Explain Today's Conservative/Liberal Split to Me

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's more that I find the issues you mentioned (mostly social) pivotal and think there's still room for healthy debate on other topics. I don't agree with libertarian ideology most of the time, but my feelings towards them don't even come close to being hateful hateful. Republicans have simply based far too many of their talking points on stances over which there should be no controversey in the 21st century.

I guess what I'm saying is if those issues are important to you it really shouldn't be "Republicans" or "Conservatives" the issue should be "People who believe X" because there are Republicans I agree with on some issues but deeply disagree with on other issues, and there are Democrats I feel the same way about.

For me the issue isn't about partisanship and believing my opponent on a particular issue is my opponent because they're a member of a political party. They're my opponent because of the issue I'm disagreeing with them on. Whereas I feel there are members of each party that are heroes on some other issues. Although admittedly I'm sure the issues I care about would certainly not always overlap with your issues.

But the point is framing it as a partisan issue and then summarily dismissing an entire ideology because of the subset of people within it (even if it's a large subset) denies you potential allies on other issues.
 
In this two-party dynamic there seems to be less and less incentive to work together. If your "side" is credited with passing legislation, you get all the credit for it. So, it behooves the other side to immediately oppose it's passage and then deride it the entire time it's a law (regardless of their past support or if the law is even any good).

It doesn't help that we have a media that aids this madness by pointing cameras at those that are howling the loudest (and often the dumbest). So, people just repeat what they see on television and the cycle keeps spiraling downward.
 
the centre post in the middle has been pushed really far right in the US.

What Americans perceive as ''LEFT'' or ''Liberal'' is hugely laughable in the rest of the western world because there really is no left in the US actually

the Democrats and Obama are Centre-Right in their policy and form of governing and they are still even more Right wing the most actual Right Wing parties in Europe


**edit**

modern cable news thrives on presenting you a two sided debate with Dem vs GOP panels and try to make you believe that is what Left Wing is when the Left Wing inside the US is as dead as a dodo bird
 
"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains." - Churchill

He visited the states and was asked by a reporter the question you're basically asking, what's the difference you noticed between the right and left, that was his reply
 
the centre post in the middle has been pushed really far right in the US.

What Americans perceive as ''LEFT'' or ''Liberal'' is hugely laughable in the rest of the western world because there really is no left in the US actually

the Democrats and Obama are Centre-Right in their policy and form of governing and they are still even more Right wing the most actual Right Wing parties in Europe


**edit**

modern cable news thrives on presenting you a two sided debate with Dem vs GOP panels and try to make you believe that is what Left Wing is when the Left Wing inside the US is as dead as a dodo bird
Please elaborate on how our "left" is more right wing then the most right parties in europe.
 
"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains."
I was way more close minded and absolutist during my teens years and only opened up to nuance when I grew into my 30s, the older I get, the more compassionate I become
Please elaborate on how our "left" is more right wing then the most right parties in europe.

you don't have a left to begin with

Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush would be considered too Liberal today for today's Republican standards
 
Its hard to define.

I think most rational and logical people who aren't caught up in the whole "I'm a liberal" "I'm a conservative" game, have a mixture of beliefs of both.

My father-in-law for example, is an evangelical Christian - that should place him in the no-brainer category of conservatism, but wait, he's also a life long member of the UMWA (coal mining union) and a retired coal mining electrician, so that should put him squarely in the 'liberal' box because unions will always support liberal Democrats at the ballot box. He has very conservative beliefs at his core, but he will always vote Democrat because he was raised that way and it was ingrained into him over 40 years of working in a union.

My parents have conservative beliefs, my stepmom is an active practicing Catholic. The Catholic Church has a strong anti-abortion stance, but she always votes Democrat, and has been very active in the local Democrat party at times serving in different position. There's a conflict there because Democrats support a woman's right to choose. My parent's also believe in gun rights and a smaller limited government.

There's a disconnect that's hard to explain but I think it comes down to whichever belief you feel the strongest about and then go with whichever political party trumpets that belief the loudest.

This is only my opinion but today's conservative/liberal split is because the extremists of both sides are speaking the loudest and drowning out all voices of moderation and bi-partisanship from people in the middle.

Some time in the late 90's-early 2000s, Conservatives took over talk radio, and liberals took over the internet. The extreme partisans from both sides like to whip up people into a frenzy and try to divide and polarize as many people as possible. This brings them ratings, website hits, and ultimately lots of money. They have enormous power over their listeners, viewers, and readers, and they're always putting out a call-to-arms for their people to draw their pitchforks, take up sides, and go to battle against the other side.

I was born 3 months before Richard Nixon resigned, Jimmy Carter is really the first President that I remember. This period of American history, from around the year 2000 until now, is the most polarizing that I've ever seen this country. The country has always had partisans who shout from the rooftops and rally the troops, but with today's technology they can reach more people and mobilize faster. I also believe that the polarization really ramped up after the 2000 election when George W. Bush became president. Many democrats, still to this day, believe that he stole the election thanks to his brother who was governor of Florida, and caused all kinds of shenanigans to make sure that state went to his brother. They also feel he was ultimately handed the Presidency by the Supreme Court who had a conservative majority. That is when shit really started to get nasty in this country. At that point, I started seeing a lot of people who no longer had respect for the office of the presidency. I was raised in an era where no matter whether you voted for that particular person or not, to always have respect for the presidential office, but that is no longer the case, and this just sends the partisan hacks on both sides into bigger rage fits when they see their guy getting disrespected.
 
you don't have a left to begin with

Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush would be considered too Liberal today for today's Republican standards

Yea I knew that. I'm asking or examples of comparisons where the democrats are more right than true rightwing parties of Europe. And examples of the rightwing parties of Europe to the republicans.
 
As someone who is interested in learning, how is it wrong?

have Bill Clinton and Barack Obama really been as Left as that chart says?

Obama has been the Drone king and has been way more pro-active on anti-terrorism than Bush 43 ever was.

Bill Clinton is the most fiscally responsible President in US history, only one the ever get consecutive surpluses.
 
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29640

The Republican party, in representative Convention assembled, submits to the people of the United States the following declaration of its principles and purposes:

...

Those objectives as there stated are these:

"To form a more perfect Union; establish justice; insure domestic tranquility; provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

...

"The Republican Party is firmly opposed to involving this Nation in foreign war. "

...

"The Republican Party stands for Americanism, preparedness and peace."

...

"We shall remove waste, discrimination, and politics from relief—through administration by the States with federal grants-in-aid on a fair and nonpolitical basis, thus giving the man and woman on relief a larger share of the funds appropriated. "

...

"Labor Relations

The Republican party has always protected the American worker.

We shall maintain labor's right of free organization and collective bargaining.

We believe that peace and prosperity at home require harmony, teamwork, and understanding in all relations between worker and employer. When differences arise, they should be settled directly and voluntarily across the table. "

...

"The principles of a free press and free speech, as established by the Constitution, should apply to the radio. Federal regulation of radio is necessary in view of the natural limitations of wave lengths, but this gives no excuse for censorship."


---

This is what the Republican Party stands for...in 1940.

Funny how 70 years completely reverses everything.
 
One shoots blue lasers the other shoots red lasers.

That reminds me of Star Wars, where the Rebels shoot red lasers and the Imperials shoot green lasers.

Conservatives treat America like a religion. The Founding Fathers are the gods, the Constitution is the Bible, and the American flag is the Holy Cross. If you say criticize them in any way, you're just an evil Communist/Muslim who wants to turn every American into a government slave.
 
I think this country has a very polarizing media. Whether its fox news or msnbc they will word every story to fit to their viewer demo's paradigm and in doing so pretty much make it biased news every goddamn time. There used to be a time when journalists just reported the news instead of spinning it but alas.
 
I think this country has a very polarizing media. Whether its fox news or msnbc they will word every story to fit to their viewer demo's paradigm and in doing so pretty much make it biased news every goddamn time. There used to be a time when journalists just reported the news instead of spinning it but alas.

Yea, I think all the "instant analysis" has made a lot of people turn off their brains. In the past, you would read/digest the news, then maybe the next few days there might be a syndicated op-ed on it. Then on the weekends you might watch one of the Sunday news programs for more analysis or get a news magazine. This gave you much more time to digest and analyze things for yourself.

Now a lot of people skip the news part and just go right to the analysis (of whatever favorite talking head/blogger they like). "Here's the news and here's how you should feel about it".
 
I think this country has a very polarizing media. Whether its fox news or msnbc they will word every story to fit to their viewer demo's paradigm and in doing so pretty much make it biased news every goddamn time. There used to be a time when journalists just reported the news instead of spinning it but alas.

CNN is pretty neutral. People who watch MSNBC and FOX want a biased viewpoint.
 
The whole, if you aren't totally in step with us you are against us (as perpetuated by all the news channels) is absolutely awful. It takes away independant thought.

Take me for instance. Im a conservative.

I believe in small government. I believe that government should regulate as little (but effectively) as possible in the economy.

I also believe that government should STAY OUT of personal lives as much as possible because that is what small government is.

I have no one to vote for.
 
I think 99% of the problems with US politics could be solved by having more viable parties and a two round system for the presidency.
 
CNN is pretty neutral. People who watch MSNBC and FOX want a biased viewpoint.

placing talking head panels split on both sides evenly arguing is not really news, it's just a platform to have opposing talking heads both spew their shit without the newsman verifying their claims
 
Democrats: "Let's fuck the poor up the ass and suck off the rich!"

Republicans: "Let's fuck the poor up the ass without lube and give the rich a rimjob!"

That's all you need to know.

CNN is pretty neutral. People who watch MSNBC and FOX want a biased viewpoint.

CNN is also run by total morons and spineless equivocating wimps. I thought the "Obamacare struck down" debacle would have erased all their credibility.
 
American liberalism is a flawed political position.

American conservatism is a howling void of unrestrained madness and contempt for one's fellow human beings.

Basically this, though I'd be a bit harsher on liberalism.

Conservatism has been on an unstoppable downward slide since the Southern Strategy.
 
Fiscal conservative, social liberal - the only stance to have. =P

Both extremes, and the media that feeds it, can go drown in a fire or something.
 
Funny, as bloody a battle Left vs. Right seems, it's getting to the point where Moderate vs. Not-Moderate is almost as bad. I guess its virtually impossible for a collective to view arguments in anything other than binary terms. I honestly think having more political parties would help alleviate at least some of the problems.
 
In this two-party dynamic there seems to be less and less incentive to work together. If your "side" is credited with passing legislation, you get all the credit for it. So, it behooves the other side to immediately oppose it's passage and then deride it the entire time it's a law (regardless of their past support or if the law is even any good).

It doesn't help that we have a media that aids this madness by pointing cameras at those that are howling the loudest (and often the dumbest). So, people just repeat what they see on television and the cycle keeps spiraling downward.

Perhaps the solution is to ban political parties...?
 
Its hard to define.

I think most rational and logical people who aren't caught up in the whole "I'm a liberal" "I'm a conservative" game, have a mixture of beliefs of both.

My father-in-law for example, is an evangelical Christian - that should place him in the no-brainer category of conservatism, but wait, he's also a life long member of the UMWA (coal mining union) and a retired coal mining electrician, so that should put him squarely in the 'liberal' box because unions will always support liberal Democrats at the ballot box. He has very conservative beliefs at his core, but he will always vote Democrat because he was raised that way and it was ingrained into him over 40 years of working in a union.

My parents have conservative beliefs, my stepmom is an active practicing Catholic. The Catholic Church has a strong anti-abortion stance, but she always votes Democrat, and has been very active in the local Democrat party at times serving in different position. There's a conflict there because Democrats support a woman's right to choose. My parent's also believe in gun rights and a smaller limited government.

There's a disconnect that's hard to explain but I think it comes down to whichever belief you feel the strongest about and then go with whichever political party trumpets that belief the loudest.

This is only my opinion but today's conservative/liberal split is because the extremists of both sides are speaking the loudest and drowning out all voices of moderation and bi-partisanship from people in the middle.

Some time in the late 90's-early 2000s, Conservatives took over talk radio, and liberals took over the internet. The extreme partisans from both sides like to whip up people into a frenzy and try to divide and polarize as many people as possible. This brings them ratings, website hits, and ultimately lots of money. They have enormous power over their listeners, viewers, and readers, and they're always putting out a call-to-arms for their people to draw their pitchforks, take up sides, and go to battle against the other side.

I was born 3 months before Richard Nixon resigned, Jimmy Carter is really the first President that I remember. This period of American history, from around the year 2000 until now, is the most polarizing that I've ever seen this country. The country has always had partisans who shout from the rooftops and rally the troops, but with today's technology they can reach more people and mobilize faster. I also believe that the polarization really ramped up after the 2000 election when George W. Bush became president. Many democrats, still to this day, believe that he stole the election thanks to his brother who was governor of Florida, and caused all kinds of shenanigans to make sure that state went to his brother. They also feel he was ultimately handed the Presidency by the Supreme Court who had a conservative majority. That is when shit really started to get nasty in this country. At that point, I started seeing a lot of people who no longer had respect for the office of the presidency. I was raised in an era where no matter whether you voted for that particular person or not, to always have respect for the presidential office, but that is no longer the case, and this just sends the partisan hacks on both sides into bigger rage fits when they see their guy getting disrespected.

I guess this is generally how I've felt, right down to the parents. My parents are from the deep south and basically grew up in a hardline Christian environment. My dad has a long history with the Army and the DOD. They're even quite well off relatively speaking. Yet, both of them vote Democratic like clockwork and generally agree with Obama's side of the story.

I just wanted to confirm these feelings with GAF because It's still hard for me to believe how things have gotten. I mean, I typically see politicians as people who have to balance things and whatnot.
 
Funny, as bloody a battle Left vs. Right seems, it's getting to the point where Moderate vs. Not-Moderate is almost as bad. I guess its virtually impossible for a collective to view arguments in anything other than binary terms. I honestly think having more political parties would help alleviate at least some of the problems.

Yeah its not right vs left, its moderation vs party dogma. These issues fluctuate based on who is in power and affects both parties its just become horrifically polarized due to the right vs wrong and the inability for a 4th party medium (Journalists) to do their damn job. News on television (outside of some local affiliates and the broadcast news hours) no longer tries to report on issues, it tries to create the issues or find someone to create news. There is little investigative journalism these days on television that gives the bare bones info on the issue and tries to fact check when something doesn't seem right. And even if they did fact check they always have to give some kind of 'slant' on how it affects the political parties or ideology as if they can be contained under one large banner.

Everything has become a race for profit, and opposition politics happens to be a ratings kicker for 24/7 news networks especially if you 'root' for the same team as your target audience. I'd say the only way to solve the problem is to not watch it but the people that keep getting influenced by these networks are the most likely to not listen. I really don't see it changing without a 3rd party or coalition of both parties coming together and shutting out the normally loudest members of their party which has been breeding the discord. I don't see that coming any time soon till we start electing officials who have that goal in mind so its on us to make the changes.
 
Yeah its not right vs left, its moderation vs party dogma. These issues fluctuate based on who is in power and affects both parties its just become horrifically polarized due to the right vs wrong and the inability for a 4th party medium (Journalists) to do their damn job. News on television (outside of some local affiliates and the broadcast news hours) no longer tries to report on issues, it tries to create the issues or find someone to create news. There is little investigative journalism these days on television that gives the bare bones info on the issue and tries to fact check when something doesn't seem right. And even if they did fact check they always have to give some kind of 'slant' on how it affects the political parties or ideology as if they can be contained under one large banner.

Everything has become a race for profit, and opposition politics happens to be a ratings kicker for 24/7 news networks especially if you 'root' for the same team as your target audience. I'd say the only way to solve the problem is to not watch it but the people that keep getting influenced by these networks are the most likely to not listen. I really don't see it changing without a 3rd party or coalition of both parties coming together and shutting out the normally loudest members of their party which has been breeding the discord. I don't see that coming any time soon till we start electing officials who have that goal in mind so its on us to make the changes.

Nothing short of an armed revolution or complete economic devastation that affects the majority of Americans (even the rich) will bring about drastic change in our political system. There are far too many special interest groups with far too much money to throw around on both sides. You and I don't have a voice in the system, but they try and dupe us into believing that we do every single election cycle.
 
I was under the impression that we had the Republican and Democratic parties, and that people within them might trend towards the right or left. I was taught in high school that there was a sliding scale between "conservative," "moderate," and "liberal," and that your beliefs came together to put you somewhere on that scale.

Partisanship is a trap. The Ds and Rs are peddling largely the same serving of shit in different colored wrappers.
 
My father-in-law for example, is an evangelical Christian - that should place him in the no-brainer category of conservatism, but wait, he's also a life long member of the UMWA (coal mining union) and a retired coal mining electrician, so that should put him squarely in the 'liberal' box because unions will always support liberal Democrats at the ballot box.

I thought coal miners hate Democrats because of the EPA regulating mining.
 
conservatives believe wholeheartedly in the myth of self sufficient individualism
liberals believe more or less that government and unions can some some problems too
 
I thought coal miners hate Democrats because of the EPA regulating mining.

They have to vote Democrat because democrats are the only party favorable to union agendas, even though certain segments of the Democratic party have an agenda against them.

Your example, and some of mine are why it's hard to explain to someone like the OP exactly what conservatism/liberalism is, and why people vote the way they do.

I see people on this forum all the time talking about how certain groups of people vote against their own interests and this holds true for both sides.
 
Eventually even the Hatfields and the McCoys had no idea why they hated each other either.
 
You're going to be very confused if you ever take a Political Science course and find out that "Liberal" and "Conservative" have very well defined historical meanings that have virtually no connection to those terms as used in American politics, adding another layer of definitional mess to the equation.

I really wanted to be a Radical for the two seconds before that was explained to me because who doesn't want to say that their political views are totally radical?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom