the conservative need for a boogeyman

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

I find it interesting that the right wing, the conservative,
needs a boogeyman…you hear it all the time…

it is Soros or the Jews or minorities or the gays or
women… or whatever they decide upon this week…

which is the left wing Antifa professional anarchist… and what exactly
is the pay for a “professional” anarchist? I was an anarchist for
10 years and I went to conventions and anarchist bookstores,
and trust me, I only saw poor people… who weren’t paid to
be anarchist…………

so what is the deal with the conservative needs to have some
sort of boogeyman?

I am guessing that it comes from the fact that the conservative is
someone who is afraid of their own shadow and very, very insecure…

fear and insecurity…that is the conservative message to us…

be afraid and be very insecure…

look at IQ45… he spent 2 days hiding in his bunker under the White house
because he was afraid of the protesters……. in the white house…with
thousands of troops standing out in front and he still was too afraid to
be in the white house…

look up the word “cowardice” and you will see IQ45 picture…
and in fact, you could see a picture of any conservative in the
dictionary for the word “cowardice”………

hence the need for a boogeyman… conservatives are afraid of everything…
and they need a boogeyman to help with their fear…

kind of like a 2 year old who is afraid of the boogeyman in their closet…

most people outgrow the need for a boogeyman…
but not the conservative… they still hold on to their fear…

combined with their insecurity… ugly mix…….

Kropotkin

2

Peter, it’s been proven in sociological/ neuro-biological that ALL!!! conservatives only process information from the fear centers of the brain, and liberals only process information from the logical centers of the brain!

3

K: I will accept that idea when you remove words like “all” and “Only”…
nothing we do is “all” or “only”… most of the information, yes, I can get
on board with that, but “all” or “only”…… no…

Kropotkin

4

So, who is on first and who is on second?

One would/could think of it in terms of the third man argument but that’s un certain.

This is merely tentative, how ever.

It may be beyond the scope, and merely a reaction to something Fixed said in reference to some thing You said, Peter, but at any rate will dig it up and hope to keep it alive.

Later:

Cursory search failed to disclose the syntactical connection, and maybe it was a sub-ordinate reference , anyway. But that proves little, as far as this goes. Meanwhile , this:

“Some scholars (including Gregory Vlastos) believe that the TMA is a “record of honest perplexity”. Other scholars think that Plato means us to reject one of the premises that produces the infinite regress (namely, One-Over-Many, Self-Predication, or Non-Self-Partaking). But it is also possible to avoid the contradictions produced by the TMA by rejecting Uniqueness and Purity (while accepting One-Over-Many, Self-Predication, and Non-Self-Partaking).”

Peter, I do owe this to You, however:

If at times I appear to be talking to myself, does not mean I’m irrational, and if I run the gamut of similarity to Cantor, I must assure myself of someone else’s assurance that he did not loose his mind on account of his unsatisfactory set theory, but that it was due to a neurological decompensation.

So please don’t mind that, but would like to reassert the search for the role of the third man argument.

(“Russell’s paradox arises automatically from Cantor’s theorem if we ask why the identity function is not a bijection between VV and P(V)=VP(V)=V where VV is the (assumed) set of all sets. – hmakholm left over.”)

5

K: I look forward to it…

Kropotkin

6

Eurika! It was a subordinate reference to correspondences between Ecmando and Fixed. That just came to me clear out of the blue, and in what context I still have no idea. But I think I will just quit the search, and presume there is no further need for it.

Parting shot: hoping it will not swallow me/us in an infinitely regressing swamp.

Peter, thank You for the invite!

7

Every extremist ideology needs a boogeyman, whether consevative or libral. It is not fair to blame only consevatives for that. Far left also try to put fear into the mind on the people in order to follow its ideology. Having said that, Trump needs boogeyman more than others beause he is siting at the extreme right.

with love,
sanjay