Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,060,466 times
Reputation: 11862
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpg35223
I think this is highly self-congratulatory nonsense, and I'm not even a conservative. Both mindsets are highly close-minded, each beginning with a preconceived belief system, followed by only accepting information that already fits with that mindset. In that sense, the vast majority of self-termed liberals are just as limited in their reading and worldview as any paleoconservative. When I engage a self-described liberal in any kind of discussion, I tend to find them extraordinarily ill-informed, at best just having sizable gaps in their knowledge.
Yes, self-labelled liberals or conservatives both seem very narrow-minded and one-eyed, only listening to whatever backs up their own point of view of reinforces their bias.
Case in point, I was recently told I 'couldn't be a liberal' because I didn't believe all women should have abortion on demand for any reason. I suppose merely holding this one view made me a 'conservative.' I mean there are probably conservatives who would say not be associated with anybody who supported gay marriage but otherwise shared their views: both views are pretty ludicrous, if you ask me.
There is a difference between a true liberal and somebody who believes they are pursuing a so-called 'liberal' dogma. Sometimes the two do actually kind of align, sometimes not. I think the spirit of true liberalism was stronger in the 60s, until it was taken over by all-powerful interest groups.
Biologically, humans are roving pack omnivores. Any pack requires a few who are very adventurous and will strike out to discover new territory, a few others who refuse to quickly follow, and a bunch in the middle who will follow those who are at opposite ends that can prevail. The need for the brave risk takers, the cautious and wary, who never like taking risks, and the safety of being in the middle, where most of us are, is always present.
Since we all have big brains, all of us use reason to a high degree, but our biological instincts are still there, and I believe that although we are as unaware of our instincts as all the other living creatures are, they still play a larger part in who we are as individuals than our ability to reason, which only tempers our instincts a little. Instinctively, very smart people tend to attract other very smart people as mates, just as very slow people, who do the same. The big middle goes back and forth between these extremes in smaller degrees.
I'm not saying a political belief defines which is which. Life is much more than just politics. But I believe that a lot of what we prefer to believe, who we are attracted to, and much of our actions in life are reflected by the genes we have and where in the pack we best fit.
'Liberal' and 'conservative' are relative terms that are dependant on the socio-cultural norms of the time. In 2012 America it's seen as 'conservative' to be Christian. In Britannia in 200 AD it was conservative to be a pagan and 'liberal' to be Christian. Now things are switching, lol.
You don't need to go all the way back to Roman times to find an example of changes in perception of what's liberal and conservative, or a shift of association with either term in the modern sense.
The classical meaning of liberalism of the 19th century was limited government, anti-monarchy, etc. and the (relatively new at that time) liberal notions then such as free markets, freedom of religion, speech, equality before the law etc. which often has quite different associations with the term liberal used in many nations today.
Actually, your country itself is an example of one that retains the older (19th century, classical) meaning of liberal, where the rest of the English speaking world (I think?) changed their definitions of liberal, since then, to what people associate with "left wing" view of more government intervention to try to make society run better, whereas the classical liberalism meant less government intervention to try to make society run better.
I absolutely do not think people are born anyway. They do have personality traits that are inherited and probably a certain IQ level that may or may not be reached in life. What one does with what they inherit is based more on enviornment and I don't mean only family.
If we are born conservative or liberal, how can one explain how we change with age and maturity? Some become more liberal and some conservative or we switch back and forth. I do believe most of us are a mixture of the two.
I certainly know, even at my age, I am still changing my mind of issues. How I learn and re-examine is based on exposure, reading, listening, discussing, etc. I am not just referring to politics by the way, I am referring to health issues, religion, eating habits, spending habits and a whole string of other things. There are parts of me that are extremely conservative, some that are very liberal and others that fall inbetween. I do think I am much more tolerant than I was 10, 20 or 30 years ago.
Saw the other thread about "born gay?" and it brought up a different thought.
Researchers have been able to use magnetic fields to basically turn on or off sections of the brain, and people who have had brain injuries have sometimes spontaneously changed attitudes including religion and political affiliation. I hesitate to say it, but the studies I have read indicated that the trend was for people with damaged brains to become more conservative. I make nothing of that other than the possibility there might be an "overlay" of the brain that when damaged causes the brain to revert.
My observation of kids as I was growing up was that some kids seemed quite set in their views very early on, while others went through various permutations of attitudes and behaviors until they locked into one.
So:
1. are attitudes based on nurture or nature?
2. can they be changed by "boot camps" or other means?
For those of you who can't resist...
3. is one attitude superior to others?
1. Mostly nurture.
2. Education levels change standings. Older people who are conservatives with just highschool degrees, the longer their children are in higher education, the more likely they seem to end up be liberals.
3. I'd want to say no, we need both standpoints. Though currently, I side with the liberals much more often. Right is too far right. They're too selfish, uneducated rantings, and misunderstand everything about basic economics. That and growing up I thought they were the group of small government, and these days they're busy telling people how to live their lives and increasing size of government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita
I certainly know, even at my age, I am still changing my mind of issues. How I learn and re-examine is based on exposure, reading, listening, discussing, etc. I am not just referring to politics by the way, I am referring to health issues, religion, eating habits, spending habits and a whole string of other things. There are parts of me that are extremely conservative, some that are very liberal and others that fall inbetween. I do think I am much more tolerant than I was 10, 20 or 30 years ago.
I'm constantly changing and refining my beliefs as well. I tend to fall in as being a social liberal and fiscal conservative. Though I have a much higher understanding of economics than the conservative party...
Not really. i thni they are born with a childs mind that day dreams and thinks thngs are as their parents and they will automatically inherit their parents lifestylre or better. they become more gronded with age and certainly experience. If they are responsible for more they wil become more grounded in reality. If they become old and can't cope with responsibilty they become depdnent which means often they are liberal because of wanting.
YES, I do believe that you are born that way. Those who are born a little stronger- a bit more brighter than average...better looking become conservatives- The weaker ones- the runts of the litter...become liberals..They have to embrace liberalism to survive...They organize and team up - If you notice liberals operate in swarms- Conservatives are more likely to be lone wolves.
I thought that you start off liberal and then become conservative as you age and your income increases.
No, what you describe above is called selfishness, not conservatism.
If everyone thought that way, the liberal who was just 'starting off, would never have to chance, or be given the opportunity to increase their income in the first place.
Half of the Senate and the House of Representitives are made up of older, predominantly rich, democratics and liberals. Age and income has no barring on your political philosophy. If it did, we wouldn't have any younger conservative politicians, and all of our Democratic politicians would be changing party, as they got older.
Does anyone remember the old TV sit-com called "Family Ties?"...The parents in the show were "former hippies" with very liberal views. But their oldest son Alex became "ultra conservative."...I think some kids decide to rebel against their parents' beliefs and ideologies to try to establish an identity of their very own. I saw this happen to a certain degree with my oldest son. He didn't become just like Alex on the sit-com but he was looking for ways to step-out of the "fold" and "mold" and come into his "very own" a little more...None of this showed-up until he became a teenager. Later in life he did a "turn-around" and came back to his "roots" a little more. (His choice!)...I felt entitled to expand my views and beliefs as I moved through life. (Beyond what my parents believed.)...What's important to me today is to remain "free." (Versus pledging my allegiance to either political party.) I want to be able to make-up my own mind about each issue and candidate.
I think people are definitely born liberal. Conservatism has to be ingrained and beat into someone's head from a young age for people to fall for it.
When I first went to college, my peers and I really began to talk about politics. I noticed very quickly that the conservatives in the group have been having their parents politics rammed down their throats since they were toddlers. Me and the other liberals though, the experience was almost always the same. Our parents didn't care one bit who we voted for. We were all told we can vote for and affiliate ourselves with whatever politics we want. Hell, my mother didn't even discuss her own political views with me until I was 18.
Now fiscal conservatism is a different story. I think various experiences (nurture) in life can greatly influence ones stance on how the government handles it's people's money and taxes. The social conservatism though? Yeah, that has to be rammed down your throat to buy into it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
