupled with a federal crackdown on the H1-B visas that have allowed the leftist kooks who run all of the biggest social media and internet companies to bring in cheap overseas labor and screw American workers.

An increase in enforcement against the employers of the illegals is yet another message that there is a new sheriff in town.”

No matter what you think about immigrants, we must understand that turning a blind eye to breaking the law will only bring lawbreakers into the safe haven that is the United States. Thankfully President Trump is working hard to untie the hands of law enforcement and make this country safe, and great, once again.

[H/T: The Washington Examiner, Downtrend]

Share if you’re glad that ICE is finally being allowed to do their job! 

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Culture

Look What Loudmouth Jerk Just Announced A Run Against Trump Because They KNOW They Can Beat Him

Would you vote for them?

Published

on

There was once a time when politicians were actually public servants. They were driven to seek public office in an effort to better the country that they call home and make a  better future for their children. That is one of the attributes that the American people believed we saw in President Trump, and that plus the fact that he didn’t need the job, is probably one of the reasons he got it.

However, we all know that power corrupts and there are still many that supposedly serve our country, but in reality are working in politics to serve themselves. Unfortunately, they probably make up the majority at this point, and it’s one of the biggest problems that we face as a nation. Since the election of President Trump, that problem has expanded exponentially. Any person who considered President Trump to be a rival in business now sees this as his crowning achievement.

While reaching the office of President of the United States is obviously the hugest of huge accomplishments, it was done for a distinct purpose, and that purpose wasn’t winning a competition. But that’s not stopping fellow billionaire and Shark Tank frequent flyer Mark Cuban. According to Daily Mail, the ultra-rich Mavs owner thinks that he could beat President Trump, and he would even run as a Republican, just to win in the primaries:

“Billionaire Mark Cuban has said that if he were to run for president in 2020, then he would run as a Republican and would therefore challenge the incumbent, Donald Trump, in the party’s primary.

‘I think there’s a place for somebody who is socially a centrist but I’m very fiscally conservative,’ Cuban said in a Sunday night interview at his Dallas, Texas home with Fox News show ‘OBJECTified‘.

Cuban discussed with the show’s host, Harvey Levin,’ how he fashions himself as ‘fiercely independent’ but would decide to run as a Republican under the United States two-party system.”

Mark Cuban spoke with Harvey Levin on the Fox News show 'OBJECTified' on Sunday night. On the show, he said that he would challenge Donald Trump as a Republican if he were to run for president in 2020

Something that neither Cuban or any true blue liberal could understand is that to a real conservative, there’s a whole lot more to life than money. We don’t just want somebody who can balance a checkbook (although that should be a minimum requirement). We need someone who will stand up for our rights to free speech and association, and who will work to stop the killing of our unborn.

If he was looking to convince Republicans that he’s a conservative by just saying that he knows how to manage money, he couldn’t have done anything that would more clearly demonstrate how non-conservative his priorities are.

“The Dallas Mavericks owner also said that he is asked ‘100 times a day’ whether or not he would run. He said that on a 1-10 scale of the likelihood of him running, he is currently at a ‘4’.

Cuban also discussed how he initially supported Donald Trump. He eventually endorsed Hillary Clinton.

Speaking of Trump, he said: ‘I liked the fact that he was honest, outspoken, that he wasn’t like I told him a Stepford candidate.’

‘His base won’t turn on him, but if there is someone they can connect to and feel confident in, they might turn away from him,’ Cuban told The Associated Press in August. 

‘The door is wide open. It’s just a question of who can pull it off.'”

Cuban has a pretty big ego if he thinks that his sheer business prowess is what’s going to win him the highest office in the land because that’s not what won it for President Trump. Our current Commander-in-Chief won that title because he saw problems that the nation has that he believed he could solve. He told us, we agreed and we voted him in, despite his lack of political experience (or perhaps because of it).

The office of President isn’t something that just anybody can fill, especially if you want the conservatives to back you. And while we’re talking about ridiculous candidates, here are a few other people considering a bid for the highest office in the land, including box office superstar Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson:

“‘Baywatch’ star Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson has been encouraged to run in 2020

Ohio’s GOP Governor John Kasich has not ruled out a second run in 2020.

Another Republican and frequent Trump critic, Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, last month visited Iowa, which hosts the nation’s first presidential caucuses. 

And a handful of wealthy outsiders including Cuban and wrestler-turned-actor Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson, are being encouraged to join the fray. 

Yet there is good reason why no sitting president since Franklin Pierce in 1852 has been defeated by a member of his own party. As is almost always the case, the most passionate voters in the president’s party remain loyal. And in Trump’s case, activists across the country are starting to come around.

The president has personally installed his own leadership team at the Republican National Committee and in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, where new GOP chairmen are more devout Trump supporters than their predecessors.”

'Baywatch' star Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson has been encouraged to run in 2020

Let me repeat for the sake of clarity; the job of President isn’t a pissing contest for billionaires to see who can win this term’s national game of chess because there are literally lives at stake. If Cuban thinks that he can do a better job of running the country than President Trump than it is his right to run. But if he plans to dupe conservatives into voting for him, he is once again making some pretty insulting assumptions about the constituency that he plans to play. We didn’t get to be conservatives by being stupid; if that is the voters demographic he’s looking for, he might want to check out a different party.

[H/T: Daily Mail]

Share if you think President Trump will win in 2020, no matter who runs against him! 

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Culture

Nasty Kaepernick Just Demanded One Personal Item From Every NFL Team Owner For FOUL Reason

This is sick & he needs to just go the hell away!

Published

on

The protest against the NFL is escalating to new heights every day. Even though the boycott that was brought on by the ridiculous protest has cost the league hundreds of millions (possibly even billions) in ad revenue, ticket and merchandise sales and possibly government subsidies, that they are unwilling to upset their social justice warrioring players by putting a stop to it.

The first of these anti-American millionaires was, of course, Social Justice Warrior-in-Chief, Colin Kaepernick. He not only started the aforementioned shenanigans but has been unemployed & is accusing the team owners of collusion. He is filing a lawsuit against the league and is asking for discovery that would prove his theory.

According to Downtrend, the former backup quarterback for the San Fransisco 49ers wants the phone and electronic communication records from all the owners of NFL teams as well as other top brass:

“Legal representatives for former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick are reportedly in the process of demanding that the cellphone and other electronic communications of NFL owners and general managers be turned over to prove that there was a sinister conspiracy to keep him out of the league this year.

Weekly reports on the ratings show that their concerns were well-placed but that will never stop the sense of entitlement that some feel is owed to them by an oppressive white society that some like Kaepernick ally Michael Bennett has referred to as slave owners and the multimillionaire players as chattel.”

Apparently, the equality that Kaepernick is fighting for includes equality for any player who wants to be in the NFL but can’t get signed. It’s unclear whether these efforts will bring him closer to signing a contract with the National Football League, but even if he is able to force someone’s hand, it’s certainly not making him any more popular.

 CBS Sports doesn’t think that his demand will actually be granted, it’s a bold move on the part of a player who wouldn’t likely have any career or presence left at all if not for his anti-American stance that catapulted him into fame.

“…ultimately the process generally results in a smaller sample granted. Currently, there is a ‘litigation hold’ in place regarding the electronic communication of NFL teams, according to the source, with team officials prohibited from expunging any relevant data.

While getting access to every owner’s phone records seems unlikely to legal experts, Kaepernick’s case would have a particular need to inquire about certain teams that had direct communication with the quarterback, and teams that have suffered injuries at the quarterback position and worked out other players, and those teams whose owners have been in direct contact with President Trump. As previously reported, Trump’s influence and directives regarding Kaepernick and protesting players will be a part of Kaepernick’s collusion argument, with the NFL’s collusion rules in the collective bargaining agreement stipulating that “implied” collusion can take place between an agent outside of the league and member clubs and/or the NFL league office.

The formal discovery requests will include not just owners, but also top executives for the clubs involved.”

The phrasing of his lawsuit does seem a bit on the nose to those keeping up with politics. It’s looking like if you’re a liberal or politically correct in any way, your go-to move is to try and prove that someone is colluding against you. You know, there’s a diagnosis for people who always think someone is planning something or out to get them; it’s called paranoia.

“It’s as loony as the Democrats’ scam to blame Hillary’s loss on Russia colluding with Trump. Collusion seems to be the left’s new organizing principle even if it is all horseshit being pushed by people in tinfoil hats.

It’s hard to see how this is going to do anything to bolster his case to find a job again and it’s clear that he is looking for a big payday as well as a high-profile case that will elevate his personal profile in the public eye.

This crusade won’t result in him getting a spot on an NFL roster because, at this rate, there may not even be an NFL by the time that this farce is over.”

At this stage of the game, it’s more likely that Kaepernick has nothing to lose, other than a possibly sympathetic jury who might award him some money for doing being disrespectful and getting himself fired.

One of the things that Kaepernick and those who associate themselves with him are trying to fight against is these “dirty rotten capitalists” and the money that they control. The only problem with that crusade is that NFL players are also rich and Kaepernick seems to just be sulking that he ticked enough people off that his former employer doesn’t want to hire him any longer.

If we take away a boss’s ability to fire someone because it might offend them, we no longer have capitalism. Even President Trump didn’t require that the teams make their players respect the flag, he just said that it would be better for the country if they did. If we let the courts tell these teams who they can and can’t hire, won’t have freedom, we will have a pervasive big brother that we might never get rid of.

[H/T: Downtrend, CBS Sports]

Share if you support the team’s right to hire and fire at will! 

Join the “Support our Vets – Boycott the NFL & their Sponsors” Facebook page by liking it

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Trending