Conservatives > Liberals

<p>By ANDREW KLAVAN | Posted Tuesday, April 24, 2007 4:30 PM PT
The thing I like best about being a conservative is that I don't have to lie. I don't have to pretend that men and women are the same. I don't have to declare that failed or oppressive cultures are as good as mine. </p>

<p>Nor do I have to say that everyone's special or that the rich cause poverty or that all religions are a path to God. I don't have to claim that a bad writer like Alice Walker is a good one or that a good writer like Toni Morrison is a great one. I don't have to pretend that Islam means peace. </p>

<p>Of course, like everything, this candor has its price. A politics that depends on honesty will be, by nature, often impolite. Good manners and hypocrisy are intimately intertwined, and so conservatives, with their gimlet-eyed view of the world, are always susceptible to charges of incivility. It's not really nice, you know, to describe things as they are. </p>

<p>This is leftism's great strength: It's all white lies. </p>

<p>That's its only advantage, as far as I can tell. None of its programs actually work, after all. From statism and income redistribution to liberalized criminal laws and multiculturalism, from its assault on religion to its redefinition of family, leftist policies have made the common life worse wherever they're installed. </p>

<p>But because it depends on — indeed is defined by — describing the human condition inaccurately, leftism is nothing if not polite. With its tortuous attempts to rename unpleasant facts out of existence — he's not crippled, dear, he's handicapped; it's not a slum, it's an inner city; it's not surrender, it's redeployment — leftism has outlived its own failure by hiding itself within the most labyrinthine construct of social delicacy since Victoria was queen.
This is no small thing. To rewrite the rules of courteous behavior is to wield enormous power. I see it in Southern California, in the bleeding heart of leftism, where I live. I've been banned from my monthly poker game, lost tennis partners, lost friends — not because I'm belligerent but because I've wondered aloud if the people shouldn't be allowed to make their own abortion laws, say, or if the world might not be a better place without the United Nations. </p>

<p>It's a rotten feeling. I sometimes think that I'd rather be deemed evil than a boor. Wickedness has some flair to it, even a whiff of radicalism. If you molest a child, there's always a chance that you can get the ACLU to defend you as a cultural innovator. </p>

<p>But if you make a remark at table about the destructive social effects of broken homes and then discover that your dinner partner is a divorcee — trust me, you feel like a real louse. It's manners, not morals, that lay the borderlines of our behavior. </p>

<p>This, I believe, is the reason conservative politicians so often lose their nerve, why they back down in debate even when they're clearly right. No one wants to be condemned as a brute — especially not conservatives, who still retain some vague memory of how worthy it is to be a lady or gentleman.
And because we've allowed leftists to define the language of political good manners — don't say women are less scientific; don't remark that black people bear the same responsibility for their actions as whites; don't point out that the gunman was a Muslim, it's not nice — the sort of person willing to speak the truth isn't always the sort of person you want to be seen with.
It sometimes takes, I mean, a Rush Limbaugh or a Sean Hannity to withstand the obloquy attached to stating the facts of the matter. If these people in their public personae seem harsh to more genteel conservatives, it may be because it requires that extra dollop of aggression to shatter the silence created by the left's increasingly elaborate sensitivities. </p>

<p>Still, mannerly as we would rather be, truth-telling continues to be both compelling and ultimately satisfying. There is, after all, something greater than courtesy. </p>

<p>"Firmness in the right," Lincoln called it, "as God gives us to see the right."
We find ourselves at a precarious moment in an endeavor of great importance: namely, the preservation of Western rationalism and liberty. It does mankind no good to allow so magnificent an enterprise to slip away merely for fear of saying the wrong thing.</p>

<p>LOL, conservatism is more "truthful" than liberalism? Let me just give you the rundown on some conservative lies.</p>

<p>1) War is the answer. Just look at Hitler! (Thank god for that Teutonic nutcase...)</p>

<p>Ask a conservative to justify war and inevitably, they'll resort to Hitler/Nazism and thus are automatically intellectually bankrupt because of Godwin's Law. For every "good" war, there's at least 10 bad ones that mostly caused destruction for some obscure reason nobody really remembers (case in point, Iraq: how the search for WMD's transforms into toppling a dictator into the spread of democracy into the prevention of civil war). </p>

<p>2) Christianity is naturally peaceful</p>

<p>The violent and corrupt history of the papacy, the Calvinist police state in Switzerland, and the Catholic-Protestant conflicts show that this religion is nothing like what Jesus preached. The only time that Christianity and tolerance/justice has co-existed somewhat peacefully is when the church and state are separated as far as possible. There needed to be lots of anti-Christian/atheist writings by intellectuals who lived in a stifling Christian era in order for us to have the religious freedom we enjoy today. If the church had its way... </p>

<p>3) Islam is irredeemably violent</p>

<p>For centuries, Islam was a haven for those who wanted desperately to escape Christian persecution. Islam took a turn for the worse when Europeans began to screw over the Middle East in the 19th century, and that screwing-over continued on into the 20th. Hey, you create a monster, you deal with it. If Islam is naturally violent, then Christianity is naturally conducive to child molestation.</p>

<p>4) All wealth is earned in deserved fashion</p>

<p>I salute all the self-made millionaires and billionaires out there. But taking some old-money trust fund baby and a Black kid born in the ghetto and pretending they're off to an even start is just the wealthy trying to preserve their head starts. If you're born into privilege, what the hell did you do to deserve it? Either you're proud of leeching off your ancestors (<em>gasp</em> isn't that Affirmative Action? Nooooooooo!!!!!!), or you're boasting that the birth canal you came out of had more net worth than 95% of the population. You want a medal for that? Oh wait, society will give you 100 medals!</p>

<p>5) The 2nd Amendment is incontrovertible, but simple decency (aka PC-ness) towards others is unacceptable</p>

<p>Conservatives see little wrong with arming students, teachers, or little kids, but they're wholly against being denied the right to call a Black person a nigger, an Asian person a chink, a gay person a fag, etc. How else will they keep feeling like "The Man", now that Jim Crow laws are no longer here? They'd rather shoot someone than be forced to consider their feelings. </p>

<p>6) Society is equal now, so everybody should stop complaining</p>

<p>What a lark. Just look at the upcoming elections. There's Bush, a White Southern man who will possibly go down as the worst president in history. And who's in line to replace him? More White men (John Edwards, John McCain). Just imagine if a woman, or a minority did something even 1/10 as inexcusable as starting an illegal war. Maybe they raised taxes by 0.5%. Another member of their demographic wouldn't even win a Senate seat for the next 25 years. But if you're a rich White man? You can drive corporations into the ground, cheat thousands or millions, start unjust wars, or deal drugs, and you'll get away with it.</p>

<p>7) War is fine, but abortion is murder</p>

<p>Well, maybe if abortion helped us against dark-skinned anti-Western savages, it'd be somewhat okay. But save embryos so they may die as teenaged soldiers!</p>

<hr>

<p>Conservatives, I'm sorry that your Straight White Male Privilege Era is coming to an end. Actually, I'm not. But hey, if you're innocent of having ****ed off or even oppressed others, you have nothing to worry about! I'm sure everybody will be as nice to you as you've been nice to them.</p>

<p>yawn. doesn't anyone ever get tired of arguing the same points over and over again?</p>

<p>Word, laserprecision.</p>

<p>nbachris, I like the cut of your jib for the most part, dude, but I have to disagree with this:</p>

<p>
[quote]
The violent and corrupt history of the papacy, the Calvinist police state in Switzerland, and the Catholic-Protestant conflicts show that this religion is nothing like what Jesus preached. The only time that Christianity and tolerance/justice has co-existed somewhat peacefully is when the church and state are separated as far as possible. There needed to be lots of anti-Christian/atheist writings by intellectuals who lived in a stifling Christian era in order for us to have the religious freedom we enjoy today. If the church had its way...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is right to some extent. But Christian fundamentalism has always been a problem, and I don't think it's fair to put all Christians in with the extremists, the same way you just made a point about Islam not being irredeemably violent. And honestly? I'd say a lot of that was politically based, not religiously based. I think Americans overstate the part religion plays in a lot of these issues because the first settlers came to escape "religious persecution." </p>

<p>Also, both Hitler and Stalin killed, in the course of, like, three decades 100M people all in the name of some kind of atheist, agnostic world. That's way more people than Christianity has ever killed.</p>

<p>Why do people enjoy arguing over random crap on an internet forum?</p>

<p>enough withthis topic, ok?</p>

<p>Wow, this thread is pretty daggone partisan. As a politically aware person, here's how I would answer the numerical issues. These responses aren't directed at the above posters. I do not identify with either political party.</p>

<p>1) "Ask [a person] to justify war..."
"Let every nation know,whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty." - John F. Kennedy</p>

<p>2 and 3) Keep religion and politics separate and have a meaningful dialogue for both. Judgments are reserved for the courts and (arguably) for a deity. Neither faith has a peaceful history but right now more publicized (and possibly more crimes in quantity, I can't say) are being committed in the name of Allah than in the name of Christian God. The Koran rewards some types of violence committed by its followers. The Bible condemns child molestation. Now the worldly institutions of these faiths stray from these teachings, as Islamic cults hijack planes and Catholic churches hide abuse, while the majority of both faiths is peaceful. Just think back to Pope Benedict's speech a few months back. He disagreed with the quotation he used saying that Islam is innately violent and in response to that, there were riots and at least one murder (of a nun in Somalia). The current version of Islam is more violent than the version of Islam from a few hundred years back and no one should make judgments about the current sects based on history.</p>

<p>4) The situation you described is the status quo in our society right now. I don't really see a problem with it, aside from the glaring hypocrisy. We live in a socioeconomically unequal, Capitalist country. The decisions regarding the Estate (Death) Tax, Capital Gains Tax, and other types of financial legislation belong in the hands of the elected officials, as they are accountable to the people affected by the laws. If that changes, then it will set a precedent against representative democracy for other issues.</p>

<p>5) We shouldn't pick and choose which parts of the Constitution we choose to believe in and we should rely on the Courts to interpret the Constitution and laws, as the Founders intended. Racism is covered in the 1st amendment as is the right to speak out against racism. Burning flags is also covered in the first amendment. There is hypocrisy from both parties about the bill of rights. People should have the right, within the applicable laws (ie- threats, harassment, etc), to say whatever they want about whomever they want. The courts have affirmed the citizen's right to own a firearm with reasonable restriction and until the 2nd Amendment is overturned, that's a fact of life. The position Chris paints of Conservatives is that they believe a person has the right to decide what comes out of his/her mouth or his/her gun and who it is directed at. Unless a crime is committed, I don't see how society has the grounds for denying a person of that decision.</p>

<p>6) Assuming all of what you say is true, you're overlooking one pretty important fact. They got elected. They'll continue to get elected. We live in a democratic society and the majority is normally willing to overlook very serious indiscretions by members of both races and both political parties. Marion Berry comes to mind. So does Edward Kennedy. There are members of both parties who have been implicated in crimes and the voters don't hold them accountable. </p>

<p>7) In my opinion, abortion is a gross violation of the civil rights of an unborn child. Take my word for it, I'm pro-choice all the way. Women have a right to control their reproductive health. They can choose to be on birth control. They can choose to have sex. They can choose to wear a condom. They can choose to take Plan-B on the morning after. That's my moral view. As for the legal view, the Supreme Court ruled that abortion is legal in 1973 and until there is a judicial reversal of that decision (and I'm not saying there should be from a legal view) there will be abortion in this country. Guilt tripping women who exercise this legal right/privilege or harassing the doctors isn't going to solve the bigger issues, which are unwanted pregnancies, poverty, education, and single parenthood.</p>

<p>It's time that the level of debate in this country is elevated beyond Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, $400 haircuts, and infidelity. That goes for the political leaders of our country, the pundits, and people like us. Find the stance on each issue that you believe in, then advocate for those issues and the CANDIDATES (not the parties) who best represent your beliefs.</p>

<p>Again, the statements I made are not directed at anyone in particular and I did not mean to imply or accuse Chris or anyone else of having beliefs that I mentioned in my post.</p>

<p>I laughed at a flyer posted by the College Republicans at my school which read "REPUBLICANS SUPPORT DIVERSITY". Their aim was to get students to participate at a speaker's event. </p>

<p>I then question why College Republicans need to assert their support for diversity; it as if they perceive themselves as ignorant, confederate flag waving racist hicks but want to counter this notion by making such a contradictory statement. Yawn.</p>

<p>.....or maybe they just supported diversity and wanted to hear different viewpoints.</p>

<p>you've created a stickman to knock down. I'm a liberal and I HATE political correctness. Bill Maher, the king of insensitivity and the former host of "Politically Incorrect" is one of the most hated liberals on earth. He was attacked because of his insensitive remarks following 9/11.</p>

<p>One thing I really don't understand-what does fiscal conservatism have to do with being a Christian?</p>

<p>The thing I like best about being a LIBERAL is that I don't have to lie.
I dont have to pretend that the status quo is acceptable.
I have a voice if I don't agree with something.
I dont have to be an old wealthy christian white man to be treated with respect.</p>

<p>wow, why would you even start a thread like this.</p>

<p>boys > girls. </p>

<p>nike > adidas</p>

<p>soda > water</p>

<p>shower > bath</p>

<p>/thread</p>

<p>don't forget red>green.</p>

<p>Seriously, don't just make a topic so vague as this with such a strong statement. "Conservative" is a pretty general term.</p>

<p>Umm... hello Oprah Winfrey > Martha Stewart.</p>

<p>Anyways... this topic has been discussed so much, and obviously one side will never convince the other side. Let's give this a rest already... (even tho the original post is ridiculous)</p>

<p>I'm going to go ahead and add limes > lemons to the list.</p>

<p>chicken > turkey</p>

<p>coke > pepsi</p>

<p>east coast > west coast</p>

<p>this game is fun</p>

<p>Just to clear things up, I'm a moderate, white, Jewish girl, from one of the most liberal towns in the Hudson Valley. That being said, I pretty much agree with everything the OP said. Bottom line: liberals are annoying. I refuse to say "developing country" and the term "people of color makes me want to vomit." I support the ideals and am a Democrat, and come the presidential elections, I will vote Democrat (unless it comes down to Guliani vs. Obama), but I'd mauch rather have a chat about international politics with a conservative than a liberal.</p>

<p>its just symantics.</p>

<p>why is "people of color" any different from "black people"? why waste your time arguing what syllables to pronounce to describe the exact same thing?</p>

<p>Why do you refuse to say "developing country"?</p>