socio-politics

&

Sep 06 2008

Why true discussion between conservatives and liberals is a lost cause

Published by aluglio at 7:09 pm under Society Edit This

Time to go back to emphasizing the socio part of socio-politics, because the purely political aspect has been killing me.

A few posts back, I posted the differences between conservatives and liberals.  Here’s how those differences relate to the current situation.

Conservatives have a specific agenda that liberals can never understand, and conservatives see liberals as coming from a completely different world.  Liberals seek discussion, and may very possibly hate a conservatives viewpoint, but will at least get all of the details to make sure that they understand the argument correctly.  Alternately, conservatives can not relate to ideas unrelated to their realm of thought, as they see the “right” way for things to be as very specific.

A discussion between two liberals is likely to involve very different viewpoints, but that’s the whole point - differing viewpoints are invaluable because seeing something from something other than your instinctive point of view is the best way to learn and better your own personal theories.

Two conservatives, assuming that they agree about what they see as the most important issues, will inevitably state their own views back and forth, and be in almost complete agreement for much of the time - if they are not in agreement, an argument will result where they will try to convince each other of why their own view is the correct one, though they’ll still walk away believing their own view.  This is not to say that their views can not change; they inevitably will at points, though it takes a specific event to act as a catalyst for giving the conservative reason to adopt the different view.  This differs from a liberals aptness to change, which is attributed to a genuine desire to learn.

When speaking to a liberal, a conservative will believe that they are speaking to somebody that just completely does not “get it,” and will be extremely reluctant to even entertain the liberals’ thoughts because the conservative believes that they know better.  The liberal will end up frustrated from the conservatives’ steadfastness and inability to truly consider a different viewpoint and will end up either staying frustrated and angry or will avoid speaking their own views in favor of just letting the conservative speak.

That being said, many, if not most, democrats are not actually liberal.  A true liberal would not tell a conservative that what they believe is wrong because everybody sees things from a different perspective.  In political discussions today, there are plenty of democrats that will take a subject such as abortion, gun rights, taxes, etc. and say that what they believe is correct and that’s all there is to it, though that is a conservative approach.

The exemption to all of this for liberals pertains to issues concerning the general welfare of society.  A key belief for liberals concerns the necessity to help those in need, and from this they will not budge because, if people are in need as so many are, they are being underrepresented and their views are not being given the same weight as others.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
Possibly-related Articles:                                        (auto-generated)

4 Responses to “Why true discussion between conservatives and liberals is a lost cause”

  1. mikeywriteswellon 06 Sep 2008 at 9:49 pm edit this

    I’ll have to get back to you on this one, but I like it!

    http://waxingpoetically.today.com

    http://artfromtheoutskirts.today.com

  2. Virginia Shanahanon 06 Sep 2008 at 10:03 pm edit this

    That was a very well written opinion piece. Unfortunately it’s not well thought out and the entire premise is one sided and wrong.

    When attempting to present yourself as an unbiased intellect, you must not permit your slip to show.

  3. khlindseyon 07 Sep 2008 at 3:35 pm edit this

    I agree with you: This is hell. Opinion is grounded in a certain position that contains inherent underlying assumptions. My philosophical grounding in Existential Phenomenology states that there is no such thing as “an objective opinion” because no one is capable of transcending their own noetic horizon. I also know of no intellect that would ever presume to be “unbiased”. “True discussion” is made impossible when people refuse to bring an opposing posititon, along with support for that posistion, to the table.

  4. aluglioon 07 Sep 2008 at 7:34 pm edit this

    Did Virginia even bother reading the post?

    What I see as one of the bigger points that I made was that all people have opinions and that in itself is extremely limiting. Debate is how you see a different perspective, and therefore loosen the hold that your instinctual reaction has.

    Virginia didn’t like that I stated conservatives allow their gut reaction to dictate their approach to discourse, but if you disagree and don’t use any kind of support for your argument then you’re just exemplifying my point.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.
Not A Member? Register for Free!

Some Today.com contributors may have received a fee or a promotional product or service from a manufacturer for promotional consideration, while others receive no consideration at all. Each contributor is responsible for disclosing any such promotional consideration.