“A Conservative is someone who believes in change, just not while they’re alive.”
-Mort Sahl
If humans have flourished under the exploitation of fossil fuels, what do you think will happen when those fuels run out?
Because we have a two party system. Come off it, The Democratic Party is far too moderate for me but I still vote for them because of the only two choices I have they’re the better one.
Drop the scarlet letter nonsense.
One area that’s tangible progress is in interracial and/or interethnic marriages. They are now something around 17% of new marriages. And it’s not just black/white. More common than that is white/hispanic or white/asian. And it’s occurring with men and women. I think that’s an example where the US is becoming more comfortable with people choosing their own mates, and no one gets punished for it.
If the Democratic Party is too far to the right for you, that puts you in a small minority. Sure, you and voters like you could “take your ball and go home” but that accomplishes nothing because people on the far left are a small minority, even among those who vote Democratic. Unless your view of conservatives is very restrictive, that isn’t the case for them. I suspect that you and survinga might be caught up in a True Scotsman fallacy. If conservatives stopped voting Republican, they would basically be able to form their own new major party, let’s say the Conservative Party. This wouldn’t be like, say, the Green Party splitting of from the Democrats, where the vast majority of the Democratic Party was left intact. All that would be left of the Republican Party in this scenario is a small handful of people, most likely a few rich people that currently vote Republican because they personally benefit but who otherwise don’t hold conservative views.
Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to add one more thought. The Republican Party came about in this way, when the Whig Party disintegrated and most of them became Republicans. This led to a new two party system, and I agree with you that we will be stuck with two major parties because of the nature of our system. Where I disagree is the numbers involved. If conservatives made their own party, they wouldn’t be relegating themselves to the political wilderness. They would be become the new major party, and the Republicans would go the way of the Whigs.
If only they were moderate… You have two right-winged parties in the US today.
Can you give me an example of where I’m doing that?
It was the post I quoted in post 59. You mention that the “real” conservatives aren’t in charge of the Republican Party. I took that to mean that you were probably thinking of people like Bill Kristol, David Frum, and George Will. Those people are conservative, and they are not currently in agreement with where the Republican Party is at or going, so on that part we agree. The thing is that the Republicans in power, whether the politicians like Mitch McConnell, John Cronyn, Ted Cruz, and even Trump himself, as well as the news people like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Laura Ingraham, all consider themselves conservatives. I doubt that a single Republican senator or congressperson, if asked “are you a conservative” would answer that they aren’t.
ETA. Maybe Rand Paul, with his libertarian leanings, might answer no, but I doubt any of the others would.
We have electric cars coming down the pike. They are still a bit pricey, but their costs are coming down. What will make a big difference is what their resale price is, and how available they are to the used car market.
I am a big proponent of nuclear power, and I keep my fingers crossed for fusion as well. Renewables have their place as well. We have the problem that wind and sun do not always shine when we need peak power, but if we are needing to charge gigawatt hours worth of car batteries everyday anyway, that could even out the load rather well.
We are not going to agree to lowering out standards of living, it’s just not going to happen(we may suddenly find our standard of living stripped away from us due to our refusal to lower it, but that’s just how we humans roll). But, that doesn’t meant that we cannot lower our carbon footprint, while still maintaining or even increasing our standard of living.
The ones in charge of the party are the ones who get to set the standards. A real conservative is someone who agrees with the platform of the current conservative party, in this case, the Republicans.
Someone can claim that they are not the kind of conservatives that they are, they can complain that they would like to see them be conservative in a different way, and they can opine as to what a true conservative should be ITHO, but they cannot claim that they are the true conservatives, and that the people who actually have the power to set the conservative agenda are not.
OK, well for the record, my main point was that the current Republican party is a radical, crazy party. I think the True Scotsman fallacy is re-defining something to rebut a counterexample…I don’t see that in my description of the party. I’m just describing what I think of the party.
I do agree that many of these people you listed - Limbaugh/Hannity/etc - would call themselves conservative, when in my view, they are not any such thing. And in any event, I don’t want to be a part of any political movement that they are in. The labels might not matter much at this point.
My anecdotal observations through life is “no”, conservatives do not believe in social progress. That is to say, while they may pay lip service to equality and freedom and whatnot, they only tend to do so as long as a) it doesn’t require any societal change and b) doesn’t involve annoying protests by hipsters and colored people.
Conservatives seem to operate from either a position of “America is fine the way it is” or anything that is not “fine” about America is probably due to something liberals, Democrats, immigrants, minorities or some other group is doing. This view is likely reinforced by the tendency of conservatives to live in more homogeneous and isolated communities. Rural areas and suburbs and whatnot. Places where, if minorities exist at all, do so in non threatening numbers and are at worst a cultural curiosity.
Anecdotally, many of the conservatives I know come across as “dumb jerks”. “Dumb”, because they tend to have a narrow world view and simplify complex concepts into logically incoherent self-serving bullet points. And “jerks” because their views on people who don’t believe as they do range from “condescendingly dismissive” to “violently hostile”.
Taxes to pay for poor people and health care (also roads and schools), allowing immigrants and minorities into their communities, gays and lesbians altering their concept of what a “family” looks like are all threats to their narrative that “America is fine as is” and their position in America is a result of their hard work and industrious nature. Which is why any real change illicit such a hostile response from conservatives.
To quote George Carlin, “The planet will continue to be here. WE won’t.”
There seems to be a definitional issue with this thread. If by “social progress” we mean a liberal wish list of ideas that should be present in society, then a fortiori conservatives do not believe in “social progress.”
I think the assumption is that most people believe society should be moving towards greater freedom, more acceptance, less inequality, etc.
What is “greater freedom” for example? Fewer gun restrictions or a freedom to pay less than minimum wage or establish corporate monopolies?
More acceptance of what? Less inequality of what? Outcomes?
Again, these are in need of definitions. If they are just left wing wish lists, then of course conservatives do not support it.
It would be as if I posted a thread asking “Liberals: Do you believe in decency and morality?” and then I define those terms to mean no abortions, same sex marriages, or prayers in school, then I have answered my own question.
If you honestly want to know how conservatives feel about a topic, this isn’t a very good message board to be asking the question given the political makeup. I’m not really sure where the best place to ask would be though. Maybe https://www.reddit.com/r/askaconservative/ ?
Although they’re outnumbered, there are still plenty of conservatives and libertarians at SDMB. The numbers are swelled if “conservatives” dissatisfied with Trump or the modern Republican Party more generally are included — are these anti-Trumpists considered “conservatives” or not? And SDMB’s conservatives are often happy to share their thoughts.
Unless your concern is that the conservatives here are from “the bottom of the barrel,” I’m not sure what another message board would offer. I’ve gone to the bother of setting up accounts on over a dozen message boards, but SDMB has the broadest debates of general-interest sites I’ve tried.
Right-wing blather is VERY easy to find on the Internet. If the recommendation for AskAConservative.Reddit was sincere and well-informed, why not post an excerpt?
Give conservatives some credit. The smarter ones fully understand that freedom and equality are generally incompatible. My freedom not to serve gays impacts gay equality. My freedom to hire scabs impacts wage equality. A drug company’s freedom to maximize profits and wealthy people’s freedom to hire many doctors for cosmetic surgery affects equal access to medicine by the less priveleged. My freedom to fire my gun when I feel threatened affects the chance of someone surviving to old age if their skin color seems threatening.
It’s a matter of pros and cons, costs and benefits. If right-wing bigots can discriminate against gay customers, the right-wing bigots can say “I got my way” and go about their business as if nothing happened, but gay people are now officially second-class citizens unable to procure the same goods and services as straight people. If right-wing bigots cannot discriminate against gay customers, said bigots can say “Boo hoo, I didn’t get my way” but still go about their business as if nothing happened, but gay people are not treated as second-class citizens and can procure the same goods and services as straight people. Therefore, in terms of costs and benefits, the second way is better.
How would you rate affirmative action within this equality vs freedom argument? I think that’s one area where conservatives very much see it differently from liberals, and I can see their point.
At its core, affirmative action is another freedom vs equality matter. But the details are complicated. As a centrist, I have no clear position on this controversial issue.
Obviously there are anecdotes of white males being passed over to give preference to less qualified women, Hispanics or blacks. But only through exaggeration has this issue, framed as “denying whites equality of opportunity,” become a hot-button rallying cry for conservatives. On Yahoo and Youtube blogs are whites lamenting that their lives would be easier if they were black. Does anyone take these whines seriously?