What's the conservative equivalent of the "regressive left?"

(The “regressive left” denoting some liberals who hold ‘liberal’ views that actually run counter to liberalism - for instance, opposing “Islamophobia” or supporting cultural-tolerance to the point of ignoring Islam’s treatment of women and gays, or liberals who don’t mind authoritarianism if it’s done by leftist folks such as Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez, or the recent effort by Antifa and some other folks on the left to oppose free speech - free speech has historically been a ‘liberal’ cause.)

Some conservative counterparts seem to be:
[li]Reaganomists who don’t mind deficit spending (conservatives should be in favor of reducing the national debt);[/li][li]Neocons who are aggressive foreign interventionists even though traditional conservatism is rather isolationist;[/li][li]Hawks who support unnecessary defense spending;[/li][li]Folks who support crony capitalism or corporate welfare;[/li][li]Republicans who support Trump (Trump is one of the most un-conservative Republican presidential candidates of all time);[/li][li]Using an extreme fringe example, Westboro Baptist saying “Thank God for dead soldiers” even though conservatives should be in support of the military.[/li][/ul]

What else?

tastes the water That well-poisoning sure worked quickly…

What type of orange is equivalent to Granny Smith apples?

The “Progressive Right”?

Liberalism stands for free speech and free markets. To the extent it survives in America in 2017, it is largely among libertarians and social liberals who have abandoned parts of the economic side of it. So to speak of the illiberal left is to refer to people whose politics are left, usually on economics, but who also reject some aspects of liberalism, usually related to civil liberties.

The ideological content of conservatism is epistemic humility and respect for tradition (partly as a consequence of that epistemic humility). So un-conservative conservatives are people who advocate for radical social change or claim that they know the truth about what will cause society to do X or Y. That’s a huge swath of people who identify as conservatives, most prominently neoconservatives, but also including people who, for example, want to radically lower the number of foreign-born people in the US.

I could see Richard’s argument if we were talking about the “illiberal left.” But the term is the “regressive left.” They aren’t attacking modern liberalism, but modern progressivism. The claim is basically that what we are now pushing as progress is actually making things worse. It is calling progressives hypocrites who are actually increasing racism/bigotry/whatever with their ideas.

So I think the first place to look is hypocrisy on the Right. And it needs to have to do with social areas, since progressivism is socially left. So I think you’d have to go with the Immoral Right. Those for whom morality is not a concern, despite claiming it to be so. So it would largely be the Evangalical Right at this point. You know, the group that’s supporting Trump.

It could also be those who call liberals “snowflakes” and hate “safe spaces,” but then want the latter and get easily offended like they claim about the former. That’s still a social arena.

That is, if we’re looking for something that really exists. The epithet is, of course, a gross misstatement and exaggeration of the actual Progressive left. It largely arises from ignoring the actual points they make, and instead substituting your own strawman beliefs.

Problem is, given how the Right is going right now, I hvae a hard time coming up with something like that. Before, I would have used something like Nazis or fascists, but those groups do actually exist on the Right now.

Best I can offer is using “alt-right” for anyone who is on the right, instead of reserving it for white supremacists. It’s a fallacy to assume that both sides must have equal opposites.

That’s only for physics.

Republicans who hate “big government” and love “freedom” but still cheer Trump on while he rolls back civil liberties, installs a shadow state, and tries to destroy the right to vote.

What they’ve learned is that people will keep supporting them as long as they’re told they’re winning.

I think there’s a schism on the left between old-fashioned liberals who champion civil liberties and a new wave that sees social justice as more important than individual liberties. It might be irredeemable.

The “regressive left,” huh? Guess that’s the hot new thing on Fox and Friends.

Seriously, this seems to be all about the right’s desperate need to find someone on the left to demonize, and make out to be way more significant than it is.

I think this is it. There is a large contingent of Republicans who are less concerned with morality than ever, especially the alt-right - however, at the same time, some conservatives paradoxically supported an immoral candidate (Trump) because they felt his election would help further moral issues (i.e., get Gorsuch onto SCOTUS, help overturn *Roe, Obergefell, *etc.) They’d rather have a guy like Pence as POTUS than Trump, though.

It’s not a new term, actually, it’s been around for a while, mostly since 2012.

Frankly, with all of the Anti-ism that has taken the place of actual policy in modern politics, looking for validation for ANY of the now plentiful “disguised insult” names that people come up with in order to pretend that they are being thoughtful (when they are instead simply spewing unsupported invective), is a bit on the futile or even ingenuous end of things.

It’s been true for some time now, that the terms “liberal,” “conservative,” “left,” and “right,” really don’t mean even what the people SAYING THEM AT THE TIME, are pretending they mean.

Most of the time, if you substitute the phrase “people who I don’t like and refuse to get to know” for pretty much any label someone uses in an attack, you’ll get much closer to the truth of whatever their fuss is about.

If you are asking about conservatives who aren’t actually loyal to conservative values, and are just loyal to their tribe, I’d say Trump supporters are a major example.

Trump does share some conservative values (patriarchal white nationalism and an America first philosophy) but he is a deeply immoral, incompetent, corrupt human being. The religious right supporting him and people claiming they value competence in government are engaged in hypocrisy for supporting him.

I agree that what the OP discusses about failures of the left are valid concerns. People who claim to be liberal but then get upset when you point out that Islamic nations lag the world in human rights, women’s rights, political rights, minority rights, etc. are not espousing true liberal values. Same with supporting authoritarianism as long as it is leftist.

That is not accurate at all. It is a real term with academic roots and lots of justification even among other Leftists. It doesn’t mean all Leftists. The full explanation is long but the basic idea is that some Leftists have become so totalitarian (and insane IMO) that they no longer represent traditional Leftist values. One of the key complaints is that the guilty ones have gone full-circle and now promote segregation and divisiveness. I can certainly see that from my front porch.

The semi-equivalent term on the Right is “The Alt-Right” (aka Trump supporters). They aren’t Right at all (no pun intended). Many of them aren’t even traditional Republicans just like Trump isn’t. It is just a populist movement that includes many different types of people (a few of them really are “deplorable” but most are not).

I don’t want to get into a No True Scotsman argument but there are still many conservatives on this board of many different stripes including me in my own weird way but there are very few of us that identify at all with the Alt-Right but we do have a minority of members that tend to promote Regressive Left ideas.

Lot’s of people think lots of things. Why should I care what you think?

In other words, do you have the slightest bit of evidence to support this, fairly obviously, incorrect assertion?

Because it is respectful and most people have something meaningful to contribute to any dialogue. You were just flat-out rude to a person you don’t even know personally. That is a hallmark of the Regressive Left as well several other other fringe groups. Why don’t you just ask someone about their opinions politely? You may not agree with them but that is hardly the crime of century. People are allowed to have different opinions in the U.S. because they have different experiences than you do. They also may not be like you assume them to be.

Congratulations, you just showed the why this thread exists. Small-mindedness exists in many different forms.

You must be under the impression that this is a special snowflake polite dialogue forum. It is not. It is a debate forum. The poster had a chance to explain his opinion in the post in which he stated it. He chose not to. I am under no obligation to gently hold his hand and tease out the reasoning behind his ill informed opinions.

Speaking of which…

Why do you hold this goofy opinion? You could have supported it, but you didn’t.

I have been here for over 17 years and I am not under the impression of anything. It takes a lot more than that to impress me. You are going to have to do much better than that.

I hold many goofy opinions but this isn’t one of them. I just find incredibly odd that some people on the Far Left promote re-segregation and love the idea of dubious self-selected identity politics that has no basis in much of anything and causes election losses.

I honestly just think that you aren’t debating in good faith. Your strategy seems to be insulting other posters based on your own biases. No, we don’t do that here. I and many other posters will try to question your own biases and prejudices as long as you can keep an open mind in the real sense. That is admittedly very difficult but I think you are smart enough to be receptive to the general idea.

It is going to be difficult but I am confident you can do it as long as you make it a goal. Can you give us some real ideas rather than just insulting those of others? You sound rather weak intellectually in this thread.

I’ve been here longer than you, and nobody cares.

Why, instead of defending your goofy opinion about the hallmarks of the regressive left, did you advance an even goofier opinion about resegregration. Sure there might some extremely minor fringe groups who support something that might, if you squint in the dark, look something like re-segregation.

On the right, however, it’s pretty mainstream. There are actual real efforts by real elected officials to resegregate schools right now. These guys aren’t lefties.

Here’s a link. Enjoy.

Let me make this really simple. Even some of us on the slightly conservative side really wish with all our hearts for everyone just to do the best job they can and for everyone to get along. There are some hippie type liberals that feel the same way and I can almost emphasize with them. What I can’t empathize with is the new Radical Left including Occupy and Black Lives Matter. They may have some point buried deep inside their message but their presentation and approach is so bad that it will only lead to more conflicts and deaths. I cannot and will not support that.

I am 44 years old and friends with all different types all around the world. I have never been a social activist. All I want to do is hang out with my kids, do my job and have fun. Anyone that interferes with that goal going to be met by force. That is their doing, not mine. My job is to help people in general for very serious injuries all over the U.S. and I do it well. Leftists and Progressives are antagonists by their very nature and want to piss people off. No, I will hurt those little arrogant piss-ants right back because they don’t know what they are talking about.

Most importantly, I am not an asshole or poser in person like many people that claim to be “Leftists” or “Progressives”. I don’t think I have ever met a Leftist in my life that didn’t have a serious mental disorder. There may be some out there and there is nothing wrong with special viewpoints but I have talked with them and every single one has been in the psychiatric ward for a while. It is better to deal with reality than the world that you wish exists.