# Thinking Like a Conservative **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 30, 2015, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338 "2015-01-30T16:37:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/101 "2015-02-03T01:14:41Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > That’s the one I thought you might have meant. But, under that paradigm, the Confederacy was liberal and the Union conservative, as it was the Union that wanted to maintain the status quo of a single nation. If the South had won, it would have been the Confederate Revolution. Well, except that the Confederacy was mad that their minority of states was slowly losing the ability to control the majority of states. They were fighting for an antiquated status quo: slavery, the power of the state legislature, the power of land-owners, the preservation of an agricultural economy, etc. The Confederacy was both anti-democratic and virulently opposed to change. > [@](#): > > How liberal is it to say that states have no right to leave the union? Not very. You’re quite right there. The liberal ideal would be that anyone should be free to leave if they don’t want to stay. This only shows that there were more than one ideological divides involved. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/102 "2015-02-03T01:24:18Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > The liberal ideal would be that anyone should be free to leave if they don’t want to stay. By the way, the USA was closer to that ideal than the CSA. This is about right: [http://civilwartalk.com/threads/no-attack-on-fort-sumter.20495/](http://civilwartalk.com/threads/no-attack-on-fort-sumter.20495/) > [@](#): > > Lincoln believed time was on his side - that as cooler heads prevailed in the South the average Southerner would come to the realization that secession did nothing for him, and that this might lead to a movement to “rescind” secession. But he also seemed to be looking for ways to engage a peaceful secession, if it turned out that that’s what the people desired. In his inaugural address he flirted with the idea of a Constitutional amendment for the benefit of those who had grown “weary of the existing government”. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/103 "2015-02-03T02:13:36Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Wait a moment now, I protest. I thought hard about that one in light of the rules before posting it, and all I’m attacking is **Clothahump’s** posting style/history – isn’t that all fair game in GD? No, I don’t really think so. 1. You’re not attacking his post, you’re attacking him and his history. 2. It was completely a personal comment and not any form of attempt to engage the discussion at hand. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/104 "2015-02-03T04:44:07Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Do you have a cite to back this up? I’m not aware of any American colonist at the time who believed in the Divine Right of Kings. Not to say that no such existed, but I’d certainly need to see a good citation for what you’ve said here. Did I say “most American colonists” or “most Christians”? :dubious: Most of them were still living in Europe and most of those were undoubtedly still supporting their respective monarchies. > [@](#): > > The colonists were overwhelmingly Christian. And a lot of them wanted to make George Washington king. You can be a liberal and still be a Christian, and one way is to reject the very _conservative_ notion of the Divine Right of Kings–or monarch in general–in favor of Democracy. (Another way is to reject the authority of the Catholic Church. **ITR champion** , I would suggest you google “founding fathers anti-catholic”.) ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/105 "2015-02-03T04:50:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Or said they did, because, you know, the king might not like to hear otherwise . . . > > The course of the French Revolution showed the idea might not be as widely accepted as it had appeared to be. I could be wrong about a strict majority of the common people throughout Christendom believing in DROK in their heart of hearts, but it was what they were _expected_ to believe by the political authorities and the prevailing culture and that makes it a form of conservatism. ---
**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:** [February 3, 2015, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/106 "2015-02-03T05:16:15Z")
> [@sqweels](#): > > I could be wrong about a strict majority of the common people throughout Christendom believing in DROK in their heart of hearts, but it was what they were _expected_ to believe by the political authorities and the prevailing culture and that makes it a form of conservatism. And as pointed by historians, it was still expected outside England but much more so in colonies of other empires like the Spanish or the French as their kings had not suffered something like the Glorious Revolution. Then in the Spanish colonies the inquisition was enforcing those divine rights, there was still fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency…and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope… 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/107 "2015-02-03T14:38:10Z")
> [@sqweels](#): > > Did I say “most American colonists” or “most Christians”? :dubious: Most of them were still living in Europe and most of those were undoubtedly still supporting their respective monarchies. > > And a lot of them wanted to make George Washington king. > > You can be a liberal and still be a Christian, and one way is to reject the very _conservative_ notion of the Divine Right of Kings–or monarch in general–in favor of Democracy. > > (Another way is to reject the authority of the Catholic Church. **ITR champion** , I would suggest you google “founding fathers anti-catholic”.) You’re conflating monarchy and DRoK. Except for France, if anything, the widespread of concept of DRoK as an important political/social idea was waaaaay on the decline. THere was, still, a confusión of church-state boundaries, but DRoK was already packing. I’ll repeat, DRoK was in no way, even remotely, a factor (pro or con) in the Independence of the US or the Spanish colonies. > [@sqweels](#): > > I could be wrong about a strict majority of the common people throughout Christendom believing in DROK in their heart of hearts, but it was what they were _expected_ to believe by the political authorities and the prevailing culture and that makes it a form of conservatism. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/108 "2015-02-03T14:44:21Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > [Pat Buchanan and William Kristol have both been physically assaulted](http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7356248/ns/politics/t/pat-salad-buchanan-gets-doused-dressing/#.VM8NBHYvZV8) by left-wing activists while speaking at college campuses. And recently a professor who teaches “black cultural studies, pornography, and sex work” at UC Santa Barbara was [arrested for battery](http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2014/03/17/not-news-ucsb-prof-charged-destroying-pro-life-sign-unrepentant) after assaulting an anti-abortion activist. > > So yeah, if liberals are in favor of free speech and open exchange of ideas, some of them have an odd way of showing it. I’m sure there are plenty of other examples you could use, but that NBC article doesn’t say anything about Buchanan or Kristol being assaulted by “left-wing activists.” One might safely assume that Buchanan’s attacker leaned left, of course. ---
**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:** [February 3, 2015, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/109 "2015-02-03T14:53:27Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > You’re conflating monarchy and DRoK. > Except for France, if anything, the widespread of concept of DRoK as an important political/social idea was waaaaay on the decline. THere was, still, a confusión of church-state boundaries, but DRoK was already packing. > I’ll repeat, DRoK was in no way, even remotely, a factor (pro or con) in the Independence of the US or the Spanish colonies. Sure, tell others that we should ignore Richard E. Greenleaf, who was an eminent scholar of the Mexican Inquisition and former director of the Stone Center for Latin American Studies at Tulane University, and others. Not my problem if your you insist on an argument from ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/110 "2015-02-03T15:14:48Z")
Cross-posted from another thread, I notice liberal bastion _Mother Jones_ seems opposed to genetically modified sterile male mosquitoes being released in Florida. [As seen here.](http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/04/genetically-engineered-mosquitoes-oxitec) This seems sorta… anti-science. Eh? ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/111 "2015-02-03T15:47:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Cross-posted from another thread, I notice liberal bastion _Mother Jones_ seems opposed to genetically modified sterile male mosquitoes being released in Florida. > > [As seen here.](http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/04/genetically-engineered-mosquitoes-oxitec) > > This seems sorta… anti-science. Eh? Maybe they’re just pro-mosquito. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/112 "2015-02-03T15:50:58Z")
Actually, they explain their reasoning in the article you cite: > [@](#): > > But not everyone is convinced that this sort of approach is a silver bullet. “This technology hasn’t been properly tested, nor is it clear that it’s going to work,” says Eric Hoffman, who tracks genetic engineering issues for the environmental group Friends of the Earth. “The public isn’t being told the whole truth.” > > For starters, Hoffman says, no one quite knows what will happen to an ecosystem suddenly devoid of Aedes aegypti. Suppose a worse mosquito species takes over? Of particular concern is the so-called Asian tiger. One of the most invasive species in the world—and a potential dengue carrier—it breeds extremely rapidly and may require great quantities of pesticide to control. (Oxitec says it has an answer for that: Mutant Asian tigers are in the works, which raises the weird specter of an endless succession of engineered bloodsuckers.) > > Then there are the offspring that don’t self-destruct. Oxitec admits that a small percentage of its altered mosquitoes, including biting females, can survive in the lab without tetracycline. Introducing any new engineered species into the wild, Hoffman says, brings up the possibility that we may be allergic to it. Not anti-science, but cautious. Too cautious, I’m sure some would say, but YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/113 "2015-02-03T15:54:02Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > No, I don’t really think so. > > 1. You’re not attacking his post, you’re attacking him and his history. > > 2. It was completely a personal comment and not any form of attempt to engage the discussion at hand. I repeat my protest. I was attacking his **posting history.** That is **fair game.** My comment showed **Clothahump’s** posting history to be an **instance** of what the discussion at hand is about, and you know it. I will gladly cease and desist from this line of comment if a mod wishes it. But, **I want that warning withdrawn.** It’s not right. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/114 "2015-02-03T15:56:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Cross-posted from another thread, I notice liberal bastion _Mother Jones_ seems opposed to genetically modified sterile male mosquitoes being released in Florida. > > [As seen here.](http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/04/genetically-engineered-mosquitoes-oxitec) > > This seems sorta… anti-science. Eh? There were zero cases of dengue fever in the US from 1934 to 2009. Since then we’ve had two small localized outbreaks (both were in Key West.) You’ll also note that article points out that the CEO “doesn’t know whether its method can reduce dengue over the long term.” So this seems less “anti-science” than “cautious”. It’s not as though we’ve had 20 years of consensus about whether combating dengue with genetically engineered mosquitoes is a good idea. ETA: weirdly, Cal used the exact term I did. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/115 "2015-02-03T16:22:00Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > There were zero cases of dengue fever in the US from 1934 to 2009. Since then we’ve had two small localized outbreaks (both were in Key West.) You’ll also note that article points out that the CEO “doesn’t know whether its method can reduce dengue over the long term.” > > So this seems less “anti-science” than “cautious”. It’s not as though we’ve had 20 years of consensus about whether combating dengue with genetically engineered mosquitoes is a good idea. > > ETA: weirdly, Cal used the exact term I did. Apparently, “…The critics in that piece are known anti-GMO organizations (FOTE), and their criticisms are either not well founded or apply to pretty much any control strategy.” ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/116 "2015-02-03T16:33:30Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > There were zero cases of dengue fever in the US from 1934 to 2009. Since then we’ve had two small localized outbreaks (both were in Key West.) You’ll also note that article points out that the CEO “doesn’t know whether its method can reduce dengue over the long term.” > > So this seems less “anti-science” than “cautious”. It’s not as though we’ve had 20 years of consensus about whether combating dengue with genetically engineered mosquitoes is a good idea. > > ETA: weirdly, Cal used the exact term I did. But isn’t “cautious when confronted with untested changes” the definition of conservative many are using? > [@sqweels](#): > > I could be wrong about a strict majority of the common people throughout Christendom believing in DROK in their heart of hearts, but it was what they were _expected_ to believe by the political authorities and the prevailing culture and that makes it a form of conservatism. (I quoted you before but didn’t qrite anything) Exactly, but still you get the conslusion wrong. DRoK had been all the fad in the Middle Ages, but the 18th saw it massively falling from favor. Even if the concept still existed, it wasn’t really pinging most people’s radars. Even if religion/church were still important political figures, the specific concept of DRoK wasn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/117 "2015-02-03T16:48:19Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > But isn’t “cautious when confronted with untested changes” the definition of conservative many are using? I think that’s a fair description of conservatism generally. I’m not sure that it describes modern American conservatives well, other than social conservatives. Fiscal deregulation is certainly a form of “untested change” that US conservatives generally favor. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/118 "2015-02-03T16:50:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Apparently, “…The critics in that piece are known anti-GMO organizations (FOTE), and their criticisms are either not well founded or apply to pretty much any control strategy.” I’m glad that quotes from unidentified agencies can confidently be cited as categorically dismissive. I was beginning to worry there might be a believable reason behind the fears of the folks in that article. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/119 "2015-02-03T17:00:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Apparently, “…The critics in that piece are known anti-GMO organizations (FOTE), and their criticisms are either not well founded or apply to pretty much any control strategy.” I’m confused. Where does that quote come from? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338/120 "2015-02-03T18:00:28Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I’m confused. Where does that quote come from? From a poster in the above-mentioned cross-posted thread. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thinking-like-a-conservative/711338.md?page=7)