Differences Between Conservatives and Liberals

[questor]

Since you have seen fit to attack me:

There is nothing "educational" or informative in your first post here. It is, in fact, a devisive, rhetorically malicious, taunting, baiting, insulting, prevaricating, misleading, erroneous, fallacious and trite example of a thinly veiled rant.

Before I take offense, why don't you explain exactly what YOU are ranting about?

[Essay]

Yes Pyro, tell us what you really think.

...but:

Originally Posted by questor

What does science have to do with politics? All people of the world should embrace conserving the environment, it's the only environment we live in. In my opinion the best way and only way to save the earth is to reduce population to a sustainable number. But no one is talking about that.

...

As former PM Tony Blair said on Charlie Rose, last night, if I recall correctly....
"Politics hasn't caught up with what globalization has done to the rest of the world."

Your opinion about population is fine, but it is limited in its scope of seeing the problem and in offering solutions.
After all, just a few hundred million people could still destroy the global biosphere, given a profligate enough lifestyle.

Science offers ways to see the problems integrated from various perspectives (including various global perspectives) and offers even more in the way of technological, educational, and systemic solutions to those problems.

"What does science have to do with politics?" is an attitude that kind of sums up a major problem with conservatism, I think.

Thoughts?
~


UPDATE:
Well, I was close (just to update that "quote" I wrote, above). Tony Blair actually said:
"I think what's most interesting about politics today is that politics hasn't yet caught up with what globalization's doing to the world; and as I say, what globalization's doing is pushing everyone together."
"And there is no turning back. That's why I sometimes say, as important as left versus right in today's politics, is actually open versus closed; where are you on immigration, trade, international engagement...."

Questor, isn't focusing on population as the cause of all these problems just a way to avoid acknowledging the many possible solutions that can handle the current and projected population? It would require a lot of effort to change the trajectory for the future of the world; regenerating the biosphere, accommodating even the least among us. Continuing on a business-as-usual path will lead more quickly to the solution you've focused on; a much lower population, with limited profligacy; and probably enforced by a pandemic (but possibly by warfare -or no doubt some combination thereof).

But seriously, do you not see what science should have to do with politics?

~Thanks,

[questor]

I cannot see what science has to do with politics per se. Whay aspects of science are an integral part of politics? Here are some definitions of politics:

<quote> Definitions of politics on the Web:
social relations involving intrigue to gain authority or power; "office politics is often counterproductive"
the study of government of states and other political units
the profession devoted to governing and to political affairs
the opinion you hold with respect to political questions
the activities and affairs involved in managing a state or a government; "unemployment dominated the politics of the inter-war years"; "government agencies multiplied beyond the control of representative politics"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/
I don't see anything scientific here unless you are talking about Political Science which is the study of politics.

[Pyrotex]

Originally Posted by questor

Since you have seen fit to attack me:
Before I take offense, why don't you explain exactly what YOU are ranting about?

questor, questor, questor... it's okay. calm down.

I wasn't "ranting" about anything, dear boy.

What I was doing was merely accusing you of premeditated character assassination of the very class of people who gave us Rule of Law, Trial by Jury, Capitalism, Democracy, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, the Equality of Women and People of Color -- and your freedom to publicly malign that class of people.

Peace be unto thee, and amen.

[questor]

Pyro. excuse me, I did not know the modern American liberal '' gave us Rule of Law, Trial by Jury, Capitalism, Democracy, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, the Equality of Women and People of Color''. I always thought these were a culmination of ideas from ancient Greek civilization, English common law and our founding fathers.
If you choose to do so, you may re-read what I wrote in my first thread on this subject. i.e. ''This gives an idea of one conservatives view of the dichotomy of ideas.
My own view may differ in some respects, I always try to ascertain which course of action is best for society. Shouldn't everyone?''


Peace to you and reading comprehension.

[Pyrotex]

Originally Posted by questor

Pyro. excuse me, I did not know the modern American liberal '' gave us Rule of Law, Trial by Jury, Capitalism, Democracy, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, the Equality of Women and People of Color''. I always thought these were a culmination of ideas from ancient Greek civilization, English common law and our founding fathers....

"Liberals" of each generation, of each civilization, were those who declared that the status quo was not good enough and who were willing to lay their lives down for the possibility that a NEW idea, a NEW form of governance, a NEW form of justice, a NEW form of economic system, a NEW concept of "right", a NEW Social Order -- was worth creating, even if it meant the destruction of centuries-old traditions.

Jesus, George Washington, Socrates, Demosthenes, Teddy Roosevelt -- they are considered "conservatives" by some today, because they founded the traditions that today's conservatives prize so highly.

But in their own times and in their own cultures, they were the "liberals" -- the radicals, the fanatics, the rabble rousers who threatened to crash the status quo down upon everyone's head for the sake of some theoretical concept that all right-thinking people of the day scorned.

[questor]

You are correct in saying that liberals are never satisfied with the way things are, this is why they constantly try to ''re-invent the wheel''. Social experimentation can carry great cost..witness the Great Society, and the current economic breakdown caused by trying to get unqualified buyers into
a property they can't afford. Many Liberal ideas just don't work, especially when they go against common sense. For instance our educational system. The liberals have been in charge for years and have been unable to deliver
a product to compete with most of the world's advanced societies. They can't get a handle on why our schools fail.
link: U.S. falls in education rank compared to other countries | The Kapio
This shows an inability to understand the problem and confusion about cause and effect. The world is constantly evolving, but human nature and market laws stay fairly constant. If it aint broke, don't fix it.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by questor

You are correct in saying that liberals are never satisfied with the way things are, this is why they constantly try to ''re-invent the wheel''. Social experimentation can carry great cost..witness the Great Society, and the current economic breakdown caused by trying to get unqualified buyers into
a property they can't afford. Many Liberal ideas just don't work, especially when they go against common sense. For instance our educational system. The liberals have been in charge for years and have been unable to deliver
a product to compete with most of the world's advanced societies. They can't get a handle on why our schools fail.
link: U.S. falls in education rank compared to other countries | The Kapio
This shows an inability to understand the problem and confusion about cause and effect. The world is constantly evolving, but human nature and market laws stay fairly constant. If it aint broke, don't fix it.

Questor, how do you manage to walk around? It must take tremendous cojones to lay all those things at the feet of liberals. If not for liberals we would all still be living in a feudal society with no freedoms, no education, a state religion you could be put to death for questioning. If it ain't broke don't fix it? Who are you to say it isn't broke? It wasn't broke during medieval times either but we went ahead and pushed for change. change is a good thing questor, with out change the list of horrific conservative values that would still be the laws of the land is too big to even imagine, I guess you assume you would have been part of the ruling class? . North America wouldn't have been discovered or for that matter homosapiens wouldn't have left Africa. The Neanderthals were conservative and look where it got them.

[Essay]

Originally Posted by questor

Social experimentation can carry great cost..witness the Great Society.... ?
. . . .
If it aint broke, don't fix it.

I guess what we have here is a failure to communicate about agreement on when something is broke.

===

"This shows an inability to understand the problem and confusion about cause and effect." -Questor

...for instance, you think:
"...and the current economic breakdown [was] caused by trying to get unqualified buyers into a property they can't afford." -Q

...so you think it was liberals? "trying to get unqualified buyers into a property" so that they could create those "creative" financial instruments, securitized mortgage backed bonds, to have something to sell to big investors (inflating them) to make them also look attractive as an actual investment. Most of the problem comes from those investments in other investments (and even tertiary and 4th degree investments) leveraged more than 20 or 30 times on the originally lousy mortgages, and not from the sub-prime mortgages themselves.

McCain picked Senator (and crook) Phil Graham as his campaign's co-chairman and campaign economic advisor. Phil Graham ...a 10,000 page Omnibus bill, a 260 page bill of his own which allowed deregulation of the banks and finance institutions. What you saw last week -- economic collapse on Wall Street due to pure corruption and greed -- was the direct result of Graham's deregulation bill.
McCain: Deregulation Helpful to Economy | Drudge Retort

...maybe we just have different definitions of "liberals."
===

"Many Liberal ideas just don't work, especially when they go against common sense." -Questor

What is your common sense based on? (see also: the fallacy of "common sense")
Why are we so stupid?

But aside from that, I use history to guide my common sense. What does history show us about the end results of that octopus of free-enterprise fundamentalism? Something along the lines of the most un-Christian exploitation of resources and labor, from slavery, child labor, and neo-slavery, perhaps?
The Untold History of Post-Civil War ‘Neoslavery’ HighBoldtage

Yes, the market would self correct if left alone; but that is analogous to a population crash in a changing ecosystems.
Market correction is just another name for survival of the fittest.

Does civilization allow us no benefit in leaving the jungle; or are we still bound by the law of the jungle?

~

[questor]

Moon, you are correct....''North America wouldn't have been discovered ''
Columbus and his crowd were indeed among the first liberals:
1. They didn't know where they were going
2. When they got there they didn't know where they were
3. And they did it all with other people's money