One Difference between Liberals and Conservatives

[bryant69]

This is a generality of course--it always is. But Conservatives believe in a mechanistic universe and Liberals believe in an Organic one.

The most obvious point of contention is how each side answers the question of why some people turn to crime.

Liberals point to environment; many if not most criminals become criminals because they are put in an environment where crime makes sense. For example a poor kid who is hungry turns to drugs as a way to allieviate his pain. Or a stock broker who realizes that everybody is ripping of their customers a little bit figures him doing it won't be too bad.

Note, though, this is not determinism. Lots of kids in bad environments don't turn to drugs. A few stock brokers don't rip off their customers. It's tendancy not prediction.

On the other hand, Conservatives believe that the tendancy to do evil is something ingrained. In other words those who are going to break the law do so because it's part of who they are, not because of their environment. (in this way, they write off the idea that if we wanted less crime we should make life less miserable for the poor and unemployed).

Both tendancies have their negative side; Liberals tend to be a bit too understanding of criminals, placing too much emphasis on environment (For the most part, people choose to committ crimes, even if they are in a bad situation). Conservatives tend to be wildly inconsistant in their policy towards crime (Seeing other criminals go to jail makes crime less likely, while having enough to eat has no effect).

Anyway what do you think?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Sir_Shrek]

1. I think it's tough...

...to put Libs here and Cons there definitively. For instance, I know plenty of cons who will say "Well, the kids a chip off the old block" when referring to a kid getting in trouble often because they have a parent that does so....in other words, an environmental consequence. Think of the politics of family values that cons promote.

[Butterflies]

2. Maybe.

I was thinking this morning about the word "harmony" and how it goes with my ideas of the Democratic Party. I see us as wanting to get along with eachother in society, and with the other countries of the world.

I see the Republican Party as much more "competitive". They now have control of all three branches of government, the corporate control of TV news and AM radio, and they fight everyday to beat us more and more. They won, but they can't stop fighting. It's destroying our country, and they can't see it because they are too focused on the competition.

[rock]

3. Yes. It's a gloss, a generalization, but I pretty much agree

[Smokie]

4. There be Cons, and there be Liberals

Liberals believe that good resides in everyone. Cons believe bad resides in everyone and they are the living proof of that belief.

Liberals think that if you made a mistake, you should not be hung for it. Cons believe that if you get caught and you have connections you should not be hung, no way.

Cons live in the shadow of their greatest fear: They are bad people and should be punished unless you can slip away from the law.

Examples: Enron, The Various TV Preachers, Assorted Congressmen, Nixon, Limbaugh, .... the list goes on and on....

[TreasonousBastard]

5. I always thought it was the other way around.

The idea of innate good and evil has always been around (with or without religion).

Conservatives tend to lean toward the innate good, and that leads them to their individualism and suspicion of communalism. Left to ourselves, we will tend to do the right thing. Acting in one's "enlightened self interest" will lead to the greatest good for all. Those who don't, of course, are entirely responsible for their own actions, and must be doomed to the various hells available.

Us liberals actually are suspicious of individualism, and tend toward the view that individuals are innately self-serving and little good can come of leaving people alone. We tend to believe that, left to themselves, individuals will tend to ruin it all. Self-interest is not really that enlightening.

Forget about the wingnut obsessions with what we do in our bedrooms or other nonsense. We liberals are the ones who insist on protections for the environment, the poor, edible food, safe products and workplaces and the other dreaded social programs that conservatives say are best dealt with by individual initiative.

The lines are constantly crossing, but we are the ones who consistantly look for communal approaches to solving problems caused by individuals. Government has been the handiest way to do this most of the time, and that drives the other guys nuts.

[Kanary]

7. Hi Smokie!

Welcome to D.U.!

:hi: :hi: :hi:

:toast:

I'm glad you posted that about liberals viewing people as basically good and conserves viewing people as basically bad. I thin it's quite accurate, and, as coincidence would have it, just posted the same thing on another forum, and then come here and see your same words.

I *do* believe this is at the core of our differences, and wish I was smart enough to figure out how to deal with it in practical matters. I do believe it helps to point it out to conserves, which I just did on the other forum. We shall see how that turns out. :)

I also think this helps to connect the prevalence of fundies with the right wing.

Kanary

[TreasonousBastard]

6. Religion doesn't really apply here, but...

the distinction between Calvinism and Catholicism, both of which affect our own culture might be a little illuminating.

Catholicism has historically understood that we are innately both innocent and evil, and that the evil part breaks out on a regular basis. It is a constant battle within ourselves to control this "old Adam." Dealing with the id, as it were, and similar to Islamic Jihad as it pertains to one's personal growth. Catholics have been pretty severe about some things over the years, but there has always been an underlying tendency to forgive trespasses and understand that no one can be pure as the driven snow.

Calvinsts, on the other hand, believe that some are predestined to be the "saved," and they are recognized by their pure and productive lives. One does not attain grace, and so one cannot fall from it. Criminals and other miscellaneous lowlifes are obviously not of the "saved" since the "saved" could not conceive doing such things.

This Calvinist thought was brought over here by the Puritans and has infected our history with the "Protestant ethic" tht remains today. Everyone is entirely personally responsible for everything they do or that happens to them.

Us libruls don't buy into that simplistic thinking, and are fully aware that while individuals may be ultimately responsible for what they do with their free will, individuals are often as not influenced by nurture as well as nature.