Understanding liberals - FB Conversation

Excerpts from "The Manifesto of the Fascist Struggle:"

We demand:
a) The quick enactment of a law of the State that sanctions an eight-hour workday
b) A minimum wage
c) The participation of workers' representatives in industry commissions
d) The same confidence given to the labor unions as is given to industry executives or public servants
e) The nationalization of all the arms and explosives factories
f) A strong progressive tax on capital that will truly expropriate a portion of all wealth
g) The seizure of all the possessions of the religious congregations and the abolition of all the bishoprics

B.R.: Actually I think you got that from "The Manifesto of the Ultimate Straw Man"

Me: Ben, Italy. By the way, ever read the communist manifesto? Reads like a liberal wet dream.

B.R.: You don't understand liberals as well as you think you do, buddy.

Me: With the exception of e and g, everything on the list has been accomplished. Apparently you disagree. Why?

B.R.: The main reason you misunderstand liberals is that you overgeneralize. Yes, EACH item on the list is likely favored by SOME liberals. But not EVERY item is favored by EVERY liberal. Yet you speak about liberals as if they all share the same values, priorities and agenda. That may not be your actual worldview - hopefully it's not - but your rhetoric does consistently illustrate it as such. It's a repeatedly incorrect negative generalization, and it undermines your intelligence.

Me: Before you continue your personal attacks, please produce a single liberal that disagrees in principle with any part of the liberal agenda.

B.R.: I'm not personally attacking you, so feel free to drop the victim act. If you really feel that my last comment was a personal attack, then I get the feeling you're not even considering what I'm saying. You use Facebook to attack the imaginary boogie man of Liberalism on a regular basis, with no care to delineate or clarify who in fact you are attacking. I'm taking an opportunity to show you your own blind spot, in the hopes that you'll be more respectful of those you neither know nor understand.

There is not one kind of liberal, and there is not one liberal agenda. If you have a problem with a particular liberal issue, then I request that you address the particular liberals who apply to that issue, rather than applying it to all liberals and thus treating us all as hive-minded and inferior.

To entertain your challenge, I submit myself: I disagree with many propositions and actions that are praised by a majority of liberals. Just like you don't deserve to be lumped in with the whole of conservatives, Libertarians, Christians, whatever groups you may or may not identify as a member of, no liberal deserves to be boiled down to a cartoonish state by cynicism and judgment.

Me: You're not attacking, but I am. You're responding in an informed way, I'm not. I have a blind spot, you don't. I engage in cartoonism, you don't. Ok, I understand.

B.R.: In turn: Yes, I'm not making personal attacks on you, I'm calling you out for treating others poorly. We're both responding in an informed way, but you never show evidence that my views and words have changed your mind in any way. No, we both have blind spots, and our continued communication is in part due to the value I find in the blind spots of mine that you have pointed out. No, I do not engage in cartoonism, and I dare you to prove otherwise. No, I don't think you do understand, but I'd appreciate it if you tried to instead of simply trying to win or escape.

Me: Name the people I'm treating poorly.

Me: I play to win just like you do. Otherwise you wouldn't insist on evidence that I've changed my mind.

B.R.: Some people you're treating poorly, by generalizing all liberals in a negative and judgmental way: James Rapson, Jim Strange, Ben Rapson, Amber Rapson, Michael Rapson, Cate Buck, Warren Buck, Michael Jeppesen, Oliver Franklin, Alex Kuller.

I don't play to win, I play to affect change. Again, if you really think after all this time that I'm just playing to win, then you've been focusing on winning instead of listening to and considering my perspective.

I don't need notches on my Facebook post, I need people to stop labeling, judging, and shunning one another so much. Especially those they don't know or don't understand.

Me: Ben, you're playing games with me. General statements do not redound to individuals. I don't know most of those people, yet I've hurt them because 1) I make general statements about liberals, 2) the statements are not positive statements, 3) some of your friends are liberals, 4) they are therefore being treated poorly.

Utter and complete nonsense. That is the biggest load of shit I've ever read from you. You are beneath that. You have an admirable intellect that you are wasting on useless rhetoric.

Playing to affect change means you want to win. Don't parse words with me.

B.R.: Sigh. Willful ignorance, hard at work.

Me: You win, I'm an ignorant idiot. Well done.

B.R.: I never win. You know how I would win? If, just once, you issued a response somewhere in the ballpark of, "Ya know what, Ben, I recognize and understand what you're saying, and I'm going to keep it in mind when I'm putting my statements of opinion out on Facebook in the future." What a trophy that would be.