View Poll Results: Do liberals "get it"?

Voters
6. You may not vote on this poll
  • Liberals understand and care.

    1 16.67%
  • Liberals understand but don't care.

    0 0%
  • Liberals don't understand but care.

    2 33.33%
  • Liberals neither understand nor care.

    3 50.00%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

  1. #11
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    You are free to disagree with the concept of natural rights, but doing so makes any opposition to rights violations on your part morally baseless.
    This is another thing libertarians tend to never understand. Multiple philosophies about life mean there are multiple ways in which people can come a conclusion about what rights people have, which rights are appropriate, how far rights extend (whether they are absolute or not), and the nature and context of rights. I have come across exactly one libertarian who is able to see past their tunnel vision and realize that there are multiple ways one can come to a conclusion about human society and the role of the individual vs the group.

  2. #12
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    15,273

    Re: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    This is another thing libertarians tend to never understand. Multiple philosophies about life mean there are multiple ways in which people can come a conclusion about what rights people have, which rights are appropriate, how far rights extend (whether they are absolute or not), and the nature and context of rights. I have come across exactly one libertarian who is able to see past their tunnel vision and realize that there are multiple ways one can come to a conclusion about human society and the role of the individual vs the group.
    Now you have met two. I understand that completely, but rights to be rights must be understood to be derived for human nature itself and not society. What you are doing is confusing morality with majority or societal decree. There is nothing magical and certainly nothing moral about what society or a majority determines to be right. What you are describing are privileges: things society as a whole or the leaders of that society allow an individual to do. Rights refer to things you may do by virtue of you being human.

  3. #13
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    I agree with that. Many conservative social positions are based upon ignorance and/or mysticism which as an atheist I find a bit difficult to label as 'principled.'
    Oh, they're principled, they're just principles derived from religious belief.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  4. #14
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    Now you have met two. I understand that completely, but rights to be rights must be understood to be derived for human nature itself and not society.
    I agree, but human nature is yet another debate. (and I hate generalizing, but I see it necessary to get my point across here, sorry). However, human nature is still up in the air and while libertarians tend to view it a certain way, it by no means set in stone and without room for debate. Given that there is plenty of room to come up with any number of variations on what rights are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    What you are doing is confusing morality with majority or societal decree. There is nothing magical and certainly nothing moral about what society or a majority determines to be right. What you are describing are privileges: things society as a whole or the leaders of that society allow an individual to do. Rights refer to things you may do by virtue of you being human.
    Look to my other comment on this post about how I see it. While other progressives may or may not view it the way you describe (I have never cared enough to look into it, so I don't know) That is my point of view.

    As an example, look at SB's post. Religion certainly can inform a person about what human nature is and thus what rights are derived, even if you just dismiss it. While I disagree with evangelicals, while still being a Christian myself, I find there is a need to see people's views where they are at, even if one disagrees and simply no to dismiss. Another example would be Islam's view of human nature being completely different and therefore natural rights derived being something libertarians may disagree with. Natural rights is not a philosophy that anyone has a monopoly over.

    Overall, I tend to find this to be a HUGE blindspot in general libertarian philosophy which causes them to get into an echo chamber where they end up doing a bunch of self confirmation because they have dismissed information they disagree with. Interestingly enough, this is what I see a lot of libertarians accuse others of doing.
    Last edited by tacomancer; 07-28-12 at 10:12 AM.

  5. #15
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    Now you have met two. I understand that completely, but rights to be rights must be understood to be derived for human nature itself and not society. What you are doing is confusing morality with majority or societal decree. There is nothing magical and certainly nothing moral about what society or a majority determines to be right. What you are describing are privileges: things society as a whole or the leaders of that society allow an individual to do. Rights refer to things you may do by virtue of you being human.
    This is a philosophical discussion rather than a pragmatic one. I personally find the issue of natural rights to be completely irrelevant, as it absolutely makes no difference what types rights humans possess by nature. If you possess natural rights as a human being, but society has a whole doesn't agree that those are your rights, or otherwise denies your ability to exercise them, then it simply makes no difference. The best you can do is persuade them to come around to your point of view.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    I can tell you this, most of the time I don't understand you but it has nothing to do with my liberalism.
    You can tell me lots of things. That doesn't make them true.

  7. #17
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktoria View Post
    You can tell me lots of things. That doesn't make them true.
    People who profess to understand a poster better than the post itself tend to be prone to straw men and are generally not worthy of debate due to the inevitable errored assumptions that this person would make about their opponent.

    Secondly, KFC


  8. #18
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,601

    Re: Conservatives: Do Liberals "Get It"?

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Oh, they're principled, they're just principles derived from religious belief.
    Many "conservative" views about social policy have nothing to do with religion, e.g. single parent "families" and not getting even a highschool education should NOT be rewarded with gov't assistance EVER. Since the "great society" social programs began, that very behavior has been adopted as a "right" and we have seen both increase, yet seem puzzled as to how that could be. There is no mystery at all, that offering a "living wage" for out of wedlock childbirth, begets more of it especially if no successful completion of highschool is required to get it. People are not going to expend effort that is not "required" or "rewarded". Society (especially the left) is quick to demand near perfect behavior for the right to bear arms, yet willingly rewards that SAME behavior which prevents one from keeping that right with public assistance.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •