Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 1 votes

The difference between Liberal & Conservative


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1    Yamato

Yamato

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,350 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 25 July 2013 - 06:15 AM

is nothing worth fighting about.

Posted Image


Unless we're actually going to engage in the usual right-wing arguments about Obamacare plus nothing George W. Bush did.   But that's not what I'm going to engage in.  I've said it before I'll say it again.  President Obama is the 3rd and 4th term of Bush, plus Obamacare.   Simply having more time to do more of the same crap is hardly a difference.

The real battle over modern American politics are the statists vs. libertarians.   And that's the reason for the contempt on display for both of these two groups.  And unlike the partisan-fueled differences people can feign actually exist, that's a real reason worth fighting about.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#2    Wickian

Wickian

    Doppelganger

  • Member
  • 3,403 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lake Elsinore, CA

  • Save it for Queen Doppelpoppellus!

Posted 25 July 2013 - 07:31 AM

Most people will identify themselves as liberals/conservatives/libertarians based on whichever few voting topics they feel most strongly about.  I identify as a moderate who varies between the 3 stances(and probably more) from topic to topic.


#3    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 25 July 2013 - 07:45 AM

View PostWickian, on 25 July 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

Most people will identify themselves as liberals/conservatives/libertarians based on whichever few voting topics they feel most strongly about.  I identify as a moderate who varies between the 3 stances(and probably more) from topic to topic.

I too find it kind of crazy how the 2 big American political partys have divided various political issues among themselves and are fighting tooth and nail for dominance of their whole package.

I agree on some issues with one party and on some with the other. But on a lot of issues, I strongly disagree with both.

Although I must say in the polemics and demagogery department, the Democrats and their sycophantic media are heads above the Republicans. But I suppose that is because their talking points largley represent the political correctness that the media have bought into.

Edited by Zaphod222, 25 July 2013 - 07:46 AM.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#4    Yamato

Yamato

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,350 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 25 July 2013 - 09:27 AM

It's oft repeated that there's no material difference between the two parties and I can't agree with that sentiment more.   The link I've had on my signature expresses that agreement.

But not often is it said that there's also no real difference between liberals and conservatives.  They largely agree on the big picture, like what the role of government ought to be.   The differences seem to be measured in tweaks and squeaks.   After doing some homework on this, the differences on paper between liberal and conservatives are immense on the issues, but for some reason I just can't see how what should be enormous differences in values, beliefs and ideals are translated into legislation or administration.  Either do this, or do that, for every issue that comes across the nation's desk.  Rarely is the question asked by anyone from either label:  Should the federal government be doing anything at all?

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#5    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,694 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 25 July 2013 - 10:07 AM

Robert Anton Wilson goes into some detail why volunteerism cannot work in modern America in this article p19 A FEW BLUNT STATEMENTS ABOUT NEURO ECONOMICS;

https://skydrive.liv...473&app=WordPdf

Well worth reading before you all disappear down the rabbit hole of abstraction.

The world has moved on to the point where old tribal solidarity has been replaced by the Market. Anyone left to the whims of the market to find security in hard times will likely die before someone volunteers to help them out.

This thread is abstract noodling of the first order devoid of any contact with real understanding of modern society or the drivers of human nature.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 25 July 2013 - 10:11 AM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#6    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 33,478 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 25 July 2013 - 10:27 AM

Do we get one of these every fortnight from now on?

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#7    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 14,716 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 29 July 2013 - 05:43 AM

View PostYamato, on 25 July 2013 - 06:15 AM, said:

Unless we're actually going to engage in the usual right-wing arguments about Obamacare plus nothing George W. Bush did.   But that's not what I'm going to engage in.  I've said it before I'll say it again.  President Obama is the 3rd and 4th term of Bush, plus Obamacare.   Simply having more time to do more of the same crap is hardly a difference.

The real battle over modern American politics are the statists vs. libertarians.   And that's the reason for the contempt on display for both of these two groups.  And unlike the partisan-fueled differences people can feign actually exist, that's a real reason worth fighting about.

I thought the main difference in modern  (last decade) conservatives and liberals is their Social stands. Fiscally both are pretty much the same,with what the money is spent on being slightly different, but not monsterously so.

The social stands of the two ideologies are "old school" conservatives (many of them Christians), and "post-modern" progressives (who claim to want everyone treated the same, but actually are hopelessly bigoted on just about all subjects).

One problem with looking up the differences between Conservatives and Liberals on the internet is that all sites seem to be bias, and so a Liberal leaning site will demonize conservatism, and Conservative sites the opposite. Both sides will say the other is against education, security, liberty, individual success, science, and that the other side is unethical, immoral, and just downright wrong.

It almost always comes down to each side saying... These are our broad beliefs and accepted goals, and those being contrasted... not by the other sides broad beliefs, but by individual examples showing how the other side is bad/evil. When it is super easy for either side to point at individuals and say the other side is corrupt.


Posted Image

Edited by DieChecker, 29 July 2013 - 05:50 AM.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#8    Yamato

Yamato

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,350 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 29 July 2013 - 07:14 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 29 July 2013 - 05:43 AM, said:

I thought the main difference in modern  (last decade) conservatives and liberals is their Social stands. Fiscally both are pretty much the same,with what the money is spent on being slightly different, but not monsterously so.

The social stands of the two ideologies are "old school" conservatives (many of them Christians), and "post-modern" progressives (who claim to want everyone treated the same, but actually are hopelessly bigoted on just about all subjects).

One problem with looking up the differences between Conservatives and Liberals on the internet is that all sites seem to be bias, and so a Liberal leaning site will demonize conservatism, and Conservative sites the opposite. Both sides will say the other is against education, security, liberty, individual success, science, and that the other side is unethical, immoral, and just downright wrong.

It almost always comes down to each side saying... These are our broad beliefs and accepted goals, and those being contrasted... not by the other sides broad beliefs, but by individual examples showing how the other side is bad/evil. When it is super easy for either side to point at individuals and say the other side is corrupt.


Posted Image
That's an interesting map of general beliefs and it's difficult to tell which one is going to spend less money.   Which isn't surprising since conservatives and liberals basically agree on the role of the federal government.  It's a difference of spending priorities, the money just blows in the other direction, but money is always spent trying to sell the ideology.   So I agree they're basically both the same fiscally but they're both a fiscal disaster.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#9    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 14,716 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 30 July 2013 - 12:51 AM

View PostYamato, on 29 July 2013 - 07:14 AM, said:

That's an interesting map of general beliefs and it's difficult to tell which one is going to spend less money.   Which isn't surprising since conservatives and liberals basically agree on the role of the federal government.  It's a difference of spending priorities, the money just blows in the other direction, but money is always spent trying to sell the ideology.   So I agree they're basically both the same fiscally but they're both a fiscal disaster.
The current crop of politicans anyway. We can still hope that eventually some real fiscal conservatives get into office and cut back.

It is why I hate the various "Keynesian" Democrats. Because they are not true keynesians, but want to use keynesian economics to back their spending in the Hard times, but then want to go ahead with heavy spending in the Good times too. When the keynesian model says that in the good times, you need to cut back strictly on government spending and put that money aside to spend when times are hard. Keynesian economics does not say that you can go on an endless spending spree, running on credit forever.

I'm not even 100% sure that keynesian economics is correct, but I'd at least like those who call its name over an over to validate their platforms to use the theory correctly.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#10    Yamato

Yamato

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,350 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:21 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 30 July 2013 - 12:51 AM, said:

The current crop of politicans anyway. We can still hope that eventually some real fiscal conservatives get into office and cut back.

It is why I hate the various "Keynesian" Democrats. Because they are not true keynesians, but want to use keynesian economics to back their spending in the Hard times, but then want to go ahead with heavy spending in the Good times too. When the keynesian model says that in the good times, you need to cut back strictly on government spending and put that money aside to spend when times are hard. Keynesian economics does not say that you can go on an endless spending spree, running on credit forever.

I'm not even 100% sure that keynesian economics is correct, but I'd at least like those who call its name over an over to validate their platforms to use the theory correctly.
I'm not 100% sure of that either but I'm 100% sure I agree with every word you said here.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users