• 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!

The fundamental problem with conservatives

MrWonka said:
It seems like I'm finding that so many of the disagreements that we have in the United States today break down along the same exact lines. Conservatives fail to grasp the incredibly enormous distinction between knocking someone off their high horse, and stomping them into the ground. The difference between taking someone down a peg, and kicking them when they are already on the ground. One is not only acceptably, but often times very necessary, the other is absolutely abhorrent. What at a cursory glance may seem like the same actions, tactics, or behaviors are judged radically differently depending on who is using them against who.

That doesn't mean it's a double standard it means that when you are in a position of power over someone you cannot blame them for using whatever means are at their disposal to defend themselves, but when you are the one who is dominating another person in every conceivable way to use cheap shots in order to further your dominance is completely out of line.

Conservatives simply cannot grasp this reality. In their minds letting their opponents stand up is equivalent to being knocked down themselves. Worse yet their opponent isn't even trying to fight them, it simply wants to stand up. They assume that if their opponent gets to equal footing with them then they will start doing the same things to them that they have been doing to their opponent for decades.

White Christian Men in our society have grown so accustom to their position of dominance that anything less than dominance over others is seen as an injury to them. How does one overcome this mental block and get through to these people?
Click to expand...

Lmao. Wow. So basically...as long as you aren't a Christian white male conservative...anything you do to get a leg up is justified. Thuggish behavior, stealing from people, burning down businesses of hard workers who sacrificed a lot to get to where they are. Yep.

One more left winger expressing that the "ends justify the means." And you wonder why conservatives are pro gun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The expensive post containing the cartoon about success vs failure does make some good points.

First of all, in a free economy there will be some who succeed and some who fail. And yes, loving parents do help their children to succeed. The question seems to be, "How to help break the pattern of failure".

I believe that you do not do it via special privileges for those in need - that only creates further dependency. Education is important, but overlooked in the cartoon is the disruptive element in some schools that prevent education. Yet, when something is done about it - someone comes up with a set of stats claiming racism. That happened a while ago in Tampa. Single motherhood is a problem as the cartoon stated. So, is the answer to continue to reward the pumping out of more and more children whose parent is unable to take care of their needs?
 
Nilly said:
on-a-plate-privilege-comic-pencilsword-e91e85879792b6c08dcf3b080802c5a2.gif


on-a-plate-privilege-comic-pencilsword--2-54ee3d194ef86c93a66af21bd1c30310.gif


on-a-plate-privilege-comic-pencilsword-3-3f2e115e4f8d7ef796fd655e13173066.gif


on-a-plate-privilege-comic-pencilsword-4-495a0430070935dd4a750dcb47876157.gif
Click to expand...

Are your children entitled to the profits of your hard work?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
ray9152 said:
The expensive post containing the cartoon about success vs failure does make some good points.

First of all, in a free economy there will be some who succeed and some who fail. And yes, loving parents do help their children to succeed. The question seems to be, "How to help break the pattern of failure".

I believe that you do not do it via special privileges for those in need - that only creates further dependency. Education is important, but overlooked in the cartoon is the disruptive element in some schools that prevent education. Yet, when something is done about it - someone comes up with a set of stats claiming racism. That happened a while ago in Tampa. Single motherhood is a problem as the cartoon stated. So, is the answer to continue to reward the pumping out of more and more children whose parent is unable to take care of their needs?
Click to expand...

The concept that the Federal Government can successfully level either the field of opportunity or of outcomes for 330 million people is absurd. Who gets to decide if someone doesn't have an opportunity or if someone had an opportunity but didn't take advantage of it? Who decides if someone didn't get a good education because of their circumstance or didn't get a good education because they decided to drop out of school? Are we going to try to change peoples circumstances so they have opportunities, or do we give them money to compensate for their lack of opportunity? This is not a problem that the federal government could possibly solve and would probably make the situation worse. As the old government saying goes: "If you think the problems we create are big, wait till you see our solutions.
 
Last edited:
MrWonka said:
It seems like I'm finding that so many of the disagreements that we have in the United States today break down along the same exact lines. Conservatives fail to grasp the incredibly enormous distinction between knocking someone off their high horse, and stomping them into the ground. The difference between taking someone down a peg, and kicking them when they are already on the ground. One is not only acceptably, but often times very necessary, the other is absolutely abhorrent. What at a cursory glance may seem like the same actions, tactics, or behaviors are judged radically differently depending on who is using them against who.

That doesn't mean it's a double standard it means that when you are in a position of power over someone you cannot blame them for using whatever means are at their disposal to defend themselves, but when you are the one who is dominating another person in every conceivable way to use cheap shots in order to further your dominance is completely out of line.

Conservatives simply cannot grasp this reality. In their minds letting their opponents stand up is equivalent to being knocked down themselves. Worse yet their opponent isn't even trying to fight them, it simply wants to stand up. They assume that if their opponent gets to equal footing with them then they will start doing the same things to them that they have been doing to their opponent for decades.

White Christian Men in our society have grown so accustom to their position of dominance that anything less than dominance over others is seen as an injury to them. How does one overcome this mental block and get through to these people?
Click to expand...

We have witnessed the lefts attempt to gain equal footing by destroying property , assaulting those that disagree , and by lawlessness ! Give me a break with that utter BS !!! :roll:
 
blackjack50 said:
Are your children entitled to the profits of your hard work?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Does a child deserve success more than another child because their parent works hard?


You'll note that in the comic it shows that Paula's parents do work hard, they work two jobs. These kind of issues propagate in feedback loops (Richards child is now more likely to be successful than Paula's).

Wealth of the parent is the most reliable indicator of the wealth of a child. Which doesn't really make sense in a land of equal opportunity for all, and one that is meant to be a meritocracy.

Finally, of course they are, but that doesn't mean they deserve it more, it doesn't make them better, it doesn't make them harder workers, it doesn't make them smarter. But oh so many people do seem to think that way.
 
blackjack50 said:
Are your children entitled to the profits of your hard work?
Click to expand...

No, but I am entitled to do as I see fit with the money I have earned. If helping my children is my choice - so be it. If not - so be it. It is no one's decision but my own.

There is a theory that says a free market economy does not produce identical outcomes. A managed economy, on the other hand, does produce equality - equality of poverty. So, which do we want??
 
MrWonka said:
It seems like I'm finding that so many of the disagreements that we have in the United States today break down along the same exact lines. Conservatives fail to grasp the incredibly enormous distinction between knocking someone off their high horse, and stomping them into the ground. The difference between taking someone down a peg, and kicking them when they are already on the ground. One is not only acceptably, but often times very necessary, the other is absolutely abhorrent. What at a cursory glance may seem like the same actions, tactics, or behaviors are judged radically differently depending on who is using them against who.

That doesn't mean it's a double standard it means that when you are in a position of power over someone you cannot blame them for using whatever means are at their disposal to defend themselves, but when you are the one who is dominating another person in every conceivable way to use cheap shots in order to further your dominance is completely out of line.

Conservatives simply cannot grasp this reality. In their minds letting their opponents stand up is equivalent to being knocked down themselves. Worse yet their opponent isn't even trying to fight them, it simply wants to stand up. They assume that if their opponent gets to equal footing with them then they will start doing the same things to them that they have been doing to their opponent for decades.

White Christian Men in our society have grown so accustom to their position of dominance that anything less than dominance over others is seen as an injury to them. How does one overcome this mental block and get through to these people?
Click to expand...

You would probably benefit from fewer trips to the chocolate factory, and a few more to the book shelves.
 
Nilly said:
Does a child deserve success more than another child because their parent works hard?


You'll note that in the comic it shows that Paula's parents do work hard, they work two jobs. These kind of issues propagate in feedback loops (Richards child is now more likely to be successful than Paula's).

Wealth of the parent is the most reliable indicator of the wealth of a child. Which doesn't really make sense in a land of equal opportunity for all, and one that is meant to be a meritocracy.

Finally, of course they are, but that doesn't mean they deserve it more, it doesn't make them better, it doesn't make them harder workers, it doesn't make them smarter. But oh so many people do seem to think that way.
Click to expand...

What does anyone deserve? And who are you to determine what anyone does or doesn't deserve? Life is not about what you deserve, but what you make of it. And sometimes people, for scores of reasons, will have scores of different outcomes in their life. Some people make bad choices. Should there be any consequence for that? Some people have more drive. Should they be rewarded? Some people are smarter than others and figured out how to be successful. Other people haven't. Some people are lazy, should they be rewarded anyway? I'm guessing you're a career educator. If you're an educator, I would suggest you tell your students that they can strive to do anything they want. Encourage them be a good person, do the right thing and be in control of their lives, rather than waiting around for the bureaucracy of the federal government to fix their problem or situation. Be a leader, a mentor and encourage your students to work hard instead of showing them how to fill out government assistance forms.
 
Cvir said:
What does anyone deserve? And who are you to determine what anyone does or doesn't deserve? Life is not about what you deserve, but what you make of it. And sometimes people, for scores of reasons, will have scores of different outcomes in their life. Some people make bad choices. Should there be any consequence for that? Some people have more drive. Should they be rewarded? Some people are smarter than others and figured out how to be successful. Other people haven't. Some people are lazy, should they be rewarded anyway? I'm guessing you're a career educator. If you're an educator, I would suggest you tell your students that they can strive to do anything they want. Encourage them be a good person, do the right thing and be in control of their lives, rather than waiting around for the bureaucracy of the federal government to fix their problem or situation. Be a leader, a mentor and encourage your students to work hard instead of showing them how to fill out government assistance forms.
Click to expand...

Some people don't make bad choices, and they end up far worse off than the kids that do make bad choices, through no fault of their own.

Of course equality of outcome is a lie, but I really believe that it's our responsibility as a society to raise the floor of opportunity as high as we can.

And what makes you think I'm an educator???
 
Nilly said:
Does a child deserve success more than another child because their parent works hard?


You'll note that in the comic it shows that Paula's parents do work hard, they work two jobs. These kind of issues propagate in feedback loops (Richards child is now more likely to be successful than Paula's).

Wealth of the parent is the most reliable indicator of the wealth of a child. Which doesn't really make sense in a land of equal opportunity for all, and one that is meant to be a meritocracy.

Finally, of course they are, but that doesn't mean they deserve it more, it doesn't make them better, it doesn't make them harder workers, it doesn't make them smarter. But oh so many people do seem to think that way.
Click to expand...

A clever attempt at trying to avoid responsibility here. But it isn't going to fly. It is a simple question: is the child entitled the profits of the parents hard work? Perhaps I should rephrase it to make it a little easier...should a parent be allowed to pass along the profits of their hard work to their child?

You seem to think that is unfair. You seem to think it is unfair for a parent to do everything in their power to make their child a success. So I have to ask: why? Why is that unfair? Isn't that your responsibility as a parent? It certainly isn't mine, or your church's, or your neighbor's, or your parent's. So it definitely isn't the government's either.

So before we go down the road of what the "government's" role is to be in raising your kid, we need to at least understand what the parent's responsibility is and how far that parent should go. If the answer is anything other than to the ends of the earth? You are kidding yourself. So what does that responsibility entail?

Education. Teaching your kid that education is not a joke. Your little cartoon seems to think that lowering standards for Paula is ok. Why? Why shouldn't she be trying to make an A? Nobody said life was easy. Nor is it fair. And the one thing her parents should have instilled in her was that she is going to have to work hard. And if being an absentee parent is hurting the child? Maybe they should rethink their job choices for the sake of their child.

So here is the crux of the issue then with parental responsibility. It is going to be hard work. But it is on the parent. And at some point hard work is going to be the only thing that pays off. Welfare isn't going to keep you out of poverty. Especially if you are buying cigarets and beer and so on. At some point you have to realize that if you as a parent are going to get your child to succeed...it will take sacrifices. And that is your responsibility as a parent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blackjack50 said:
A clever attempt at trying to avoid responsibility here. But it isn't going to fly. It is a simple question: is the child entitled the profits of the parents hard work? Perhaps I should rephrase it to make it a little easier...should a parent be allowed to pass along the profits of their hard work to their child?

You seem to think that is unfair. You seem to think it is unfair for a parent to do everything in their power to make their child a success. So I have to ask: why? Why is that unfair? Isn't that your responsibility as a parent? It certainly isn't mine, or your church's, or your neighbor's, or your parent's. So it definitely isn't the government's either.

So before we go down the road of what the "government's" role is to be in raising your kid, we need to at least understand what the parent's responsibility is and how far that parent should go. If the answer is anything other than to the ends of the earth? You are kidding yourself. So what does that responsibility entail?

Education. Teaching your kid that education is not a joke. Your little cartoon seems to think that lowering standards for Paula is ok. Why? Why shouldn't she be trying to make an A? Nobody said life was easy. Nor is it fair. And the one thing her parents should have instilled in her was that she is going to have to work hard. And if being an absentee parent is hurting the child? Maybe they should rethink their job choices for the sake of their child.

So here is the crux of the issue then with parental responsibility. It is going to be hard work. But it is on the parent. And at some point hard work is going to be the only thing that pays off. Welfare isn't going to keep you out of poverty. Especially if you are buying cigarets and beer and so on. At some point you have to realize that if you as a parent are going to get your child to succeed...it will take sacrifices. And that is your responsibility as a parent.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't think it's about fairness. I think that providing people the best platform to succeed will benefit me in the end. Socially and financially.

What do all the most successful countries have in common? A willingness to give people as much opportunity as they can. This is true between countries (the opportunity we give our kids as opposed to opportunities afforded in Somalia benefits us) and within a country (the opportunity we give our kids as opposed to opportunities afforded in 1900 benefits us).
 
Nilly said:
Some people don't make bad choices, and they end up far worse off than the kids that do make bad choices, through no fault of their own.

Of course equality of outcome is a lie, but I really believe that it's our responsibility as a society to raise the floor of opportunity as high as we can.

And what makes you think I'm an educator???
Click to expand...

You might think equality of outcome is a lie, but you know social engineers like yourself, will say "well of course there was an inequitable outcome, that's because there was inequitable opportunities." You never separate the two. Just like Paula and Richard. In the end, they had different outcomes. But you argue it's because they did not have equal opportunities. How do you know? Opportunities come in all forms. Are we going to follow everyone around to make sure they have and take advantage of all the opportunities before them. Our public education system is a good example. If I go to class everyday and take advantage of the opportunity and as a result I am successful, should I reap a reward? Should the kid that cuts classes, plays baseball after school instead of studying and becomes less successful, should he reap the same reward? Or will you try to find some reason why he didn't have the same opportunity as I. Maybe because he wasn't as smart as me. What are going to do, make him smarter? I said before, achievements needs rewards and I don't mean a participation trophy. And in the final analysis, sometimes life isn't fair. That's the way it has been since the dawn of man and you're not going to change that.
 
Last edited:
Cvir said:
You might think equality of outcome is a lie, but you know social engineers like yourself, will say "well of course there was an inequitable outcome, that's because there was inequitable opportunities." Just like Paula and Richard. In the end, they had different outcomes. But you argue it's because they did not have equal opportunities. How do you know? Opportunities come in all forms. Are we going to follow everyone around to make sure they have and take advantage of all the opportunities before them. Our public education system is a good example. If I go to class everyday and take advantage of the opportunity and as a result I am successful, should I reap a reward? Should the kid that cuts classes, plays baseball after school instead of studying and becomes less successful, should he reap the same reward? Or will you try to find some reason why he didn't have the same opportunity as I, maybe because he didn't have the drive, maybe he wasn't as smart, maybe he's happy right where he is in life. I said before, achievements needs rewards and I don't mean a participation trophy. And in the final analysis, sometimes life isn't fair. That's the way it has been since the dawn of man and you're not going to change that.
Click to expand...

Sure some people will fail to grasp the opportunities afforded to them, but I don't see why that means we shouldn't strive to lift the floor of opportunity as high as we can for everyone. If we ensure all our Paula's have the same access to opportunity as our Richards then how is that a bad thing?
 
Nilly said:
Sure some people will fail to grasp the opportunities afforded to them, but I don't see why that means we shouldn't strive to lift the floor of opportunity as high as we can for everyone. If we ensure all our Paula's have the same access to opportunity as our Richards then how is that a bad thing?
Click to expand...

The much bigger issue is people not taking advantage of the opportunities that already exist, which you obviously overlook. If people are not currently taking advantage of existing opportunities, you can lift the floor all you want, it is a waste of time and money.
 
Nilly said:
Sure some people will fail to grasp the opportunities afforded to them, but I don't see why that means we shouldn't strive to lift the floor of opportunity as high as we can for everyone. If we ensure all our Paula's have the same access to opportunity as our Richards then how is that a bad thing?
Click to expand...

I'll tell you what. I'll strive to raise the opportunity floor, just don't expect my tax dollars to help, since I think the opportunities in this country are almost limitless. As for helping people see opportunities and take advantage of them, I'm all in. But it would be a mistake to diminish the efforts of those who triumphed over adversity, used their skills to overcome and became successful. I am concluding that there is a little resentment on your part of successful people in general, because you believe they didn't achieve their success fairly. You look at Donald Trump and think, well sure, he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he had rich parents or whatever. I think you would find most successful people worked hard, took advantage of one of the limitless opportunities in this country and became successful and you find that very hard to accept. And I'm not talking about millionaires. I'm talking about the hard working people in this country who went out, found a job and worked their way up from the bottom. Jobs are the opportunity and Donald Trump is determined to increase those opportunities. How's that for raising the floor of opportunity? Or were thinking more along the lines of a government handout? That's usually the socialist's answer. Under Obama, on the other hand, the labor participation rate dropped every year of his presidency. He was so concerned about jobs for illegal aliens coming into this country, he killed opportunities for Americans. If you really care about opportunities for Americans, you would be doing everything you could to support Donald Trump and help make America great again.
 
Cvir said:
I'll tell you what. I'll strive to raise the opportunity floor, just don't expect my tax dollars to help, since I think the opportunities in this country are almost limitless. As for helping people see opportunities and take advantage of them, I'm all in. But it would be a mistake to diminish the efforts of those who triumphed over adversity, used their skills to overcome and became successful. I am concluding that there is a little resentment on your part of successful people in general, because you believe they didn't achieve their success fairly. You look at Donald Trump and think, well sure, he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he had rich parents or whatever. I think you would find most successful people worked hard, took advantage of one of the limitless opportunities in this country and became successful and you find that very hard to accept. And I'm not talking about millionaires. I'm talking about the hard working people in this country who went out, found a job and worked their way up from the bottom. Jobs are the opportunity and Donald Trump is determined to increase those opportunities. How's that for raising the floor of opportunity? Or were thinking more along the lines of a government handout? That's usually the socialist's answer. Under Obama, on the other hand, the labor participation rate dropped every year of his presidency. He was so concerned about jobs for illegal aliens coming into this country, he killed opportunities for Americans. If you really care about opportunities for Americans, you would be doing everything you could to support Donald Trump and help make America great again.
Click to expand...

Lol how about I'll tell you what. How about you don't 'assume' what I do or 'conclude' how I feel about people so that when you construct your counter argument you don't flail wildly off base. I already addressed earlier in this thread how I feel that plenty of successful people do work hard and deserve all the success they get, and just because I want to afford equal opportunities to those who weren't lucky enough to be born with a silver spoon in their mouth doesn't delegitimize the work and sweat of those who were.
 
Koke said:
Are these by chance the same white Christian men that first immigrated to America and successfully created the most free and prosperous civilization of all time?

Or did you just write a block of text about inequality to just then finish it with a broad generalization and kick an entire demographic in the teeth.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was after the Salem witch trials and slavery.
 
MrWonka said:
It seems like I'm finding that so many of the disagreements that we have in the United States today break down along the same exact lines. Conservatives fail to grasp the incredibly enormous distinction between knocking someone off their high horse, and stomping them into the ground. The difference between taking someone down a peg, and kicking them when they are already on the ground. One is not only acceptably, but often times very necessary, the other is absolutely abhorrent. What at a cursory glance may seem like the same actions, tactics, or behaviors are judged radically differently depending on who is using them against who.

That doesn't mean it's a double standard it means that when you are in a position of power over someone you cannot blame them for using whatever means are at their disposal to defend themselves, but when you are the one who is dominating another person in every conceivable way to use cheap shots in order to further your dominance is completely out of line.

Conservatives simply cannot grasp this reality. In their minds letting their opponents stand up is equivalent to being knocked down themselves. Worse yet their opponent isn't even trying to fight them, it simply wants to stand up. They assume that if their opponent gets to equal footing with them then they will start doing the same things to them that they have been doing to their opponent for decades.

White Christian Men in our society have grown so accustom to their position of dominance that anything less than dominance over others is seen as an injury to them. How does one overcome this mental block and get through to these people?
Click to expand...

Your OP has no thesis and it's difficult to find what your message is.
 
Nilly said:
Lol how about I'll tell you what. How about you don't 'assume' what I do or 'conclude' how I feel about people so that when you construct your counter argument you don't flail wildly off base. I already addressed earlier in this thread how I feel that plenty of successful people do work hard and deserve all the success they get, and just because I want to afford equal opportunities to those who weren't lucky enough to be born with a silver spoon in their mouth doesn't delegitimize the work and sweat of those who were.
Click to expand...

That's nice. Since you don't seem to have any counter points, I will assume you are in pretty much agreement with me. Thanks for the conversation, Bye
 
Cvir said:
That's nice. Since you don't seem to have any counter points, I will assume you are in pretty much agreement with me. Thanks for the conversation, Bye
Click to expand...

Again with the dumb assumptions :lamo
 
There are two elements to one side of the discussion "raising the floor of opportunity" and "fairness". Both are great concepts - both need clarification.

For example, if two people are doing the same job with the same efficiency, it would be fair to pay both the same. But, suppose of two employees one has worked hard and brings a greater skill set to the table. If there were to be a disparity in their pay, would that not be fair.

Education - if education is offered but some students are not interested and do not avail themselves of the opportunities offered there will again be a disparity of outcome. Is there unfairness in this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom