The Monopoly On Condescension Belongs To...

I've always felt we lived in a liberal world - ok, maybe not in Alberta and Texas and maybe Montana where the militias are. Or is it Wyoming?

I never did quite connect to the assertion conservatism ruled the continent. To me, deep within the subconscious, liberal reflections continue to hold sway. It's just that conservatism is now in full organized mode. It just feels, as I peruse the internet and read publications, Conservatism produces the bulk of studies on a wider range of topics these days. They go where no liberal dares touch. Naturally, as is the case with most things that rise, all sorts of characters come along for the ride. By the way, don't dare site a conservative think-tank in a debate with a liberal. "What? The Fraser Institute? They're right-wing nuts!" End of discussion. Never mind they may actually have something of value to impart.

Plus, I think, the pulse of the people has lent itself ripe for a dose of conservative-libertarian views. That probably has something to do with the fact that most of the time Liberals have been in power in North America. I also never bought into this "conservatives are paranoid" or liberals are "more rational and logical" or engage in "politics of fear" crap. Yeah right, liberals don't play that game.

One day we'll tire of the bums, speaking of the cons-lib alliance that seems to be forming, and go back to, hopefully for liberals, a renewed and reinvigorated stale liberal doctrine not so damn hung up on the government.

I've often wondered who was more "arrogant" or "misinformed" or "condescending." If anything, it's a fun exercise in trying to bridge perception to reality. While it's true no one ideology holds a monopoly on anything of the sort, we can have an exercise in determining who exhibits these tendencies, proven or otherwise, "more."

One thing that's always turned me off about modern liberalism is the condescending nature of its proponents. Lord knows I had my share of it in university. It was always welcomed to see a professor who actually presented all sides to a story. Not for all of course. Liberal students were an intolerant bunch. They saw no purpose in ever discussing the conservative point of view. I remember one time in history class both sides went at it. It was like 15 against 2 (you guess who had more) while I tried to offer a "balanced" view. After class, I sat with my liberal friends and they thought it was "quaint" how I tried to see the conservative perspective.

You know, these were people who played in bands, traveled to Honduras, knew all the latest graphic artists, yet they had such an incredible myopic streak in them it left me speechless. And they were proud of it - if they were aware of it at all.

They weren't dumb. Far from it. Very smart. I dated a couple (one of them told me all men had homoerotic tendencies. When I plead against it - not that there's anything wrong with that - she dismissed it as macho denial. Like I said, condescending. She knew more about how I felt than the other way around). They just come from a different place.

Anyway, the Washington Post published an article by Gerard Alexander titled "Why are liberals so condescending?" So much for the Post, George Will writes for them, being a "liberal" paper. Maybe it was once upon a time but is it now?