As part of my effort to become rich and famous, I’m trying to write a book that does a scientific analysis of the left and why they “think” like they do. Here is a sample of what I have so far:
A Brief History of the Left
It’s impossible to talk about the history of liberals without also talking about the history of conservatives. The first right/left split occurred probably about 20,000 B.C. when caveman were happy killings things and painting about it on their cave walls. One day, though, a caveman suggested that maybe they should find kinder, gentler ways of getting food than killing bison and instead paint pictures that promote caveman/bison tolearance.
He was promptly beaten to death, as was the custom of the time.(1)
Now, the dead caveman is what we now know as a liberal, someone who proposes a wacky idea, and the ones who beat him to a pulp are conservatives, vanguards of sanity.(2)
Now, the ways conservatives dealt with wacky liberals has progressed a lot throughout the years from the simple beating; later on liberals were stabbed and then, as society advanced, shot. You’d think from that progression, today we’d disintegrate liberals with some sort of ray gun(3), but instead we now have decided it is wrong to deal with people with idiotic ideas through violence.(4)
The important point is how that change in thinking was made. One day, some guy proposed that maybe people with new ideas shouldn’t be beaten to death. He was promptly beaten to death for his new idea. Then another guy said the same thing, and he was stabbed and barely survived. Then it was repeated by another guy, who was shot in the leg. He kept talking (and limping) and eventually everyone decided, “Yeah, I guess you’re right.”(5)
Now, you’re probably thinking that’s pretty harsh to get an idea across, but that’s just because you don’t hear the stories of countless people who were justly pummeled for their moronic ideas. Think about it: how many good ideas are there about politics and social interaction? It’s finite. But how many utterly idiotic ideas are there? Infinite.(6) So if someone comes up with a new idea, i.e., draws from the infinite ideas out there, what’s the chance of it being one of the finite good ideas. Nearly zero. Thus, by being a conservative and just opposing any new idea out there, you’ll be right 99% of the time or more. Just do the math.(7)
Here’s the rub, though(8): if a “liberal” idea actually survives the rigors of conservative scrutiny (the beating, the shootings, etc.), it, being an accepted idea, is now a conservative one. Yes, the dark secret of conservatism is that, once, long ago, all their ideas were liberal. But(9), by being a conservative, not only do you get to be right almost all the time by opposing new ideas, you also automatically gain ownership of all the liberal ideas that are worth keeping. As the scientific community would characterize that, it is totally sweet!(10)
Now let’s talk about present day.(11) Inevitably, as time as past, the number of finite good ideas out there have been discovered, and thus there is less and less chance that any liberal will have anything worth saying. Ergo, the ideas they do propose now are increasingly idiotic. And, now only using the weapons of derision to stop them, they strive by sealing themselves off from outside input, huddling together in small enclaves protected form the light of reason. They’re like cockroaches, hiding in the walls, and occasionally emerging from the shadows to wreak havoc.
Or they become judges.
Anyway, liberals are out there, and their ideas are more and more chaotic. And, though everyone calls them idiots, instead of taking the logical conclusion and realizing they are idiots, they think only they are right and all others are wrong and must be crushed. Oh, the horrors they would subject us to if only they had the power.
Lucky for us, though, their main weapon is the whine.
NOTES
1. This history is mainly speculation based on some National Geographic magazines I’ve leafed through in a waiting room and from some episodes of the Flintstones.
2. Admittedly, since caveman didn’t bathe and grew long mangy hair, the conservatives then resembled hippies today.
3. I wanted to include sketches of the ray gun, but the editor said no.
4. It wasn’t me who decided that.
5. Ibid.
6. I’m not sure if it’s infinite like how many non-negative integers or infinite like how many irrational numbers there are, but I’d lean towards the latter since “irrational” and “liberal” go hand in hand.
7. Actually, I’m not sure on the rules about dividing by infinity, but what I said sound right.
8. That’s a Hamlet reference; pretty cool, huh? I wonder what it means.
9. I like starting sentences with conjunctions; I hope you don’t mind.
10. The scientific community has cut off all ties with me and I in no way represent them.
11. Doesn’t that sort of sound like a holiday where we all get presents?
That’s the first time I laughed out loud in a long time.
That’s the first time I laughed aloud since Frank’s last post.
How’s your fiction book going?
How can you people laugh at something which is so dead serious and more sensible than than anything in the NYT? I frowned, mumbled and nodded in agreement with the obviously gifted author. Get serious, folks.
That’s the first time I laughed at one of Frank J’s posts ina long time.
Laugh? I agree with Mr. Clark: this is serious, scholarly research. How can we liberals come up with reasonable ideas when we are both being horribly persecutued (pummelled, stabbed, shot, disintegrated…) by conservatives AND when an infinite number of our ideas are idiotic??? (And when 99.9% of liberals are even more idiotic than the ideas.)
No, this must not be laughed at. This must be presented at a special session of all the appropriate scientific institutions, and discussed, debated, ect… Yes. Yes, indeed.
That sounded suspisciously anti-conservative…
Re dividing by infinity:
It’s perfectly OK to divide any finite number by infinity; the quotient is 0, since as the denominator of a fraction gets bigger, the fraction itself gets closer to 0. (But you can’t divide infinity by infinity; it’s an indeterminate form.)
So your assertion regarding the probability of randomly selecting one of a finite number of things from an infinite number of things is correct.
Not that anybody actually cared about the math…
Why can’t you divide infinity by infinity? 10 divided by 10 is 1. 100 divided by 100 is 1. Let x equal any number you chose, and x/x = 1. Hard and fast math.
I’ve always argued that zero times infinity equals one, but every yells at me for that.
Josh,
“That Last American” is in the middle of a rewrite. The sci-fi industry is pretty competitive, so I’ll really need an edge to get in there. I’m hoping I can use my site readership statistics to get my foot in the door, but I think that will apply more towards this analytical look at the left book excerpted here (I have a title, BTW, but it’s so cool that I’m keeping it secret).
Forget all that finite and dividing x by x crap. The real question regarding Frank’s brilliant, though rambling, satire is: what does “ergo” mean?
mikey
It’s a haughty way of saying “accordingly”. Maybe I need another footnote…
Which, again, is a haughty way of saying “therefore”.
Why anybody even bothers when we all know that all you need to say is “because Emperor Misha says so”, however, I do not understand.
A little known but important turning point in the development of liberalism was Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s discovery that if you persuade college girls that traditional morality is repressive, you can get them into bed a lot more easily. This discovery caused Rousseau to invent Feminism, so that girls could go to college and be available to be seduced by him. The great dilemma of liberalism today is trying to find some morality left in the world to reject.
That’s the first time I’ve laughed out loud.
more frank
why write posts when frank just writes better ones?…
You know Frank,
I could have written that!
And this is not the first time I feel that way, either.
If only (a) I were not so lazy, (b) the stars had lined up for me right, (c) Al Gore were president, then I could sue you for copyright infringement and would be a rich man already.
Grrr…
your an inspiration to us all Frank… well me anyway
Mid-Week Roundup
There are so many good links this week that I couldn’t wait for the weekend to start the roundup: A Christian’s Duty Those of us busy fighting the culture wars tend to forget what type of behavior is required of…
ergo smergo. What does Ibid mean? the closest my dictionary comes is ibis which is a bird
ibid. means “look up at that last footnote… it goes for this one too.”
I have no idea what it means; I was just copying a sample I saw from Ann Coulter with all the footnotes.
Frank:
You have so far refused to answer my question I submitted to you regarding lawyers. Therefore, I am submitting one more question. This question is more thought-provoking and virtually demands an answer, and soon!
How is it possible, in a country of over 300 million people, that the Democrats can come up with the nine evil, monkey-loving, crazed, and totally stupid candidates now running for the position of Democratic candidate?
Mikey Webster
Dallas, Texas
mikey- That’s easy! 9 Candidates are all Liberal. 100% of them are idiotic. We would have to go through about 990 more candidates to find a sane, rational one. This is all in theory of course.
Greg:
It may be theory, but it sounds right. And it makes more sense than freakin Frank trying to get rich and famous by selling t-shirts for $15.95 each. That tee is worth $25.00 if its worth a dime. Frank, your marketing guy is selling you out too cheap.
just a theory. i could be wrong.
mikey
this was this first explanation I’ve discovered that made sense of my attraction to burritos.
only the hard right can appreciate
Spice. (eeegads. Afrankherbertreference!)
Anybizzare 40 y wymyn mail me XANGINatSympatico.ca
Time to get hitched. Being a Jew/Victim will help.
Me? Belgian Browning 9 and Campgun 8 Shot (still legal, here in Canada!). Do ya like weather? Point my needle south.
This works? I buy a T-Shirt.
Lars Walker
“Morality” is simply a subset of “Ethics” and as such is relative. Duh!
You sum sort of monotheist?
O anonymous poster — of course I’m a monotheist. What do you think I am, a Democrat?
The point is not whether morality is relative (it’s not, but if I said that I’d be arrested by the Thought Police), but whether, in the absence of a morality to reject, geeky college professors would ever be able to seduce their female (or male, if that’s how they swing) students. It’s my contention that if colleges had never gone co-ed, providing a dating pool of naive freshmen for professors to hit on, Latin would still be required and there would be compulsory chapel at every school. Which would be a good thing.
By the way, my book BLOOD AND JUDGMENT is in stores now. Why should only Frank be rich and famous?
Dudes, you’re both wrong! An “Ergo” is just a Yugo built in Eritrea.
Ethics are not the same as morals. Two different things.
PS – Not enough strangling.
In the news today…
This isn’t news but IMAO has the first two installments of his Scientifical Analysis of the Left. This stuff is funny as hell (I know hell isn’t particularly funny but you know what I mean): A Brief History of the…
Mid-Week Roundup
There are so many good links this week that I couldn’t wait for the weekend to start the roundup: A Christian’s Duty Those of us busy fighting the culture wars tend to forget what type of behavior is required of…
The sum of the parts
There comes in the growth and maturity of one who ponders politics when cogito, ergo sum gives way to sum, ergo cogito. It is left to those who still ascribe to the former schema of formulating policy positions and opinions in their ponderances to keep…