Jump to content

A Study of the CURRENT State of Liberal and Conservative Ideologies


Nationalist

Recommended Posts

I want to gain a better understanding of why current Liberals think the way they do, and in all fairness, should include an examination of why current Conservatives think the way they (we) do.

I've spent countless hours arguing things with Liberals and still don't "get" them...and I was a Liberal at one time. The issues that drove me from the Liberal doctrine still exist and seem to have become amplified. Globalism...an insistence that minority rights supersede majority rights...a willingness to follow paths that are hurtful to the general public.

Now admittedly...Conservatism has flown a little further right of late as well. Is this a response to the changes of common Liberalism? Or has Liberalism become more...imposing...because Conservatism altered course. Is wanting leadership that works primarily for the nation's people, as opposed to "the greater good" as described for instance by the climate religious and globalists, an abhorrent idea?

How do we separate logic and common sense, from feelings of fairness and sympathy? Should they be separated?

 

On ur marks...get set...go...

Edited by Nationalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty pointless if you're going to start by using the phrase "climate religious".  You paint yourself as a wingnut right off the bat, and ensure that the thread is going to devolve into name calling pretty quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

Pretty pointless if you're going to start by using the phrase "climate religious".  You paint yourself as a wingnut right off the bat, and ensure that the thread is going to devolve into name calling pretty quickly.

Exactly.  Why would somebody join a discussion that declares itself anti-science from the outset.  You can actually be a climate skeptic and NOT use the term "climate religious" but that's for people who see politics as a rational and progressive discussion of issues.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

I want to gain a better understanding of why current Liberals think the way they do, and in all fairness, should include an examination of why current Conservatives think the way they (we) do.

I think it's worth separating "Conservative" and "Trumpie".  A lot of people who previously identified as "Conservative" could never get behind Donald Trump and his brand of politics, and these folk have very different attitudes from the ones that did.  

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Is wanting leadership that works primarily for the nation's people, as opposed to "the greater good" as described for instance by the climate religious and globalists, an abhorrent idea?

I would say your question isn't actually a question, but rather a summary of your attitudes and conclusions with a question mark added at the end.  

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

How do we separate logic and common sense, from feelings of fairness and sympathy? Should they be separated?

By making common sense arguments about these things.  As silly as wokeness, or inclusivity can sometimes get, there are common-sense limits to it (especially within the legal framework) that can be referred to without defaulting back to hyperbole and slogans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Pretty pointless if you're going to start by using the phrase "climate religious".  You paint yourself as a wingnut right off the bat, and ensure that the thread is going to devolve into name calling pretty quickly.

OK...I'm not sure what to call the climate movement though. And I didn't start off by calling people names in my first post...which is a habit I also hope to explore here but...moving on for now.

What shall we call them then? Climate...concerned people? what would make you not react negatively?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Exactly.  Why would somebody join a discussion that declares itself anti-science from the outset.  You can actually be a climate skeptic and NOT use the term "climate religious" but that's for people who see politics as a rational and progressive discussion of issues.

Thanks for participating Mike. I'm actually trying to sort this out a bit.

You can take your back-handed comments and just tootle off now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

I think it's worth separating "Conservative" and "Trumpie".  A lot of people who previously identified as "Conservative" could never get behind Donald Trump and his brand of politics, and these folk have very different attitudes from the ones that did.

OK granted. But "Trumpie" is incorrect. I had become much more nationalistic well before The Donald happened. Lets say...well..."Nationalist" actually fit best I think. Unless you have a reason for wanting to be abrasive?

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

I would say your question isn't actually a question, but rather a summary of your attitudes and conclusions with a question mark added at the end.  

OK I said:

Quote

How do we separate logic and common sense, from feelings of fairness and sympathy? Should they be separated?

Is there a problem with this? Am I wrong about what drives Liberals?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

OK...I'm not sure what to call the climate movement though. And I didn't start off by calling people names in my first post...which is a habit I also hope to explore here but...moving on for now.

What shall we call them then? Climate...concerned people? what would make you not react negatively?

You can call them whatever you want.  What you shouldn't do is pretend you want to have a rational, non-partisan discussion about ideologies.

If you start with a conspiracy minded position that is driven by right wing denial of the science on the subject, you don't instill any confidence that any other subject broached will be treated any differently.

 

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

You can call them whatever you want.  What you shouldn't do is pretend you want to have a rational, non-partisan discussion about ideologies.

If you start with a conspiracy minded position that is driven by right wing denial of the science on the subject, you don't instill any confidence that any other subject broached will be treated any differently.

 

I see. So you're not interested in a discussion because...I represent the opposite of you and discussion past simple name calling is of no use to you? Interesting.

Do you even know what my position on climate change and our response to it is? Or are you really just spoiling for a fight?

Edited by Nationalist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nationalist said:

I see. So you're not interested in a discussion because...I represent the opposite of you and discussion past simple name calling is of no use to you? Interesting.

Do you even know what my position on climate change and our response to it? Or are you really just spoiling for a fight?

If I was spoiling for a fight I would have added that you are a mindless magachud who wrongly thinks that Trump was robbed of the last election.  Or something along those lines.  But I didn't.  So no, I'm not.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

If I was spoiling for a fight I would have added that you are a mindless magachud who wrongly thinks that Trump was robbed of the last election.  Or something along those lines.  But I didn't.  So no, I'm not.

 

Groovy...

@Michael Hardner - You like to wax on about how you hate this "culture war". I submit this short thread as of now, as evidence that it's not conservatives or even the evil "right wing nationalists" like me, who are responsible for the slag discourse on boards like this. But rather the smug, holier-than-thou attitude "Libbies"...to coin a term...take as an immediate posture.

And the passive aggressive thing is sooo...yucky to listen to.

Having gotten that off my chest...

@bcsapper - I'm going to resist any inclinations I have to retort to your...rather revealing comments.

Thanks for playing...

Edited by Nationalist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Groovy...

@Michael Hardner - You like to wax on about how you hate this "culture war". I submit this short thread as of now, as evidence that it's not conservatives or event the evil "right wing nationalists" like me, who are responsible for the slag discourse on boards like this. But rather the smug, holier-than-thou attitude "Libbies"...to coin a term...take as an immediate posture.

And the passive aggressive thing is sooo...yucky to listen to.

Having gotten that off my chest...

@bcsapper - I'm going to resist any inclinations I have to retort your...rather revealing comments.

Thanks for playing...

You're welcome.  Always happy to contribute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Yeah, the climate religious...?

That really bothers you eh? Climate religious. Climate activists. People scared we're dooming ourselves by using fossil fuels. Climate panicked. 

I don't know...you pick a term that doesn't upset you. In the meantime...

Perhaps we should discuss how all this war of ideologies...and of words...got started?

During the Bush years, the railing against Bush became deafening. The rhetoric was unbelievably mean...for the time. But the condemnation was pretty much coming from all sides.

Then Obama. As I've said before, I was proud of Americans for electing a mulatto man. And I found his wife elegant. But there was a lot of opposition to Obama. The Birther thing was quite over the top. But then Obama began his infamous apology tour...not so good. Left mountains of hardware behind bugging out of Iraq...not so good. Gave Iran bales of cash...not so good. Red line...not so good. And ended by destroying Lybia and getting involved in Sierra. Neither good.

Trump...if I recall...revived the Birther thing at one point...not so good.

Then...finally Trump became POTUS. I was shocked. Hell I think even Trump was shocked. The blow-back was and remains IMO...insane.

I think the public got more and more angry...until they finally popped. Half went for Trump...half hated the very air he breathed...and now we have Brandon.

But in there somewhere...battle lines were drawn. Was it Trump?

What prompted this nastiness?

Edited by Nationalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

Yes, the thread itself is an education. It immediately demonstrated what the actual problem is... and who. ;) 

I just want to figure out what went wrong. How everything got so wildly polarized. What made people become so extreme? 

Is it being created? If so...by whom and why?

Unless we all find a way to "bury the hatchet", I fear people will actually start burying the hatchet.

That result would be...unfortunate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

That really bothers you eh? Climate religious. Climate activists. People scared we're dooming ourselves by using fossil fuels. Climate panicked. 

I don't know...you pick a term that doesn't upset you. In the meantime...

Perhaps we should discuss how all this war of ideologies...and of words...got started?

During the Bush years, the railing against Bush became deafening. The rhetoric was unbelievably mean...for the time. But the condemnation was pretty much coming from all sides.

Then Obama. As I've said before, I was proud of Americans for electing a mulatto man. And I found his wife elegant. But there was a lot of opposition to Obama. The Birther thing was quite over the top. But then Obama began his infamous apology tour...not so good. Left mountains of hardware behind bugging out of Iraq...not so good. Gave Iran bales of cash...not so good. Red line...not so good. And ended by destroying Lybia and getting involved in Sierra. Neither good.

Trump...if I recall...revived the Birther thing at one point...not so good.

Then...finally Trump became POTUS. I was shocked. Hell I think even Trump was shocked. The blow-back was and remains IMO...insane.

I think the public got more and more angry...until they finally popped. Half went for Trump...half hated the very air he breathed...and now we have Brandon.

But in there somewhere...battle lines were drawn. Was it Trump?

What prompted this nastiness?

It doesn't bother me.  As I stated, it just made the exercise pointless.  If you're going to post a request for such a debate, you have to at least start from a position where you look at all sides equally.  I have always found Donald Trump to be an utterly worthless human being, and those who vote for him gullible fools, but I wouldn't have said so right off the bat in a post ostensibly designed to foster debate about polarization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

It doesn't bother me.  As I stated, it just made the exercise pointless.  If you're going to post a request for such a debate, you have to at least start from a position where you look at all sides equally.  I have always found Donald Trump to be an utterly worthless human being, and those who vote for him gullible fools, but I wouldn't have said so right off the bat in a post ostensibly designed to foster debate about polarization.

OK. I was never a fan of Trump's. And I did find some of his statements...less than civil or called for. Yet he was smart enough to realize Americans had had enough of the direction the country was going in. And for as much of a boor he could be, the results were fantastic. 

Which brings us to an important question.

Is it unacceptable to want leaders to act in the best interests of the people who elected them?

Edited by Nationalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

If you want to start a thread with the premise that Climate Change is another conspiracy theory, then you will be discussing with your like-minded cohorts.  

I have never said that climate change is a conspiracy theory Mike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

OK. I was never a fan of Trump's. And I did find some of his statements...less than civil or called for. Yet he was smart enough to realize Americans had hadn't enough of the direction the country was going in. And for as much of a boor he could be, the results were fantastic. 

Which brings us to an important question.

Is it unacceptable to want leaders to act in the best interests of the people who elected them?

What if the results weren't fantastic, but instead were really crap?  We can't come to an agreement on why something happened if we can't agree what happened.

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

What if the results weren't fantastic, but instead were really crap?  We can't come to an agreement on why something happened if we can't agree what happened.

How do you figure the results were crap? Up until The Rona, America's economy was booming. They had energy independence. The border was secure. The middle east was approaching all around peace. The Saudis...had signed a peace deal with Israel.

How was it crap?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

How do you figure the results were crap? Up until The Rona, America's economy was booming. They had energy independence. The border was secure. The middle east was approaching all around peace. The Saudis...had signed a peace deal with Israel.

How was it crap?

That's not the point.  I could go on about what he did to the SCOTUS and environmental regulations and how the middle east was a powder keg now that Iran had pulled out of the nuclear deal and his abysmal performance during Covid and the fine people on both sides and the ridiculous crying over the 2020 election result which in turn resulted in an attempted insurrection and some actual deaths, but what would that do except turn this thread into just another thread, and not at all one about why we are so polarized.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

That's not the point.  I could go on about what he did to the SCOTUS and environmental regulations and how the middle east was a powder keg now that Iran had pulled out of the nuclear deal and his abysmal performance during Covid and the fine people on both sides and the ridiculous crying over the 2020 election result which in turn resulted in an attempted insurrection and some actual deaths, but what would that do except turn this thread into just another thread, and not at all one about why we are so polarized.

 

No no...I think this is good stuff.

I believe the financial and security concerns of America were served well by Trump. I like the results I perceive as important.

You believe that he appointed conservatives to the courts ( not sure why any conservative or liberal wouldn't do exactly the same), fear of Iran reprisal, not wanting Rona shutdowns to be the norm, and not believing the 2020 election was on the up an' up, are the significant results.

This exemplifies a major difference in perceptions. While I'm focused on financial and security, you're focused on a loss of power, concern for reprisal by Iran and the questioning of election results.

It appears the concerns of the right, are not concerns of the left and Visa versa.

Tell me...did you not enjoy the booming economy? Did the success somehow offend you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...