LOS ANGELES, May 3, 2013 — Separate events in Seattle and Colorado recently descended into violence and chaos. A group celebrating the Occupy Wall Street anniversary was responsible for the former. A gathering of pro-marijuana advocates caused the latter.
This is months after Michigan hot dog vendor Clinton Tarver was abused for selling food to conservatives. These occurrences all have a common thread that is anything but coincidental. The violence was perpetrated by leftists.
The myth is that “both sides do it.” Despite right-wing statistical aberrations, most American violence emanates from the left. The very leftists calling for civility are the ones spreading the most hate.
If one combed thousands of hours of Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly speech, researchers would struggle to find one example of true hatred. Finding leftist hatred takes seconds. Look up Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Joan Walsh, E.J. Dionne and Paul Krugman.
Liberals claim moral equivalence to stifle truthful analysis. It promotes laziness. Verbally and physically violent conflict is owned by the left, rendering conservatives virtually blameless.
The left wants, needs, loves, and exacerbates violent conflict. The question is…why?The answer lies in emotional wiring and the situation on the ground.
Conservatives generally want policy discussions because we disagree with liberals. Liberals need gutter politics because they despise conservatives personally. There are two explanations for this, one warm-blooded and one cold-blooded.
The warm-blooded explanation is God. There are more religious conservatives than liberals and more secular liberals than conservatives. Belief in a higher power telling you to love your neighbor, feed the poor, house the hungry, and live honorably increases the chances of doing that.
This explanation is flawed. Atheists and agnostics can live nobly, and religious hypocrites exist. Secularists falsely believe religious people are bad. Yet even the tiniest of crossover can weaken religioisity. The warm-blooded theory feels good, but the cold-blooded theory works better.
Conservatives want impersonal politics for a calculating reason. We lose at personalized politics. Always.
This is a center-right country. We do fine discussing policy. Most Americans want lower taxes, more freedom and liberty, and limited regulation. The welfare state is unpopular. Hand-ups are preferred to handouts.
Criminals and terrorists are the bad guys while law enforcement are the good guys. Rights of victims should trump the bad guys. Americans support capital punishment.
Bill Clinton got elected by talking tough on crime, supporting welfare reform, supporting capital punishment, and preaching tax cuts. Barack Obama ran as a centrist, hiding his liberalism. Moderate supporters liked him personally, but that did not mean they agreed with him on issues.
The left loses most policy debates, leading them to engage in the politics of personal destruction. Many liberals do not see conservatives as human, so demonizing them as “stupid” or “evil” is inbounds. Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” teaches leftists to “polarize” and “personalize.”
How can people possibly improve society using such behavioral guidelines? Liberals cannot credibly say everyone should tone it down when their electoral survival depends on ripping conservatives and their loved ones to shreds.
Policy is impersonal. Personal polarization divides people, the antithesis of unity. The left does this because it often works. Like any bully, they then get more emboldened.
Why debate policy when you can call somebody a racist, sexist, Nazi, Fascist, homophobic pig wanting dead seniors and starving children?
Alec Baldwin (liberal) once said he wanted to take the late Henry Hyde (conservative) and “stone him to death.”
There are zero attacks on Obama’s lovely children, yet routine cheap shots were taken at the Palin children, even the Down’s Syndrome baby.
Conservatives will not engage in unilateral disarmament, and good liberals will not stand up and criticize the bad ones.
If leftists would stop hating, conservatives would love policy discussions. Liberals can prove this theory wrong through leading by example. Stop calling conservatives the various “ists” over policy disagreements.
Stop attacking individual conservatives unless evidence of crossing the line exists. When conservatives cross the line, other conservatives stand up. Right is right, wrong is wrong, and we know the difference. So the challenge to liberals is twofold.
Do not attack a single conservative ever again on a personal level unless they say or do something beyond the pale. Decades old campaign rhetoric does not cut it. Otherwise, the song “We Will Rock You” would be a death threat. Without specific examples, knock it off and stick to policy.
The second challenge to liberals is to stop whitewashing their own behavior. Do what conservatives have done for decades. Renounce any and all political violence without excuses or equivocations. Outside of defending human life, renounce violence as wrong.
If somebody kicks animals or invalids, exacting justice may involve violence. Be honest about whether you are defending goodness or being an aggressor bully. Liberals have beaten wheelchair bound conservatives and conservative minorities at tea parties. There is no conservative equivalent.
Declaring violence “unhelpful” does not suffice. Unhelpful means of violence will be lessened when counterproductive, but used whenever effective.
This is why conservatives have their cars keyed and their lawn signs stolen. This is why liberals run over conservatives with their cars. Conservatives do not do this. Statistical aberrations aside, calculating all these crimes would reveal the leftist tilt.
We have no reason on the right to hate the left. We see opposition. They see enemies. When the left gives up all verbal and physical violence, they will be surprised how peaceful conservatives are. Yet, this potential lovefest will never happen.
The left needs warfare to win. The ends justify their destructive means. The only solution for conservatives is full throttled self-defense.
This desired leftist war will end when liberals surrender and concludes they cannot win using warfare. Only then will they come to the table and dialogue. As long as violence works for them, they will keep burning the entire village while wondering why there is ruin all around them.
Brooklyn born, Long Island raised, and now living in Los Angeles, Eric Golub is a politically conservative columnist, author, public speaker, satirist and comedian. Eric is the author of the book trilogy “Ideological Bigotry, “Ideological Violence,” and “Ideological Idiocy.”
Eric is 100% alcohol, tobacco, drug, and liberalism free. Follow Eric on Twitter @TYGRRRREXPRESS. Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.