Liberalism vs Conservatism

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Huntn, Nov 2, 2014.

  1. Huntn, Nov 2, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2014

    Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #1
    In a nutshell:
    Liberalism = Progress.
    Conservatism = Stuck in the Mud.

    Part 2: Global Warming Reply No.62, Page 3.
    Part 3: The Environment Reply No. 109, Page 5.

    If you examine the body of laws created to help average citizens and employees, virtually every law created has been championed by liberals. Take for example minimum wage. It is liberals that inject the moral argument and push for such laws to exist.

    On the other hand you have pragmatic business conservative free market types who have no problem with $.50 per hour wages if the market will bear it, that is their morality. Don't ask them about people suffering, them's the breaks.

    Their solution: "get an education, get a job, and work hard" without a thought applied to the possibility that when individuals exist in a broken family environment or on a survival level, they don't have the time nor the finances to get themselves educated, besides snagging a good job.

    One exception to helping average folks was the "individual health mandate" once upon a time, a Republican idea that appeared in Massachusetts under Mitt Romney (later forced to disavow it), but a GOP think-tank idea when they thought it could save them money (Christian Science Monitor link). But now that it has been enacted by a Democrat President, they are rabidly against it, a great example of how far the Republican party has veered away from it's own history, how rabidly conservative they have become. Why I no longer vote Republican.

    Which brings me to the original reason I started this thread, this Mother Jones article: Scientists Are Beginning to Figure Out Why Conservatives Are... Conservative

    A Great read, ie Conservatives are menatally living 12000 years in the past. ;)

    This explains quite a rash of conservative characteristics. :)
     
  2. orestes1984 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Location:
    Australia
    #2
    There is correlative evidence that suggests conservative brains are wired differently.

    I'm too empathetic personally to ever get conservatism. The interesting part is that it does run in my family on my mothers side of the family, I just don't get how anyone thinks its morally or socially acceptable to screw someone for 0.50c
     
  3. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #3
    To put it a little more fairly.

    Liberalism = Change and expansion.
    Conservatism = Stability and safety.

    A conservative tends more towards a circle the wagons, protect the group mindset, while a liberal is more apt to roam the hills, meet new people.

    When you get right down to it, both mindsets are necessary, depending on the situations. A liberal will give us progress, and expand our horizons, a conservative will keep us from getting killed.

    So the real question of politics isn't which one is better for our country overall, but rather which one is the necessary mindset for the times.
     
  4. orestes1984 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Location:
    Australia
    #4
    Seems more like the fact that a conservative is more prepared to kill the weakest in the flock these days more than anything else. I'm not even going to mention the whole economic walk off the cliff thanks to the works of Greenspan, Reagan and Bush.
     
  5. boast macrumors 65816

    boast

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Location:
    Phoenix
  6. Solomani macrumors 68040

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #6
    I certainly prefer your definition than Huntn's original definition. He seems to propose that Conservative values have no place in society. So very untrue.

    But I'll stop short of defending Conservatism any further …. since I'm a dirty Centrist! :D

    Liberalism = Change and expansion.
    Conservatism = Stability and safety.
    Centrism = Moderation and pragmatism.
     
  7. orestes1984 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Location:
    Australia
    #7
    The types of extreme conservatism we are seeing around the world at the moment have very little value in fostering a better society from a broad perspective.
     
  8. Gutwrench macrumors 68000

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #8
    Another cogent, well thought-out, unbiased, intelligent post sure to promote an environment filled with mutual respect where everyone listens actively with a genuine commitment to understanding all sides of an issue and a willingness to change a personal position if the evidence suggests it's necessary. I look forward to the ensuing dialogue surely filled with rational, well-structured reasoning.

    Kudos.
     
  9. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #9
    That'd be the very basis of it. They're not so much social darwinists (though they can lean in that direction at times), as much as willing to protect the status quo at all costs.

    The problem with a too conservative mindset is that it's tendency towards Any Means Necessary is likely to create more enemies it'll have to protect itself against in the future, which stunts the growth of its society, because it's too busy, too obsessed with protecting itself. I know on my Facebook page, I see a lot of people who advocate bombing Muslim schools, because if we kill them now, we won't have to worry about them later. Anyone capable of a bit of forethought will see that'll only make people even angrier, and create far more problems than it solves. But there is an animal appeal to the idea. We are good, they are bad. Kill all of them, so all of ours can thrive.

    The opposite of that would be the too liberal mindset, which tends to assume the best of everyone, and wants to moves forward by any means necessary. These are people who want to fix something that isn't broken, because it could be better, and overextends themselves to points of easily exploitable vulnerability. Compared to the too conservative, who's far too paranoid to make any progress, the too liberal mindset is too naive to protect its own interests.

    So for a society to work, you kinda need both. It's the wisdom to know when to rely more on one mindset over the other that's most important.
     
  10. Huntn thread starter macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #10
    I call it a pragmatic/convenient approach. The idea is based on a business fantasy of sorts, that proposes if you can find someone willing to work of $.50/hr, then what's wrong with that, (flush the morals consideration)? The implication is that there are no other jobs out there paying more, and to be competitive, disregarding any of the related circumstances that might cause wages to drop that low. It's pragmatic and convenient because morals are flushed with an outcome of potentially greater profits, other than the fact you might have difficulty finding people able to buy your products.

    But it fits in nicely with the two tier class aspect of the haves and have-nots. That is the danger of where we head if Conservatism wins the game. A relative wealthy few, supported by the struggling masses while walking a tight wire of affluence vs poverty, facing the potential unraveling of society, even revolution. We just have to get some of those struggling masses to stop supporting causes that are ultimately hostile to their own self interests.

    The fast food worker struggle is a good example. Look at McDonalds, owners are made wealthy while workers struggle because their jobs are not labeled important, other than they made the owners wealthy. :rolleyes: Why not pay the workers that facilitated your franchise's success decently and be content with living relatively affluently? I'll acknowledge this is not true of all franchises, but for many it is.

    The 1930s New Deal was a successful shot against rampant Tycoon-ism, but since then we've slipped back and Tycoon-ism is once again on the rise. If you ask me philosophically, I don't see a future for the human race with capitalism if that future is to encompass raising the species as a whole. It's "we" vs "me". In an ideal society, millionaires should be limited and billionaires should not be allowed IMO. Those excess funds should be distributed for the good of society. Of course to work, the entire premise is a system built on honesty and virtue, not corruption, a huge obstacle.
     
  11. orestes1984, Nov 2, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2014

    orestes1984 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Location:
    Australia
    #11
    It's a shame what happened to Wilsonian ideals against greed, aristocracy, and imperialism. America used to be a nation actually stood for something and someone. That went by the way side of Nixon and Reagan though.

    The who two tier thing, that would be going on with Russia at the moment with the oil rich vs the people with nothing living in poverty.

    I tend to think there IS a need for pragmatism where necessary as free reigning liberal progressiveness can get entirely out of hand also, but I draw a line at where conservatism has headed at the moment.
     
  12. Huntn, Nov 2, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2014

    Huntn thread starter macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #12
    Overall I agree with you. My post specifically concerns the Conservative mentality on steroids of today and how it has morphed from decent values of the 1950s, people like General Eisenhower who warned of the military/industrial complex, or even Lincoln who freed the slaves?

    Accepted. :)

    How far off the mark am I describing conservatives as "stuck in the mud" when it comes to social issues? It's liberals that unstick their wagons. ;) Currently it's impossible to offer them any praise in this regard. Maybe you can tell me what labor/health/ or any law concerning the well being of average citizens that have been championed by conservatives?

    ----------

    Agreed any movement can get out of hand, become excessive. Although they have much less in the way of civil rights (my impression), Russia is the economic model we should be scared of morphing into.
     
  13. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #13
    Yet, the American voters are electing conservatives to the House and Senate. Is there a single prediction that the Democrats will pick up seats?
     
  14. Huntn thread starter macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #14
    I can't argue that majority rules. My perspective is there are voters, especially meager income citizens voting against their own best interests in many cases based on single wedge issues such as religion, prejudice (civil rights), and perception of what role government should play in their lives.
     
  15. aaronvan, Nov 2, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2014

    aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #15
    Classical liberalism

    "That government is best which governs least."

    Attributed to either Thomas Jefferson or Thomas Paine. Some credit Thoreau. Whomever, it is the greatest utterance in political history. (And no, they weren't advocating anarchism.)

    ----------

    You exclude Bill Clinton, who overturned the Glass-Steagall Act which directly led to the collapse of the banking and the mortgage industries and cost trillions of dollars.

    "I predict the Democrats will pick-up seats." There's one. Probably the only one.
     
  16. 556fmjoe macrumors 65816

    556fmjoe

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
  17. Huntn thread starter macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #17
    Bill Clinton made a huge mistake trying to be a centrist- hindsight, easy for me to say. :confused:
     
  18. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #18
    I'll definitely agree with you there. We're a more conservative nation these days because, from the 50's on, our society was built almost in opposition of the communist threat. We were better than those guys, and our privately owned big businesses were symbols of our better model of government, our ingenuity, and our defiance.

    And guess what? It worked! We don't have communists to worry about anymore. We won! Problem is, a lot of us are still running with that idea, and are taking it too far. Quite a few people in this country are still hung up on the idea that anything besides extreme capitalism is communism, and we have to protect ourselves from that threat at all costs. Any change could break down the comfortable lives we now live, even while our comfortable lives are slowly being eroded away by the very system we're protecting. It's all or nothing, black and white view of the world is very, very conservative. Why change the whole thing, when it worked so well for us in the past?
     
  19. Happybunny, Nov 2, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2014

    Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #19
    I would like to say as an outsider, the one thing that always springs out at me in US politics is the complete lack of compromise. Because of this you to often end up with gridlock.

    No one side has all the answers, but because of your inbuilt adversarial winner takes all, very little gets done, and the general public lose all respect and trust in all politics.

    The danger of all two party systems is that in the end both parties push outward to the extremes, making compromise even more unlikely.
     
  20. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #20
    You're from the Netherlands, right? My dad always said, "If you ain't Dutch you ain't much." :)
     
  21. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #21
    If you ain't got little wooden shoes, you just a foo'.
     
  22. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #22
    Um, no.

    It is certainly true that Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB), which partially repealed some aspects of Glass-Steagall. However, there is little - if any - evidence this led in any way to the financial crisis of 2008. As (that paragon of economic and political liberalism) Forbes magazine puts it:

    Emphasis mine.
     
  23. samiwas macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #23
    Well, America isn't exactly known for its educational superiority. Maybe there's a correlation in there somewhere.
     
  24. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #24
    Voters in the US get most of the information to make up their ballot choices from 60 second commercials during American Idol.
     
  25. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #25
    From what I've seen, all the political commercials consist of:

    "OBAMA"

    "...AIN'T OBAMA"
     

Share This Page