The conservative/Republican ideology is completely selfish. It’s about “me, me me”. The ideas and beliefs are all about maximizing both the individual’s and the corporations’ profits and personal comforts, at the expense of other people, the environment, whatever. Now, some people may like that, but that’s not the point.
Liberal/Democratic ideology, on the other hand, is inclusive and charitable. Whether you LIKE it or not, it IS about inclusion. It’s about charity, tolerance, a helping hand. It is NOT selfish. You may not like that, you mayu think it sucks, but it is what it is. The reason Dems are characterized as “tax and spend” isn’t because they want to spend it on themselves…they want to spend it on social programs.
Therefore, my assessment of the MOTIVES of rights vs. lefts is that Rights are not to be trusted.
This is constantly proven to me when I listen to to conservatives speak and argue. They have incredibly convenient and selfish logic.
So there.
(This is NOT about the various stands on the issues. Depending on the specific topic, you will find me agreeing with Dems, Repubs, Greens and Libertarians. But yes, I’m much more often in the liberal camp. When I vote, I vote what I believe is right, not what I want for ME. Considering my income level and the tax I pay, the obvious choice for me would be Republican. But I don’t base my choices on what is good for ME persoanlly, and that is precisely the difference between liberals and conservatives.)
It is not all that hard to be charitable with other people’s money.
Sure, as long as you are part of the Government recognized groups to be included. Would you include people who think homoexuality is a crime? How about racists? What about people who want to make their own personal decisions?
Shining examples of this boundless inclusion would be Jesse Jackson and Al Sharption. Oh yeah…this little rant would be another shining example of liberal inclusiveness and understanding.
This is commonly reffered to in conservative circles as buying votes. Of course they don’t even want to use their own money to buy those votes. They will be happy to steal from group A to buy the votes of group B.
Stoid, you have a basic lack of understanding of the conservative viewpoint. We want to be able to make our own decisions. We want to be able to succeed, and this includes having the risk of failing. We want to decide for ourselves who we will help. Passing off all social responsibility to a faceless federal gov’t in Washington is not how we want to decide who receives help and who doesn’t.
Big government is fundamentally corrupt and wastefull. Learn to trust the individual, and you may understand where conservatives are coming from.
What a ridiculous characterization in the first place.
Conservatives simply believe that concentrated power is not a good thing, and that individuals should be able to make their own decisions.
I’ve known lots of Liberals who were incredibly selfish, and I’ve known lots of Conservatives who were incredibly charitable. And vice versa.
I give a lot of time and money to charity. But I’d like to give it to the charity that I believe in, and not have my money taken from me and given to the charity that YOU believe in, if you happen to be in the majority.
As for inclusion and tolerance… PLEASE. I could easily make the case that Conservatives, who generally favor smaller government (an institute of force), are far more ‘inclusive’ than those of you who would use that force to determine where my child can go to school, how many people of a certain ethnic origin I must hire, how much I can pay someone, which charities I support, how I will provide for my retirement, which people I can trade with, etc. You want to make these decisions for me by FORCE. That’s not very tolerant of you.
Of course, the truth is different. It’s easy to find nasty characterizations for people who have different philosophical beliefs. It’s far more productive to try to understand their point of view rather than to ridicule it.
Here’s a generalization for you that I think used to be fairly accurate - “Republicans think Democrats have bad IDEAS. But Democrats think Republicans are bad PEOPLE.”
In the Clinton era I don’t think this is true any more, but your attitude certainly helps support it.
Republicans are selfish
Blondes are ditzes
Football players use steroids
Dutch all make cheese
Blacks are thieves
Rednecks are prejudice
Corporations want to destroy the earth
Jews are moneygrubbers
Gays want to have sex with kids
Indians are untrustworthy
Soldiers are bloodthirsty
Girls just want to have fun
Libertarians are anarchists
Socialists are Nazis
Police are brutes
Priests are pedophiles
French are xenophobic
Canadians can’t speak
The English are fops
Arabs are terrorists
Al Gore and Bill Clinton are charitable and unselfish people. Generous they are the soul of kindness and discretion who lead us and protect us for our own failings.
Of course any means we use to put these people in power, fair or otherwise are just.
Nice worldview babes.
I am not going to debate the relative merits of the conservative vs. the liberal viewpoint. You have proven my original point with this statment:
"It is not all that hard to be charitable with other people’s money. "
My point, again, was this:
The conservative ideology is about self/profit.
The liberal ideology is not.
Stated in the extreme, it’s capitalists vs. socialists.
I think the MOTIVES of the socialist thinker are kinder, gentler, and unselfish. The MOTIVES of the capitalist are utterly selfish.
For the record, I think that capitalism is the only workable system, because it is the only one that deals honestly with human nature. But again, that’s not my point.
Well, I would venture a guess that I probably make 2 or 5 times as much money as you do, and I almost certainly pay more taxes. (I make that judgement simply based on where I fall statistically on the economic scale, not as any assessment of you personally.)
And it hasn’t changed a thing about my liberal heart.
I don’t know who said it, but I do not subscribe to the famous idea:
“If you aren’t a liberal when you’re 20, you have no heart. If you aren’t a conservative when you’re 40, you have no brain.”
Again and again, when conservatives rant, they rant about selfish matters.
The best path is the middle path. If the far left succeeds, and government regulation is carried too far, we wind up opressed and controlled by the government. If the far right succeeds, and there is no government regulation at all, we wind up opressed and controlled by the wealthy and powerful.
Hence, I tend toward the moderate Democratic approach.
Sam, Freedom - right on. Scylla, you are my new hero.
Can someone tell me how and when the U.S. Democratic party claimed the moral high-ground for all time?
I don’t think any political party has the monopoly on truth, justice, and the American way.
Since when did race-baiting and inciting hatred of people who have achieved the American dream of wealth earn you a halo and a name as “the party of inclusion”?
Since when are you an evil person if you don’t support a law or a social program to fix every single problem in the USA?
I am not a Republican, never will be. But excuse me if I fail to bow before the shining moral glory that is the Democratic party.
Let’s see, let’s take our current reigning champions of selflessness, Hillary and Bill.
Both of them are champions of the Liberal cause. In the 1980’s both of them railed against greed, selfishness, tax dodges for rich people, the S&L crisis, etc.
During this time, they were rich. During this time, they used every trick in the book to minimize how much tax they had to pay, going to such exents as ‘donating’ used underwear to charity and then writing the underwear off as a charitable donation.
During this time, Hillary managed to turn $10,000 into $100,000 in a questionable stock deal.
During this time, the Clintons were embroiled in the middle of an S&L fraud involving Whitewater, and Mrs. Clinton represented the crooks involved, who were also personal friends.
So much for good Liberals being charitable and unselfish. At least, not with their own money.
Would you like more examples, or will you perhaps consider that there is more to the conservative/liberal ideological split than just selfishness?
Unless, of course, you’re a homosexual. Then you don’t get the same freedoms as everybody else.
Or if you’re a non-Christian in a Christian area (or even a Christian of a different type). Then you don’t get the same freedoms as everybody else.
I could go on for a while, but I hope you get my point.
Conservatives aren’t for overall freedom. They are for certain freedoms. Those who are currently considered liberals are for other freedoms but may be against some of the others.
I would think that a guy using that particular pseudonym would know that…
"Unless, of course, you’re a homosexual. Then you don’t get the same freedoms as everybody else. "
You were the one that warned me that using extremists to characterize an entire group was unfair and disingenuous, and made you a giant poopy head if you did it.
That is not Conservative thought. That is bigotry hiding under Conservatism.
It’s not conservative thought? I bet Bush and Cheney and many other Republicans (though obviously not the Log Cabin Republicans) would disagree with you.
I could have added:
Unless you want to have the freedom to control your own body. Then they don’t want you to have that freedom.
(This applies to both abortion and drugs, incidentally.)