Liberals and Conservatives don't exist

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

Someone else claims that Liberals like to eat live babies. They don't. (well, there's always a few crazies...)

that may have been me, did i get it backwards, is it conservatives that eat babies and liberals that rape small forest creatures, sometimes i get confused

0 Replies

@Irishk,

"Your answers suggest that you are a conservative. The yellow star shows more precisely where you fall within the conservative region of the Nolan chart."

http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/6430/nolanj.jpg

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Quote:
I guess I'm just objecting to the ambiguity of it all.

The ambiguity belongs to the centrists. I am a proud American liberal. There is nothing ambiguous about that.

I want well-funded government programs that work paid for by taxes that are higher for the rich then for the poor. I believe in a regulation of the economy that provides a fair distribution of wealth. I want socialized medicine and government funded education for all.

I think war is bad and families (of whatever make or model) are good. I believe that religion should be protected from government and kept out of government. I believe in civil rights, and same-sex marriage and abortion rights. I think minorities should be protected from hate crimes and the diversity should be celebrated.

I think that science, including evolution, should be taught in schools and that global warming should be taken seriously. I believe in strong unions and worker rights. I believe that Corporations are not people and that immigrants are people.

There... do you still think liberals don't exist?

Well I'll be damned. Maybe you do exist after all.

But how many people who call themselves Liberal would match up exactly with your list of viewpoints? If it's just you, then you're not a Liberal, you're more of an ebrown_p. If it's just a few people who match up with your views, then you can call yourselves Liberals, but there will probably be another group of people with slightly different views who call themselves Liberals also...

1 Reply

"Your answers suggest that you are a conservative. The yellow star shows more precisely where you fall within the conservative region of the Nolan chart."

I was fascinated to see that the only choices available regarding homnosexual marriage were either (a) to permit gay marriage or (b) to say that homosexuality is an abomination and invoke the Bible. Not even one option for prohibiting gay marriage but generally respecting civil rights protections for homosexuals.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

"Your answers suggest that you are a conservative. The yellow star shows more precisely where you fall within the conservative region of the Nolan chart."

I was fascinated to see that the only choices available regarding homnosexual marriage were either (a) to permit gay marriage or (b) to say that homosexuality is an abomination and invoke the Bible. Not even one option for prohibiting gay marriage but generally respecting civil rights protections for homosexuals.

Yeah, that's probably because they consider that to be a bullshit argument which is logically inconsistent, like most anyone else who has put any actual thought into it.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

"Your answers suggest that you are a conservative. The yellow star shows more precisely where you fall within the conservative region of the Nolan chart."

I was fascinated to see that the only choices available regarding homnosexual marriage were either (a) to permit gay marriage or (b) to say that homosexuality is an abomination and invoke the Bible. Not even one option for prohibiting gay marriage but generally respecting civil rights protections for homosexuals.

Yeah, that's probably because they consider that to be a bullshit argument which is logically inconsistent, like most anyone else who has put any actual thought into it.

Cycloptichorn

It seems to me that the purpose of the test is to classify what people believe, and give them the option of checking off their actual opinion, rather than to judge which opinions are "right."

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

SOME editorial control has to go into it. Otherwise, there would need to be a box labeled 'I'm against gay marriage because the aliens told me that it's wrong.' Otherwise, they're just judging your opinions, right?

Obviously not. The VAST majority of those against gay marriage are so for religious reasons.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

SOME editorial control has to go into it. Otherwise, there would need to be a box labeled 'I'm against gay marriage because the aliens told me that it's wrong.' Otherwise, they're just judging your opinions, right?

Obviously not. The VAST majority of those against gay marriage are so for religious reasons.

Cycloptichorn

So, according to you, there is no significant fraction of the population which wants homosexuals to generally have their civil rights protected, yet opposes gay marriage? I would think that this would be a substantial number of people, and not of a number similar to the tiny "aliens told me" group. Typically, majorities or significant minorities oppose gay marriage. According to you, all but a small fraction are Bible thumpers who want homosexuals to be persecuted? Thats millions and millions of people.

1 Reply

I think Brandon has a good point. Although it may not be your way of looking at things, Cyclo, it is reasonable that there would be people who favor full civil rights for homosexuals, but who stop short of endorsing homosexual marriage. I think the evidence at this site is pretty good that Brandon is not in the least bit religiously motivated.

That's why i haven't taken that "test," and won't. It will be a series of questions about emotive issues, and it will be basically on a "pass/fail" basis, to the extent that it wants you to choose one idea or the other. It is only in the divisive, adversarial climate of the late 20th century, early 21st century that anyone would ever consider me a liberal--i certainly never considered myself a liberal. It is only in an era in which reactionary loonies have grabbed the conservative spotlight that the definition of the term has been dragged so far to the right. Anywhere else in the world, and my personal outlook would be considered centrist in the most liberal interpretation, and very likely conservative. In most of the world, liberal means center or center-right.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

SOME editorial control has to go into it. Otherwise, there would need to be a box labeled 'I'm against gay marriage because the aliens told me that it's wrong.' Otherwise, they're just judging your opinions, right?

Obviously not. The VAST majority of those against gay marriage are so for religious reasons.

Cycloptichorn

So, according to you, there is no significant fraction of the population which wants homosexuals to generally have their civil rights protected, yet opposes gay marriage?

No, I do not believe there is any significant fraction of the population who holds this logically inconsistent view. You can't protect someone's civil rights by denying them civil rights.

Quote:

I would think that this would be a substantial number of people, and not of a number similar to the tiny "aliens told me" group. Typically, majorities or significant minorities oppose gay marriage. According to you, all but a small fraction are Bible thumpers who want homosexuals to be persecuted? Thats millions and millions of people.

You just want to pretend this, because everyone likes to think that their fringe view is a common one.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Quote:

But how many people who call themselves Liberal would match up exactly with your list of viewpoints? If it's just you, then you're not a Liberal, you're more of an ebrown_p. If it's just a few people who match up with your views, then you can call yourselves Liberals, but there will probably be another group of people with slightly different views who call themselves Liberals also...

Many people with "exactly" my list of viewpoints? Of course not. But...

Politics is about coalition. You need coalitions to get things done.

There are a large number of people whose views coincide enough with mine that we can make common cause.

The interests of immigrant right groups (this is the issue I am most involved in) match up with the interests of traditional civil rights groups, the labor movement, and the homosexual rights movement. And these groups are all working together for common cause.

We all benefit when Democrats win elections. We all want almost exactly the same candidates to win nominations. We have the same political enemies, and are fighting against the same arguments. We work together with complimentary messages, and we work together with fund raising and political campaign.

It is about people working together with common interests and a common identity.

A hundred thousand people with competing viewpoints don't accomplish very much without a shared purpose.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

I think Brandon has a good point. Although it may not be your way of looking at things, Cyclo, it is reasonable that there would be people who favor full civil rights for homosexuals, but who stop short of endorsing homosexual marriage. I think the evidence at this site is pretty good that Brandon is not in the least bit religiously motivated.

I haven't seen any data with which to support his position, and there is plenty of evidence that the fight against gay marriage is funded, organized and motivated by religion and religious groups.

I'm not saying it's impossible to hold his opinion - obviously - but it is logically inconsistent (the separate but equal argument all over again) and I understand why it wasn't an option on the exam.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

SOME editorial control has to go into it. Otherwise, there would need to be a box labeled 'I'm against gay marriage because the aliens told me that it's wrong.' Otherwise, they're just judging your opinions, right?

Obviously not. The VAST majority of those against gay marriage are so for religious reasons.

Cycloptichorn

So, according to you, there is no significant fraction of the population which wants homosexuals to generally have their civil rights protected, yet opposes gay marriage?

No, I do not believe there is any significant fraction of the population who holds this logically inconsistent view. You can't protect someone's civil rights by denying them civil rights.

Quote:
I would think that this would be a substantial number of people, and not of a number similar to the tiny "aliens told me" group. Typically, majorities or significant minorities oppose gay marriage. According to you, all but a small fraction are Bible thumpers who want homosexuals to be persecuted? Thats millions and millions of people.

You just want to pretend this, because everyone likes to think that their fringe view is a common one.

Cycloptichorn

So, just to be clear about what you think, you believe that of the roughly half of the population in the US who oppose gay marriage, almost all want homsexuals to be persecuted generally?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

it is reasonable that there would be people who favor full civil rights for homosexuals, but who stop short of endorsing homosexual marriage.

I don't see how "full civil rights" can mean anything other than homosexual marriage (if the word "full" weren't part of this phrase, there might be a compromise position that is at least logically consistent).

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Quote:
it is reasonable that there would be people who favor full civil rights for homosexuals, but who stop short of endorsing homosexual marriage.

I don't see how "full civil rights" can mean anything other than homosexual marriage (if the word "full" weren't part of this phrase, there might be a compromise position that is at least logically consistent).

The question is whether the test should include, when possible, options representing common viewpoints, or force people to check statements which aren't even close to what they believe.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

So, just to be clear about what you think, you believe that of the roughly half of the population in the US who oppose gay marriage, almost all want homsexuals to be persecuted generally?

If by 'persecution,' you mean the denial of rights, then the answer is clearly yes.

Even your watered-down 'separate but equal' position seeks to rob them of legitimacy based on irrelevant differences. You ought to come to terms with the fact that this is what you are doing to people's lives: persecuting them based on your beliefs.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

You're raising your confidence in "logic" to the level of a deity. It is a commonplace among historians, for example, that people will hold and be strongly motivated by logically inconsistent (or seemingly logically inconsistent) views. A good example are American isolationists who think we should have nothing to do with the rest of the world, while strongly supporting a powerful military with which we are to project power throughout the world.

"Logic" ain't all its cracked up to be.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
So, just to be clear about what you think, you believe that of the roughly half of the population in the US who oppose gay marriage, almost all want homsexuals to be persecuted generally?

If by 'persecution,' you mean the denial of rights, then the answer is clearly yes.

Even your watered-down 'separate but equal' position seeks to rob them of legitimacy based on irrelevant differences. You ought to come to terms with the fact that this is what you are doing to people's lives: persecuting them based on your beliefs.

Cycloptichorn

The only question I'm debating is whether a significant fraction of the people taking the test will have to check off an option which is greatly different from what they believe. If the purpose is to categorize people accurately, then there is no excuse for this. According to what you advocate, everyone will either have to indicate they he endorses gay marriage, or indicate that he thinks it's an abomination because the Bible says so. Neither choice captures my opinion.

0 Replies

I am a centrist leaning toward libertarian, but not to familiar with exactly what is a libertarian. Saying that, I usually stay away from political threads.

I do think the person one chooses to marry is nobody's business, and the two should have the same rights as a man and woman. They have been punished and beat on long enough.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

There should not be consistent definitions of liberal and conservative because the meanings of those words change over time and vary from place to place.

When I was studying political science as an undergraduate, one prof suggested that are usual picture of the political spectrum, a line with arrows at either end and the center marked off was both incorrect and inadequate. Whoever the prof was suggested an elliptical spiral and I think that is a much better representation.

Certainly, the Founding Fathers could not be categorized as either liberal or conservative as those words are used today.

Our senior seminar (for history majors and political science concentrators) was on the Cold War and I wanted no part of it so I chose the least controversial topic of the bunch: how people select their political preference. People make political decisions the same way they make all decisions: with their emotions. Any intellection occurs afterwards as they rationalize their choices.

0 Replies

Liberals and Conservatives don't exist

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know