| Kasz216 said: Yeah uh... A) Authoritarian =/= conservatism as has already been proven. B) Authortitarian doesn't even correlate with this kind of violence. There are tons of terrorist grooups that aren't Authoritarian, which you keep ignoring... because you know I'm right C) Notice how the Republicans are all WELL below any kind of "dangerous" level of Authoritarianism. D) There are just as many Authortiarian Democrat fringe groups ad republican ones... that's why they're you know... fringe groups. E) There are plenty of threats and statements made by actual liberals.
Your whole arguement has been nothing but a poorly constructed house of cards from the get go. |
A) Thats what the graph you posted is about, so its even more absurd that you dont understand it. Social issues on one axis and economic issues on the other, free economy vs controlled economy and social conservative vs social liberal.
B) Terrorist and guerilla groups who commit violence in an effort to force others to adopt their beliefs are exhibiting authoritarian characteristics.
C) I guess I didn't see the 'danger level' of authoritarianism that the Republicans are hovering under. Sarah Palin was just below Stalin on the authoritarian scale but above Robert Mugabe, a sigh of relief for Zimbabweans who post here because they now know that they are in the safe zone. (http://www.politicalcompass.org/)
D) When someone like Republican President George Bush says that atheists shouldn't be considered citizens of the United States of America, I don't consider that a fringe idea.
E) Of course there are crazy peolple in all groups, but there are a lot more conservatives commiting acts of violence than liberals. By the very definitions of authoritarian and liberal, when someone commits acts of violence to force other people to adopt their beliefs, that is not a liberal action, that is an authoritarian action.
