# Conservatives: Do you believe in social progress? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 25, 2018, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687 "2018-12-25T16:49:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![survinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@survinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/survinga)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/61 "2018-12-28T13:17:29Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > I’ll ask again. If the Republican Party isn’t conservative, why do most voting conservatives vote Republican? Not sure I have an over-arching answer. It’s probably a complicated thing that goes back decades. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/62 "2018-12-28T14:47:40Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Were you being intentionally ironic with these two sentences? ‘Planet’ is a metonym for ‘the only known site of living things, and suitable habitation for humans’. It does not mean an iconic distressed fat blue man wiping his fevered brow. Similarly ‘saving the planet’ does not mean that it will physically explode and leave a void in space. It just means we shouldn’t shit on the rich inheritance of life and biodiversity that keeps us alive, without any idea of what would replace it, or how much shitting-on is enough to make that web unravel enough to become inhospitable to us. ---
**Author:** ![EscAlaMike](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/escalamike/32/4177_2.png) [@EscAlaMike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EscAlaMike)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/63 "2018-12-28T14:50:11Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > I’ll ask again. If the Republican Party isn’t conservative, why do most voting conservatives vote Republican? Having grown up in the house of a hard-core Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity right-winger of a father who claims to despise the Republican party, yet votes for them every time without fail - it’s because their hatred of Democrats overrides everything else. They are positively convinced that the Democratic Party is the embodiment of evil. ---
**Author:** ![survinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@survinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/survinga)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/64 "2018-12-28T15:39:56Z")
> [@EscAlaMike](#): > > Having grown up in the house of a hard-core Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity right-winger of a father who claims to despise the Republican party, yet votes for them every time without fail - it’s because their hatred of Democrats overrides everything else. They are positively convinced that the Democratic Party is the embodiment of evil. There is some of that certainly. My father was the same as your father. He didn’t have to like the Republicans to vote for them, because he thought the Dems were Un-American. I think some of them have also been conned into supporting policies that are to their own detriment. They were told that tax cuts pay for themselves, and that too much government spending and government regulations are why this or that recession has occurred…government strangling the private sector, and so forth. They often end up opposing policies that would help their own geographic areas, such as not supporting the Medicaid expansion, because they’ve been sold on the villainy of government and “socialism”. Also, there’s some identity politics in play in fear-mongering of certain minority groups, which bought Pubs a lot of votes in the 60’s and 70’s. Early on, there was a view that Republicans were stronger on foreign policy, too, and that Dems are either weak or anti-American. There’s the anti-Hillary and anti-Clinton views as well. I think there’s a mix of reasons, including some things I haven’t mentioned. It’s not an easy question to answer honestly. I used to be Republican myself, mostly because I thought they were more grown-up on foreign policy & I used to buy into their economic supply-side views. I now see them for the frauds that they are. But most people don’t switch parties ever. Once they identify with a party, it’s set in stone almost forever. ---
**Author:** ![EscAlaMike](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/escalamike/32/4177_2.png) [@EscAlaMike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EscAlaMike)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/65 "2018-12-28T15:53:22Z")
> [@survinga](#): > > He didn’t have to like the Republicans to vote for them, because he thought the Dems were Un-American. Yep, this is another huge part of it. A common refrain was: “Republicans are terrible, but at least they don’t hate America like the Dems!” ---
**Author:** ![survinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@survinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/survinga)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/66 "2018-12-28T16:03:17Z")
> [@EscAlaMike](#): > > Yep, this is another huge part of it. A common refrain was: “Republicans are terrible, but at least they don’t hate America like the Dems!” I used to think similar on that “hate America” part. It’s easy to sit in a bubble, and think the worst of the “other”, whomever the “other” is. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/67 "2018-12-28T16:05:29Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > Voluntary? I think the vast majority of progress in the US has been involuntary. Was the Emancipation Proclamation and the South being forced to repudiate slavery not progress? What about when Eisenhower sent in the National Guard and 101st airborne to forcibly integrate the public schools in Little Rock? The forces of bigotry are almost always dragged forward kicking and screaming. Sure, there are a few that change on their own, like the aforementioned Robert Byrd who conservatives seem to have a special hate for, but most never personally change. Let’s not forget that it was the government that propped up slavery for so long in the first place. It was a terrible initiation of force on many individuals. Like I said, some things, like the state ending it’s violence in certain areas, is certainly progress. The forcible integration was a squabble between state and federal governments, so it doesn’t really bug me. That said, I imagine such a forceful move sowed the seeds for bad things later. So no, it is not unqualified progress that the state stuck a gun in somebody’s face or that they killed many thousands. Imagine that. ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/68 "2018-12-28T17:39:32Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > So no, it is not unqualified progress that the state stuck a gun in somebody’s face or that they killed many thousands. Imagine that. This is very interesting, because I have a fundamentally different interpretation of things like the end of slavery, women’s suffrage, integration of the public school system, and so on. I don’t see the fundamental issue as the government sticking a gun in someone’s face and forcing them to do something. The way I see it is that the federal government is (metaphorically) forcing a private citizen or a state government to put down the gun that they are holding on someone. In other words, in my view of the world, the federal government is like the Big Brother who is protecting Little Brother from Not Quite As Big Brother. At least it was until Trump came along. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/69 "2018-12-28T18:05:26Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > The forcible integration was a squabble between state and federal governments, so it doesn’t really bug me. That said, I imagine such a forceful move sowed the seeds for bad things later. Would you have advocated a less forceful move to effect constitutional rights? If so, I’d be curious as to what that would be. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/70 "2018-12-28T18:08:32Z")
> [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > ‘Planet’ is a metonym for ‘the only known site of living things, and suitable habitation for humans’. It does not mean an iconic distressed fat blue man wiping his fevered brow. > > Similarly ‘saving the planet’ does not mean that it will physically explode and leave a void in space. > > It just means we shouldn’t shit on the rich inheritance of life and biodiversity that keeps us alive, without any idea of what would replace it, or how much shitting-on is enough to make that web unravel enough to become inhospitable to us. Yeah, that’s what it comes down to. I’m not an environmentalist because I give a shit about a species of owl or tree. I am an environmentalist because I care about my own survival and comfort, as well as that of other fellow human beings. But, conservatives do like to mock liberals when they refer to the Earth, the only planet known to harbor life, a planet where life can be found in every square inch, and even not only in the soil under our feet, but even down in the rock near the mantle, as a living planet. I can only reason that is because they prefer to change that status. Mars and Venus are (most likely) dead planets. The Earth differs from that. To say that the earth is a living planet is not the same as anthrompozing it, but that can be a subtle nuance that escapes those who read for gotchas, rather than comprehension. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/71 "2018-12-28T18:19:06Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > … I can only reason that is because they prefer to change that status. … Your reasoning is faulty. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/72 "2018-12-28T19:50:36Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Your reasoning is faulty. Actually the point is that the reasoning of the conservatives is faulty here about what they think in general about why we should not worry much about our environment. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/73 "2018-12-28T20:23:38Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Your reasoning is faulty. My reasoning was somewhat tongue in cheek. But since you are here, would you like to explain why you mock the idea of the Earth being a living planet? ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/74 "2018-12-28T21:18:35Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Yeah, that’s what it comes down to. I’m not an environmentalist because I give a shit about a species of owl or tree. I am an environmentalist because I care about my own survival and comfort, as well as that of other fellow human beings. > > But, conservatives do like to mock liberals when they refer to the Earth, the only planet known to harbor life, a planet where life can be found in every square inch, and even not only in the soil under our feet, but even down in the rock near the mantle, as a living planet. I can only reason that is because they prefer to change that status. > > Mars and Venus are (most likely) dead planets. The Earth differs from that. To say that the earth is a living planet is not the same as anthrompozing it, but that can be a subtle nuance that escapes those who read for gotchas, rather than comprehension. There is no legitimate human-centric rationale for limiting the use of fossil fuel technology. Humans have flourished under the exploitation of fossil fuels like in no other period in human history. ---
**Author:** ![EscAlaMike](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/escalamike/32/4177_2.png) [@EscAlaMike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EscAlaMike)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/75 "2018-12-28T21:20:07Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > There is no legitimate human-centric rationale for limiting the use of fossil fuel technology. Humans have flourished under the exploitation of fossil fuels like in no other period in human history. What if the price we pay for our fossil fuel-based flourishing over the past century is multiple centuries of misery and suffering due to environmental catastrophe? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/76 "2018-12-28T21:28:34Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > There is no legitimate human-centric rationale for limiting the use of fossil fuel technology. Humans have flourished under the exploitation of fossil fuels like in no other period in human history. I agree absolutely that having a dense and convenient energy source completely changed our lives. Fossil fuels replaced our slave labor and our dependance on draft animals. OTOH, even if you are not concerned about the effect to the climate that we humans live in, it’s gonna run out at some point, so there may be a basic physics and logical rationale for suddenly stopping, as the spigot goes dry. We may want to ween ourselves before that happens. And then there is the climate. I don’t know if you are a climate change denialist, if so, then I don’t really care, you are wrong, end of story. If you are not, then you recognize that this is our world that we live in, and we can make it rather uncomfortable, or even inhospitable, if we do not limit our use of CO[sub]2[/sub] emitting technologies. Was there any “legitimate human-centric rationale” for decreasing the sulfur acids that were being produced by coal power plants? is there any reasons that humans should care about the ozone layer? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/77 "2018-12-28T21:40:18Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > There is no legitimate human-centric rationale for limiting the use of fossil fuel technology. Yes, there is. [https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06827-x](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06827-x) > [@](#): > > Combined country-level costs (and benefits) add up to a global median of more than $400 in social costs per tonne of CO2 — more than twice previous estimates. On the basis of CO2 emissions in 2017, that’s a global impact of more than $16 trillion. The new analysis is based on a set of climate simulations, rather than a single climate model, and the authors calculated future harm using empirical damage functions that were independently developed for that purpose. > [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Humans have flourished under the exploitation of fossil fuels like in no other period in human history. And horses and carriages did so before, we dumped them as soon they were seen as not needed, regardless of sentimentalities back then. ---
**Author:** ![EscAlaMike](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/escalamike/32/4177_2.png) [@EscAlaMike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EscAlaMike)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/78 "2018-12-28T21:44:27Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And horses and carriages did so before, we dumped them as soon they were seen as not needed, regardless of sentimentalities back then. Only because something better came along (mass availability of autos with IC engines). Has something better than fossil fuels come along that is readily accessible by the masses? If so, I don’t think people will be sentimental about abandoning fossil fuels. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/79 "2018-12-28T21:54:05Z")
> [@EscAlaMike](#): > > Only because something better came along (mass availability of autos with IC engines). > > Has something better than fossil fuels come along that is readily accessible by the masses? > > If so, I don’t think people will be sentimental about abandoning fossil fuels. The reply was made because that pleading for that sentimentality is a running and silly point many many many times before by the other poster. By taking into account the real costs of emitting global warming gases into the atmosphere and the costs of alternative power vehicles the time when they were better was yesterday. But if the environmental costs are perversely ignored we could see alternative energy as cheaper soon. > **[Renewable Energy Will Be Consistently Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels By 2020,...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2018/01/13/renewable-energy-cost-effective-fossil-fuels-2020/#374a39ac4ff2)** > > The cost of renewable energy is now falling so fast that it should be consistently cheaper than traditional fossil fuels within just a few years, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency. > [@](#): > > The cost of renewable energy is now falling so fast that it should be a consistently cheaper source of electricity generation than traditional fossil fuels within just a few years, according to a new report from the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). > > The organisation – which has more than 150 member countries – says the cost of generating power from onshore wind has fallen by around 23% since 2010 while the cost of solar photovoltaic (PV) electricity has fallen by 73% in that time. With further price falls expected for these and other green energy options, IRENA says all renewable energy technologies should be competitive on price with fossil fuels by 2020. As for better, just in the area of health alone, ending the idea of treating our atmosphere as a sewer will give us a lot of benefits. > **[The missing maths: the human cost of fossil fuels | Ploy Achakulwisut](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/apr/26/the-missing-maths-the-human-cost-of-fossil-fuels)** > > Ploy Achakulwisut: We should account for the costs of disease and death from fossil fuel pollution in climate change policies > [@](#): > > Decades of research have revealed that air pollution is associated with a wide range of diseases and disorders, including asthma, cancer, heart disease, stroke, and premature birth. There is also emerging evidence that pollution from coal combustion and motor vehicles can cause development delays, reduced IQ, and autism in children. The societal and economic costs of air pollution are multifold. There are costs to the affected individuals, to their families and to society in terms of direct medical costs, costs to healthcare systems, productivity losses, and lower economic growth (not to mention costs resulting from damages to ecosystems). > > Yet almost none of these costs stemming from our fossil fuel reliance are included in the majority of cost-benefit analyses of climate mitigation strategies. A recent study estimates that the health co-benefits from air pollution reductions would outweigh the mitigation costs of staying below 2°C by 140–250% globally. Historical evidence paints a similar picture. The EPA estimates that the U.S. Clean Air Amendments cost $65bn to implement, but will have yielded a benefit of almost $2tn by 2020 in avoided health costs. ---
**Author:** ![fedman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/278dde/32.png) [@fedman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fedman)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/80 "2018-12-28T23:28:53Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > No, really, conservatism is all about allowing the privileged to maintain their privilege while behaving exactly as everyone else does. They fuck whom they want, they cheat, rape, steal. And nothing touches them, because they benefit from conceptual fictions like “legitimacy” that protect their ability to hoard resources. > > But anyone else, they behave just as the people at the top, no better and no worse, but their small trespasses are not forgiven, not to mention the large. A ticket for walking in the wrong place from the Ferguson, Missouri, police can send them into a spiral of ruin. Illegitimacy becomes a mark of doom, though it is nothing but the absence of a piece of paper and the lack of money to obtain divorces. > > It’s all a pageant to hide the ball. wrong! A 300 hundred lb shoplifter was stopped and attacked cop [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687.md?page=5)