I agree with some conservative positions like Americans have an individual right of freedom. I can and should be able to live my life in manner that I want to without the government forcing me to live it another way. I view things like LGBTQ rights fall under this surprising core conservative belief. Now most conservatives would view it as individual freedom mean they can be a racist bigot and discriminate, but that isn’t individual freedom.
I also agree with the concept of limited government, but from the view that government even in its best state is a necessary evil. It should not govern our everyday lives but it must serve the people. Government isn’t a power, it is a service that ultimately serves the people.
The government is a tool to ensure the good will, safety, and prosperity of the people. What we can’t achieve on our own gets done through the collective power of the government.
Liberals aren’t trying to force government on people, they’re trying to ensure that the rights of everyone take precedent over someone’s perceived “right” to discriminate.
Business aren’t moral entities and it should never be assumed that they will act as such. In fact, the basis by which one should assume a business will operate is on profits and profits alone.
Therefore, if you want to make business behave in any sort of moral fashion their behavior must be regulated and businesses with a history of societal harm must be highly regulated.
Based on these truths one must view with a highly skeptical eye anyone who wishes to broadly remove regulations without specificities as to which ones they want to remove and why the regulation is unnecessary. The belief that regulations are bad–generally speaking–is an inherently unethical and immoral position.
some conservative positions like Americans have an individual right of freedom.
That’s not a conservative position. Proof: Conservatives don’t want women to have the freedom to end their pregnancies (or just get basic prenatal care in general apparently). They also don’t want universities to have the freedom to choose who they admit based on race (trying to undo historical racism or to prevent a single race from taking over).
In Florida the conservative government removed the freedom of local government to decide how they handle a great many things from elections (can’t have them using ranked choice voting) to what they teach in schools (e.g. teaching about historical racism).
In other states with conservative governments they are banning books, limiting citizens right to sue for damages, making it harder for minorities to vote, and generally reducing the people’s power to change how their government is run. They’re very anti-democracy lately (it was talked about in the article).
What individual freedoms are liberals trying to take away? The historical record here is vastly in liberals favor.
This is silly analysis. They’re religious nuts and that supercedes their views on human rights. People refuse to use a consistent or sane definition of conservative. If you’re just gonna say “proof: thing that violates the very premise of their presumed identity” then fucking give up. You’re not criticizing any coherent model of thought, you’re engaged in shit slinging.
You didn’t justify any of those positions. I wouldn’t call most of them good and the only good one of them, “people should be treated equally,” is not at all a value conservatives have. Just ask one about giving trans people basic human dignity.
People should be treated equally. This one is obvious, even if we disagree on the details.
“The details” are “LGBT+ aren’t people.”
Viability?
Sounds good to me.
And your ancestors were probably immigrants unless you’re fully Native American, so maybe you shouldn’t complain about them. But if you’re Native American, yes. Immigrants have fucked you over for a long time.
I’m of the belief police should be disarmed and laws put in place that gun violence of any kind is a minimum 50 year sentence. Select police can be armed, but not everyday peace officers.
I’m of the belief that the act itself should be what’s considered. If you murder someone, it should be because you murdered someone, not because of what you used to murder someone with, whether that be a car, knife, or gun.
If you want a right-leaning platform then go find one with a small, toxic community, heavy censorship and immature leadership.
Find a place of freedom and somehow the majority ends up being considerate and liberal. You can come to your own conclusions about why that is but it seems pretty obvious to me.
Back in 2016, Hillary had both of those in which people were paid to go online and argue with people who said negative things about her. For example, someone could say “Hillary did X” and people who worked for either CTR or ShareBlue were paid to go and explain how the allegation was incorrect.
You have to remember that the people you are replying to are literally delusional.
Conservatives love to convince themselves that everyone else secretly think just like them. Any time someone doesn’t agree with them or they get pushback, they start blaming far-left minority groups. The funniest part is the “Correct the Record” idiocy(It was super pac that existed in 2015-2016 and they think it’s still secretly operating and influencing social media), which is such obvious projection that it’s literally funny. But they’re so stupid they think they’re being subtle…
I don’t hate republicans because I do know some in real life unfortunately and do tolerate their existence. However republicans definitely tend to have less capacity for critical thought. The only intelligent republicans I have known personally have been rich business owners, and I attribute their affiliation with greed/malice instead of stupidity.
Removed by mod
So what’s one good conservative position?
I agree with some conservative positions like Americans have an individual right of freedom. I can and should be able to live my life in manner that I want to without the government forcing me to live it another way. I view things like LGBTQ rights fall under this surprising core conservative belief. Now most conservatives would view it as individual freedom mean they can be a racist bigot and discriminate, but that isn’t individual freedom.
I also agree with the concept of limited government, but from the view that government even in its best state is a necessary evil. It should not govern our everyday lives but it must serve the people. Government isn’t a power, it is a service that ultimately serves the people.
Bro, that’s exactly what liberals want.
The government is a tool to ensure the good will, safety, and prosperity of the people. What we can’t achieve on our own gets done through the collective power of the government.
Liberals aren’t trying to force government on people, they’re trying to ensure that the rights of everyone take precedent over someone’s perceived “right” to discriminate.
Do you consider a business employing people to mutually ageed standards moral?
Business aren’t moral entities and it should never be assumed that they will act as such. In fact, the basis by which one should assume a business will operate is on profits and profits alone.
Therefore, if you want to make business behave in any sort of moral fashion their behavior must be regulated and businesses with a history of societal harm must be highly regulated.
Based on these truths one must view with a highly skeptical eye anyone who wishes to broadly remove regulations without specificities as to which ones they want to remove and why the regulation is unnecessary. The belief that regulations are bad–generally speaking–is an inherently unethical and immoral position.
Yeah. So literally using police to force shit is just bros being bros. Hiring someone to paint your fence, oppression. Got it.
deleted by creator
Just being reductionist doesn’t make it bad faith. I do appreciate your response and I’m sorry I just wasn’t into digging into weeds of justification.
It doesn’t really do any good to go back and forth and call our views when we have wild deviations at a very basic level.
That’s not a conservative position. Proof: Conservatives don’t want women to have the freedom to end their pregnancies (or just get basic prenatal care in general apparently). They also don’t want universities to have the freedom to choose who they admit based on race (trying to undo historical racism or to prevent a single race from taking over).
In Florida the conservative government removed the freedom of local government to decide how they handle a great many things from elections (can’t have them using ranked choice voting) to what they teach in schools (e.g. teaching about historical racism).
In other states with conservative governments they are banning books, limiting citizens right to sue for damages, making it harder for minorities to vote, and generally reducing the people’s power to change how their government is run. They’re very anti-democracy lately (it was talked about in the article).
What individual freedoms are liberals trying to take away? The historical record here is vastly in liberals favor.
This is silly analysis. They’re religious nuts and that supercedes their views on human rights. People refuse to use a consistent or sane definition of conservative. If you’re just gonna say “proof: thing that violates the very premise of their presumed identity” then fucking give up. You’re not criticizing any coherent model of thought, you’re engaged in shit slinging.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
You know people can actually see conservatives actions when it comes to these positions and know you are lying?
You didn’t justify any of those positions. I wouldn’t call most of them good and the only good one of them, “people should be treated equally,” is not at all a value conservatives have. Just ask one about giving trans people basic human dignity.
Removed by mod
“The details” are “LGBT+ aren’t people.”
Sounds good to me.
And your ancestors were probably immigrants unless you’re fully Native American, so maybe you shouldn’t complain about them. But if you’re Native American, yes. Immigrants have fucked you over for a long time.
The Native Americans are an excellent example of why immigration is bad. Look at what happened to them!
Are you going to give your home to one?
Our collective ancestors genocided a lot of Indians so we wouldn’t have to.
Having babies incurs costs and lowers wages. We need less workers to get paid more individually.
Apply the immigration argument to fetuses and they cancel out. Easy peasy. Fetus yeetus.
If you can’t see how bankrupt your reasoning is here I don’t know what to say.
I’m of the belief police should be disarmed and laws put in place that gun violence of any kind is a minimum 50 year sentence. Select police can be armed, but not everyday peace officers.
I’m of the belief that the act itself should be what’s considered. If you murder someone, it should be because you murdered someone, not because of what you used to murder someone with, whether that be a car, knife, or gun.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I mean 2 for 5 ain’t too bad I guess. I’m out here trying to defend you fucks and you come out with this idiocy.
what do you mean?
Removed by mod
Is it hateful, or just critical?
Removed by mod
How’s it hateful? At least in a way that modern right wing ideology isn’t?
ah, there’s the victimhood the article spoke of
You are aware that scientific studies have shown a clear correlation between conservative thinking and lower cognitive ability?
Removed by mod
Then try finding a single study that says the opposite.
Which tobacco studies?
Removed by mod
There’s nothing there about any studies claiming tobacco was good for you. Just finding doctors to say so.
Removed by mod
Here’s a history.com article. Maybe that’ll be more to you’re liking? https://www.history.com/news/cigarette-ads-doctors-smoking-endorsement
It’s hateful? How exactly?
Well I hated it!
--Michael Scott
Is basically what all the arguments I’ve seen boil down to
Poe’s law my dude.
This type of article is just absolute garbage
Fucking salon Jesus Christ
Let’s keep Rule 34 out of this. Thanks!
If you want a right-leaning platform then go find one with a small, toxic community, heavy censorship and immature leadership.
Find a place of freedom and somehow the majority ends up being considerate and liberal. You can come to your own conclusions about why that is but it seems pretty obvious to me.
I have no clue what either of those things are. Can you provide some more context?
Back in 2016, Hillary had both of those in which people were paid to go online and argue with people who said negative things about her. For example, someone could say “Hillary did X” and people who worked for either CTR or ShareBlue were paid to go and explain how the allegation was incorrect.
Wikipedia probably explains it better.
Whatever else happens on this whole entire thread, may I just offer kudos to YOU for linking to an actual wikipedia article:-).
Seconding u/openStars, the amount of blue text in this thread is too damn low
Removed by mod
Pointing out stupidity is now hateful? News to me, we used to just tell those people to shove it not give them a platform
You have to remember that the people you are replying to are literally delusional.
Conservatives love to convince themselves that everyone else secretly think just like them. Any time someone doesn’t agree with them or they get pushback, they start blaming far-left minority groups. The funniest part is the “Correct the Record” idiocy(It was super pac that existed in 2015-2016 and they think it’s still secretly operating and influencing social media), which is such obvious projection that it’s literally funny. But they’re so stupid they think they’re being subtle…
Sounds like the “are statistics hateful” rethoric
I don’t hate republicans because I do know some in real life unfortunately and do tolerate their existence. However republicans definitely tend to have less capacity for critical thought. The only intelligent republicans I have known personally have been rich business owners, and I attribute their affiliation with greed/malice instead of stupidity.