Why we still have Democrats


Vort
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest MormonGator
12 minutes ago, mnn2501 said:

I believe one of the problems is that each side looks at the most extreme members of the other party (media influence?) and labels all members of the opposite party as being like that.

I believe there is a vast group of people that call themselves democrats and that call themselves republicans that could meet in the middle and agree on many topics, more people (I believe) than the number of people at the extremes. 

Perfectly said. You knocked it out of the park with this one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
1 hour ago, mnn2501 said:

I believe one of the problems is that each side looks at the most extreme members of the other party (media influence?) and labels all members of the opposite party as being like that.

I believe there is a vast group of people that call themselves democrats and that call themselves republicans that could meet in the middle and agree on many topics, more people (I believe) than the number of people at the extremes. 

Perhaps someone should start a "Middle of the Road" political party.

I couldn't agree more.  I think a first step towards resolving this is to get people to talk to each other and listen.  Not to sway the other side, but to simply see what you said.   There is a group that is trying to get people from opposing sides to get together and have civil conversations, a friend of mine is in it and it's going well so far apparently.  It's called Better Angels.  https://www.better-angels.org

Edited by LiterateParakeet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need two parties in the USA so that competing evil forces of secret combinations can destroy each other.  The hope is - that as long as they say nasty things about each other that they will leave the majority of citizens (that are non political) alone.  Sadly it does not quite work that way - whoever is in power or striving to have the power wants to control everybody.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
22 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I couldn't agree more.  I think a first step towards resolving this is to get people to talk to each other and listen.  Not to sway the other side, but to simply see what you said.   There is a group that is trying to get people from opposing sides to get together and have civil conversations, a friend of mine is in it and it's going well so far apparently.  It's called Better Angels.  https://www.better-angels.org

Sadly, this is one of those wonderful groups that will be ignored by the people who really need it the most. I get no joy saying that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The harsh truth:

The typical slightly-above-average conservative can explain what liberals believe and why they believe it, and do a fairly accurate job of it. The typical well-above-average conservative can give the liberal argument more convincingly than most liberals. The conservative won't agree with the liberal argument, of course, but he understands it—not just the words, but the motivations behind it and the intent of those who proclaim it.

The typical slightly-above-average liberal has no real idea why conservatives believe as they do, and can give only leftist parodies of conservative thought, things that any conservative would roll his eyes at. ("They hate brown people! They are afraid of women having power! They're unevolved angry white men!" That sort of thing.) The typical well-above-average liberal—and this is true—still does not understand why conservatives think the way they do. Seriously. They're mostly clueless. When asked, they literally throw up their hands and respond, "Who knows why they think the things they do?" Then they fall back on the same stereotypes as their 65th-percentile compadres.

I know whereof I speak. I see this every day of my life. And it is not a Seattle-area-only phenomenon. Go to the eastern part of the state, which is much more conservative, and you will see Exactly The Same Thing. Go to ANY major college campus in the US not called BYU and you will see Exactly The Same Thing. Go to any large software corporation, where the average IQ skews at least a standard deviation above the norm, and you will see Exactly The Same Thing.

Note that I'm not talking about the average or below-average liberals or conservatives. The 50th percentile and below typically neither knows nor cares about their opponents' arguments. I'm talking about the people who should know what the other side thinks. In general, intelligent conservatives understand what liberals think. In general, intelligent liberals do not understand what conservatives think. Probably more frighteningly, in my experience most intelligent liberals do not care to understand why conservatives think as they do.

And why not? Because they are convinced of their own moral superiority. They don't need to understand conservative thought any more than they need to understand Nazi thought (a comparison they're happy to make). In the liberal mindset, conservatives are Nazis. They're evil. Not every liberal thinks this way, of course; but it's terrifyingly common among liberals, and not just the bottom half.

Dialog is a good second step. But the first step has to be education—specifically, education of liberals about conservative values. I guess the zeroeth step would have to be cultivating a willingness to understand the empathize with someone you don't agree with, an area in which (astoundingly enough) conservatives appear to be much more adept than liberals.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
3 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Sadly, this is one of those wonderful groups that will be ignored by the people who really need it the most. I get no joy saying that. 

Yes, probably so. My friend has gone to a couple meetings and participated in conversations. She said it went really well. I wish I had some time to get more involved. I really love the idea of getting people to sit down and actually talk to each other.   In my experience, our best hope for doing that is in person...the internet brings many complications. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
35 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

 I really love the idea of getting people to sit down and actually talk to each other.   In my experience, our best hope for doing that is in person...the internet brings many complications. 

Couldn't agree more.

One great thing I've learned is that good people can think all sorts of things politically-and more importantly, someone can be a scumbag even though I agree with them politically. As a younger man I had this naive (and shameful) view that in order to be a "good person" you had to have a certain type of political views. After all, how could you be a good person if you didn't agree with what I did? 


Some people never get past that life stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mnn2501 said:

I believe one of the problems is that each side looks at the most extreme members of the other party (media influence?) and labels all members of the opposite party as being like that.

I believe there is a vast group of people that call themselves democrats and that call themselves republicans that could meet in the middle and agree on many topics, more people (I believe) than the number of people at the extremes. 

Perhaps someone should start a "Middle of the Road" political party.

excellent post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
15 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I couldn't agree more.  I think a first step towards resolving this is to get people to talk to each other and listen.  Not to sway the other side, but to simply see what you said.   There is a group that is trying to get people from opposing sides to get together and have civil conversations, a friend of mine is in it and it's going well so far apparently.  It's called Better Angels.  https://www.better-angels.org

You really haven't seen just how imbalanced it is, have you?  (I'm not yelling this)  I'm just honestly wondering at how much you probably have NOT heard is going on.

It's not just individuals.  There is a concerted effort to shut down conservative speech, not just disagreeing with it.  An effort to shut it down.  While I disagree with most of the left's tenets, I will always accept that you all have a right to free speech and all other rights protected by the Constitution.  But when the tables are turned, what principle to leftists actually adhere to (not just give lip service to) that protects a conservative's right to free speech and freedom of religion?

Edited by Mores
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
1 hour ago, Mores said:

You really haven't seen just how imbalanced it is, have you?  (I'm not yelling this)  I'm just honestly wondering at how much you probably have NOT heard is going on.

I am aware of what is going on and how bad things are with speech and religion.

The problem is BOTH sides feel threatened--- for different reasons, of course. But they refuse to listen to one another. I mean really listen and try to understand....  They hear each other's protests, but before the other side can stop speaking they are downplaying the other side's issues. 

I understand that there are fundamental reasons for the disagreements, and those will not go away...that is where compromise comes in. The Founding Father's did it.....they took people with very different goals and made it work. They didn't join arms and sing kumbaya, and that's not what I 'm suggesting either. But they did sit down in that room and hammer out a Constitution that all the states eventually accepted...the more I learn about human nature the more I understand what a miracle that truly was. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I am aware of what is going on and how bad things are with speech and religion.

The problem is BOTH sides feel threatened--- for different reasons, of course. But they refuse to listen to one another. I mean really listen and try to understand....  They hear each other's protests, but before the other side can stop speaking they are downplaying the other side's issues. 

I understand that there are fundamental reasons for the disagreements, and those will not go away...that is where compromise comes in. The Founding Father's did it.....they took people with very different goals and made it work. They didn't join arms and sing kumbaya, and that's not what I 'm suggesting either. But they did sit down in that room and hammer out a Constitution that all the states eventually accepted...the more I learn about human nature the more I understand what a miracle that truly was. 

What if the compromise is merely a stopgap measure to an inevitable civil war?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I am aware of what is going on and how bad things are with speech and religion.

The problem is BOTH sides feel threatened--- for different reasons, of course. But they refuse to listen to one another. I mean really listen and try to understand....  They hear each other's protests, but before the other side can stop speaking they are downplaying the other side's issues. 

I understand that there are fundamental reasons for the disagreements, and those will not go away...that is where compromise comes in. The Founding Father's did it.....they took people with very different goals and made it work. They didn't join arms and sing kumbaya, and that's not what I 'm suggesting either. But they did sit down in that room and hammer out a Constitution that all the states eventually accepted...the more I learn about human nature the more I understand what a miracle that truly was. 

 

Will you openly condemn the leftist efforts at shutting down conservatives right to free speech?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
13 hours ago, MormonGator said:

One great thing I've learned is that good people can think all sorts of things politically-and more importantly, someone can be a scumbag even though I agree with them politically. As a younger man I had this naive (and shameful) view that in order to be a "good person" you had to have a certain type of political views. After all, how could you be a good person if you didn't agree with what I did? 
Some people never get past that life stage.

Yes!  I went through that stage as well. "How could a Latter-day Saint be a Democrat?"  I had a really limited understanding of politics back then....it literally boiled down to if you love God and hate abortion, you should be Republican. If you are Democrat you have no regard for life and must be atheist. Now I laugh at my younger self.  So many beliefs of those younger days have fallen away.  Good riddance.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
3 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Yes!  I went through that stage as well. "How could a Latter-day Saint be a Democrat?"  I had a really limited understanding of politics back then....it literally boiled down to if you love God and hate abortion, you should be Republican. If you are Democrat you have no regard for life and must be atheist. Now I laugh at my younger self.  So many beliefs of those younger days have fallen away.  Good riddance.  :)

Same here! 

You know one of my favorite stories in politics? The friendship between Scalia and Ginsburg. They disagreed on 99.9% of the issues, but usually spent New Years Eve together. When Scalia died, Ginsburg was devastated. Ironically so was Kagan, another moderate-liberal member of the court. 

If they can be polite and friendly to one another, why can't we? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
4 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

What if the compromise is merely a stopgap measure to an inevitable civil war?

You mean as it was for the Founding Fathers?  

Their compromises did leave us open to eventual Civil War.  Would they have been better not to compromise and stay fragmented? 

I don't think so, and yet those compromises have left deep wounds in the fabric of our country that still have not healed.  But also lead us to be one of the most powerful nations in the world. So, yes compromise with its inherent weaknesses is the best we can do in a fallen world. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
4 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

So, yes compromise with its inherent weaknesses is the best we can do in a fallen world. 

Yup. I think most adults realize that if you don't compromise, your life becomes difficult. Both in your professional and personal life. Like the Rolling Stones said, you can't always get what you want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

 

12 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

 

Will you openly condemn the leftist efforts at shutting down conservatives right to free speech?

Absolutely I am concerned about the attacks on free speech and religion. Years ago, I heard Joel Skousen speak at a conference. He said that we were losing freedoms every day and no one was paying attention....the last freedom to go would be freedom of religion (which is related to the speech we are discussing, no?) . 

He said freedom of religion would be the last to go because then people would notice, but it would be too late. 

So yes, that is a very serious concern of mine.  

Pornography is called to be freedom of speech as well, and I am strongly against that. A handful of states have declared pornography a health crisis (i.e. it's not just a problem for religious people).   Pornography is not covered under freedom of speech. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
13 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Same here! 

You know one of my favorite stories in politics? The friendship between Scalia and Ginsburg. They disagreed on 99.9% of the issues, but usually spent New Years Eve together. When Scalia died, Ginsburg was devastated. Ironically so was Kagan, another moderate-liberal member of the court. 

If they can be polite and friendly to one another, why can't we? 

That is seriously impressive!  You make me want to learn more about them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

Having had the pleasure of meeting @LiterateParakeet in person, and having spoken with her in depth on a ton of issues for several years now, I can back her up 100% on this. She's incredibly fair and balanced. Willing to critique BOTH the left and the right. 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

 

Absolutely I am concerned about the attacks on free speech and religion. Years ago, I heard Joel Skousen speak at a conference. He said that we were losing freedoms every day and no one was paying attention....the last freedom to go would be freedom of religion (which is related to the speech we are discussing, no?) . 

He said freedom of religion would be the last to go because then people would notice, but it would be too late. 

So yes, that is a very serious concern of mine.  

Pornography is called to be freedom of speech as well, and I am strongly against that. A handful of states have declared pornography a health crisis (i.e. it's not just a problem for religious people).   Pornography is not covered under freedom of speech. 

I will ask again.

 

Will you openly condemn the leftist efforts at shutting down conservatives right to free speech?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

17 hours ago, Vort said:

I know whereof I speak. I see this every day of my life. And it is not a Seattle-area-only phenomenon. Go to the eastern part of the state, which is much more conservative, and you will see Exactly The Same Thing. Go to ANY major college campus in the US not called BYU and you will see Exactly The Same Thing. Go to any large software corporation, where the average IQ skews at least a standard deviation above the norm, and you will see Exactly The Same Thing.

Seconded.  I have a leftist friend who actually thinks it's a virtue to not understand the opposing views.  That's right, ignorance is a virtue.  And yes, he's one example, he typically points to his sources for that attitude.  The Atlantic, The Guardian, etc.  He regards any public conversation about conservative ideas to be "giving a platform to hate" because that's how it's expressed in the media he consumes.  He, like the mayor of Berkeley, is perfectly at ease with Antifa's efforts to forcibly shut down events with conservative speakers because to him, they're defending freedom against Nazis, no different than the warriors who stormed the beaches of Normandy.

"Stop exaggerating, unixknight."

I am doing no such thing.  This guy expressed to me  how weird he thinks it is that I'm "defending Nazis" when I express my views on free speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
2 hours ago, mirkwood said:

I will ask again.

 

Will you openly condemn the leftist efforts at shutting down conservatives right to free speech?

You have my answer already. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
1 minute ago, mirkwood said:

Your evasiveness speaks loudly.

So does your own.

Mirkwood, I'm not your enemy. If you don't trust me, can't you trust Mormongator?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share