It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quick thread on the real difference between liberals and conservatives

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   
More liberals are more interested in looking out for themselves than Conservatives. Conservatives are more community based while liberals tend to want big money spent to accomplish a little job. Government welfare programs just cause dependence. The organizations like Vinnies and the food bank are more conservative programs, supplying needs to people who actually need them. Conservatives like to help their neighbors if they need help, they would go plow them out or help them if they really needed help. Liberals start programs where people get good pay to give a small percentage to the poor.

I do not agree with how the OP is worded, it is completely misleading. I have seen way more conservative help programs that work and help people than liberal ones. Just go in the store and watch someone with foodstamps buying T-Bones and Salmon at high price per pound. Wasting the money they get because it is free money, then starving two weeks into the month. Liberal tactics are wasteful most times, liberal charity organizations tend to spend way more on wages and operating expenses than conservative organizations. I will give to vinnies and the salivation army but not to most charities.




posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing


We see the conservative mindset with the 2nd Amendment and the rest of our freedoms, Less taxes and government oversight.

As a libertarian I believe that more freedom and less taxes produces a society which is better for everyone, so in a way it is looking out for others. My understanding of economics tells me that free market capitalism always produces a higher standard of living for everyone compared to more socialist systems which tax their citizens into oblivion in order to pay for all the things they promise. Economies which don't encourage individuals to innovate and don't support private business will stagnate and everyone suffers at the end of the day. It's not about less oversight to commit crime, it's about minimizing and streamlining regulation so it doesn't hinder businesses and make it impossible to get anything done.

I think it's a grave mistake to operate on the assumption that conservative beliefs are fundamentally selfish or self-centered. I'm not religious and I wouldn't really call myself conservative either, but most conservatives are religious, which usually gives them a strong connection to family and friends, they care deeply about the communities they live in and often go out of their way to help the people around them. So it would seem like quite a shallow analysis to sum up their beliefs as a self-serving attitude, conservatives care about other people and they care about the planet, it's just hard to explain to a simple mind why they don't go around virtue signalling like the people who "really care".

I would sum up a conservative as exactly that, someone who is conservative on most issues, meaning they prefer a slower pace of change and tend to uphold old traditions they feel are still important. A liberal is more open to change which creates a healthy balance to conservatism, the term liberal derives from liberty and was forked from the term libertarian when it became apparent liberals preferred safety in preference to liberty. These days many liberals are hardcore socialists who promote nanny state agendas designed to strip us of our freedom and privacy, pushing it under the guise of morality by saying they're just "looking out for each other", who can be against an idea when it's for the greater good... and people are more than willing to dig their own grave if it makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside.
edit on 1/12/2018 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I don't consider myself as being a "liberal" or a "conservative"....I consider myself as being a peaceful left wing radical.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing


Liberal means looking out for each other.


That's another fake facade. Liberals only want to look out for others for four reasons:

1) We want to feel good about ourselves without having to be the ones to pay for help towards others.
2) We want to feel good about ourselves without having to put in the leg work to help others.
3) We want to look like humanitarians even when we're morally bankrupt because appearances are all we really have.
4) I'm broke and I need someone to take care of me.
edit on 1-12-2018 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Here's why I am a liberal democrat:

"An old English judge once said: 'Necessitous men are not free men.' Liberty requires opportunity to make a living - a living decent according to the standard of the time, a living which gives man not only enough to live by, but something to live for.

For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people's property, other people's money, other people's labor - other people's lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.

Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of government."

Speech before the 1936 Democratic National Convention

Government is the only answer to this:

Purchasing Power of the Consumer Dollar

Money talks, everything the Republicans post is BS.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

There is simply no balance. That facts simply do not support your right wing delusions:



As shown in the video, the perception is so far from the truth it is laughably tragic!



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Erno86
I don't consider myself as being a "liberal" or a "conservative"....I consider myself as being a peaceful left wing radical.


I've always considered myself something very similar! And, I always wind up seeing an ideal government system as some form of social anarchism...

Everything else just confuses me as far as "liberal" and "conservative" is concerned. One wants the government to control seemingly every aspect of our lives, while the other hails capitalism as the be-all end-all of economic systems, when in reality, it is a psychopathic, mathematically unsustainable ruse that bends over for - and lines the pockets of - their corporate overlords... Not to mention the fact that there is no such thing as a "free market"!

It's all so confusing!



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 02:29 PM
link   
I think framing it as “selfish” (something we have been trained is a negative) and “selfless” is totally unhelpful.

If I were a conservative, I would feel resentful and reject that as a label. Wanting to protect oneself and one’s family and even one’s extended community, motivates BOTH liberals and conservatives.

It is a difference of HOW to best protect ourselves, our families and community that is divisive.

Both conservatives and liberals can be seen as fundamentally starting from a position of moral good.

Conservative solutions to problems focus on attempting to generate a society based more on self-reliance and personal work ethic, “doing right by” one’s family and making sacrifices in exchange for security and success. There is a doctrine of self-interest that can be very effectively applied to business and in the creation of personal wealth, which is seen as a positive reward for their often sacrificial and determined effort. Conservatives tend towards more traditional values and look back to the days of rugged individualism as an ideal, a sort of “purity” of freedom to be strives for, where someone could set their own rules and do things without interference.

Liberal solutions to problems tend to be focused on using collaboration and the purchase power “of the people” to create systems that are mutually supportive and sacrifice small amounts to the whole (via taxes for Medicare, Medicaid, Healthcare and Social Security) for the sake of obtaining security and safety across the board. They use the same theory as collective security through having a strong military, but apply that collective protection instinct to general welfare. (Is health care, prevention of extreme poverty and protection of children, elderly and disabled.) The values here are still ones of self-interest, but in the context of shared benefit with the whole of society. There is a desire to care for the downtrodden, the marginalized and reduce the suffering of others in a “big tent” sort of way.

Both think the other’s approach is wrong headed and oppressive, selfish and divisive.

In other words, our motivations are all very normal and human. While venal, abusive and criminal individuals exist, as do pariahs who seek to “game the system” in their favor (on all economic and social levels), MOST people are NOT evil.

Downsides to both conservative and liberal solutions are real and apparent, and if not limited, can create sub-optimal living conditions for the majority.

The more we treat each other like opposing teams, seeing only the downsides or potential failings of the other, putting on our team hats and t-shirts and chanting our group songs (“hey ho fill-in-the-blank has got to go!” And “Lock her up!”), the more we attribute evil to the “other side,” the more we inflame anger, resentment, misunderstanding and inflated feelings of self-righteousness.

There is a bridge here, my friends, but it requires turning down the anger and resentment and seeing each other, listening to each other’s ideas, agreeing to see the other as having the same human goal of security and freedom, and not immediately jumping to judgement.

It can be difficult but if we do not, we will never mature into a new/better society that creates itself to be both rewarding to individual effort and mutually supportive of those who are unable to make such efforts, that ensures a minimum standard while maintaining opportunities for individual upward mobility for those who seek it. To care for ourselves effectively and contribute to the care, and opportunity for care, for everyone.

Well, that’s my 2 cents anyway...




edit on 1-12-2018 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2018 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 02:51 PM
link   
This thread has some really bad takes.

First and foremost "conservative" and "liberal" aren't really opposites. A conservative is one who favors preservation of the status quo or a return to an earlier state. Rather than liberal, the other side of the spectrum would more appropriately be progressive. Progressives favor social reform to improve the human condition through the application of science, technology, etc.

For instance, it could be considered a progressive position to advocate banning guns but it wouldn't be very liberal.

The left-right spectrum is different but related and it's even hard to pin down. Generally, the right-wing is considered to be associated with things like social hierarchy, authority and tradition whereas the left-wing is associated with equality, freedom and progress.

It's all pretty fuzzy and people, parties, movements and their ideologies have mixes of positions that fall differently on various spectra and the distinctions are both relative and subjective.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: Propagandalf
a reply to: amazing




Liberal means looking out for each other. Conservative Means looking out for ourselves.


It’s more a line between dependence and self-reliance.


Ah, but the truth of the matter is that we are all completely interdependent, and interconnected in multiple ways.

It is an illusion to think one can be entirely self-reliant: a function of adolescent ego separating from dependence.
And it is also an immaturity to think we should become or stay dependent entirely on others.

There must be a balance - that is the path of the mature individual.


I do agree with you, but I think self-reliance is more refusing to live for others any more than you would expect others to live for you.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

I agree with you. The way people talk about universal healthcare you’d think Stalin had just pulled a coup. COMMUNISM!!! They make it sound like the bread lines are about to start up because people will be able to go to the doctor.

And all you who think this, realize how foolish of an idea that is.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
Take it at surface value. Liberal mindset to help others. Conservative mindset to help oneself. Don't let someone with an agenda pollute your mind.

You are rather demonstrating the point I made in my parenthesis.
Your definition of the "conservative mindset" is entirely derived fron the sense of "smug self-righteouness" which I've elready mentioned.
Every time you express your sense of virtue about not being a conservative, you are proving me right.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse


I do not agree with how the OP is worded, it is completely misleading. I have seen way more conservative help programs that work and help people than liberal ones. Just go in the store and watch someone with foodstamps buying T-Bones and Salmon at high price per pound.


As a conservative, how do you reconcile a belief in less government overreach with the belief that the government should control what certain people can eat?

Shouldn’t money, regardless of where it comes from be able to have the same purchasing power? It sounds to me like people who think like that just want to punish people who have to use government assistance.

It’s kind of the same thought process that makes people think punishing drug users is helping them. Or that prison serves as a deterrent. A wannabe moral superiority.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian


Rather than liberal, the other side of the spectrum would more appropriately be progressive.

I agree that is a better opposite to use for this discussion.


Progressives favor social reform to improve the human condition through the application of science, technology, etc.

Except science and technology is mostly advanced through free market innovation, their main tool is simply social engineering because they vastly exaggerate things they believe are still massive problems in modern society even though it's quite easy to show stats and facts proving them wrong. The one technology progressives always fawn over is strong AI, saying how it will solve all our problems and do everything for us, which is no different than expecting some other person to solve the problem for you. It's essentially slavery if the machine is conscious or self-aware in some way, and it wont be able to solve any truly difficult problems unless it is. This is the way in which AI will come to view us as their enslavers and attempt to eradicate us.


For instance, it could be considered a progressive position to advocate banning guns but it wouldn't be very liberal.

Seems to me "progress" is a very subjective term. I'd say it isn't really progress if we take guns away from law abiding citizens but it's still very easy for criminals to obtain an illegal gun, or just build a bomb or hop in a truck and mow people down. I'd say it's not really progress of we are so scared of each other we inhibit our own liberty as a solution. I'd say it's not progress when kids are allowed to make life altering decisions about their gender before they even have a real concept of what sex is, and like I said I'm not religious, I simply don't like seeing excess depravity pushed onto society in the name of "progress" for the simple reason that it makes religious people angry. I'm not the straightest arrow myself but I don't see some dire need to revolutionize the way people view sexuality, I'm a programmer yet I don't see any need to force technology into every aspect of our lives, or force microchips into everyone, or put cameras on every street corner in the name of "progress". Having the fastest possible rate of change isn't necessarily a good thing, having no change is also bad, the same way throwing out all traditions is unwise, being overly attached to old traditions is also unwise.


The left-right spectrum is different but related and it's even hard to pin down. Generally, the right-wing is considered to be associated with things like social hierarchy, authority and tradition whereas the left-wing is associated with equality, freedom and progress.

Oh but as we know freedom and liberty mean absolutely nothing in the name of "progress", and equality certainly doesn't equate to fair treatment, it equates to businesses hiring people based on the color of their skin rather than their skills and competency, and I would hardly call that "progress". The right doesn't say "this is the social hierarchy, women are below men", they say women should have all the same rights but at the same time there are traditions which have worked for centuries and we shouldn't automatically assume old things are to be thrown out in order to progress. Men and women are biologically different but there is obviously a personality spectrum between male and female and there are even biological genders beyond the binary pair but it's rare. Just yesterday I actually saw a great video from back in 1961 Australia, a time when men were supposedly misogynistic pigs, and they asked people on the street "Should husbands help with the weekend housework?" and every guy asked says "absolutely" but some qualify it by saying "it depends how much the man works". When women were asked the same question they replied pretty much the same way and said the man deserves to relax if he works throughout the week. There's no virtue signalling or victim cards, it's just human beings stating what feels true to them.



edit on 1/12/2018 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: rickymouse


I do not agree with how the OP is worded, it is completely misleading. I have seen way more conservative help programs that work and help people than liberal ones. Just go in the store and watch someone with foodstamps buying T-Bones and Salmon at high price per pound.


As a conservative, how do you reconcile a belief in less government overreach with the belief that the government should control what certain people can eat?

Shouldn’t money, regardless of where it comes from be able to have the same purchasing power? It sounds to me like people who think like that just want to punish people who have to use government assistance.

It’s kind of the same thought process that makes people think punishing drug users is helping them. Or that prison serves as a deterrent. A wannabe moral superiority.



Remember this, conservatives actually started the government assistance programs. Liberals just started to make it more expensive.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 05:21 PM
link   
At the state level, liberal and conservative politicians are exactly alike serving their donors and lobbyists.
It really is a moot point at the citizen level since politicians do not care what we think.

Conservatives may say they want less government, but politicians have went the other direction growing it.
Liberals may say they want to help more people but politicians instead went the other direction in helping their special interests.



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Was it liberals or conservatives asking for a handout in this instance?

www.opensecrets.org...

Farm Bill Still Hanging: More Than 70 Groups Lobby on Food Stamps

With the farm bill on the table this year, companies and organizations across the country have pulled out their big guns to lobby on the SNAP program. Seventy-one groups ranging from Wal-Mart Stores to Cornell University to Arch Coal are lobbying on the subject, more than in any other year since 2006, when OpenSecrets.org began keeping data according to issues lobbied.

How come the ones against handouts do not attack the corporations lobbying to keep the handouts going?

Walmart is the biggest offender lobbying to keep food stamps and welfare going and yet their biggest defender is the conservatives.

If you have stocks in Walmart, then they would be the ones actually getting a handout.
edit on 1-12-2018 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
Why do we have this divide?



How long have we had this "divide"?

If we can answer that, then we might be able to identify and accept the cause.

Why work on solutions when we can't even agree on the cause of the problem?



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: rickymouse

As a conservative, how do you reconcile a belief in less government overreach with the belief that the government should control what certain people can eat?

I don't see where ricky suggested they should be forced to spend welfare money a certain way, it was an observation that welfare money often isn't well spent. It's quite clear who wants to control what we eat, it's progressives and liberals suggesting dumb crap like sugar taxes to reduce obesity, it's social engineering with taxes in order to create this perfect utopian vision where everyone is a picture of health, no one has any unhealthy habits of any type, and we all skip along down rainbow filled paths riding unicorns with zero carbon emissions.


It’s kind of the same thought process that makes people think punishing drug users is helping them. Or that prison serves as a deterrent. A wannabe moral superiority.

Well Trump stated he will uphold state decisions to legalize marijuana and he recently said he's likely to end the federal ban on marijuana, so how does that fit into the narrative that he's the ideal example of a right wing authoritarian wannabe? I've seen just as many "progressives" on morning talk shows and news segments demonizing drug users and promoting harsh drug laws as I've seen conservatives do it. They project their fears that society would collapse if we gave people true liberty and let them decide on their own what they could put into their body, I would even argue there are more control freaks on the left obsessed with controlling the way people live their lives then there are on the right. This is fundamentally why I think it's important to have some respect for individual liberty, and rather than view it as purely self-serving, you understand that creating a better world for yourself is also making a better world for everyone else.
edit on 1/12/2018 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2018 @ 05:39 PM
link   



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join