Why?

Discussion in 'Community' started by jermsmingy, Sep 2, 2002.

  1. jermsmingy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2002
    Location:
    Houston
    #1
    I have a question for the majority of mac users out there. Why is it that most mac users are liberals? I am not bashing anyone for being a liberal because that is there right to be. I just find it interesting and would like to know why you are a liberal and maybe some background on how you were raised. Also I would like to know your education level . If you are a conservative or a moderate you can post and answer the same questions.

    I am a conservative because I believe that people should govern there lives. Government should not tell you what to do. I am big on states rights. I am in my second year of college. I have been raised in church all my life and my biggest frustration is Christians who try to cram their beliefs down on you. But then again I know conservatives and liberals who try to do that too. I guess what is hardest for me to understand is why people would want the government taking more than 10% of their income. Why would people want to keep other people from driving SUV's? I find it amusing that undeveloped nations pollute worse than industrialized nations. I would look for the article I found that in. I read it last week.

    Feel free to comment on my beliefs and bash me if you feel it is necessary. You won't hurt my feelings so don't worry. But I really won't to find out where some of you guys are coming from.
     
  2. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #2
    you have to do a little searching in the forums and read up on the political threads - so much has been discussed back and forth (for me - ad nausium) that you might find out that there are more people that share your point of view.
     
  3. MacRumorSkeptic macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2002
    Location:
    Southern California
    #3
    Hey, I was beggining to think I was the only conservative Mac user on this board. Its nice to see that I'm not. As for your question about liberals, who can say. To me being a liberal defys all logic.

    I myself am a 25 yr.old graphic artist with a high school education and was raised in a very liberal household. Im agnostic and was never taught anything about God or religion as a child but would say that I have old fashioned values.

    Ive always found it somewhat frustrating as an artist and a Mac user that everyone around me seems to be liberal. Theyre almost never capable of having any intellectual discussions on politics or religion because they quickly demonize and name call anyone who disagrees with them. Liberals say that their open minded but nothing could be further from the truth.

    Anyway, I too look forward to any response from the libs.
     
  4. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #4
    Re: Why?


    I don't know if they are. If they are, I think it goes along with the willingness or desire to be different that the Mac symbolizes. Which is not to say liberal Mac users are different in a good or bad way.

    I'm overall pretty liberal, but not on all issues. I'm in my third year of college.

    The difference between conservatives and liberals here, I think, is that conservatives see the government as a big, evil thing whose only purpose is to get into people's business and eat up money, whereas liberals see it as a capable provider of social, environmental, economic, military, etc. services. Liberals are happy paying high taxes with the condition that they know those taxes are going to be used smartly.

    I think those who want SUVs completely banned are a very small fringe group, but I think the reason some liberals want to see SUVs relegated to more utilitarian purposes is because SUVs are big polluters and create dangerous road conditions for other drivers.

    Undeveloped nations pollute worse per capita than developed nations, because they don't have the capital or technology to control what they expel into the environment to the extent that richer nations do. As a whole, the U.S. is the worst polluter in the world.

    Cheers,
    Alex
     
  5. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #5
    Just to be fair, I think a lot of people are guilty of this no matter what their political beliefs. :)

    Charles Krauthammer said (to paraphrase), "Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil."
     
  6. groovebuster macrumors 65816

    groovebuster

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Location:
    3rd rock from the sun...
    #6
    Re: Why?

    Since I am from Europe, I don't see a correlation between conservativism and "not being being told by the government how you have to lead your life". The subject is much more complex than that.

    I experienced that the so called "conservative" people (being all into old fashion values) are the ones who always tell you what's wrong and what's right.

    Talking about myself, I am a mixture of old fashioned values and liberal thinking. I don't see any problem in that. Conservative just means to preserve the old values. And not everything was bad in the old days... so why not keeping it?

    Regarding your questions... I think you are thinking too much in clichés yourself and your questions are a little bit too superficial to be answered correctly. Why people should be kept from driving a SUV? There are many reasons, if you think globally. And also that pollution subject... It sounds as if you take the pollution of the poor countires to pollute the environment yourself. But this is such a complex subject... Can the yafford to have technology that pollutes less? Why are they so poor? Do they have a chance to get out of the mess of being a poor country? Overall I don't see why it gives any other "rich" country the right to go on polluting the environment at all!?! You should have been here in Germany the last two weeks when we had the flood in eastern Germany. The signs of global warming are showing all over the world. This something that you can't just solve by saying "I'm conservative and therefore I can do whatever I think suits me!" Sometimes people need to be told what they have to do, because very often they are uninformed, ignorant and selfish. Or why do we have laws and judges?

    As I said before, the subject is much more complicated than your approach allows. And of course no offense intended...

    groovebuster
     
  7. Quark macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    #7
    THANK GOD FOR CONSERVATIVE MAC USERS!

    I also thought I was one of the only ones -- all alone.

    Unfortunately, it seems that most people that are artistic and creative, have trouble/difficulty thinking logically about politics and the anti-socialism freedoms we have in the United States of America. That part of the brain is greatly under-utilized.

    However, with that said, the Mac has been primarily pushed as a tool for creative artists -- for a long time.

    I think you'll see more people like us "switching" to the Mac now becuase it has become far more appealing.

    [Switch add music playing in the back ground]
    I have always loved Apple products and grew up with an Apple II+ in the house. I haven't consider getting a Mac until I heard Steve talk about the entirely new OS based on Unix. That got my attention -- most everyone at work is having a similar response -- I am a Senior Programmer in an IT Department. With the fantastic upgrades to the iMac, the new iPod, and the Airport2 base station, I had enough reason to get another Apple or two.

    My point is, many conservatives are in the same boat on this one.

    Take care,
    Quark
     
  8. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #8
    I wish both liberals and conservatives would have more respect for each other's views. The truth is, there is no right or wrong political belief system. It's really quite wrong to accuse those with different beliefs of being logically retarded. I'm sure many liberals would accuse YOU of being that way. :)
     
  9. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #9
    well politically is where alex and i usually agree... on most things... and i feel he's summed it up pretty well

    i was raised pretty conservative, catholic, etc.

    i'm still catholic, and pro life... but other than i'm liberal basically. i voted for nader. i wouldn't vote for democrats in general. and i wouldn't vote for republicans in general. people like john mccain though, seem to have their head on straight.

    suvs. if you're hauling something or driving on undeveloped roads or something... fine. but if there's a businessman commuting from new jersey to the city for work every day, and he's driving by himself in a navigator, or even with another person or two. then that's a disgusting waste of resources.

    why is it that ads are made showing buying drugs supporting terrorism when it's very well known that most of the terrorist's money comes from saudi arabia and other middle eastern countries, and that money is almost fully the result of oil.... suvs use much more of this oil than more gas efficient cars. the main two parties are owned by car companies (and all other types of companies) and thus would never restrict car production of such gas guzzling beasts.

    i don't think there will be any good strong movement towards progress until there is a more level playing field in elections.
     
  10. Durandal7 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #10
    There are a lot of Conservative mac users. Among them are myself and Backtothemac.

    I feel the same way as you do, the government should not intefere with people's lifes. I stay out of most political debates on here because they tend to become ridiculous. :rolleyes:
     
  11. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #11
    I'M SO SICK OF THIS CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!

    This is the new far right conservative tagline. Did you happen to read Ann Coulter's book??

    The fact of the matter is that there are a ton of people out there--either side--who hold beliefs without really knowing why. These are the people who can't hold intellectual conversations about politics. It has nothing to do with being a liberal or conservative.

    The fact of the matter is that real political discourse has ceased in this country because of namecalling and the blame game. Its all about public image and getting re-elected.

    The fact that conservatives--en masse--are saying that liberals can't have a real conversation about politics is probably one of the greatest hypocracies I've heard of in the last few years. Luckily the argument has been pretty much contained to the very, very far right or I'd be screaming bloody murder.

    Want proof??? Go to some very rural area and try to strike up a conversation about politics. Start to disagree with them. Then observe the deep understanding they have of the issues. The problem is that you are in the middle of the liberal hotbed of America: the Big City. The fact is that cities are more liberal than conservative. Just as rural areas are more conservative than liberal.

    And in either area, for every one well reasoned, articulate, and well informed person, you'll find ten who have their heads shoved up their backsides. At least ten.

    You want real political discussion?? Bring it here. I'll argue with you till the cows come home and talk about REAL issues. I won't be the most liberal person you meet, but I certainly lean liberal.

    Taft
     
  12. Durandal7 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #12
    Taft, you seem to have a lot of stereotypes about Conservatives. I really find it silly that you charecterize all conservatives as hicks living in the country. I could go and say that all liberals are pot-smoking hippies or that all people from the middle-east are terrorists. You say that conservatives are saying that liberals can't discuss politics, I find the same thing for both sides. Most liberals you talk to will brush off a conservative as a "uneducated hick."

    If theres one thing I can't stand it's stereotypes...
     
  13. Rower_CPU Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #13
    Your attitude espouses everything that's wrong with politics today.

    Both sides come to the bargaining table convinced that the other party has nothing of value to add. They fall back on generalizations (never, always, every, etc.) and stereotypes, and listen with deaf ears and look with blind eyes.

    Your hypocrisy is staggering.

    PS. My background: 24 year old grad student, employed full-time as a computer techinician/webmaster/server administrator. I'm politically left of center.
     
  14. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #14
    Re: Why?

    Here I both agree and disagree with you.

    I think that what liberal and conservative differences come down to is the following...

    Conservatives have a certain degree of faith in people to make intellegent and compassionate decisions in how they live their lives. They believe that, if given the freedom to do so, people will act in a "good" way, help their fellow man, and act in the well being of their community and environment.

    Liberals are more cynical. They think that people can't be trusted to make these decisions because the majority of the time, they will act in their own self interest. They believe this poses a danger to our community, our environment and people that are too weak, poor or disadvantaged to protect themselves.

    I lean liberal, and I believe that we can't COMPLETELY let people do what they want, because people can't be WHOLLY trusted. So what I mean when I say that I'm both with and against you is that I think the government is interfereing too much with our lives right now, but I still believe that we need some intervention. We need some system where our environment, communities and underpriviledged people are protected and aided.

    The funny thing about the "government must get out of our lives" argument is that a lot of government intervention has come about because of conservatives. For instance, the drug war. The war on drugs is often lauded by the far right (though mostly from the far Christian right). Programs like DARE, which have been proven ineffective time and time again, have not been cut because of enormous pressure from the religious right lobbies.

    I a not in favor of more than 10% of my income going to a government which is a hugely inefficient beurocracy. This is the current situation.

    But as my answer above said, I would be in favor of some restructured system where money would be taken from the people who can afford it and used to benefit the environment, community and underpriviledged peoples. This system must be well designed in order to work (most of us could agree that the current system is not well designed).

    For the good of the environment. They guzzle gas (which you probably already knew). Petroleum is a fossil fuel and non-renewable resource which is slowly (or quickly depending on who you ask) running out. The burning of Petroleum based products releases gasses into the air which almost all scientists and governments recognize as having an impact on our global temperature and environment.

    If I had my way cities would already be full of cars such as those in Europe (small and highly fuel efficient). If I had my way we would be quickly moving to vehicles powered by cleaner and renewable fuels and energy sources.

    Its not that I don't want people to have freedom. Its that I've observed what people do with certain freedoms: they buy needlessly large and environmentally damaging vehicles. If the choices of those people are going to eventually effect all of us, why should we let that happen??

    While I don't find it amusing, I agree that it is a problem. This is why we need things like a system of international law and need to start working better with other governments in order to pressure them into having better environmental and human rights policies. This is why I support (in concept anyway) the Kyoto treaty and an International court that has some real power.

    The US needs to swallow its pride and surrender some of its power to a global authority for the benefit of ALL people's of the world and the world itself.

    Taft
     
  15. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #15
    You completley missed what I was saying.

    Go and look up voting records for urban and rural areas. Urban areas are overwhelmingly liberal leaning. And rural areas are overwhelmingly conservative leaning.

    Now read this very carefully...

    No matter where you go, you can try to strike up a political conversation with people and you will find that the majority are uninformed, inarticulate and incapable of discussing politics intelligently. This is just as true in the city as in the country. A lot of people simply believe in things without really knowing why. That is human nature and is independant of what political party or set of ideals you subscribe to.

    Please read my post again and you will see that I was not bashing conservatives or labeling them hicks. I was making an objection to the statement than liberals won't (or can't) intellegently discuss politics.

    I have a lot of very articulate friends who are conservative and for whom I have a lot of respect. If anything, my last post was trying to do away with stereotypes.

    Taft
     
  16. jermsmingy thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2002
    Location:
    Houston
    #16
    here is the problem

    Most liberals do not want the government messing in the personal lives and most conservatives dont' want the government messing with corporations. Liberals favor heavy regulation on coporate america and conservatives tend to favor regulation on drugs and other things of that nature.

    I know that people are corrupt and are selfish. I think though that it is selfish to expect someone to pay more than 10% of their income because they make more than you. I don't want my money going to fund abortions. I have a personal belief against it. On the same hand I am sure that liberals don't want their money going to bailout the airlines because they pollute the air.

    My biggest problem with our political system today is that the Federal government forces the states to do things that they dont' want to do. Why should people in Texas tell people in California what to do or visa versa. They shouldn't. If the federal government would do what it is supposed to do and nothing else, we would all be better off. If Californians dont' want to drive SUV's fine, but don't tell people in Texas they can't drive SUV's. They government has no business telling you what type of car you should drive. That is why people came to America. They didn't want government telling them what to do when it is none of governments business.

    Another problem I have is with social programs. I can't stand social security. I would rather the money be given to me so I can at least stick in it the bank and yield interest. Then I wouldn't be paying into a system that I am not going to get anything back from. I work hard for my money and I should be able to keep it. And what I don't keep should not go to foreign countries. It should stay in my state and help other Texans.

    Life isn't fair and no amount of government intrusion is going to make it fair. We should stop trying to make life fair because it will never be fair. Someone will always feel like they are getting screwed. People need to learn to take responsibility for their own actions stop playing the victim and live their lives and not tell me how to live mine. I obey the laws of this great country because I am a citizen. I believe that there are 3 types of laws. Ones that regulate you. Ones that tax you. Ones that take away your freedom. Which type of law do you want?
     
  17. Quark macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    #17
    I was referring to the different halves of the brain. Those that are creative and artistic are NOT retarded. They utilize more of one half of the brain over the other, that's all.

    I think your spin on it is disrespectful.;) :p :D :) :rolleyes: :confused: :p :p ;)
     
  18. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #18
    I doubt political ideology has much to do with dominant sides of the brain, though. There are plenty of liberal mathematicians and plenty of conservative artists. :)
     
  19. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #19
    Re: here is the problem

    But that isn't exactly true. How about gun laws??

    First, I don't necessarily support richer people paying a higher total percentage on taxes. Second, how is it selfish for a middle class white boy to want richer people to pay more? I wouldn't see a dime of that money. The only reason I would support the wealthy paying more is so that more money could go into better social programs.

    Also, public money is prohibited from going to places that either discuss or perform abortions. Planned Parenthood is absolutely prohibited from recommending or informing people of abortions because of this. On the other hand, there is no restriction on public money going to anti-abortion houses posing as women's health clinics. There seems to be some hypocracy in this area...

    The airline thing is a bit stereotypical. Its true that airlines do pollute the air (as any fuel burning vehicle does). But thats not why liberals (and I'd like to point out its not just liberals on this one) don't want the government to bail out corporations. People don't want corporations to be bailed out because they see corporations as abusing their money, clout and power.

    And just for the record, I'm not against an airline bailout. I think the airlines are in trouble because people expect to pay next to nothing for luxerious travel. Its the same reason the trains in this country are in so much trouble (I like trains even more :) ).

    Actually, people came here for religious freedom and then broke off their ties with England because of taxation and rules being imposed on them without any representation in what was the "government" at the time (actually a monarchy with some parlimentary powers). They wanted the freedom to rule themselves as they saw fit. Nowhere in any of our founding documents does it say anything about unlimited or unchecked freedom.

    There is a fundamental difference between having the freedom to believe and say what you want and the freedom to do or buy whatever you want. The only reason I have any problem with SUVs is because the long term effects of a population driving those things can be very damaging. If the actions of selfish people will hurt other people (or in this case an entire population), I think those actions should be curbed.

    Maybe we should let corporations dump their waste anywhere they like (like your backyard). Or let people purchase reasonably priced tanks that burn deisel fuel and come equipped with short range artillary. We can all agree that this is not a good idea. The only difference here is that the effects are long term and aren't visible immediately (or even in our lifetime).


    All three, in the right proportions. The fact of the matter is that we cannot have unlimited freedom. I don't have the freedom to do something that would infringe on your rights in anyway. I couldn't, for instance, kill you, or steal your money, or stalk you.

    Now you would probably argue that these laws exist to regulate me. I agree. But they also take away my freedom. I don't have the freedom to rob whomever I like, and for good reason. My point is that as much as we like to believe we are totally free, we are not. Our freedoms are restricted by rules which exist for the protection of other's rights and the good of the society as a whole.

    The politics I believe in are those that I believe will further our society and make it a better place to live in. That is my goal. I'm not willing to give up all of my freedoms and rights, but there must be a balance between freedom and social responsibility. That is what I'd like to acheive.

    Taft
     
  20. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #20
    Re: here is the problem


    Everyone will agree that our current system of government isn't perfect and that it needs reform. It always will. I hope that liberals will understand and respect where you're coming from and that you will reciprocate that respect.

    Again, it just comes down to different ways of seeing things. Conservatives see the federal government as a big obnoxious entity, and liberals see it as something that has the power to make a positive impact on the nation/state/county/city. Liberals like the federal government because it is big and it has the power to change the behavior of many people. Conservatives hate it for the same reason. As the quality of our environment becomes worse and worse every day, there is the feeling amongst liberals that although people can be trusted to do good to some extent, they are inherently self-interested and will not put what's good for the nation or the world above what's good for themselves. Which goes back to what Taft was talking about.

    As a more-or-less liberal, I am personally in favor of a hierarchial government, where the federal government is responsible for those laws that should apply to all people and the state are responsible for those laws that should apply to the states, etc.

    Many liberals are actually in favor of a world government such as the UN representing the highest tier of our government, whereas conservatives will say that the US should not belong to the UN because the rest of the world should not be allowed to tell the US what it can and cannot do. As a liberal, I believe this is dangerous on the global level. As a resident of Minneapolis, I'm not only a resident of Minneapolis - I'm a resident of 8th District, Minneapolis, Hennepin County, Minnesota, United States, Earth. I believe there should exist a level of government on each of those levels.

    Again, this is just another way of seeing yourself and the world around you. Not right or wrong, but not the only way, either. :)

    I don't think anyone is trying to make life for everybody completely equal. Except maybe communists. But there is the idea of equal opportunity, and we (as a nation or world, or even state or country or city) are not there yet.

    The reason some people would like to "tell you how to live your life" as you put it (or more accurately, tell you what you should and shouldn't be allowed to do in some situations) is because these people see the connections between your choices and the impact of those choices on other people and things around you. "Your right to flail your arms around like a maniac ends at my nose." Just as "your right to drive a gluttonous, grossly-polluting vehicle," a liberal will say, "ends at the air I breathe."
    That seems to be a negative and selfish way of putting it. It could just as easily be said that the laws that regulate you are designed to create fairness in society; the laws that tax you are designed to help others, the environment, the world, the military, the economy, and even yourself; and the laws that take away your freedom do prevent your doing harm to others, but they also prevent others doing harm to you.

    If there were no laws, society would immediately disintegrate into a chaotic mess of unrestricted murder, theft, rape, torture, barbarism, etc... wouldn't it? Some laws are very dumb and shouldn't exist. Some are very good and should absolutely continue to exist. Shouldn't they?

    Alex
     
  21. Choppaface macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Location:
    SFBA
    #21
    generalization is handy, humans love to do it, but greatly interferes with the developement of society. if one agrees with so-and-so brand of politics, then I wouldn't label them, although I might call them an individual. I think it mainly has to do with ...what was it... "crowd mentality" or something... Le Bon described it very well in "The Mind of Crowds." At some point, due to 'crowd mentality,' the individual loses responsibility for their thoughts and actions. I think this observation plays very well with politics....people who like to stereotype liberals/conservatives...use names, etc...I don't think that they're at fault for being so spiteful. Rather, they may have made (relatively!) poor choices and joined a group that they now cannot separate themselves from. In other words, I believe that one should be careful with one's mind...it is something you can lose (in some senses) :D

    the main problem is that over time, opinions turn into reality for people, as prejudices begin to form. people really do a disservice to them by thinking that they're "right" all the time, and they do a disservice to the community though the act of ostracization of said "hypocrites." to tell the truth, the only "hypocrites" I've ever found are those who use the word. if people would just admit that they're "wrong" once in a while, step back, and attempt to reassess the situation from a fundamentally different point of view (something not liberal nor conservative, DIFFERENT!), I believe they would be rather better off.

    in response to the first question in the thread, well.... a lot of mac users are californians for one. another thing is that apple has always been one of those companies that's attracted "smart consumers" (well, being a minority in the market and all...), and I've always thought that that was believed to be a liberal ideal in society....

    one comment about taxes though....not that the government is justified in what it does, but it does seem that it's going to need more than 10% of income, probably more from those who can afford it, to sustain such a large, horny population of ours :D
     
  22. Durandal7 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #22
    Sorry, there's just been so much nonesense on here by both sides that it starts to blend together. I'm on edge from all the BS on here lately as well as from the idiot harassing me for some reason.
     
  23. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #23
    No problem.

    Is the idiot harrassing you doing it via private messages or on the message boards?? Have you reported it to the moderators??

    I don't want to see any other members leave.

    Taft
     
  24. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #24
    Great post, except for....

    First, I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're trying to say. But the piece that stands out is "the only 'hypocrites' I've ever found are those who use the word."

    This rubs me the wrong way. There are plenty of people out there who are self-described 'pots,' yet call the kettle black. But there are just as many who speak one way and then act in another.

    By this logic I would be guilty of hypocrisy. And only because I dared question a person who labeled all liberals as people who are incapable of reasonable conversation and who resort to namecalling and labelling conservatives. Think about it. A conservative who is generally labelling all liberals as people who generally label all people as.......well you get the picture.

    Sometimes there is a perfect word for a given situation. In this case it was hypocrisy. It has nothing to do with wrong or right.

    Taft
     
  25. Durandal7 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #25
    E-mail. I informed arn of the situation but I have no way of knowing if it's even a registered user here.

    I'm not going anyway.
     

Share This Page