Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

I need to talk to more liberals.

Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2015 12:11:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Ah, topic character limits. The w/ is with. I was listening to NPR's On Point with the Guy That Hosts It. Tom Ashcroft? They were talking about Hillary running, and what Conservatives think, and how dreadfully unpopular their ideas are, despite particular ones gaining traction. And then they went into how Conservatives think and why. If you took Conservative as defined by the panelists (all liberal, it seemed), I would barely be Conservative. I think their definition of Conservative was to have no goals or some other ill-informed definition that had no bearing on any Conservative idea. I came to the conclusion that the panelists live under well-appointed rocks in some liberal enclave, with no meaningful contact with anyone with an opposing viewpoint, at least no Conservatives. Because if they did, MAYBE they'd understand why we think and how we think. If you're going to talk about something as a panelist, it might be a good idea to do your homework, but apparently the people who write their checks disagree.

But anyway, I realized that I probably do the same thing. I kind of live in a Conservative enclave, and I don't really talk to many liberals, let alone run into them. So as frustrating as it can be sometimes, I need to talk to some people who completely disagree with me on politics. Not looking for a fight, just need to understanding so I don't sound like those panelists on NPR.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
SirCrona
Posts: 139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2015 3:21:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
American liberalism is closest to the economic beliefs of mainstream European politics, i.e. citizens' acess to economic needs should be protected (via welfare and poverty programs) preservation of a free and competitive market that works to the boon of consumers, but does not have the power to exploit or control employees or consumers (a Keynesian economic idea. "Companies play by the rules, customers and employees win." is the general idea.) That's all i can describe in the way of economics. Just google "Social democracy" or "Nordic Capitalism" and you'll find LibEcon in a nutshell.

Socially, American liberals differ from the eastern use of the word (liberal usually means something like libertarian in other English speaking countries.) Liberal social views are based largley on egalitarian philosophy and unhindered self expression. A big part of American liberalism is the concept of identity politics. IP isn't adopted by everyone, but it is at practiced in at least some form by the vast majority of mainstream liberals. IP incorporates social issues that arise because of social or economic class, race, sex, gender expression or identity, sexuality, or religion into one's rhetoric and policy. The rejection of IP is not necessarily against social justice or the denial of institutionalized discrimination, however; It just means that these problems are not considered in your rhetoric, policies, or both.
Currently, mainstream American liberalism's social agenda involves:
-Reform and expansion of welfare and other antipoverty programs (Ties back into economics)
-Demilitarization of the police force
-Protection of civil rights for gays, lesbians, and transgender individuals
-Allow unabridged access contraception and reproductive health needs
-Streamline the immigration and naturalization process

That's as objective of a description I can give. I'll be happy to discuss further, I'm probably going to lurk this thread viciously anyway.
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2015 6:09:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/16/2015 3:21:08 PM, SirCrona wrote:
American liberalism is closest to the economic beliefs of mainstream European politics, i.e. citizens' acess to economic needs should be protected (via welfare and poverty programs) preservation of a free and competitive market that works to the boon of consumers, but does not have the power to exploit or control employees or consumers (a Keynesian economic idea. "Companies play by the rules, customers and employees win." is the general idea.) That's all i can describe in the way of economics. Just google "Social democracy" or "Nordic Capitalism" and you'll find LibEcon in a nutshell.

Socially, American liberals differ from the eastern use of the word (liberal usually means something like libertarian in other English speaking countries.) Liberal social views are based largley on egalitarian philosophy and unhindered self expression. A big part of American liberalism is the concept of identity politics. IP isn't adopted by everyone, but it is at practiced in at least some form by the vast majority of mainstream liberals. IP incorporates social issues that arise because of social or economic class, race, sex, gender expression or identity, sexuality, or religion into one's rhetoric and policy. The rejection of IP is not necessarily against social justice or the denial of institutionalized discrimination, however; It just means that these problems are not considered in your rhetoric, policies, or both.
Currently, mainstream American liberalism's social agenda involves:
-Reform and expansion of welfare and other antipoverty programs (Ties back into economics)
-Demilitarization of the police force
-Protection of civil rights for gays, lesbians, and transgender individuals
-Allow unabridged access contraception and reproductive health needs
-Streamline the immigration and naturalization process

That's as objective of a description I can give. I'll be happy to discuss further, I'm probably going to lurk this thread viciously anyway.

How does the immigration streamlining fit into your philosophy? What is the purpose?

(Sorry it took so long to respond.)
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2015 8:50:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/20/2015 6:15:24 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Good on you for trying to expand your horizons! Many people today don't make it that far.

My perception of the assumption about Conservatives is that we are closed minded. I find that most people are closed minded. Allow me to demonstrate:

I've found that acupuncture is more effective than modern medicine for several conditions.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
SirCrona
Posts: 139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2015 12:24:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/20/2015 6:09:01 PM, Skynet wrote:
How does the immigration streamlining fit into your philosophy? What is the purpose?

(Sorry it took so long to respond.)

Mine specifically? I mean, our current system is broken six ways from Sunday and tha's reason enough for me. The purpose is that the U.S. is probably one of the best countries in the world and gaining the rights of a citizen shouldn't be the labrynthian mess it is today. Other people see it as a civil right issue and think that the system is the result of anti Mexican racism, which I don't buy into 100% but wouldn't dismiss outright considering a pattern of racist tendencies in anti immigration conservatives. The fact that it stinks currently is the biggest reason i can see.
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2015 12:32:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/16/2015 12:11:21 AM, Skynet wrote:
Ah, topic character limits. The w/ is with. I was listening to NPR's On Point with the Guy That Hosts It. Tom Ashcroft? They were talking about Hillary running, and what Conservatives think, and how dreadfully unpopular their ideas are, despite particular ones gaining traction. And then they went into how Conservatives think and why. If you took Conservative as defined by the panelists (all liberal, it seemed), I would barely be Conservative. I think their definition of Conservative was to have no goals or some other ill-informed definition that had no bearing on any Conservative idea. I came to the conclusion that the panelists live under well-appointed rocks in some liberal enclave, with no meaningful contact with anyone with an opposing viewpoint, at least no Conservatives. Because if they did, MAYBE they'd understand why we think and how we think. If you're going to talk about something as a panelist, it might be a good idea to do your homework, but apparently the people who write their checks disagree.

But anyway, I realized that I probably do the same thing. I kind of live in a Conservative enclave, and I don't really talk to many liberals, let alone run into them. So as frustrating as it can be sometimes, I need to talk to some people who completely disagree with me on politics. Not looking for a fight, just need to understanding so I don't sound like those panelists on NPR.

Go to the polls section, it's overrun by liberals.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2015 6:29:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/22/2015 12:32:33 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 4/16/2015 12:11:21 AM, Skynet wrote:
Ah, topic character limits. The w/ is with. I was listening to NPR's On Point with the Guy That Hosts It. Tom Ashcroft? They were talking about Hillary running, and what Conservatives think, and how dreadfully unpopular their ideas are, despite particular ones gaining traction. And then they went into how Conservatives think and why. If you took Conservative as defined by the panelists (all liberal, it seemed), I would barely be Conservative. I think their definition of Conservative was to have no goals or some other ill-informed definition that had no bearing on any Conservative idea. I came to the conclusion that the panelists live under well-appointed rocks in some liberal enclave, with no meaningful contact with anyone with an opposing viewpoint, at least no Conservatives. Because if they did, MAYBE they'd understand why we think and how we think. If you're going to talk about something as a panelist, it might be a good idea to do your homework, but apparently the people who write their checks disagree.

But anyway, I realized that I probably do the same thing. I kind of live in a Conservative enclave, and I don't really talk to many liberals, let alone run into them. So as frustrating as it can be sometimes, I need to talk to some people who completely disagree with me on politics. Not looking for a fight, just need to understanding so I don't sound like those panelists on NPR.

Go to the polls section, it's overrun by liberals.

Most people here are probably liberal. Reading poll answers is different than conversing, though.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2015 6:33:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/22/2015 12:24:55 PM, SirCrona wrote:
At 4/20/2015 6:09:01 PM, Skynet wrote:
How does the immigration streamlining fit into your philosophy? What is the purpose?

(Sorry it took so long to respond.)

Mine specifically? I mean, our current system is broken six ways from Sunday and tha's reason enough for me. The purpose is that the U.S. is probably one of the best countries in the world and gaining the rights of a citizen shouldn't be the labrynthian mess it is today. Other people see it as a civil right issue and think that the system is the result of anti Mexican racism, which I don't buy into 100% but wouldn't dismiss outright considering a pattern of racist tendencies in anti immigration conservatives. The fact that it stinks currently is the biggest reason i can see.

In order to conclude it's that broken, you'd have to know what the goal of the immigration system is, and show that it isn't achieving those goals.

So what is the goal of the immigration system, and how does it fail to accomplish that/those goals?
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
ButterCatX
Posts: 2,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2015 6:37:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
There's way too many liberals where I am, you can have some.
I bet fanfics are already being posted on random blogs about us.-Vaarka

Butters preformed his duty to the town and died with honor, he helped us kill scum, so we know have to go and make sure his death wasn't in vain and win this game for him.-lannan13

All hail the great and mighty Butters, who died for our inactive cause.-Vaarka

fuckith offith, lol.-Ore(talking to me)

And guess what happened to FT? He got raped to death.-Xlav

You are so obviously town I love you man.-VOT
Voxol
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2015 7:51:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/16/2015 12:11:21 AM, Skynet wrote:
Ah, topic character limits. The w/ is with. I was listening to NPR's On Point with the Guy That Hosts It. Tom Ashcroft? They were talking about Hillary running, and what Conservatives think, and how dreadfully unpopular their ideas are, despite particular ones gaining traction. And then they went into how Conservatives think and why. If you took Conservative as defined by the panelists (all liberal, it seemed), I would barely be Conservative. I think their definition of Conservative was to have no goals or some other ill-informed definition that had no bearing on any Conservative idea. I came to the conclusion that the panelists live under well-appointed rocks in some liberal enclave, with no meaningful contact with anyone with an opposing viewpoint, at least no Conservatives. Because if they did, MAYBE they'd understand why we think and how we think. If you're going to talk about something as a panelist, it might be a good idea to do your homework, but apparently the people who write their checks disagree.

But anyway, I realized that I probably do the same thing. I kind of live in a Conservative enclave, and I don't really talk to many liberals, let alone run into them. So as frustrating as it can be sometimes, I need to talk to some people who completely disagree with me on politics. Not looking for a fight, just need to understanding so I don't sound like those panelists on NPR.

So how would you define your typical "Liberal"?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 10:11:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/16/2015 12:11:21 AM, Skynet wrote:

Talking is overrated.
Listening to others would help, but conversing only helps if they are honest, and they can hardly speak for all liberals.
I would recommend listening to Thom Hartman and Norman Goldman for reasonable ones, and Ed Schultz and Mike Malloy for unreasonable ones.
My work here is, finally, done.
SirCrona
Posts: 139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 1:45:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/22/2015 6:33:13 PM, Skynet wrote:

In order to conclude it's that broken, you'd have to know what the goal of the immigration system is, and show that it isn't achieving those goals.

So what is the goal of the immigration system, and how does it fail to accomplish that/those goals?

That's subjective, but the objective function of immigration is to make foreigners US citizens. I'd say requiring knowledge such as every US president in history in order, advanced American political science, and perfect, academic fluence of the English language is an inefficient practice, wouldn't you?
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 8:46:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/22/2015 6:37:16 PM, ButterCatX wrote:
There's way too many liberals where I am, you can have some.

No thanks. I like living in an area where how I vote and the election results line up. Makes it feel like my vote counts.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
Pythasis
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 9:15:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
That's big of you. I'm a liberal if you ever want to message me, I've been meaning to do some similar things with conservatives.
-Liam
"Love the art in yourself, not yourself in art" -Constantine Stanislavsky
"Knowledge, without imagination, is just a list of ingredients - and a list of ingredients does not a cookie make." -Danny Grozdich
www.youtube.com/MusiruneProductions
Debates that need voting:
N/A
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 9:18:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/23/2015 1:45:34 PM, SirCrona wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:33:13 PM, Skynet wrote:

In order to conclude it's that broken, you'd have to know what the goal of the immigration system is, and show that it isn't achieving those goals.

So what is the goal of the immigration system, and how does it fail to accomplish that/those goals?

That's subjective, but the objective function of immigration is to make foreigners US citizens. I'd say requiring knowledge such as every US president in history in order, advanced American political science, and perfect, academic fluence of the English language is an inefficient practice, wouldn't you?

Which part is subjective?

I disagree with your analysis of the goal of the immigration system. The reason there has to be all these exams and re-education before citizenship is to:
1) Make sure we know who's trying to get in
2) Weed out those who are not compatible with citizenship

If our goal was to just naturalize more citizens, we wouldn't have made it so hard in the first place.

The multicultural ideas that we have in the US today don't work, and it's something I harp on a lot on DDO. We need one united culture. George Washington, in his farewell address, (actually, a farewell editorial) said that one of the biggest strengths of the US was its mostly homogenous culture. Mostly one religion, mostly one language, one common moral code, common legal traditions. They did not have, nor did they want a multicultural society. For some reason, we want to have one now. It won't work, it isn't working. People self-segregate in a multicultural group.
Take for example Black culture and "white culture" in the US. Do you have a "black" part of town where you are? Are there "white" parts of town? How rare are the truly integrated areas? And if you watch the news, you know what kind of distrust and rivalry having two groups of "others" living next to eachother can make. Skin color is irrelevant. Appearance is irrelevant. Accents don't matter. Culinary traditions are a very minor issue. A common morality is key. It may be too late, since the left and right are now so far from eachother, but we needed to maintain a common culture. That may never be possible again after the Counter-Culture movement of the 60's.
From here on out, I believe we need a lot of interracial marriage. That will at least get rid of the racial aspect. I don't care if we lose both the black and "white cultures" as a result. At least that rivalry and bitterness won't be a problem anymore.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 10:00:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/16/2015 12:11:21 AM, Skynet wrote:
I need to talk to some people who completely disagree with me on politics.

Hi Skynet,

I have conservative friends who think me liberal, and liberal friends who think me conservative. Also I'm Australian, which might mean I'm a cynical, sardonic iconoclast.

You're welcome to poke me if that's of any use. :)
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 10:02:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/23/2015 9:26:17 PM, Death23 wrote:
A lot of the conservatives I encounter on the internet seem to be more libertarian than they are conservative.

Yeah...they come in many varieties. Three main groups I see: Ted Nugent/Ron Paul conservatives (Personal freedom is the ultimate goal, not really conserving anything) Rhino old guard Republicans (Like big government because they personally benefit from it, pay a lot of lip service to Conservatives and Libertarians, but will cast them off as soon as they can.) Conservatives who actually want to conserve a balance of freedom and law based on the principals of English Common Law and the Bible culminating in the American Revolution (All men are equal before God, no one is above the law, God has defined rights, God has given humans much worth, God is the ultimate law giver.)
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 10:06:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/23/2015 10:00:27 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 4/16/2015 12:11:21 AM, Skynet wrote:
I need to talk to some people who completely disagree with me on politics.

Hi Skynet,

I have conservative friends who think me liberal, and liberal friends who think me conservative. Also I'm Australian, which might mean I'm a cynical, sardonic iconoclast.

You're welcome to poke me if that's of any use. :)

Remember that conservative and liberal don't mean the same thing in different times or places. During the English Civil War, Conservatives were the ones who supported King John, and Liberals were the direct ancestors of American Conservatives today.
It all depends on what's being liberated and what's being conserved.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
AdamEsk
Posts: 202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 1:54:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
What do liberals think about Hillary Clinton? I've heard so many conservative opinions about her, I want to know if any liberals stand by her. If so, what are your thoughts on her list of "scandals"?
debate_power
Posts: 726
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2015 4:18:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/16/2015 12:11:21 AM, Skynet wrote:
Ah, topic character limits. The w/ is with. I was listening to NPR's On Point with the Guy That Hosts It. Tom Ashcroft? They were talking about Hillary running, and what Conservatives think, and how dreadfully unpopular their ideas are, despite particular ones gaining traction. And then they went into how Conservatives think and why. If you took Conservative as defined by the panelists (all liberal, it seemed), I would barely be Conservative. I think their definition of Conservative was to have no goals or some other ill-informed definition that had no bearing on any Conservative idea. I came to the conclusion that the panelists live under well-appointed rocks in some liberal enclave, with no meaningful contact with anyone with an opposing viewpoint, at least no Conservatives. Because if they did, MAYBE they'd understand why we think and how we think. If you're going to talk about something as a panelist, it might be a good idea to do your homework, but apparently the people who write their checks disagree.

But anyway, I realized that I probably do the same thing. I kind of live in a Conservative enclave, and I don't really talk to many liberals, let alone run into them. So as frustrating as it can be sometimes, I need to talk to some people who completely disagree with me on politics. Not looking for a fight, just need to understanding so I don't sound like those panelists on NPR.

Hello, I'm a liberal. What would you like to discuss?
You can call me Mark if you like.
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2015 8:28:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
This thread has died by my negligent hand! I will start a new one.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.