Is liberalism a mental disorder?

Posted by: NewLifeChristian

Bernie Sanders recently called out Republicans for being "mentally ill", but is it just the exact opposite? Are liberals the ones who are actually mentally ill?

  • Yes, liberalism is a mental disorder.

  • No, liberalism is not a mental disorder.

38% 15 votes
62% 24 votes
  • Liberals have proven their "mental illness" through failures in policy that lead to disastrous consequences within our society. Whilst liberalism isn't technically -- by the definition given to us by psychology -- a mental illness, I believe calling it a "mental illness' would raise awareness to the fact that this flawed ideology is both dangerous and evil.

  • I'm not a certified psychologist, nor do I understand anything about psychology, but what I do know is that the Fox News tells me that conservatism is correct. And therefore anyone who disagrees with that is wrong (because I believe it). Facebook memes have taught me that politics is the single most important thing in the universe and that we need to be overtly passionate about it. We need to insult others who disagree with republicanism and say that they are subhuman and mentally ill because that will make me feel like the superior right wing being that I am.

    Posted by: n7
  • Yes, some types of liberalism is. The disease has been noticed in power seekers as early as the middle ages. Back in that time they were better at spotting it and shielding themselves a little bit. Unfortunately they were still not where they should'v been due to their empire building among other things

    Posted by: Wylted
  • They make poor choices, have no common sense, and have NO idea what is going on , especially when it comes to politics.

  • Liberals tend to have a lot of mental illnesses, but so do other political parties. Liberals are just more honest about it. Liberalism itself is not a mental disorder, and the ideas that go along with it are not either. But a lot of mentally challenged people follow liberalism and make it look like a bunch of crazies. I guess it's comparable to republicans be stupid and democrats being naive.

  • You can't just declare any ideology you dislike as a "mental disorder." I wouldn't even call National Socialism or Communism mental disorders.

  • Just because you don't agree with an ideology doesn't make it a mental disorder. If I were childish like you I would say something like "only someone who thinks that is retarded" but I'll simply imply it :3

  • Sure there are some crazy liberals, but which party is trump dominating again?

  • No more than any other ideology

  • First of all, Bernie Sanders does not speak that kind of hateful rhetoric, perhaps that's Trump and Cruz you're thinking of. And I do not appreciate you calling my political ideology a mental disorder. I may be mentally ill, but that's depression and anxiety which have absolutely nothing to do with my political ideology.

    Posted by: benhos
  • Liberalism is not a mental disorder. Why? Liberals can be quite radical with their phrasing and thoughts of the future for America, but think about this. They care about a lot of people. Many Republicans support the idea that the richer should not be taxed as much in proportion to the middle and lower classes. This whole class system is messed up. We've seen the effects of having a economic and political dictatorship where the top few percentages rule over the rest. Liberals protect the ideology that we are all made equal and that the private investments made by the millionaires and billionaires aren't for the good of the community. Bernie Sanders is a perfect example of a liberal that has bright ideas for the future of our children. He believes that wealth should be fairly distributed so that our economy can thrive through diversity and societal connections with other nations. No, Liberalism is not a mental disorder, but the one thing I can say is that people who believe that America was founded on hate, prejudice, and segregation of all types are ABSOLUTELY mental.

    Posted by: Aridox
  • Liberalism is based on liberty and equality. So I understand why a bigot would think it's a mental disorder

  • What does this question even mean? No, a mental disorder is defined as "a mental or behavioral pattern or anomaly that causes either suffering or an impaired ability to function in ordinary life (disability), and which is not developmentally or socially normative." Liberals make up approximately 29% of the U.S. This is a big enough number to be considered normal. Instead of saying liberals have a mental disorder, maybe you should try to understand their beliefs and philosophies.

  • How can proactively looking forward be an illness at all. If anything it will be that being a republican is an illness for the simple reason that republicans and/or conservatives stick to what they know and have, and do not anticipate to changes in society. When we look around us and try to remember what is was like 10 years ago or even 20 years ago we can not deny how much has changed and the pace in which things are changing. In addition to this the pace at which things are changing is also increasing. The required changes in politics to support all these changes in society are not implemented or delayed as long as possible. And as I mentioned, conservatives/republicans have a stronger tendency for this kind of behaviour then liberals/democrats. What we often forget though, is what every politicians job is. Act in the best interest of the people they represent. And this is what conservatives/republicans have proven over and over again not to be very good at.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
PetersSmith says2016-03-11T00:44:15.3863159Z
No where in the DSM does it mention liberalism and Republicans.
NewLifeChristian says2016-03-11T00:46:58.8597638Z
@PetersSmith I realize this, please read my argument carefully. I specifically said, " . . . Liberalism isn't technically -- by the definition given to us by psychology -- a mental illness . . ."
Unpopular_Opinion says2016-03-11T00:47:42.3829187Z
I wanted to edit the part where I said "be" instead of "being" but it wouldn't let me. ;-; Crap.
NewLifeChristian says2016-03-11T00:49:05.4701754Z
@Unpopular_Opinion You can still edit it. Just choose "Yes, liberalism is a mental disorder" and switch back to your original answer, then you can change your comment. It works, I've done it plenty of times.
Death23 says2016-03-11T02:11:15.6009786Z
Your poll is stupid
reece says2016-03-11T09:50:16.3609653Z
@NewLifeChristian Historically in America, which presidents tend to do better with the economy? I'm waiting.
reece says2016-03-11T09:58:39.8541928Z
@NewLifeChristian Conservatism is a hindrance to humanity. The world needs nuance ideas for it to succeed.
triangle.128k says2016-03-11T20:07:15.1410005Z
@Reece Historically? Historically, conservatism and liberalism meant different things. Liberals used to be for economic freedom, but then statism, crony capitalism, and socialism and became popular among some and statists/corporatists/socialists started calling themselves liberal. That's why you hear the old liberalism referred to as 'classical liberalism.'
NewLifeChristian says2016-03-11T20:08:18.3480462Z
@Death23 How is my poll stupid? Are you unwilling to accept the fact that liberalism has failed America and the world?
NewLifeChristian says2016-03-11T20:11:43.0876958Z
@reece Liberalism is a disaster. I encourage you to visit Detroit, St. Louis, or Chicago one day and you'll see what I mean . . .
reece says2016-03-11T20:34:50.2960104Z
@triangle.128k @NewLifeChristian
triangle.128k says2016-03-11T20:57:32.3617882Z
@Reece Can you give a reliable source instead of some random website with obviously manipulated statistics?
NewLifeChristian says2016-03-11T20:58:53.7420632Z
@triangle.128k He won't do that. No matter how dubious the source may be, as long as it agrees with reece, he'll cite it.
reece says2016-03-11T21:45:07.5178437Z
@triangle.128k How Are the statistics obviously manipulated? Is it just all of them? If not, which ones? I'll give you links backing each one up.
vortex86 says2016-03-11T21:54:53.8476022Z
@reece, well following your blog original source. The statistics that are cited 1. Aren't relevant and 2. Misinterpret the data 3. 35% of economists consisting of 20 people is not really a large sample size 4. Chicago isn't exactly a large booming arena for Conservative beliefs in general (where the website data originates)
reece says2016-03-11T22:02:28.5749171Z
@vortex86 Can you link?
vortex86 says2016-03-11T22:14:45.6796421Z
What am I linking? Your own source? The sources identified by your source are clearly linked and the entire post is conjecture and speculative at best. Although the IGM Forum is what I was referencing in regards to economists.
reece says2016-03-11T22:20:11.3005294Z
@vortex86 Give me the link.
reece says2016-03-11T22:29:45.7118115Z
Can you back up all of your claims about my source?
vortex86 says2016-03-11T23:38:50.9224311Z
@reece Less than half of the Economists that published findings on climate-related studies responded to this site's survey. Secondly, this is a survey about Ecology responded to by Economists. That in and of itself should beg the question of how reliable is this information. Even your own source describes the bias of Economists prior to any studies 2.5 times more Liberals than Conservatives. Oversimplifications include many but here are a few examples: Breaking down red vs blue states, they describe the median income but that's gross not net. When you take into account the tax rates in many of those blue states the picture is quite different. Growth by party raises questions is this in regards to who held presidency or congress (who controls the budget). Not to mention unrelated economic influences. The .com boom wasn't a response to policy more so a result of a prevailing technology The biggest outright lie is presented here, "Zero percent- not a single economist in the entire sample- of economists agree with the central tenant of Republican fiscal policy that cutting tax rates would boost the economy enough to cause revenues to increase. " Republicans never state that decreasing taxes will increase tax revenue which is what the question was posited to the economists was. They instead say it will boost the economy which the first question Economists agree. Majority agreeing that it would raise GDP As I didn't count the number of Economists polled and merely estimated. There were 39 polled for the 2nd question in which I counted. 10 of which abstained from choosing a position. This is a mere 39 economists out of the 18,680 total according to the BLS (http://www.Bls.Gov/oes/current/oes193011.Htm). So once again very small sample size for the opinions of Economists. I hardly feel the need to link your sources. I also don't feel there is any burden of proof on my end as you are the one providing a source that was questioned as a means to legitimize your opinion.
Wylted says2016-03-17T23:53:04.3251247Z
Go read Republican intellectuals like John Locke, then read so called Liberal intellectuals like Michael Moore, and then tell me it isn't a disease.
Texas14 says2016-03-18T00:01:40.7561160Z
@Wylted, John Locke is famous for being a classical liberal, which is basically a libertarian. He was NOT a Republican. Michael Moore also is a filmmaker, not a liberal intellectual.
reece says2016-03-18T00:06:54.3337261Z
@Wylted Go learn about what polynomial regression is.
triangle.128k says2016-03-18T00:19:45.5246696Z
@Texas14 The Republican party used to promote Classical Liberalism. If John Locke was alive when the Republican and Democrat parties formed, he would have been a Republican.
Texas14 says2016-03-18T00:22:25.1916931Z
@triangle, you're probably right. The main point I was making was that he wasn't alive then and therefore can't be a republican.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.