Do we always have to be so polemic?

The BBQ Pit
#1

I echo RickJay’s first sentence here in this thread.

Sure, there a few genuine attempts to explain the conservative/liberal ideologies*. And the OP wasn’t specific about the which definitions he was referring to. Could be economics, could be American politics, , or it could be a ridiculous justification of one’s ignorant beliefs. Guess which one has the most posts? The thread is bursting at the seams with steamy hot bullshit. Does anyone genuinely think that all conservatives are just selfish and greedy? Or that liberals quake in fear at the thought of competition? I’m guessing it’s simply a dumb game of gotcha-ya, but it’s the same stupidity that’s got this country in a deadlock fighting the theoretical battles instead of solving problems.

Just to be a good sport, I’ll give it a shot.

Economic Conservatives believe that the market is currently too heavily regulated to allow the best people and ideas to succeed. Liberals believe that the market is not regulated enough, and disadvantages not rooted in worth, like monopolies or poverty prevent the best people and ideas from succeeding. Everyone wants the best for people that deserve it.

American Politics This is where the mines lie. Conservatives generalize effective solutions for small towns/rural setting to include cities. Liberals generalize effective urban solutions to include towns. Neither are very effective at solving the problems of highest priority or pleasing the residents of the other. People compare abstract situations to familiar or desirable ones to determine how they feel, rather than considering actual situations.

Ridiculous justification for my ignorant beliefs Conservatives are too quick to judge and liberals are too hesitant.

Feel free to critique my positions, but know that I made them in good faith trying to legitimately characterize complex topics.
*AHunter3 and Captain Amazing had especially informative posts relatively free of partisan sniping. Apologies to those I didn’t mention who refrained from attacking the people they disagree with.

#2

Out of curiosity, I went through that thread and skimmed through the posts, tagging each with a neutral bias, left bias, or right bias. Some of the longer ones I didn’t bother reading fully, just checked them quickly to see if there was any obvious bias; otherwise, I assumed them to be neutrally discussing the differences. I didn’t count posts that were comments on the thread itself, or follow-up posts to stances already posted.

Left biased contributions came in at 4, and one of them I had to tilt my head to make it look biased. Der Trihs came in late and was naturally himself.

Right biased contributions came in at 5, and what struck me as interesting is that I racked up 3 right to 1 left almost immediately. It wasn’t until I got toward the end of the first page that left biases began to show up more often.

What’s more interesting than that is those who portrayed both sides in either a positive or negative light, both of which I’m counting as neutral, were way off the chart with at least 18 posts. I didn’t distinguish between positive and negative neutrality, but offhand I’d say positive edged out negative, but only barely. The rest of the posts in the thread were comments or discussion.

This was just an off-the-cuff survey done out of curiosity, and I don’t doubt that other folks might come up with different numbers. I can tag which specific posts I think fit in each category, but that’s more work than I really want to invest.

#3

I phrased that poorly, but I was just mentally including all the biased posts and their replies as diversions from the actual point of the OP. I just saw that thread headed towards the same argument that always pops up and got a little frustrated. There were several good and neutral one-offs like yours that are gonna get lost on the first page. I started this thread to pit the partisan bullshit that derails most discussion on the board from actually accomplishing anything, but I probably should have just cleaned it up a bit and posted in the other thread.

#4

Nah, that was a poll. Mods in IMHO tend to get cranky about too much discussion anyway. I didn’t mean the survey to refute you, but I was genuinely interested to see how much and what kind of polemic there was. It definitely exists, but I was surprised myself to see how many people stayed on-target. We just remember the braying asses, I guess.

#5

Dude, it’s the SDMB a matter of weeks before a presidential election.

Do you actually expect reasoned discourse?

I have been here since the pubs won the last two, and the board totally freaked both times. Took months for things to settle down.

Now the libs on the board are going apeshit, hoping they don’t get burned again. Big Time Shit happening now.

You might find a somewhat coherent conversation in Great Debates…

#6

I agree. There are a lot of posters in there being fair, but the number of posters who are being out-and-out intellectually dishonest is a bit disheartening. I was going to post in agreement with **RickJay **in that thread, but after he got the mod smackdown, I was too much of a pussy. Some Dopers haven’t yet realized that not everyone who disagrees with you does so because they are evil, or purely out of spite and malice.

#7

Yes, I’m afraid I do.

But I do try to sound pleasant about it.

#8

In defense of myself (and I was fairly criticized for flaming in a non-Pit thread) that wasn’t my first sentence in the thread. I had previously written what I thought was a thoughtful post, with specific examples, explaining why the “conservative/liberal” divide cannot be easily explained in a pat, easy, partisan way, and why in fact it’s not even legitimately a divide at all.

That post was completely ignored.

When I posted an inappropriate, insulting post, I got lots of replies.

I won’t flame in IMHO again, but I stand by my statement. It’s a thread of absolutely appalling, near-limitless ignorance and most of its participants come off sounding like ignorant fools.

#9

By my count there were about 10 biased posters. Some took a chance to knock both sides. Some, like mine, meant well and intended to be non-partisan, but didn’t cover the spectrum of meaning inherent in the political ideology continuum. But that’s fine. If you didn’t notice, the thread was about summing up, finding quick ways to identify left and right. Hell yes they’re going to be simplistic, probably overly so; that’s what summing up is. Most of us could probably prattle on at length about left and right and not be too far off, but that wasn’t really what the OP was looking for.

And posts get ignored in IMHO. You post your opinion, someone posts theirs, and discussion is rarer than usual.

#10

Bosstone, I really, really liked your summation. Just wanted to say that.

#11

Thank you. :slight_smile: