The liberal life explainers remained what they were: harmful, always knowing better, unscrupulous scoundrels. Written by Pál Dippold.
Intellectual terrorists can best make themselves and their ideas visible in the world of media. As in so many other things, in this field as well, it is about a well-defined minority trying to impose its opinion on the majority.
In spite of the fact that there are a number of sober data that people who think about life in a traditional way make up the majority of the world's population, but let's not exaggerate. The opinion terrorists come and come and come. They are representatives of an extremely narrow, but hugely suffocating, minority swimming in the liberal bubble of thought and proclaiming themselves to have a progressive spirit.
It is natural that each person sees the same world and its events differently, and in the 21st century it is very easy to express this. We live in the age of the Internet, on so-called social platforms everyone says what and how they want. Formally, this is total freedom of opinion.
Then there are the news portals. Anyone can comment on the articles published here. You can agree, you can express your dissenting opinion, you can curse and hate within hypocritical limits, and you can basically think of all this as complete freedom.
So that we don't just theorize here, let's look at the latest example that proves the above. The video that shows how they braked and then stopped a person running amok near Dunakeszi went viral on the Internet. It later turned out that the incident started as a simple roadside inspection. It was not difficult for the police to notice that a Mercedes without a license plate was driving on the road. They tried to stop him, the car sped away at a speed of two hundred kilometers. The police chased after him and after a few minutes of pursuit he was taken down.
For the majority, the story is simple: if someone drives without a license plate - and as it turned out: a driver's license - he clearly does not follow the rules. The policeman's job is to catch him and punish him. Pure formula.
However, the liberal life explainers came forward. One began by saying: This is not America. Because, of course, this freedom-seeking journalist learned from the movies that car chases are common in the land of limitlessness, and stopping targets in this way is allowed there. But not here.
He pulled out a traffic expert, who tried to explain why the policeman who stopped the Mercedes, which was running away with 200, acted improperly in the kind of boring, long and pompous sentences that are common in their circles. That in our country this is an act against the law and internal regulations, because a police officer cannot do such a thing. Because he endangered other road users. Because, as the video proves, he dragged the driver in slippers out of the broken Mercedes, who, by the way, shouted to the police, I'm going to kill you, and what inhumanity, they made him lie down on the asphalt and cuffed his hands behind his back.
The next day, another left-liberal interpretation emerged: the police were rude to the father of two children. It doesn't matter that this person poses a mortal danger to the dozens of fathers, mothers and their children who are driving by.
The opinion terrorists could not hide from their skin in this case either. They remained who they had always been: malicious, always knowing better, unscrupulous villains.
The policeman who stopped the Mercedes, which was endangering the lives of many, can rightfully be proud of himself. The sane majority is on his side.
