Liberals vs Conservatives: History
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
I don't know about political liberals, but economic liberalism is probably worst thing that happened to civilization since humans evolved.
http://political-commentaries.blogspot. ... trade.html
=
http://political-commentaries.blogspot. ... trade.html
=
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 881
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
Hey guys, Old Democrats were analogous to modern Republicans, and Old Republicans were analogous to modern Democrats. This isn't that hard to understand!
Sigh.
Sigh.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1813
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
no shit I think I touched on that in a post you prolly didn't read while glossing over every other opinion that isn't yoursStarWarsStarTrek wrote:Hey guys, Old Democrats were analogous to modern Republicans, and Old Republicans were analogous to modern Democrats. This isn't that hard to understand!
Sigh.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
And who cares how they choose to call themselves? One's terrorist is another's freedom fighter, and one's savior is another's butcher.StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Hey guys, Old Democrats were analogous to modern Republicans, and Old Republicans were analogous to modern Democrats. This isn't that hard to understand!
Sigh.
- mojo
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
please? answers and source/sources? seriously intrigued, here. not so much in the constant arguing as in the actual information. i mean, debate is well and good, but at some point..
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1813
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
sure what do you want specifics on? because like others have said it can get complicated as hellmojo wrote:please? answers and source/sources? seriously intrigued, here. not so much in the constant arguing as in the actual information. i mean, debate is well and good, but at some point..
- mojo
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Here are a list of questions. Try and answer whether it was conservatives or liberals that fit the answer.
1. Which side supported slavery?
2. Which side opposed womans' rights?
3. Which side opposed labor laws?
4. Which side supported the spoils system?
5. Which side opposed Civil Rights?
6. Which side opposes gay marriage?
7. Which side contains all the fundies?
8. Which side is the KKK on?
9. Which side is the westbro bapist church on?
10. Which side has lower average IQ's?
- mojo
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 881
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
I was trying to get conservatives or moderates to examine their own thinking instead of me telling them.Jedi Master Spock wrote:Now, I'm not exactly conservative (see here for a graph of many SFJ residents on Political Compass) but this strikes me as a rather provocative opening post. You'd be more likely, I think, to get productive discussion on the issue if you simply had said:
"Here are the reasons why I think liberals are better than conservatives: (list)."
There are studies showing that higher IQ people tend to be more liberal, although to be fair IQ tests are not always high indicators of intelligence.As Cocytus points out, it's generally a little more nuanced of an issue than your questions suggest. Also, I am fairly suspicious of any claims that conservative or liberal people have a higher IQ; while I might think that liberals are smarter, I would want to see iron-clad proof before proceeding to make such a broad claim.
So what?For example, within the US, it is very well documented that blacks score poorly on IQ tests, but generally vote for the Democrats, the more liberal of the US's two main parties.
You're right. High IQ conservatives such as Rupert Murdock seek to hack into the calls of children murder victims and create the disgrace to human intelligence that is Fox News.So any study of liberalism and IQ in the US must also address the issue of race and IQ - either controlling for it (in which case you arguably aren't actually presenting the average IQ of a liberal or average IQ of a conservative in the US), or not controlling for it (in which case your measurement says more about race than intelligence).
That's race. Then there's social class and income. And education, something which is difficult to disentangle from IQ, especially in conjunction with career choice. High IQ conservatives may not be aiming for the same sorts of jobs as high IQ liberals. I can believe that if we control for all other relevant variables, liberals tend to have higher IQs, but I would still want to see sources demonstrating that.
That's wrong. Most people are either openly moderate, or openly liberal/conservative, the definition between the two are well defined.Then, finally, there's the problem of how to define a liberal or conservative. There isn't a widely accepted objective standard for sorting people into the two categories. If you vary your controls and your method of measuring liberality and conservatism, I wouldn't be surprised if you could work your way into saying that either group has a higher IQ using just studies of the same country (e.g., the US).
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
What makes you think we have not examined our political positions or opinions and what the hell makes you think that some one like you who preaches other peoples crap rather than forming your own opinion could get us to do so?.StarWarsStarTrek wrote:
I was trying to get conservatives or moderates to examine their own thinking instead of me telling them.
So a test to see how intelligent people are and not good indicators to show how intelligent people are?.There are studies showing that higher IQ people tend to be more liberal, although to be fair IQ tests are not always high indicators of intelligence.
It means that liberal parties promote acceptance a lot more than others so minority groups ect tend to vote for them regardless of how smart they are.So what?
Rupert Murdock likely knew fuck all about it.You're right. High IQ conservatives such as Rupert Murdock seek to hack into the calls of children murder victims and create the disgrace to human intelligence that is Fox News.
The definition of the terms are well defined however individuals are far more complex.That's wrong. Most people are either openly moderate, or openly liberal/conservative, the definition between the two are well defined.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1813
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
and who are you to do that? you obviously haven't examined your own extreme and grandiose viewsStarWarsStarTrek wrote:
I was trying to get conservatives or moderates to examine their own thinking instead of me telling them.
your saying you wanted to change the minds of others that's awfully arrogant of you who are you to think your views are more correct then others
[
StarWarsStarTrek wrote: There are studies showing that higher IQ people tend to be more liberal, although to be fair IQ tests are not always high indicators of intelligence.
LOL WOW did you just back track on your near biblical reverence for IQ's degrees and intelligence?
it has more to do with the environment liberals have preached too for the better part of awhile not that Conservatism among minorities isn't non existentStarWarsStarTrek wrote: So what?
why of course we're going to mock fox news as if it represents over all Ruperts viewsStarWarsStarTrek wrote: You're right. High IQ conservatives such as Rupert Murdock seek to hack into the calls of children murder victims and create the disgrace to human intelligence that is Fox News.
protip the man reared a watch dog and he lost control of it. He tried to make peace between Fox and Obama (at Obamas request no less) and it lasted all of..five days
speaking in generalities?StarWarsStarTrek wrote:
That's wrong. Most people are either openly moderate, or openly liberal/conservative, the definition between the two are well defined.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
Plus people tend to be both conservative or liberal depending on the circumstances.
Forinstance in regards to rape i am conservative while for prostitution i am liberal....:).
Forinstance in regards to rape i am conservative while for prostitution i am liberal....:).
-
- Bridge Officer
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives: History
Religious Christians, perhaps. Conservatives and fundamentalists? No. The abolitionists were motivated by religious sentiment, or at least most of them were, but if you read the Bible itself it frankly rather tends to support the slave owners. Even modern day fundies (the honest ones, at least) acknowledge this.Admiral Breetai wrote:fun little fact: there were a vast number of religious Christian conservatives in both the north and the south who were vehemently opposed to slavery and were so specifically because they believed God said it was wrong.
Not really, no. The South mocked and derided them as ivory-towered intellectuals and dangerous liberals who assaulted the home and hearth of the good Christian family (including its slaves/servants) and individual freedoms and property rights. Kind of like how modern Southerners attack big government.SWSt these people for years made up the bulk of the anti slavery side and a major source of the vote that got Lincoln into office. These people mocked and derided by the South as 'ignorant fundamentalists" and "dangerous zealots" among other things that kinda draws parallels with todays "pop culture atheists" deriding Christianity..were largely responsible for the united states of Americas end of slavery.
Why was Jackson so bad? He basically was the first step towards a true democracy of the people that wasn't all run by the rich elites. Modern people might not agree with all his policies, but calling him evil is surely a stretch.it's especially difficult when you consider that before the cold war "liberal" and "conservative" in terms of definition was reversed with each meaning it's opposite and thus you had monsters like Andrew Jackson who while was basically one of the manliest world leaders of the modern world...was also pretty close to "evil villain" evil probably would of been called and herald as "a Liberal"