Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Really? What I'd heard were that there are a lot of black Americans who are pretty socially conservative, but still usually vote for Democrats because they're not the party actively catering to racists.
African Americans, in sociological generalization, are socially/religiously conservative (thus putting them at odds with LGBT rights) but typically more left wing on econ and racial justice. One of the biggest constituencies of the American Communist Party, between the 1940s to 1960s
were African Americans and were constantly the targets of the government during the Cold War due to providing left wing services, including community centers/organization and providing kids in their neighborhood free meals (along with the issue of the Black Panthers)
African Americans being left wing on economics and social justice makes sense if you assume African Americans are Left Wing Christians, and follow Socialist Christian tendencies.
edited 16th Apr '16 5:11:32 PM by PotatoesRock
I'm not familiar the demographics, but I can say with certainty that yes, social conservatism is not exclusive to white people, nor is it only a thing only minorities believe in.
Also: Although your (not-so)average wealthy white gay guy may not be crazy about social conservatism, you do see kind of similar tendencies there, sometimes.
edited 16th Apr '16 5:30:06 PM by CassidyTheDevil
Libertarians aren't social conservatives, though. They're basically capitalist social liberals.
Leviticus 19:34
They often have some fairly conservative positions, even if they're for legalizing drugs/don't want to ban gay sex. "Blacks need to pull up their pants, get off welfare and get a job, feminists need to stop whining, I don't want any more Muslim immigrants", that kind of thing.
Generally not the sort of positions that would make them popular with the progressive left.
edited 16th Apr '16 5:41:55 PM by majoraoftime
According to Wikipedia, Leftism vs Rightism is "Egalitarianism vs. Hierarchy". So there is a definition, here.
Leviticus 19:34Yes, but needless to say, that doesn't translate into actual practical beliefs precisely, mostly just feelings that people labeled. Certainly, they may tend to agree in practice on issues, but that's mostly culture.
So, for example, you do see plenty of libertarians who were drawn to the ideology because they felt subconsciously it was a way to defend the hierarchies they felt they belonged to and so they tend to have lower empathy for the marginalized.
But obviously, there's nothing intrinsically right-wing about being for free speech or civil liberties in general, for example. It's how you approach the issue emotionally that matters, not so much how that translates to policy.
I have to point out that classical liberalism, waaay back, was originally cooked up by egalitarians who believed the government was unfairly granting privilege. Which, they were. But it only took a right-wing apologetic character later on.
As I was saying earlier, although the New Left isn't particularly pro-market to say the least, they started to use the same sorts of "free market" arguments against corporations.
edited 16th Apr '16 6:17:17 PM by CassidyTheDevil
This part I'm curious about. Although I think I know what you mean. During my conspiracy nut phase (let's just say I used to be a 9/11 truther), I was heavily libertarian thinking, but for left-wing reasons. My brother
is libertarian for extremely right-wing reasons.
I wanted to see government collapse so I could see a new one that represented the needs of all the regular people be created in its place. My brother wants to see the government collapse because he believes it's enabling the racial and gender equality he hates so much. Really makes me rethink the stupidity of my past views on government.
That doesn't sound like you were a Libertarian so much as either an Anarchist (if the replacement govemrent you wanted was meant to no longer be top down) or an old style revolutionaryist, possibly of the Communsit variety.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranOh. My. God. He sounds like a SJW, but in reverse. The same emotionally-charged self-righteousness; the same ill-informed, myopic, hypocrisy.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.The day the term "SJW" leaves the intelligent discussion vocabulary will be a good one, it's such a meaningless and subjective term.
Assholes are assholes, just call them that.
Honestly Bonsai, you seem to have some 'fun' family politically, I'd guess anger at the system can drive people in a variety of directions.
Oh and apparently this[1]
has been appearing on the NYC subway, the top comment is worth a good chuckle.
edited 16th Apr '16 6:36:09 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranYeah...Ironic. The big shouty hypocrites hate each other for the exactly the same reasons. Who would've guessed?
Yeah, I think you've got the right idea what I meant. But I don't really have much to add to that, although if you have any money I'd recommend The Reactionary Mind: Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Sarah Palin
. Author is a liberal, but conservative reviewers have said it's accurate, which seems high praise.
That's why I prefer meritocracy, personally...Maybe not workable in reality, but to me it's a preferable middle ground ethically. But conservatives don't actually like meritocracy much, just give it lip service occasionally. Liberals at least try to take it seriously to an extent.
edited 16th Apr '16 8:36:32 PM by CassidyTheDevil
Ted Cruz swept Wyoming’s remaining 14 delegates at Saturday's state convention.
Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval (R) endorsed John Kasich for president on Saturday.
edited 16th Apr '16 9:13:44 PM by Demonic_Braeburn
Any group who acts like morons ironically will eventually find itself swamped by morons who think themselves to be in good company.The core problem with a meritocracy is deciding how merit is chosen. The "choosers" will inevitably discover that they have the power to control the system and will become corrupt. If there are no choosers, then it will become a Social Darwinist anarchy that forms its own power cliques, who will then seize control of the society.
There is no way to guarantee a stable equilibrium without making its governance no longer meritocratic. For all its flaws, Divergent makes a very interesting study of this problem: its core social stratification mechanism is meritocratic.
edited 16th Apr '16 9:38:40 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

The current system piles on crushing student debt. A number of these kids saw their parents go bankrupt, lose their 401ks/savings, got defaulted on, their houses revoked or even saw their parents get screwed by insane medical bills.
The economic recovery has failed to supply enough jobs for workers at a meaningful pace causing a potential lost generation like Japan who were jammed through school and college, told they could get a good job if they just got a degree, and surprise surprise, all that waited them at the other end of the tunnel was a Boat going to Shitcreak.
I wouldn't say a young person potentially voting for Sanders and wanting universal healthcare or less crushing college debt or guarantees of steady, if not expanded, Social Security / Medicare for their parents, doesn't have a stake.
I WILL admit I plan to vote for Sanders in the primary and I would be way more thrilled with him than Hillary, because I'd like to see more Healthcare, less Military spending, more Government provided social services, more Anti-Trust crackdowns, etc.
I agree with basically both of their policies one way or another but ultimately I think Hillary is the worse candidate not based on she has inferior policy (she's more nuanced but I think squaring the circle has its limits and we've reached those limits)., Personally I think she's fucking gaffe prone as Biden, if not worse than him. You might chalk it up as media blowing it up but issues with her bringing up Harry Kissinger as a good example and trying to awkwardly Nancy Reagan as pro Gay with the "Conversation on AIDS" worries me.
There's also the problem she comes off as horrendously secretive with the E-Mail Server and the Wall Street speeches, which runs afoul and counter to Obama, while not entirely transparent or open, at least made efforts and motions to be more transparent, which makes her seem squirrely and "hiding something".
Basically I'm terrified Hillary, even though she's probably going to be a more hawkish Obama and the general vibe she'll be laxer on Wall Stree, and thus middle of the course, is going to shoot herself in the foot with a Gatling gun because she and her campaign staff/speechwriters seem to have all the self awareness/self preservation of the common depiction of the Lemming running off of a cliff, with regards to poison pill statements she keeps blurting out. Which is why I keep accusing her of being in a bubble. Because I don't trust her to stop these mental time warps to the past.
Personally, I'd feel relieved with Clinton if she got the nomination and then was cryogenically frozen until after Election Day so she doesn't blurt out some other nonsense or implicate herself with some other thing she's squirreling away.
Which potentially puts it that the Democratic electorate is much more to the left than Clinton, but Hillary via her husband, Senatorship and running the State Department, has the trust of the public over a relatively minor if very dedicated senator.
Either China or Europe would be the most likely places for a next-gen crisis to occur. Europe if the Euro starts unraveling, while China's economic boom sputters out.
edited 16th Apr '16 5:02:32 PM by PotatoesRock