# In the US, has a socially conservative view ever "won" in the long run? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 3, 2009, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921 "2009-04-03T23:27:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2009, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/81 "2009-04-07T22:52:31Z")
Scorecard (a few from page 1, anyway; I tried to cut things that were reasonably contested): > [@begbert2](#): > > Nudity taboos are still in effect over most of the world, and (afaik) all of America. > > Prostitution is still illegal in most places. > > Recreational drugs are still highly regulated or outright banned in most places. > [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > Prohibition was repealed. > [@Lemur866](#): > > Or do you mean actual notions about redesigning society that haven’t gone anywhere? How about: Creche raising of children. Group marriage. Free love. Abolition of private property. Social credit. Planned economy. Industrial policy. Technocratic socialism. Free coinage of silver at 16:1. A theraputic approach to crime. And on and on. > [@MandaJo](#): > > Eugenics was a socially progressive view at one point: people talked about Kallikaks and “feeble-mindedness” and thought that with this new scientific understanding, the world could be improved with a selective sterilization. > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Affirmative action. It’s highly unpopular and a number of states have voted to eliminate it. It seems likely that more states will do so in the future. > > Welfare. In 1996 we gutted the federal welfare system, and even at the current moment there’s no talk of restoring it. And **DtC** isn’t alone as labeling the prohibition as “progressive” for the purpose of this thread. There’s also me, **Captain Amazing** , and…everybody else who bothered to read and understand the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2009, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/82 "2009-04-07T23:22:30Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Since I know Diogenes likes a good steak (I don’t know about Revtim’s eating habits), here’s one: how about PETA and the “Meat Is Murder” crowd? Are they progressive? If so, should meat-eaters just give up, since we all know “conservatives” can never successfully stand up to a progressive movement? What do you thin, Tim? You’re obviously dying to tell religious conservatives, “Give up fighting on gay marriage, since you conservatives always ends up losing anyway.” I never said conservatives always lose, and I don’t think anybody else did either, so this whole post is a strawman ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/83 "2009-04-08T16:02:42Z")
> [@Revtim](#): > > Has there ever been a social issue in the US where in the long run, the conservative view was the one than was universally accepted? I mean “conservative” in the classic “keep the status quo” sense. > > All the examples I can think of have the conservative view being repudiated today, such as slavery, women and blacks voting, interracial marriage, etc. But I realize that could be a form of confirmation bias, whereby liberal efforts for social change that ultimately failed might not be well known these days. Okay, Tim I took your advice and have read the original post again. Straw man? Not hardly, Diogenes. MAYBE Tim was honestly looking for enlightenment, but it sure doesn’t sound that way in this post. The tone is unmistakeable: the conservatives inevitably lose on every social issue Tim can think of. The issues he cites (slavery, suffrage, interracial marriage) are all ones that latter-day leftists look back on and say, “We were right, they were wrong! We won, they lost! 'Twas ever thus.” ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/84 "2009-04-08T16:53:06Z")
Like I said in what you quoted, I realize that efforts to change society that ultimately failed would not be as well known. That is what I was looking for, and the reason I made this thread. If all you can do is make this a partisan fight about what is conservative and what is not, I ask that you kindly fuck off out of this thread and let those of us who can understand the basic English sentence > [@](#): > > I mean “conservative” in the classic “keep the status quo” sense. continue providing examples. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/85 "2009-04-08T21:38:06Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Affirmative action. It’s highly unpopular and a number of states have voted to eliminate it. It seems likely that more states will do so in the future. I’d argue that that’s because, to some extent, those programs have done their jobs. In many areas, minority applicants no longer face a hurdle in hiring that equally qualified Caucasian candidates never had. I think the root problem is largely class-based: poor people have more problems with some things that, _at first glance_, should not be affected by money. When affirmative action legislation was first passed, shitloads of black people were poor, and that isn’t really true as much anymore. There is still racism, of course, but it’s weaker and less widespread than it used to be, and I think a good bit of it is from the old embarrassing relatives who still hold those antiquated views, many of whom won’t be around in, say 15 or 20 years. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/86 "2009-04-08T22:45:44Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Less than 100 years ago, eugenics was the pet cause of almost all progressives. People like Margaret Sanger took it for granted that eugenics was the future. It will happen again. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/87 "2009-04-09T00:27:56Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > I know you’re not equating 1960’s Republicans with modern Reaganite Conservatism—because everybody should have learned in high school history that in the 1960’s the GOP was a largely liberal party with a conservative wing, the Democrats were a largely conservative party with a liberal wing, & the polarization of the parties into a Left party & a Right party only happened with mass defections of conservative Democrats to the GOP, _because of LBJ pushing through the Civil Rights Act_—& surely you’re neither that ignorant nor that disingenuous. > > So you obviously mean something else entirely, which I will need a crystal ball & some peyote to parse. The Republican Party nominated Richard Nixon in 1960 and Barry Goldwater in 1964, then Nixon again in 1968. Those are not the nominations of a largely conservative party with a liberal wing. The Democrats nominated John F. Kennedy in 1960 and Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Those are not the nominations of a largely conservative party with a liberal wing. An accurate summary of the situation in the early 60’s would be that the Democrats were a liberal party, but with some old-time conservatives from the South still hanging on to their old party membership. The Republicans were a conservative party, but with some old-time liberals from the Northeast still hanging on to their old party membership. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/88 "2009-04-09T02:07:41Z")
I hope it’s beginning to sink in that the meanings of the terms “liberal” and “conservative” are highly dependent on context and subject to paradoxes when addressed in too broad an historical perspective. For example, Prohibition is conservative in the sense of “restrictive”, but liberal in the sense of “socially reformist”. It’s also important to note that liberalism is about re-evaluating previous positions, so it’s to be expected that today’s liberals might be opposed to the positions of yesterday’s liberals. As for conservatism, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to deny that it’s just a hodge-podge of knee-jerk positions. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/89 "2009-04-09T02:08:39Z")
ITR champion, I think you meant to say: \> The Republican Party nominated Richard Nixon in 1960 and Barry Goldwater in \> 1964, then Nixon again in 1968. Those are not the nominations of a largely \> liberal party with a conservative wing. The way you wrote it doesn’t make any sense. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/90 "2009-04-09T15:17:49Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > **Diogenes** has already answered your points on a substantive level. I am merely chiming in to point out that your points are offensive, troglodystic bullshit. I think it is definitely probative. What if a woman alleges rape and makes a comment that the defendant is not her type at all, and that she would never consent to sex with such a man? Are you saying that if evidence came to light that they had consensual sex two months ago that this fact would have, not only no bearing at all on your decision of who is telling the truth, but you don’t think that the defendant, facing many years in prison, should even be able to raise this point? To me that is astounding. ---
**Author:** ![Maastricht](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@Maastricht](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maastricht)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/91 "2009-04-09T15:31:56Z")
Perhaps the question might be rephrased in a politically neutral way. “In recent history, which social movements for greater individual freedom/self reliance succeeded, and which failed?” Racial segregration: tried to limit inidvidual freedom, failed. Prohibition: tried to limit inidvidual freedom, failed. Eugenics: tried to limit individual freedom (of procreation); failed. Roe- vs Wade: tried to limit individual freedom, failed. War on terrorism: tried to limit individual freedom (privacy): … dunno if it can be called a success. War on drugs: tried to limit individual freedom, so far successful. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/92 "2009-04-09T16:24:52Z")
> [@Maastricht](#): > > Perhaps the question might be rephrased in a politically neutral way. > > “In recent history, which social movements for greater individual freedom/self reliance succeeded, and which failed?” > > Racial segregration: tried to limit inidvidual freedom, failed. > Prohibition: tried to limit inidvidual freedom, failed. > Eugenics: tried to limit individual freedom (of procreation); failed. > Roe- vs Wade: tried to limit individual freedom, failed. > War on terrorism: tried to limit individual freedom (privacy): .. dunno if it can be called a success. > War on drugs: tried to limit individual freedom, so far successful. You do realize that that is a completely different question than the OP asked as the topic of this thread, right? It is indeed a good idea to frame the question in such a way as to clarify it away from the (shifting) political parties…which is probably why the OP did it. ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/93 "2009-04-09T17:46:59Z")
The trend over time is to become less restrictive in a broad sense. For instance, we’ve now had several presidents who will admit to smoking marijuana. However the marijuana laws are just as restrictive as ever. So in a “broad” sense we’ve now seen that smoking marijuana isn’t as harmful as people have made out. If one can grow up to be president and have smoked marijuana then how bad can it be? Well that’s the message, despite laws to the contrary. The American poltical scene swings back and forth. In the early 70s, liberal ideas seemed all but assured. We got rid of the death penalty, the ERA was only a few states from being law, gays started being seen. Of course then came AIDS, Ronald Reagan’s Conservatism, and gay rights had a set back, the death penalty was strengthened, and the ERA was all but forgotten. Now many of the ERA measures have been incorporated through common law. Similar to the way a constitutional amendment against child labour is dead because it’s now handled through regular law. The courts are swinging toward gay rights, we have a mixed race President, and the death penalty while still in force takes ages to carry out. But in a “BROAD” sense we have always moved toward liberal ideas, even if the laws aren’t reflecting it at the time. Remember the “Obama Revolution” isn’t really a new idea so much as an “I Hate George W Bush” thing, so let’s do everything 180º from what he did", type of thing. Similar to the way Ronald Reagan was a backlash against Carter. ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921/94 "2009-04-09T18:19:05Z")
The question certainly depends on how you define liberal and conservative, and “does/doesn’t maintain the status quo” doesn’t seem like a great way to do so for this question. The status quo includes plenty of stuff that isn’t remotely controversial, so maintaining it is hardly a conservative victory. Let me ask a different but related question, that may be more what the OP had in mind. **Has “less equality” ever won out over “more equality” in a case where there was a significant percentage of the population supporting each side?** In the cases of slavery, women’s suffrage, racial segregation, etc. it seems that the pro-equality side has always eventually won. Which bodes well for the same-sex marriage movement, I think. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-us-has-a-socially-conservative-view-ever-won-in-the-long-run/491921.md?page=4)