life is fair

life is fair and the poor only have themselves to blame.

>>1
True.

Evolution demands that the strong survive and the weak must perish.

So basically, if things aren't set up in your favor, make them in your favor by any means necessary.

Crime. Got it. If a guy dies from getting shot while being mugged, he obviously wasn't strong enough to take the bullet. Yeah, life is fair.

>>4
That's the way of things. If a mugger threatens you with a weapon and you aren't capable of handling yourself, the logical thing to do is to submit and hand over your possessions.
Unless of course if you value your iPhone over your life, in which case you don't deserve to survive the confrontation.

>>5
Assuming the mugger makes that deal with you and grants you the opportunity to comply. But then with this ideology, a lot of things are assumed.

>>1
Very true OP; america has done nothing wrong in this sick twisted world

So if you're born to subsistence farmers in Uganda then die of typhus after 3 months it's due to some character flaw.

>>6
Having been mugged I can only go off my one very limited experience, and that is what happened - it's posteriori over a priori every time.

>>8
Yes. You decided to be a nigger.

LIFE IS FAIL

>>11
Libfags are fail, everyone else is doing fine.

>>12
Of course, until shit bites you in the ass, then you'll be speaking a different tone.

>>13
If the worst happens I'd be even less likely to be a liberal because I know your illogical methods of solving problems would only increase my suffering and hasten my death.

>>13
Nah. Sane people learn from their mistakes. Therefor most people grow out of liberalism eventually.

>>1

Get your head out of your ass. We don't live in a meritocracy. There is no such thing as giving yourself a promotion.

You realize both OWS and the shit presidencies we're enduring are news corp scandals aimed at bulking our cable bills and making us even poorer right?

KEEP THAT CABLE AWAY FROM YOUR TVS STARTING NOW!!!!

Note to self for next life: 'Don't pick a poor family."

Honestly, the elites all got a nice addition to the money pile, while the middle class dissolves and the lower class sees a pay raise +$1.50/hour over the length of a decade, if they're lucky enough to keep their job...

Yet, it's the poor's fault they're poor... Aye, cruel are the cynics who believe such nonsense.

Life is fair and anybody could be a millionaire if they work hard enough...

So why aren't you a millionaire OP? Are you calling yourself lazy?

>>19 If everyone was a millionaire money would be worthless!

If half the energy spent bitching about problems went into solving them the world would be perfect ( or a least as close to perfect as we can get ).

>>14
If the worst happens I'd be even less likely to be a liberal because I know your illogical methods of solving problems would only increase my suffering and hasten my death.
Care to elaborate on what those ``illogical methods'' of solving problems are, exactly? Or are you just spouting bullshit for the joy of being a polemic?

>>15
Nah. Sane people learn from their mistakes.Therefor most people grow out of liberalism eventually.
``Most people'' who ``grow out of liberalism'' are those who ended up making quite a bit of money, and they base their political philosophy on that instead of on principles. This shows that they're naive, mercurial, and go by what people on the TV tell them. I was progressive-minded when I was a dumb 15 year-old and had no money, I'm in my mid-twenties now with much more money than I had ten years ago, and am still progressive-minded. Reasoned argumentation may have me change my political outlook, money won't. I can't say the same for most conservatives.

>>22
Wow, try to chill, it was just a 1 sentence reply, I was just explaining why >>13 was incorrect, there was no need to go into detail.

Liberalism is littered with many many logical fallacies, you should accept that this is a popular belief and a serious issue even if you think "progressivism" is perfection, one example is the confusion between the normative and the positive. Everyone should be equal so everyone should be dragged down to the lowest common denominator with quotas and taxing the middle class (while giving the top 1% special government economic intervention privileges in the name of keynesianism), sweatshop conditions are harsh so we should cut these people off from their jobs by restricting foreign trade, discrimination is wrong so we should discriminate in favor of minorities, it would be great if everyone in the world were friends so we should prop up socialists dictators and pretend islamofascists are not at war with us...

So as you can see there is a lot seriously wrong with the liberal mindset, there are some serious problems that you have to admit to and accept even if you think every single one of them is completely false and liberalism is perfect. There is in fact a psychological basis behind it, you can google "conservative liberal psychology" any time you want and you will see clearly that liberals suffer from a denial defense mechanism.

Denial is an outright refusal to admit or recognize that something has occurred or is currently occurring.

They want their utopian ideals to be real so much they are willing to pretend that they actually apply to the real world and consistently refuse to admit they are wrong even if they are logically disproven right in front of their face.

I'm not a conservative by the way, conservatives have a few flaws as well.

>>23
I think you summed liberalism up pretty well.

>>23
Everyone should be equal so everyone should be dragged down to the lowest common denominator with quotas and taxing the middle class
I don't particularly advocate for such in those exact terms, I go by evidence-based policy. It's gotta be totally scientific and peer-reviewed. Though, going more towards an equal and just society (especially economic-wise) I think should be commended. I certainly don't advocate that everyone be on some ``lowest common denominator''.
sweatshop conditions are harsh so we should cut these people off from their jobs by restricting foreign trade
I'm all for abolishing NATFA and all the other ``free trade'' agreements that have seriously affected American manufacturing. Perhaps some sort of transitional phase could be set up so nobody gets shafted. I don't have high hopes for things to be set in motion for something like that to occur, though.
discrimination is wrong so we should discriminate in favor of minorities
Discrimination is wrong. But I can definitely see how it can swing the other way.
it would be great if everyone in the world were friends so we should prop up socialists dictators
Nixon, Kissinger, CIA et al were instrumental in forcing Salvador Allende out of power in Chile (after the people democratically voted him in) and installed Pinochet in his place. He was a socialist, in the Social Democratic/Democratic Socialist flavor, like our many European allies while their governments were still relatively left-wing.
and pretend islamofascists are not at war with us...
Boy, is that term ever silly. No, Islam is quite a violent religion, and I don't ignore that there are the fanatics out there. I do think it's being blown somewhat out of proportion purely for political gain, and some of it is the result of blowback from typical CIA meddling, but not many will readily admit that.
So as you can see there is a lot seriously wrong with the liberal mindset, there are some serious problems that you have to admit to and accept even if you think every single one of them is completely false and liberalism is perfect. There is in fact a psychological basis behind it, you can google "conservative liberal psychology" any time you want and you will see clearly that liberals suffer from a denial defense mechanism.
I don't particularly side well with American Liberals. The GOP is a laughing stock, and the Democrats are a bit too right-wing for my blood. I'm going to end up voting third-party come next year.
They want their utopian ideals to be real so much they are willing to pretend that they actually apply to the real world and consistently refuse to admit they are wrong even if they are logically disproven right in front of their face.
Like being presented with evidence of Stalinist atrocities and still insisting on supporting the Soviet Union? If reasoned argumentation and sufficient evidence is brought to my attention, then I have no reason not to take a good look at such.
I'm not a conservative by the way, conservatives have a few flaws as well.
Well, at least you're being objective.

>>1

Are you implying we actually live in a meritocracy?

>>25
Oh my, that was quite a trolling. I'm sorry you felt the need to respond.

>>25
Allende was a Soviet puppet elected in a corrupt election, who was an implacable enemy of the US and Western Civilization just like Castro.  Had he been left in power he would have allowed the Soviets to base troops in his country, station nuclear missiles in his country, and train terrorists in his country to destabilize and overthrow regimes friendly to the US elsewhere in South America.

>>27
Is it? Or is that just your way of saying ``YHBT. HAND.''?

>>28
Allende was a Soviet puppet elected in a corrupt election, who was an implacable enemy of the US and Western Civilization just like Castro.
Utter nonsense and crankery. Allende was thrown out and Pinochet was put in his place, so the US, other culpable Western nations and multinationals could rape Chile a new asshole. Then you wonder why immigration from Latin America is so massive in the United States. Cuba still is the only ``Marxist'' nation in the Western Hemisphere and was never even close to spreading communism to surrounding nations.
Had he been left in power he would have allowed the Soviets to base troops in his country, station nuclear missiles in his country, and train terrorists in his country to destabilize and overthrow regimes friendly to the US elsewhere in South America.
The United States also had relations with the Soviets (the Cold War was mostly for show in the 1970s until its dissolution). And if the US can be trusted with nuclear weapons, I don't see why Chile cannot.

If the Chilean people voted for and wanted Allende as president, then who are we to judge? Apparently, some people don't seem to believe in ``national sovereignty'' and insist on meddling in the affairs of other nations.