# Issues which conservatives need to listen more closely to liberals on **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 22, 2017, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989 "2017-04-22T15:31:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/141 "2017-04-24T22:08:03Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If liberals are so pro-scientist and pro-big government intervention, and conservatives are not, why does conservative support for nuclear power exceed liberal support by so large a margin? > > Regards, > Shodan Because conservatives are pro-profit. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/142 "2017-04-24T22:21:57Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > “You need to listen to us when we call you racist” is how Hillary lost the election. I personally thought “Hillary’s got this one in the bag, may as well stay home” played a bigger role than the ire of sensitive snowflakes who held their breath until the president turned orange, but it’s possible I’m being deceived by my own unflagging optimism and faith in humankind. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/143 "2017-04-24T22:27:26Z")
Yes, I’m sure rising death-rates for the white working-class had nothing to do with it.:dubious::rolleyes: ---
**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:** [April 24, 2017, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/144 "2017-04-24T22:44:26Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Should an individual provide for himself? Or does society have a role to play? If my neighbor falls off a ladder and needs first aid, should I drop what I’m doing and help charitably? Or should I look at his urgent need as a profit-making opportunity for me? > > Optimality lies somewhere between the extremes of socialist utilitarianism and Ayn Rand-libertarianism. I consider myself a centrist and can see pros and cons on each side. In a hyper-socialist society I might root for a right-wing society. In America, OTOH, the choice is between a centrist party and the party of lying kleptocrats — this is an easy choice to make. As just one example, I might be a fan of school vouchers if such a program could be trusted to help all schools. (And there seem to be some places around the country where vouchers are working well.) But it’s foolish to endorse vouchers in the general U.S. when the focus (mostly but not exclusively by one major party) is on increasing inequality and pandering to fraudsters who make campaign donations. > \*\* > First of all, I note that you write “government” instead of “society.” In another thread we might explore why you prefer the former term! The visceral hatred many right-wingers have for “government” — and their failure to understand that government is just the agency through which society acts — is one reason Americans can no longer communicate well with each other. \*\* > > I am not an ancient historian, but let’s explore your question a bit with Google. Mesopotamia was the locus of many well-organized ancient societies: > > I hope these accounts of ancient Mesopotamia dispense with the idea that society helping its sick and injured is some 20th-century Marxist development. > > While conservatives find moral lessons everywhere (“Am I _responsible_ for him?” “Does he _deserve_ medical care?”) I have more utilitarian values. It’s better that 250 million people have insurance than that only 200 million do. Getting the same value for less money, e.g. with judicious use of public policies, would make any health system more efficient. (If Obamacare has ruptured health-co profits, someone forgot to tell the Wall St. investors who have bid share prices to record levels.) > > Rising inequality of wealth and income is central to _many_ economic questions facing the U.S. today. Projected shortfalls in Social Security revenue has been attributed to the fact that well over half of income is now no longer subject to S.S. tax — it’s beyond the $118k ceiling or untaxed altogether. The top 00.1% of 2014 IRS returns reported 11.2% of the adjusted gross income. Almost half of that was reported by the top 00.01%. > > I am a centrist. When a vast collective services all the country’s medical needs, and rich people are unable to pay for better service, I will march with you on the Right, holding a sign that says “Free the Koch Brothers! Let them pay for medical care if they wish!” But this is not the direction politics needs to move to redress today’s problems. I am especially astounded that some think it is. Society does not act. Individuals act. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/145 "2017-04-24T22:48:27Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Society does not act. Individuals act. Typical atomistic individualist rhetoric. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/146 "2017-04-24T23:02:56Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Are you saying that this is the case in the poll I cited? If so, could you please cite your figures? > > I am still not following you. If a super-majority of people become liberal when polled about nuclear power, and liberals support science and government subsidies and PR campaigns and nuclear power, then why don’t we have science and government subsidies and PR campaign and nuclear power? > > Or put it this way - please name a nuclear power plant that liberals supported but conservatives opposed. > > Regards, > Shodan You have a point. Most of my fellow libs are irrationally opposed to nuclear power. I think the technology and quality control make safe nuclear power possible, and certainly if you compare coal to nuclear, coal definitely has killed more people than nukes ever would. So this is one issue where liberals can take a lesson from conservatives on. But only to a point, successful nukes require much government regulation and oversight, no libertarian nukes for me. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/147 "2017-04-24T23:07:22Z")
Still, point is well taken. We of the left would make a lot more headway if we adopted the decorum, civility, and straightforward candor of The Donald. It is true that honey draws more flies than vinegar, but it appears that shit works best of all. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/148 "2017-04-24T23:26:29Z")
> [@CaptMurdock](#): > > Because conservatives are pro-profit. So are most rational economic actors. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/149 "2017-04-24T23:28:32Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > … no libertarian nukes for me. C’mon, you could have your very own nuclear reactor. So could all of your neighbors. 😉 ---
**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:** [April 24, 2017, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/150 "2017-04-24T23:33:57Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > You have a point. Uh, I wonder why when he actually whooshed himself 🙂 Really, I was not claiming that when polls show 60% or more people opposed to nuclear plants or the dumps needed to deal with the use of nuclear power means that I think that all of them turn liberal. Nope, negative, negatory, nein, nangas. The point was that polls all over America show that self described liberals do make about a third of the population. Meaning that when a case like the Yucca Mountain disposal shows up showing 76% percent opposed it that it is more than just the liberals fault. That number does logically point to a high number of independents and conservatives that also opposed the project. [http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/169745-nevadas-yucca-mountain-a-dilemma-for-gop-hopefuls](http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/169745-nevadas-yucca-mountain-a-dilemma-for-gop-hopefuls) > [@](#): > > In contrast to GOP leaders in Congress, Jon Huntsman, Tim Pawlenty, Gary Johnson and Ron Paul have all come out in opposition to storing the nation’s nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain. Other Republican candidates, including Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann, have ripped the Obama administration’s effort to close Yucca. Mitt Romney, who won the 2008 Nevada GOP caucus, has not taken a firm stance on the controversial issue. > > The Hill contacted each of the 2012 Republican presidential campaigns, but most of them didn’t want to discuss the matter, opting not to return calls or emails. > > A 2008 poll found that 76 percent of Nevada voters were against the facility. > > “The candidates don’t want to come to Nevada and be labeled pro-Yucca,” University of Las Vegas political scientist David Damore said. “You’re only going to get in trouble.” As for Trump, last time someone wanted to ask he just punted. [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/299575-trump-punts-on-yucca-nuclear-waste-site](http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/299575-trump-punts-on-yucca-nuclear-waste-site) I also did point before at how even a Red state like Arizona made noises about starting a disposal place if Nevada was not going to do it. After some talk about it, now there is mostly silence. BTW I do agree about the point that many liberals should be ashamed of being so fearful but the point I was making is that seeing how Republicans took control of many legislative state houses one would then expect to see a lot of progress on the nuclear front if all conservatives and independents were supporting nuclear power. The point here is that they really do not need liberals… unless the problem is that there is also a mess of independents and conservatives that are opposed too. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2017, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/151 "2017-04-24T23:34:22Z")
Shit, my neighbors here in the trailer park have enough trouble cooking meth! ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2017, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/152 "2017-04-25T00:11:27Z")
> [@Beren\_Erchamion](#): > > If racists don’t like being told they’re racists, then maybe they should demonstrate some personal responsibility and stop being racists. > > But, of course, personal responsibility is anathema to conservatives. The problem is the social justice brigade keep shifting the goalposts on what “racism” is. Every sensible person (regardless of political affiliation) agrees that discriminating against people because of their ethnicity is extremely bad and wrong. Saying to someone “You’re black so we’re not hiring you” or “We’ve already got enough Indians working here, thanks”, or “Why would we hire you, Mexican person? You’re all lazy and feckless” is appalling and completely unacceptable. But calling someone racist for “cultural appropriation” or not agreeing strongly enough with the leftist view on something doesn’t help matters and dilutes the meaning of the word “racism” - as well as weakening the position of people using it. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2017, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/153 "2017-04-25T02:09:55Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > This seems contradictory. Something can’t be unlikely to occur and simultaneously closer than any other RCP to what would happen. Nevermind the fact that RCP8.5 and others existed well before Trump was elected. Of the four scenarios, which do you think is most likely? Of the four scenarios, what percent chance do you think each has to coming to pass? It’s not contradictory, and moreover, if the first part of that paraphrase of what I supposedly said doesn’t make sense, it’s because I never said it. We seem to be talking past each other, and the only thing I can think of is that you may not have the same understanding of “business as usual” as the meaning in these climate discussions. It doesn’t mean “what is likely to happen in the normal course of events”, it means “the trajectory that we are currently on – where we will end up if we don’t make major changes”. The concept here isn’t complicated. [Here is a paper](http://cses.washington.edu/db/pdf/snoveretalsok2013sec3.pdf) [PDF] that makes the following statement: “_… the high end is a “ **business as usual** ” scenario (RCP 8.5, SRES A1FI) in which emissions of greenhouse gases continue to increase until the end of the 21st century_”. Emphasis mine for clarity. Why does it make that statement? Take a look [at this graph](https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-05/global_emissions_trends_2015.png) of actual CO2 emissions.\* Then compare it with the RCP pathways. Which one does it resemble most closely? Right, RCP8.5. This is what is going to happen if we don’t start curbing emissions. RCP8.5 is the only scenario that assumes no significant emissions mitigation. All the other ones assume a significant degree of mitigation that we, globally, haven’t done yet. **That’s why it’s called “business as usual”.** The reason I don’t think “business as usual” is the likely scenario in the long term is because I believe, basically, that the large-scale emitter nations like the US, China, and India **are going to come to their senses** under pressure from international diplomacy, the scientific community, and the evidence of a worsening and destabilizing climate. **That’s why I don’t think “business as usual” is the likely outcome for the year 2100.** If you want my guess, I think we’re going to end up with something close to RCP6. And yes, I predict RCP6 despite more than 6 years of a Republican Congress and now a Trump administration, **because I’m convinced that Republicans have to change their tune on this key issue or get voted out** – America cannot go on living an anti-science counterfactual fantasy and buck the entirety of the industrialized world on a matter of major policy. – - These are emissions from fossil fuels, not all sources, just because it was a clear simple graph I had handy. Emissions from all sources look much the same, since fossil fuels are the dominant source of carbon emissions. > [@Bone](#): > > Business as usual cannot be worst case scenario. That’s the mistake I’ve been pointing out. It’s not a mistake. See above, particularly the graphs. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2017, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/154 "2017-04-25T02:20:39Z")
> [@Beren\_Erchamion](#): > > If racists don’t like being told they’re racists, then maybe they should demonstrate some personal responsibility and stop being racists. > > But, of course, personal responsibility is anathema to conservatives. [Right!](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/04/22/students-avoid-making-eye-contact-could-guiltyof-racism-oxford/) > [@](#): > > Students who avoid making eye contact with their peers could be guilty of racism, according to Oxford University’s latest guidance. > > The university’s Equality and Diversity Unit has advised students that “not speaking directly to people” could be deemed a “racial microaggression” which can lead to “mental ill-health”. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2017, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/155 "2017-04-25T02:22:38Z")
In other words, exactly the sort of thing I referred to two posts ago. Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![Beren\_Erchamion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/90ced4/32.png) [@Beren\_Erchamion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beren_Erchamion)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2017, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/156 "2017-04-25T03:42:59Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > The problem is the social justice brigade keep shifting the goalposts on what “racism” is. > > Every sensible person (regardless of political affiliation) agrees that discriminating against people because of their ethnicity is extremely bad and wrong. > > Saying to someone “You’re black so we’re not hiring you” or “We’ve already got enough Indians working here, thanks”, or “Why would we hire you, Mexican person? You’re all lazy and feckless” is appalling and completely unacceptable. > > But calling someone racist for “cultural appropriation” or not agreeing strongly enough with the leftist view on something doesn’t help matters and dilutes the meaning of the word “racism” - as well as weakening the position of people using it. Yeah, because it’s totally impossible that as time goes on we might become more aware of the pernicious effects of things that we hadn’t realized before! Our understanding of social dynamics is fixed and cannot develop beyond where it was in 1964! ---
**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:** [April 25, 2017, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/157 "2017-04-25T03:43:37Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > In other words, exactly the sort of thing I referred to two posts ago. Thank you. 😕 We became England? I mean, the examples I used before were to point out that many conservatives on developed nations out there do not see many of the items in the OP as rare or weird. There are more than a few of those points in the OP that the American conservatives ignore, but for many conservatives in Merry Old Britain many do think that it is really weird that Americans Conservatives do not listen even to them. Now, regarding this example, first it has to be mentioned that is not really coming from American liberals, so again, 😕 Second: **So I decided to search** for the ‘offensive material’ that is “advised to students” and I have to say that the document in context is not about things that are just imagined. Before the “offending” bits to The Telegraph that reporter mentioned, the newsletter mentions this: [http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/media/global/wwwadminoxacuk/localsites/equalityanddiversity/documents/newsletter/Equality\_&\_Diversity\_Newsletter\_trinity17\_web.pdf](http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/media/global/wwwadminoxacuk/localsites/equalityanddiversity/documents/newsletter/Equality_&_Diversity_Newsletter_trinity17_web.pdf) (PDF letter) > [@](#): > > Blind Spot: Hidden Biases of Good People or Project Implicit: implicit.harvard.edu > > One example of implicit > bias playing out and being countered > is described in a study which showed that > when the major symphony orchestras in > the US used blind auditions – where the > identity of the performer was hidden by a > screen – \*\*the likelihood of a woman being > hired increased by between 25% and > 50%. \*\* > > In another study, fictitious identical > CVs were assigned White-sounding > or African American-sounding names > and sent in reply to job adverts: **White- > sounding CVs received 50% more calls > to interview than African American ones.** Then the items mentioned by The Telegraph in context are not so weird. > [@](#): > > Some people who do these things may > be entirely well-meaning, and would be > mortified to realise that they had caused > offence. But this is of little consequence if > a possible effect of their words or actions > is to suggest to people that they may fulfil > a negative stereotype, or do not belong. > Again, we are working to address this by > raising awareness of this type of subtle > racism in our training. Indeed, as they point out, well meaning **staffers** might do this,\*\* and it is just a note in a newsletter that is clearly directed to university workers\*\*, **not to students** \* and not an order from the University, just a guideline from one department among items like “how to use public transportation” for the workers the newsletter is directed at. - This bit is really important as it shows that The Telegraph there is misleading their readers when they claimed that the students are the ones being told this. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2017, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/158 "2017-04-25T03:56:11Z")
Got me to wondering where **Bricker** got it, not thinking of him as a major Engelphile. Anglophile. Damn spellcheck… But of course. National Review. \*\*Oxford University: Avoiding Eye Contact Is Racist \*\* > **[Oxford University: Avoiding Eye Contact Is Racist | National Review](https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/04/oxford-university-avoiding-eye-contact-racist/)** > > According to Oxford University’s Equality and Diversity Unit, not making eye contact and “not speaking directly” to people are examples of racism. ---
**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:** [April 25, 2017, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/159 "2017-04-25T04:01:24Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Got me to wondering where **Bricker** got it, not thinking of him as a major Engelphile. Anglophile. Damn spellcheck… > > But of course. National Review. > > \*\*Oxford University: Avoiding Eye Contact Is Racist > \*\* > [Oxford University: Avoiding Eye Contact Is Racist | National Review](http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447006/oxford-university-avoiding-eye-contact-racist) And there you go, The National Review is also playing the misleading old game of [del]Telegraph[/del] Telephone… 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2017, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989/160 "2017-04-25T06:03:26Z")
> [@Beren\_Erchamion](#): > > Yeah, because it’s totally impossible that as time goes on we might become more aware of the pernicious effects of things that we hadn’t realized before! Our understanding of social dynamics is fixed and cannot develop beyond where it was in 1964! Who’s “We”, Kemosabe? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/issues-which-conservatives-need-to-listen-more-closely-to-liberals-on/784989.md?page=9)