Somehow when you employ the argument that “everybody’s authoritarian,” you imply that all authoritarianism is alike, regardless of type or degree. This puts the conservative side in the tricky position of insisting that (say) demanding a legal right to same-sex marriage is equivalent (or worse) to passing laws that fetter a free press or the right to due process. That is, if they ever go off the attack long enough to let the debate get that far, which they’re trained very well not to do.
Oh please. Legal segregation is arresting people for using the wrong drinking fountain. Legal segregation is arresting people for sitting in the wrong place on the bus. Legal segregation is forcing people to go to a school farther from their home than is necessary on account of their race.
Look, the car pool lane is a lousy example of your point. No one is forced to car pool. No one is forced to use the car pool lanes. The car pool lane is merely an incentive to get people to car pool, and relieve congestion, by offering the incentive of a little faster and easier commute.
Not everyone uses the freeways, but everyone pays taxes.
Dean’s book offers research data indicating the preponderance of Republicans among those with authoritarian tendencies. You merely claim, without any data but merely some poor examples, that lefties are just as authoritarian only in a different sphere. Cite?
As was already pointed out, you seem to equate letting the executive alone decide whether or not an accused person is entitled to due process and legal representation and offering an incentive to act in a certain way, such as car pools.
Modern day liberals aren’t liberal at all, if one hasn 't figured that out by now, one isn’t paying attention (unless we’re talking about other people’s money or property) - that’s why Dean’s book is such a howler. Diogenes won’t provide any example of non-authoritarian liberals by name claiming that “all” liberals are non-authoritarian, which everyone knows is a crock, and haseth an odor.
The book does provide aid and comfort to those who are already prejudiced, with a veneer of pseudo respectability and authority of social scientists, giving the green light to call conservatives fascist. Eventually, conservatives can look forward to being listed in the DSMV and sent to re-education camps to get their mind straight. /s
Have you examined the astonishing economic gain in the US during WWII when the government controlled virtually everything?
The “free” market that people extol doesn’t exist in the form they admire.
WTF are you “oh pleasing” me for? I explicitly said all those things are unconstitutional.
The carpool lane example isn’t the best example, but it wasn’t the only one I gave. There are multiple motives for people to want carpool lanes, but they are largely a issue pushed by Democrats around here. No, it doesn’t force you to carpool, it just makes you miserable if you don’t. I think that’s a distinction without a difference.
But let’s look at one of the other examples I gave: Busing kids to schools in far-flung neighborhoods for the purpose of achieving the goal of racial integration was an authoritarian, coercive move by the government. Not only that, but it was found to be unconstitutional (per my earlier cite). For some lefties it wasn’t enough to eliminate the laws that enforced segragation-- they wanted to make new laws to require a certain racial balance in each school. It was completly contrary to the goal of Brown, which said that kids had a right to go to schools in their own districts regardless of their race.
Now it’s my turn to “oh please” you. I explicitly said in at least two different posts that I thought righties were more often authoritarian than lefties are on social issues.
This is nonsense. Carpool lanes don’t discriminate against anybody or allow anybody special privileges. No one is forced to use them and no demographic group is prohibited from using them . There’s nothing either authoritarian or liberal about them. Your comparison to religious or anti-gay discrimination is ludicrous.
Mace, you keep misrepresenting the reason for busing. It wasn’t about forced integration of neighborhoods, it was about finding a way to make sure all kids had equitable education. Kids in all black schools were not receiving the same education as white kids. Goping to schools in their own distcricts was not a remedy BECAUSE THE SCHOOLS WERE NOT EQUAL. What other way was there to remedy that without sending black kids to white schools (and remember “Separate but Equal” was not on the table)? I’d still like to hear your alternative solution.
Let me add some clarifications:
And I would call them authoritarian as well, if that wasn’t clear.
Jsut in case you’re not familiar with the history of busing, there were indeed instances when local governments (largely run by whites) drew up school districts along racial lines that created a new “seperate but equal” system. This was just as wrong as the old “seperate by equal” system. But the school busing movement went way beyond trying to fix that problem by forcing a certain racial quota on each school even when there was no evidence of school redistricting shenenegans.
Well, tomndebb suggested upgrading the substandard schools, and allowing the children to go where they wanted. Of course, that would have been very expensive; to a cynical guy like me busing seems like it was a solution designed not as authoritarian or fair or even effective, but as cheap.
Bullshit. Read the link I gave for the SCOTUS decision which outlawed many school busing schemes.
Fund schools equally throughout the state (or within the school district, if the districting lines are drawn in a legit manner). Wow, that was hard…
You don’t need white kids in a classroom to make it equal.
Funding schools equally is a long term answer, meanwhile kids RIGHT THEN were in shitty schools. What would have been your remedy for THOSE kids right THEN? We needed an IMMEDIATE solution for kids whose rights were being deprived AT THAT MOMENT.
This was the reason.
No one questions that bussing got out of hand. tomndebb explained how this happened quite well. Had black children been sent to schools nearest their home those schools would have been all or mostly black for the reason you gave. People tend to congregate with people like themselves. The well-justified opinion was that this would result in school boards slighting those schools in resources. So students were bussed around to maintain a mix to prevent the boards from doing this. It was a bad idea and didn’t work but it was not an authoritarian maneuver in my opinion.
Yes but you never cited any valid studies that show lefties were more authoritarian in other areas.
And, by the way I take “authoritarian” to mean either demanding blind obedience, or an executive ( orgovernment in general) who rules without a constitutional authorization from the populace.
This is among the most silly things that silly man ever said. Certainly a resolutely ignorant do-gooder who would follow their pre- and mis-concieved notion of what was good for you no matter how obviously harmful to you or however strongly you objected certainly wouldn’t be someone you would want to darken your door but so what? Send them packing. The rest of the do-gooders are at least somewhat openminded and have your best interests at heart. They would seem better houseguests than those who don’t share those characteristics.
Just my 2sense
Yp, beating a kid is the only way parents have of controlling their habits.
I’ll try again. Since I don’t believe that it is right to have jackbooted thugs from the local board of education breaking into a house to make sure the parents are teaching the right things, the only way we have to enforce a curriculum is testing. If a parent feels strongly enough about a subject that she is willing to have the kids fail the exit exam rather than learn it, there isn’t an awful lot we can do.
I’m generalizing from evolution to anything. I agree that reading is more important than evolution, I’m not so sure about algebra. How about a southern parent teaching about slavery? How about a Christian fundamentalist who doesn’t want a child to find out about the teachings of other relgions. Once you give parents a pass about evolution (and I suppose the Big Bang with it, and the age of the earth, etc.) you had better be able to explain to me why we care if the parent teaches anything at all. A la Bloom, school should give kids a shared body of knowledge. Getting that from home schooling is fine with me, in principle, allowing home schooling to be an excuse to withhold this information from kids is not.
The law was passed during a drought. New Jersey had a similar passed during a drought. No doubt the law is still on the books, but not being enforced. I suspect it is symbolic in both cases - I remember in New Jersey the purpose was not to save the water in the glass, but the water used to wash the glass after it was used.
BTW, you forgot to mention stop signs and traffic lights as other examples of authoritarian liberalism. The nerve! I don’t see how water conservation is a liberal or conservative issue, though the current administration seems to be making pollution a conservative sacrament.
Cite? I drive 880 every day, and I read Mr. Roadshow every day, and I have never heard anyone in the ten years I’ve been here trying to coerce anyone to carpool - unless you consider the existence of carpool lanes coercion. Disclaimer: I don’t carpool, so I get no benefit from them existing - except reduction of congestion.
I also haven’t seen carpool lanes as a political issue. For all I know the people who write into Mr. Roadshow ranting about them are lefties. I’ve seen plenty of cars with Bush stickers in the carpool lane also.
BTW, got a better solution for congestion? If you say make the lanes non-carpool, I invite you on 880 at 9:01 am (after the lanes become normal) and also invite you to zoom through any lane at 55. (For those not here - all lanes become immediately congested.)
If the law was still being enforced, or there was even a call to enforce it, you might have a point. Plenty of obsolete laws are on the books. Isn’t it more efficient to ignore it, and not waste the time of the legislature to repeal it, only to enact it again when there is another drought?
BTW, the balance between farm and city is not a right-left thing either.
The results from several studies in this article, to summarize way too briefly, is that openess is inversely correlated with the RWA scale. He also test conscienciousness, which is not correlated with RWA. Several aspects of openess were tested, and all but fantasy were inversely correlated.
Bullshit. This stuff comes up during droughts, when the supply of water decreases.
Other “authoritarian” measures during periods of drought in New Jersey were restrictions on lawn watering. Farmers obviously get water cheaper than Joe suburbanite. Do you think the market is working properly if farmers are forced to pay the same price as a guy in a city? Do you think a green lawn is more important than water for food? Or should the farmers go bankrupt any time there is a drought?
But I think your religious faith in the free market is touching. I bet you wish you lived in the 1880s, when all was paradise, before that authoritarian liberal Upton Sinclair wrote The Jungle*, and that authoritarian government forced the poor meat packers to stop shipping diseased meat.
I was disappointed to discover that when I coined what I thought was the neologism “enpersonment” earlier this year, with the same meaning as you have for it, you had beaten me to it, by several years. I said it was nonsense, scientifically-speaking, too, in my blog post “The mumbo jumbo of choice.” You might like to Google that title, and follow my blog. We seem to be having similar thoughts. Actually, I said that “enpersonment” itself was nonsense, at *any *“moment”.
Thank you for your wisdom.
Well, that’ll teach you. Next time you think you’ve coined a neologism, do a search for it* on the SDMB and see if you’ve been beaten to the punch.
Welcome to the Dope, btw.
*If it’s more than four letters (which is probably likely). Otherwise, just google the search terms of [your putative neologism] + SDMB.