Monster Sunday 7: Who Are the Real Blood-Suckers?

OK, Here’s some really screwed up political thinking, but since we’re still talking about monsters every Sunday, and these guys somehow think vampires have something to do with American politics, have a gander. This is a topic that has hopped around on the internet, starting out with the most bizarre question, “Are liberals vampires?” 

Vampire BushBefore you go below the fold for an excerpt, I feel obliged to counter with this picture from a site that talks about REAL VAMPIRES–both political and supernatural, where Skunks indirectly asks “Are conservatives vampires?” I definitely recommend it for sheer entertainment.

(UPDATE: Hmm. Perhaps this is more appropriate than I’d originally thought. I just read this: “Only in America .. do we use the word ‘politics’ to describe the process so well: ‘Poli’ in Latin meaning ‘many’ and ‘tics’ meaning ‘bloodsucking creatures’.”)

So there’s this study showing that conservatives are more honest than liberals, and I’m pretty sure it’s true because it confirms my prejudices. And I remember there are also studies showing that liberals donate less money than conservatives and are generally less happy. So liberals are basically a bunch of dishonest, selfish, unhappy people with dumb monkey faces. Sometimes I wonder if we should reclassify liberals as some sort of subhuman, evil creatures like vampires. And, much like vampires, they freak out if they see crosses. Also, they die if you put a stake through their heart.

From there the topic is expanded by John Shaff at, who asks, “Are vampires sub-human?”

Let’s consider the ontological status of the vampire. The vampire is certainly non-human, but is it sub-human? The vampire has certain characteristics in common with humans, such as the ability to reason, self-awareness, the capacity to experience pain (especially in the day time). By the standard advocated by many ethicists (especially defenders of abortion and euthanasia), it is not humans that have rights, but persons. It is self-consciousness and ability to reason that, they say, defines a personality. Vampires are not human, but they are persons. By this measure, vampires have rights and it should be wrong to kill them without due process. Buffy the Vampire Slayer, far from being a heroine, is in fact a genocidal maniac. This is partially the theme of Richard Matheson’s story I Am Legend (I have not seen the movie, so can’t comment).

Shaff also asks, “Could the vampire actually be super-human, rather than sub-human?”

And finally, at least as far as I was able to follow the thread, Jonah Goldberg at the National Review asks, “Do atheists think vampires have rights?” (To keep with the political theme, he also considers whether the US founding fathers would have thought vampires have rights.)

Now, the interesting question would be, do atheists think vampires have rights? I think I’m safe assuming that most atheists ground their understanding of rights and citizenship as stemming from sentience, consciousness, etc. Well, vampires have all of those things in their favor. Presumably, an atheist would reject the premise of the question. They would argue that vampires either do not exist at all (strong case there) or that vampirism is a biological state, a disease of some kind (backed up by many sci-fi portrayals of vampires). In which case, I assume they would argue that vampires do have rights because having a disease does not amount to a surrender of your humanity or rights. 

I’m not sure what I can add to this illustrious discussion. As a proud blood-sucking, cross-hating liberal, I’m at least glad to know that logically I have the same rights as conservative human beings. Maybe I’m even a super hero!

To be honest, I can’t tell if any of these posts are serious or if they’re all jokes. What do you think?

Hat tip to Peter Nunn.


Donna Druchunas is a freelance technical writer and editor and a knitwear designer. When she's not working, she blogs, studies Lithuanian, reads science and sci-fi books, mouths off on atheist forums, and checks her email every three minutes. (She does that when she's working, too.) Although she loves to chat, she can't keep an IM program open or she'd never get anything else done.

Related Articles


  1. There is a significant issue going on here that it seems like everyone is skirting around, but is afraid to address.

    Vampires are not some mass of identical blood-thirsty killing machines, but a rich tapestry of diverse traditions. I mean, are we talking about Anne Rice noble-and-sexy-but-tortured vampires, Buffy inherently-evil (with two exceptions)- but-conscious vampires, I am Legend (film) infected-and-basically-zombies vampires, or even lame-ass-goth-kids-who-like-to-drink-blood vampires.

    By ignoring the breadth of diversity of vampire-kind, we clearly are dehumanizing the undead, making it far easier to treat them with the stake-through-heart callousness that our society, up till now, has granted them. It’s time someone took a stand.

  2. All of this ignores the fact (established with science, and many many movies that I’ve seen) that werewolves are way cooler.

    Vampires suck.

  3. Now I have stuck in my head the image of a werewolf transformation set to the sound of the “quoo-quo-qua-que-quee” Transformers effect.


  4. I’m shocked and appalled by all of this blatant discrimination.

    After all, zombies are also a diverse crowd, with many members leading productive lives in society today (as shown in the docudrama, Shaun of the Dead, and the song RE: Your Brains.) The constant derogatory comparisons made – “or are they merely zombie-like?” – are hurtful to the cause of equal rights for this much-maligned group.

    Mindless or not, they are undeniably persons under the law – Terry Schiavo’s case sets a precedent that functional braaaaaains are not a prerequisite for legal rights! Mere lack of self-control as demonstrated by desire to cause harm to normal humans is not grounds for denial of personhood – just look at the neocons.

  5. Having rights also implies having obligations. One of those is following the rules, like the one that says that you can’t kill other people or risk being arrested, tried, and if the descision calls for it, jailed or executed.

    Just the mere fact that you’re hunting people for your own survival doesn’t excuse you from your obligation not to harm others or face the consequences. Regardless of whether your actions are the result of a disease or mental disfunction, or actually a conscious choice.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button