• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do far right Conservatives/Libertarians lack empathy?

Do those on the far right lack empathy?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 26.2%
  • No

    Votes: 62 73.8%

  • Total voters
    84
  • Poll closed .


The two cries of "yeah" are pretty clearly directed at his previous comment, and even Ron Paul says "no." And the question was premised that the man in question did have the resources to take care of himself.


So.... yeah... looks like you are still in search of citation.
 
i think you just showed something....not taking responsibility for ones self.......and wanting to shrug your freedom to chose you own way!

what did Wolff say...man makes good money....but does not want to pay 200 /300 a month for insurance.


i pay $305 dollars a month for my insurance....its something i accept, and know i must do........others can follow my example.

So let him die? What if this was your son, or uncle, or brother. You gonna tell him to his face, sorry you're gonna die..?
 
So let him die? What if this was your son, or uncle, or brother. You gonna tell him to his face, sorry you're gonna die..?

no i don't favor that, however his goods will hit the auction block if he does not pay, because a lien will be place on them....for his own error in not getting insurance...

act stupid.....suffer!
 
So let him die? What if this was your son, or uncle, or brother. You gonna tell him to his face, sorry you're gonna die..?

That's not the same thing and you know it. No one isn't going to try and help family.
 
A complete inability to relate to those who are less fortunate.

They have empathy, but their emotional processing is not well suited to it. Progressivism is about trying to create a world where inequity doesn't exist, or can at least be kept at mangeable levels. Conservatism is usually about trying to create a society that can survive inequity.

In the majority of time periods and cultural contexts where conservatism exists, conservatives are people who tend to accept a society where some people (often an extreme minority) are better off than the rest, because they are either a member of that minority or because they somehow depend on that minority, or at least the system itself. For example, many peasants supported (and fought for) monarchy and aristocracy against rebelling peasants because the stability the monarch and aristocrats offered was worth the massive social inequality that existed between classes.

In a general historical sense, conservative emotional processing tends to be patterned along tribal lines. They aren't predisposed to universal justice, especially not social justice. There's no need to create a massive scale welfare level to eliminate or manage poverty, because in their tribal logic the majority of people who would receive aid aren't worth helping. They do feel empathy, but their ideology requires them to repress it.
 
Last edited:
..... OR we believe that the best way to help people isn't always through government assistance, especially at the federal level.

I never said that the best way to help people is always through government assistance - it's certainly not. But by the same token, sometimes the best way to help people IS through government assistance.

Sometimes it ain't, but sometimes it is. And the very worst thing one can do is to assume that either "never" or "always" is best.
 
For **** sake.. to further your argument you simply discredit what I have to say because its personal experience. So are we only suppose to talk about Straight up facts on this website? There's no room for personal experience? You don't have to take my word for it. Get out of your house and socialize with some people. It's not like what I said is any Big Secret that only I possess knowledge of.
My personal experience is that the far right and far left have equal empathy, but I could've easily lied and said the far left has no empathy.



Do you deny that conservatives take a lone wolf attitude and liberals take a we're all in this together attitude? Libertarianism vs Communism?
Conservatives and libertarians want economic policies that are good for the economy. If you wanna spin that into a lack of empathy, I can't stop you.
 
Surely you jest...I'm a leftist now? Eh, I thinks there are about, oh, a couple dozen dozen people here who are scratching their heads on that one...

Individual freedom is mmm...mmm... good.

I do abhor hypocrisy though...

You cry against government control but only because you view it as competition. You cry against totalitarian governments and despotism but would only replace it with a privatized tyranny.

You'd applaud while millions suffer at the hands, the greedy hands of the few, but would be first to call on the evil, heavy-handed government to protect your fortune for you.

It's worse than hypocritical, its cowardice.

I responded to the content of YOUR post, that's why I quoted it.

I don't "applaud while millions suffer" nor do I believe anyone who isn't at least channeling a leftist believes it would be at "the greedy hands of a few" anyway. Nor do I have a fortune to protect. And even more hilarious, up until this moment I don't think I've ever even posted the word "totalitarian".

Sorry, you missed your target by several miles.
 
You mean those tax write off charitable donations where they simply sign a check and say here, I'm a good person?

Certainly don't mean, just give them someone else's money.
 
So let him die? What if this was your son, or uncle, or brother. You gonna tell him to his face, sorry you're gonna die..?

What do YOU do in that situation. Remember, you're talking about individuals here. You seem to be a bit confused and switch without thought, between individual and group. Now in the situation you describe, you being a leftist, are unlikely to be able to help, besides, you don't do charity when it comes from your own pocket.
 
I think you just proved my point.. lack of empathy.

From Merriam Webster:

em·pa·thy noun \ˈem-pə-thē\

: the feeling that you understand and share another person's experiences and emotions : the ability to share someone else's feelings


If someone chooses not to buy insurance, that is his choice. Empathy means you understand his choice. So in the example of the man who didn't buy insurance, respecting his freedom of choice is actually the very definition of empathy.
 
From Merriam Webster:

em·pa·thy noun \ˈem-pə-thē\

: the feeling that you understand and share another person's experiences and emotions : the ability to share someone else's feelings


If someone chooses not to buy insurance, that is his choice. Empathy means you understand his choice. So in the example of the man who didn't buy insurance, respecting his freedom of choice is actually the very definition of empathy.

How do you get respecting a choice from the definition you posted regarding empathy? I see no correlation whatsoever. Respecting one's choice is valid, absolutely, but there's no level of understanding *why* they made the choice, or *what* they're feeling. Respecting is intellectual, not emotional. One can disagree with a person and still intellectually respect their conclusion.
 
How do you get respecting a choice from the definition you posted regarding empathy? I see no correlation whatsoever. Respecting one's choice is valid, absolutely, but there's no level of understanding *why* they made the choice, or *what* they're feeling. Respecting is intellectual, not emotional. One can disagree with a person and still intellectually respect their conclusion.

I posted the definition of empathy because we discussed it at the beginning of this thread.

If someone tells me that they choose not to do "x", I don't question if it it's a choice someone has the right to make. I also understand the feelings of grown ups who think they have a right to make their own decisions.

I assume the OP meant sympathy, not empathy, since sympathy is a different emotion and has different results.
 
I posted the definition of empathy because we discussed it at the beginning of this thread.

If someone tells me that they choose not to do "x", I don't question if it it's a choice someone has the right to make. I also understand the feelings of grown ups who think they have a right to make their own decisions.

I assume the OP meant sympathy, not empathy, since sympathy is a different emotion and has different results.

Sympathy is different from empathy, though many people think they're interchangeable.
 
:shrug: if by "empathy" you mean "enabling".

In the meantime, conservatives are more likely to give their money to charity, more likely to give blood, and more likely to volunteer at soup kitchens and the like. The liberal response to this is typically that once you control for religiosity and income, conservatives and liberals are actually equally generous - an interesting argument, that once you strip out the main cause of conservatives' empathy, they only tie liberals. Regardless, it would certainly seem to disprove the thesis that somehow conservatives are significantly less likely to care about their fellow man.

A side effect of the absolute travesty that all churches are considered charities by the IRS.

Religious liberals give just as much as religious conservatives, religion is a far better indicator as to whether somebody "gives charitably" (emphasis on the double quotes there) than political lean. As soon as we take religious organizations out of the equation (seeing as by definition non-religious people don't give to church) the level of charitable donation evens out.
 
A complete inability to relate to those who are less fortunate.

I don't think they lack empathy. Some of the nicest people I know are some of the most hardcore Tea Party members with the most far rightwing politics.

I think the divide takes place with individualism vs collectivism and group mentalities.

It seems like the far right is very empathetic and supportive of people in their immediate circles or people that share a lot of their characteristics. They don't seem to be very empathetic for people outside of their immediate circles or people that are different.

I think it's interesting that you'll have overnight shifts in views when something changes though. Someone will think gays should never be married and once their son comes out gay...they do a 180. Someone will state that anyone that takes unemployment insurance is a moocher but the minute they need it the program is a life saver and is one of the "good" safety nets.
 
I don't think they lack empathy. Some of the nicest people I know are some of the most hardcore Tea Party members with the most far rightwing politics.

I think the divide takes place with individualism vs collectivism and group mentalities.

It seems like the far right is very empathetic and supportive of people in their immediate circles or people that share a lot of their characteristics. They don't seem to be very empathetic for people outside of their immediate circles or people that are different.

I think it's interesting that you'll have overnight shifts in views when something changes though. Someone will think gays should never be married and once their son comes out gay...they do a 180. Someone will state that anyone that takes unemployment insurance is a moocher but the minute they need it the program is a life saver and is one of the "good" safety nets.


i have been here for a few months

can you point out one post where a conservative, or right winger said we dont need safety nets at all?

i havent seen one

now i have posted that the unemployment benefits "should" expire at six months

but that isnt the same thing...is it?

but nothing like painting with a real broad brush
 
i have been here for a few months

can you point out one post where a conservative, or right winger said we dont need safety nets at all?

i havent seen one

now i have posted that the unemployment benefits "should" expire at six months

but that isnt the same thing...is it?

but nothing like painting with a real broad brush

So that's what you got from my post? Saying that conservatives want to abolish all safety nets? I'm not sure where I said that...maybe you could point that part out to me.
 
I responded to the content of YOUR post, that's why I quoted it.

I don't "applaud while millions suffer" nor do I believe anyone who isn't at least channeling a leftist believes it would be at "the greedy hands of a few" anyway. Nor do I have a fortune to protect. And even more hilarious, up until this moment I don't think I've ever even posted the word "totalitarian".

Sorry, you missed your target by several miles.


Yogi Berra? Is that you?

I responded to the content of YOUR post, that's why I quoted it.

The same lame caricaturization and broad generalization which you've bestowed upon me can handily be turned back at ya, and as is shown you don't like it too much neither.

and while you're between giggles, you might want to take a gander:

Synonym - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

because you haven't used a word, doesn't mean you haven't conveyed its meaning.

The same can be said about you, as well.



With all that being said -- Just because someone shares an opinion with a particular group on a particular subject doesn't translate into that person adhering to their ideology nor does it translate to them being identified as a proponent and promoter of said ideology. In short, you did me a grave injustice which you know from other correspondence with me, was dishonest. (if you'd kindly remember many, many of my posts.)


The ridiculous paradigm which has been created in which the polar opposite of exploitative, destructive economic practices automatically translates a person into a Leftist, a Marxist, a....whatever only serves to divide people, to demonize common sense, to keep yourself purposefully blind to the causes of the economic catastrophes which adversely effect all of us.

Supply side economics, i.e. Reaganomics, laissez faire economics which isn't just a synonym for free markets, (despite what many think) is just as much a destructive force as Marx-Leninism. Just as much a hand around the throat of the people. It puts the economic prosperity of the many into the hands of the few.

It does, it does, god damn it, it does. To say otherwise is to show an ignorance of economics.
 
So that's what you got from my post? Saying that conservatives want to abolish all safety nets? I'm not sure where I said that...maybe you could point that part out to me.


I think it's interesting that you'll have overnight shifts in views when something changes though. Someone will think gays should never be married and once their son comes out gay...they do a 180. Someone will state that anyone that takes unemployment insurance is a moocher but the minute they need it the program is a life saver and is one of the "good" safety nets.


yeah....kinda reads that way to me
 
From Merriam Webster:

em·pa·thy noun \ˈem-pə-thē\

: the feeling that you understand and share another person's experiences and emotions : the ability to share someone else's feelings


If someone chooses not to buy insurance, that is his choice. Empathy means you understand his choice. So in the example of the man who didn't buy insurance, respecting his freedom of choice is actually the very definition of empathy.

Sure, before he gets sick.. After he gets sick it could be looked at entirely different.

Empathy : the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner; also : the capacity for this

When the guy realizes he's going to die, I would be empathetic with him and more than likely sympathetic. This is why I agree with the individual mandate in health insurance, because I do think that sometimes personal freedom should take a back seat to personal well being. If the government has to protect this person from themselves then so be it.

You basically cherry picked that one.
 
Back
Top Bottom