When I saw the liberal paradise that is Austin, I realized that liberalism is basically parasitism. "If someone has x, and I don't, I deserve it, and I'll force them to share with social guilt"; after seeing that, and the complete social havoc -- where good people were not only ignored but socially persecuted, and vapid whores predominated and suffocated art and culture with their lies -- I left Austin and liberalism behind.

(There may be an honest liberalism. To me, when I was a liberal, it meant not allowing big pointless entities to rule over people in destructive ways. I'm thinking about all the people who got dicked over by their stupid jobs, all the toxic waste dumped into rivers, all the junk products that just ended up in landfills, all the overdeveloped areas where forests were sacrificed, etc. For me, liberalism meant restraining humanity's appetite with common sense. I soon learned that if you oppose power, however, you soon get people who oppose power for power's sake because they're powerless. They have no power in life and no control over their own appetites, so they hate anything that resembles power, but since they're weak, they don't attack directly but through whining. I was a classical liberal, which meant treat people fairly. That philosophy however decays un-gracefully into revenge for the underdog, hatred of excellence, and desire to turn the world into one uniform Safe(tm) place. I realized quickly how this plays into the hands of our leaders. It distracts our best people and sends them off to defend those who have failed at life, and then the activists in turn fail at life, so they spent their time fighting for the right to fail. It's a sick cycle but easily avoidable if you think it through: the problem isn't power, but people in power without a clue, and they're in power because all the failed people want pleasant illusions instead of reality. So if you're an honest liberal, don't take this column as a personal attack, or a political statement. I'm pointing out how liberalism commonly decays into self-importance, hipsterism and other problems, not trying to assault the emotional or psychological impetus behind liberal thinking.)

Austin is the hipster capital of the world, in many ways. I've been to Seattle and to San Francisco, to L.A. (Silver Lake) and to Mizzoula, MT, all of which are hipster-havens. But Austin hipsters have the city locked down. Under the guise of fighting the man, you're supposed to be weird and freaky and do whatever the man doesn't expect. But you go back to work the next day, having learned nothing. It's a good town to work food service until you're 42 and then become a regular, bitter writer on Alternet.org.

Death Metal and Black Metal Blog

I can see the point because I haven't seen any good things come from liberalism. All their most vaunted accomplishments, like child labor laws, didn't fix the root of the problem and often came from people who today would be conservatives. It's time to junk liberalism and find something better.

__________________
Beyond Modern Society / Transcendentalism / Pan-Nationalism

All that being said, Austin is a great place to live and work, still friendly to capitalism, and has awesome amenities. I hope you found somewhere nicer.

__________________
This land was made for you and me
-Woody Guthrie

I liked Austin and think it's about the only redeeming quality that Texas has.

__________________
Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid little rich kids like George Bush?

--Hunter S. Thompson

Well now, Big Bend is very nice, but it hasn't got many Texans in it.

__________________
This land was made for you and me
-Woody Guthrie

I absolutely disagree with you. That is not what liberalism is about. What you said there is communism. This is liberalism.

If someone has x, and I don't, I deserve to have the right to persue it.

I came to Austin from Chicago and have lived out here for 8 years. Austin is not what you've characterized it as, at least from my experience. If it was this semi-Communist state as you imply, there wouldn't be as much enthusiasm for small business and entrepreneurship ("Keep Austin Weird"). Oh, so there's some "weirdos" running around? Plenty in Chicago as well, as well as any major city in the U.S. Just depends on how much you're looking for it and what types of weirdos you're looking for.

Yes, but there are a lot of people who describe themselves as liberals, who believe that everyone has the absolute right to the things other people have, rather than the right to work for what they want.

And you've toured Texas extensively?

I would love Austin if I were 20 again. (I would love lots of things if I were 20 again) I would not live or work there, even visiting has been a dissapointment. I'd rather visit New Braunfels & Gruene. Kerrville or Comfort..................but that's just me. The world needs it's Austins and Texas just happens to have one.

__________________
Mr. Obama, please release the UFO files!

So sending children off to work in dangerous and unhealthy jobs from about 6 on is good for them and society? And what basic societal problem is not being addressed? children not competing with their fathers for work, children having actual childhoods, too many children, etc.

I was stationed at Randolph AFB in '74. New Braunfels had the best Oktoberfest. Austin was a great party town, and Galveston was great for the beaches. And the people were friendly. There were signs that said "Welcome to Texas, Please drive safely". And they did! People would pull to the side of the road if they thought they were driving to slow.

You haven't seen anything good come from Liberalism?
When you get a bank statement, do you believe it?
When you look at companies balance sheet, do you think the numbers are real?
Do you think children should work in coal mines, because smaller tunnels are more efficient?
When you purchase an over the counter medicine, do you expect it to be safe?
Do you expect a prescription drug to be safe and effective?
When you purchase meat do you worry they may have used bleach to kill the rotten smell, and nitrite to make it look red?

Because before Liberals "interfered" banks would close and all the money in them would disappear, Corporations could tell you anything they wanted to about their finances, Children worked in coal mines, Pharmaceutical companies were not required to test drugs for safety before marketing them, if too many people died they would pull the drug from the market.
And drugs were not tested for efficacy, the company could tell you anything it wanted about what the medicine did.
And the food supply was not inspected and tainted product was frequently found in the market place, disguised to look fresh.

But that is just Laissez Faire capitalism, and how it works.
McCain says his favorite president is Teddy Roosevelt.
But Roosevelt was a champion of the estate tax.
Roosevelt wanted land set aside and development restricted to preserve the environment.
Roosevelt was a trust buster, breaking up big corporations when they became too powerful.

That's Teddy, not FDR.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Most of what you say has an element of truth. But like most liberals, you practice selective citation of history. I like what you said about Teddy. He indeed was interested in preservation. He worked to preserve areas like Yellowstone and Yosemite. But . . . . today's liberal uses preservation laws to prevent "ANY" development. Remember it was Nixon that gave us the EPA. You see, that is one of the big differences between liberals and conservatives. Liberals subvert the intent of the law to further their hidden agenda. Naming the Kaiparowits Plateau coal field of Utah is just one good example. Utah is the reddest of red states, only voting 25% for Clinton in 1996. So Clinton had nothing to loose when he declared over 1.8 million acres off-limits to development. The Grand Canyon National Park is only 1.2 million acres. But in doing so, he deprived Utah, the energy industry, and America access to nearly a trillion tons of low sulfur coal.

The whole truth, and nothing but the truth, shows that the developments and legislation you cite was a combined effort between both liberals and conservatives. Certainly not a one-or-the-other situation you try to sell us.

RJ

__________________

No, not extensively. Been to Dallas, San Antonio, Brownsville, Laredo, Mcallen, Eagle Pass, and a bunch of places I don't remember the names of.

It was summer and hotter than hell and that no doubt influenced my impression. What struck me about Austin was, I didn't feel out of place in spite of not being a southerner.

__________________
Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid little rich kids like George Bush?

--Hunter S. Thompson

Don't forget weekends, Liberals invented weekends.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Did they invent the term, "TGIF"?

Seriously, I've read some of your opinions and find them well founded. For example, the Rerum Novarum is a fascinating declaration of social policy. Particularly, I like this passage:

3. In any case we clearly see, and on this there is general agreement, that some opportune remedy must be found quickly for the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class: for the ancient workingmen's guilds were abolished in the last century, and no other protective organization took their place. Public institutions and the laws set aside the ancient religion. Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hardheartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition. The mischief has been increased by rapacious usury, which, although more than once condemned by the Church, is nevertheless, under a different guise, but with like injustice, still practiced by covetous and grasping men. To this must be added that the hiring of labor and the conduct of trade are concentrated in the hands of comparatively few; so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.

4. To remedy these wrongs the socialists, working on the poor man's envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community.

I think this is so, so true. But on the negative side, I also think that true liberalism has been hijacked by malcontent activists, and narcissistic political power brokers. Much like real Islam has been hijacked by extremists.

This thread isn't so much a rant against liberalism as it is against the people who have subverted it for their own use. And don't get me wrong. We have our case of bad apples in the conservative orchard too. People like Duke Cunningham, and others have given us a black eye.

But I don't mind working with true liberals at all. It's just you need to keep your area cleaned up, like we all do.

RJ

__________________