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.
My dad voted PC/Reform his entire life, and wasn't too happy with my Liberal/NDP ways. We would argue politics for entertainment, but the conversations would occasionally get loud and animated.
I remember going out to lunch with him one day, and he wanted to talk about the latest Michael Moore movie, Sicko, which deals with the healthcare system. I was a bit under the weather, and wasn't looking forward to one of our spirited discussions in a restaurant setting.
He started the conversation by saying: Michael Moore is a very smart man. The Americans could benefit from listening to him.
After living in the USA for 25 years, it suddenly came crashing down on me how right of center the USA is when compared to the rest of the world. In American terms, my dad who was as hard core right wing as you could get in Canada, was practically a communist.
Well I know someone in Canada who seems to get all his news from the far right political Canadian news site which is Rebel News and he is not religious. His world views would easily match a right wing Republican party member except for the religious aspect of it.
BTW it is not uncommon for unreligious and people that don't believe in religion to have a far right outlook and know politicians out there are like that. However of course a majority of unreligious and people that don't have religion are more progressive view and support left wing governments.
When you have more than 2.1 million military personnel (active duty and reserves), there mere 2.3% who are atheists or agnostics still amount to more than 40,000 individuals. Still more will be found in that 24+% group labelled other/unclassified/unknown. And of course, there are far more veterans than current members of the military.
My first set of dog tags, issued during basic training back in 1988, stated ATHEIST under the religious preference category. Later, when issued a new set by my unit, that was changed to NO PREFERENCE. I suspect the company clerk thought she was doing me a favor by scratching the dreaded word 'atheist'.
Of course, I'm neither right-wing nor conservative.
I have a good friend who self-identifies as conservative (a label that isn't entirely true, but I digress) who is an Army veteran, and he equates religious belief with mental illness and raising children in religion with child abuse.
I am an atheist and some flavor of right-leaning person.
I don't lean right because I value liberty more than equality, so I'm not a libertarian. I appreciate liberty, and know I would miss it if I lost it, but I'm also pragmatic when it comes to making sacrifices for the greater good.
If I could pick out a model for what my worldview is, it would be an imperial Roman who has lost belief in the pantheon gods but is committed to preserving the social order he grew up in. Not because of a reflexive traditionalism, but because I would have believed the social order was better than the alternatives. My model is shaped by what actually happened, as it turns out imperial Roman society was in fact better than what came after.
I see statecraft as the highest good. The building of complex and harmonious societies that can be turned toward the accomplishment of amazing things that individuals and tribes cannot even dream of. I'm fundamentally a builder. I love civilization and think the noble savage is bunk. Thomas Sowell has a quote to the effect that every generation is a race to civilize a new crop of barbarians. That rings true for me.
I don't believe in natural rights because they are clearly contingent on majority beliefs within society. I evaluate political claims according to the rubric of, "will this increase the fitness of my society?", not according to ideals. It's basically the law of the jungle, but a sophisticated form that countenances altruism as a way to reduce needless feuding, is not opposed to cooperation, and thinks ahead about feedback loops stemming from my actions and the actions of my government. Just as a for instance, empirically rules-based societies fare better than more anarchical societies. Their economies grow faster, they are more peaceful, and they tend to be more resilient to shocks. But ultimately I see life as a competition for survival and states are a supra-individual vehicle for that, so I have no problem with state power since wielded well it can enhance my fitness.
I'm not sure what this makes me... A paleo-conservative? A Confucian? I believe in social order in the purest sense, order meaning rank. I believe individuals can be ranked within society, and societies can be ranked within the world. I'm not an egalitarian and my bias toward hierarchy basically makes liberalism impossible for me to embrace, although I do see how in many instances it has the correct position vis-a-vis conservatism.
I'd say that I am now moderate right with some liberal leanings. Actually, after always being totally on the right there was one certain thing that happened recently that changed almost my entire mindset about politics. I now think I am thoroughly confused about it and I don't like either side at this time. So, I am still a little conservative but not much. I guess I'm one of those weird atheist types that used to be a Christian and it's just taking me a while to shake these things that just don't add up. Like religion and politics.
I once discussed with a few Vietnam veterans on an other discusson site and I got the impression that they had lost their faith after seeing so much atrocities. Politically they seemed to be moderate right wingers.
I once discussed with a few Vietnam veterans on an other discusson site and I got the impression that they had lost their faith after seeing so much atrocities. Politically they seemed to be moderate right wingers.
One must be careful in drawing conclusions because inherently in those environments people are effectively self-selecting; you were talking to people willing to be forthright about their thinking and reasoning in that particular context. But it makes perfect sense that war veterans would have seen things that shook their cozy worldview and their trust in an allegedly benevolent, caring god.
I am an atheist and some flavor of right-leaning person.
I don't lean right because I value liberty more than equality, so I'm not a libertarian. I appreciate liberty, and know I would miss it if I lost it, but I'm also pragmatic when it comes to making sacrifices for the greater good.
If I could pick out a model for what my worldview is, it would be an imperial Roman who has lost belief in the pantheon gods but is committed to preserving the social order he grew up in. Not because of a reflexive traditionalism, but because I would have believed the social order was better than the alternatives. My model is shaped by what actually happened, as it turns out imperial Roman society was in fact better than what came after.
I see statecraft as the highest good. The building of complex and harmonious societies that can be turned toward the accomplishment of amazing things that individuals and tribes cannot even dream of. I'm fundamentally a builder. I love civilization and think the noble savage is bunk. Thomas Sowell has a quote to the effect that every generation is a race to civilize a new crop of barbarians. That rings true for me.
I don't believe in natural rights because they are clearly contingent on majority beliefs within society. I evaluate political claims according to the rubric of, "will this increase the fitness of my society?", not according to ideals. It's basically the law of the jungle, but a sophisticated form that countenances altruism as a way to reduce needless feuding, is not opposed to cooperation, and thinks ahead about feedback loops stemming from my actions and the actions of my government. Just as a for instance, empirically rules-based societies fare better than more anarchical societies. Their economies grow faster, they are more peaceful, and they tend to be more resilient to shocks. But ultimately I see life as a competition for survival and states are a supra-individual vehicle for that, so I have no problem with state power since wielded well it can enhance my fitness.
I'm not sure what this makes me... A paleo-conservative? A Confucian? I believe in social order in the purest sense, order meaning rank. I believe individuals can be ranked within society, and societies can be ranked within the world. I'm not an egalitarian and my bias toward hierarchy basically makes liberalism impossible for me to embrace, although I do see how in many instances it has the correct position vis-a-vis conservatism.
And oh yeah, none of these beliefs require a god.
I resonate with quite a bit of this but am probably more progressive / leftist by default, and less concerned around "order". As MLK once aptly pointed out, excessive concern about "law and order" can become a proxy for avoiding uncomfortable discussions and adjustments; he regarded the white centrists as a greater enemy to the progress of minorities than the KKK and similar groups. At least you knew where those stood; it was the false friendship of the less obviously hostile people, who don't want the boat rocked when it needs rocking, that were the biggest problem as he saw it.
I'm not of course putting this on you, I am just saying it's a danger of leading with a value for serenity and order. That is not always possible. Sometimes for example, unions have to strike to achieve literally any of their objectives. Sometimes actions contrary to profits or growth must be taken to minimize other harms. Sometimes wealth is too concentrated in too few individuals to have a healthy and sustainable society.
I don't think you're wrong about life being ultimately a competition for survival (or resources if you prefer), at least by default, because that IS human nature. I also believe in working to transcend human nature though. If everything ultimately reduces to a question of war over resources (and resources are dwindling right now), then that isn't sustainable, either. We can encourage ourselves to understand our mutual interdependence and not see everyone as a competitor. We can work out ways to help each other through the cascade of crises we face. We CAN; I have no idea whether we WILL. By default, of course, we won't. But that is what good leadership is; it should call to the best within us. It should call to sacrifice for the common good when indicated.
Many American veterans tend to be right wing and conservative but many are surprisingly atheists, especially Vietnam veterans.
My dear late FIL grew up in the Episcopalian church. He was never religious and said nature was his religion. He was a conservative, though not a die-hard one, and in his later years became a liberal. He was a WWII vet.
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.
