• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Liberals, what conservative stances do you have?

P

Piggus

Member
StayDead said:
Can I ask why? Why would anyone in their home over possibly need an assault rifle?
Click to expand...

Do some research about assault weapons, how they're defined, and how "effective" the original assault weapons ban was over 10 years (hint: it did virtually nothing). To ban something, you have to define exactly what it is. And what makes an "assault" weapon, by definition, is basically just a bunch of small cosmetic differences that people associate as being scary or too military-like. But in practical use, they're pretty much identical to other semi-auto guns that don't have a flash hider, adjustable stock, etc. Did the assault weapons ban stop the Columbine shooters? Did it stop the Virginia Tech shooter? In both cases, the shooters used gun that were legal under the ban (including magazine capacity). Their solution was to just use more magazines.

Also, you're saying it's okay to own a handgun, which is easily concealed and used in roughly 90% of all gun crimes, but you draw the line at something owned mainly by enthusiasts/target shooters. You can't enact legislation just for an emotional win. You need legislation that actually works.
 
Yoshi

Yoshi

Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
If "liberal" means "social democratic", then:
- in terms of education, I side with conservative stances that separation of students according to their skill level (e.g. in Germany, where we have three different kinds of high school level schools, depending on skill level) is a good idea. Preferrably on a by-course-basis, but full separation is better than none
- on a related note, inclusion for schools is counterproductive
- I do not agree with artificial gendering of language and instead think, if a word is (fe)male in its base form, then it has no gender associated and requires expliciting the gender additionally if one wants to talk about people of a specific gender (e.g. in German the word "student" is male. But in turn, if one says "students", then it refers to people who study, independent of gender. If one wants to refer to male students specifically, one has to say "male student")
- in most cases, I do not agree with "positive discriminatory" laws (e.g. quota rules)

That's all I could think of for now.
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Aytumious said:
My views on the topic basically align one to one with the ACLU which is why I found his post funny. Perhaps the two of you could post that image everyone loves when this topic comes up to their twitter account.
Click to expand...

Her post.

ACLU isn't infallible disagreeing with them on Milo isn't the same as Fuck the ACLU.
 
M

Massive Duck. C.M.

Banned
It's hilarious reading through this thread and seeing who considers themselves liberals with some outlying conservative views when they often post some suspect shit lol

The subjective nature of reality is amazing.
 
S

superdeluxe

Member
Is being a PRO GMO a conservative stance? I know some of my liberal friends that are pretty staunchly against GMO.

Also I'm pretty 'hawkish'. Compared to my liberal friends
 
G

Giant Panda

Member
RDreamer said:
Wow, this thread really feels like it's "Simplify and completely mischaracterize a liberal position, and then disagree with that!"
Click to expand...
Well I've seen the same mischaracterization happen a lot if you express agreement with "neoliberal" economics. People love attacking straw men no matter their politics.
 
DJ_Lae

DJ_Lae

Member
superdeluxe said:
Is being a PRO GMO a conservative stance? I know some of my liberal friends that are pretty staunchly against GMO.

Also I'm pretty 'hawkish'. Compared to my liberal friends
Click to expand...

Both GMOs and vaccines seem to be bipartisan, although anti-science has usually fallen more on the conservative side.

It's weird to see.
 
R

rjinaz

Member
Aytumious said:
My views on the topic basically align one to one with the ACLU which is why I found his post funny. Perhaps the two of you could post that image everyone loves when this topic comes up to their twitter account.
Click to expand...

Alright let's go back then. What exactly about ekai's post conflicts with the ACLU?
 
B

Brashnir

Member
In theory, I find a lot of positions taken by conservatives to be reasonable, but most of those are just things Republicans pay lip service to in order to fool people into letting them fuck everyone over. Such areas include States' rights, personal freedoms, and - to some degree - economic policy, although I think the pendulum is currently a bit too far to the right economically now that the unions have mostly all been broken and regulations have been rolled back to a dangerous degree.

That leaves me with only one real party to vote for as a reasonable human being, which is itself a scary proposition.
 
R

Raigan5088

Banned
I am gay and liberal somewhat however i have profound doubts about this sort of 'liberal morality' that is coming into our society that is as intolerant and oppressive as folk on the right.

In other words "fuck you for having an opinion that doesn't match mine!!"
 
R

rjinaz

Member
Raigan5088 said:
I am gay and liberal somewhat however i have profound doubts about this sort of 'liberal morality' that is coming into our society that is as intolerant and oppressive as folk on the right.

In other words "fuck you for having an opinion that doesn't match mine!!"
Click to expand...


I mean one side aggressively oppresses people through congress and law, the other side says some mean things some times based on actual things the Right does. When Christians are actually being targeted or White people are actually being treated unfairly, then maybe, maybe I'll start seeing the point about intolerance.

Brashnir said:
In theory, I find a lot of positions taken by conservatives to be reasonable, but most of those are just things Republicans pay lip service to in order to fool people into letting them fuck everyone over. Such areas include States' rights, personal freedoms, and - to some degree - economic policy, although I think the pendulum is currently a bit too far to the right economically now that the unions have mostly all been broken and regulations have been rolled back to a dangerous degree.

That leaves me with only one real party to vote for as a reasonable human being, which is itself a scary proposition.
Click to expand...

Well said. This is why just a few years ago I was on the Right. Well that and I was heavily religious. But it's all shallow. If we actually had a Republican party with real ideals, and you know less bigotry, I could actually support some of their stances to a degree and certainly the country would be better off.
 
E

Epsilon-delta

Banned
Massive Duck said:
It's hilarious reading through this thread and seeing who considers themselves liberals with some outlying conservative views when they often post some suspect shit lol

The subjective nature of reality is amazing.
Click to expand...

OT is not as liberal as some make it out to be.

As for the topic, I have asian, hispanic, and black in my family.

I cannot come up with a conservative stance that would not be a detriment to my family members, so none at all.
 
O

opoth

Banned
I think "liberals" are sometimes bad at choosing their battles, and I recognize that if you talk guns/firearms to city, suburban, and country folk, you get 3 different perspectives, with the suburban one (alternative to golf or whatever) being the least relevant.
 
F0rneus

F0rneus

Tears in the rain
Death penalty and gun rights. That's it. There's legit nothing else humane in my eyes, about political conservatism.
 
H

Hasphat'sAnts

Member
Liberals often forget that civil asset forfeiture had been a conservative cause for a while.

Not the law and order type conservative, but real Heritage Foundation/NRO type conservatism.
 
R

Raigan5088

Banned
rjinaz said:
I mean one side aggressively oppresses people through congress and law, the other side says some mean things some times based on actual things the Right does. When Christians are actually being targeted or White people are actually being treated unfairly, then maybe, maybe I'll start seeing the point about intolerance.
Click to expand...

Its about imposing views on others that they might not share themselves and force the issue to the point of violence, which has been happening on the right for years but its rearing its ugly head on the left now
 
Arkage

Arkage

Banned
Being a moderate means I tend to disagree with both sides in equivalent ways. One example is that liberals tend to explain a person's successes and failures entirely through the lens of systemic powers, to the point where any sense of personal responsibility or accountability evaporates. And then conservatives do the opposite, saying a person's lot in life is entirely self determined bootstrapping and there are no underlying systemic problems in society.

Feel the same on the other false dichotomies that have formed around gun control, political correctness, student protests, immigration, terrorism, etc. This two party system is really doing wonders for our country :(
 
E

Ekai

Member
Raigan5088 said:
Its about imposing views on others that they might not share themselves and force the issue to the point of violence, which has been happening on the right for years but its rearing its ugly head on the left now
Click to expand...

As a minority, hell no. This both sides stuff is ridiculously intellectually dishonest.
 
G

Grug

Member
It's not a conservative thing as such but as a liberal, I am bothered by other "liberals" who fall down black holes of cultural relativism.

Certain human rights are universal and can't be explained away because "well you have to see it through their cultural/religious lens".

I'm also a bit uncomfortable with how some on the left are trying to redefine "free speech". I despise hate speech and bigotry but at the same time I don't know how you can claim to have "free speech" when you want to make saying racist or ignorant things a crime.

I believe that unless they are actively trying to incite violence or harrass/intimidate you should be allowed to say what you like without breaking the law. It doesn't mean that what you say is okay, just not illegal. It also certainly doesn't doesn't mean you are immune from consequences... you must be willing to wear the social and professional suicide that you can inflict upon yourself in doing so, as well as the condemnation of your peers. Anti-discrimination and libel laws are sufficient to punish the ancillary behaviours linked to these views.

The same free speech laws that allow bigots to express their idiotic views are the same laws that allow me to call them ignorant, fascist pieces of shit. The rider on this is that I am a white male, and have had very little experience being on the end of this sort of abuse. I am certainly sensitive to those who want to protect people from it, but I just don't believe this is the way to do it. If you weaken these sort of fundamental rights, it can come back to burn you big time when the tables turn.
 
K

Kusagari

Member
I would support the death penalty if there was ever a way to guarantee the people sentenced were actually guilty.

Because there isn't I'm against it.
 
F

Fuchsdh

Member
superdeluxe said:
Is being a PRO GMO a conservative stance? I know some of my liberal friends that are pretty staunchly against GMO.

Also I'm pretty 'hawkish'. Compared to my liberal friends
Click to expand...

I think there's a couple of broadly "anti-science" stances that seem to be more liberal-focused (alternative medicine, GMO scares, vaccines), but I don't think it really makes GMOs a conservative stance. What is far more politicized is the corporations that produce these GMOs, and there I guess it becomes a more classic left vs right question.
 
S

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
I am now a moderate Dem. At one point, I would have been considered pretty left-wing of the party, but I think I have moderated a bit and the party has definitely moved further left.

1) Generally more pro drone usage with strict congressional oversight
2) More pro-capitalism and private-public partnerships to solve issues
3) Certainly more pro globalization. I was a huge advocate of the TPP.
4) Less inclined to want to break up large banks, but I worked on Wall St so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
5) Pro-sanctions on certain regimes. Though, this is less of a sticking point than it was in the late 90s. You hardly here anti-sanctions from the left-wing of the party, who I think are more domestic/economically focused than they were when I was in college when international issues drove the day.

I am also pro-GMO and pro-vaccination. But those are not mainstream liberal views and more on the "nutty side of the left" issues.
 
S

shintoki

sparkle this bitch
Quite a few I feel.

I don't inherently believe the country people are immigrating too, should have to respect all the cultural traditions from the immigrant. There are some like the Burqa, that simply are bullshit and do not belong at all in the world. Nor should those ideals be allowed to spread. The idea that you have to be 100% culturally tolerant is bullshit.

It's similar to language, where I do like the idea of an official language since it would make everything much easier. Of course, I do believe ESL classes should be freely given alongside students being forced to learn a second language from K thru 12.
 
S

SMattera

Member
What I find interesting about this topic is that it highlights many issues that do not really fall onto the conservative/liberal political spectrum.

I'm not sure if being pro-free trade or against protectionism is a liberal or conservative stance. I'm not sure if being anti-GMO or anti-vaxx is a liberal or conservative stance. I'm not sure if wanting limitations on free speech is a liberal or conservative stance. You could make an argument for both sides of these issues in the context of traditional liberal/conservative world views, and point to leaders in these movements that have argued strongly one way or the other.
 
I

Ishan

Junior Member
guess illegal immigration and in adapting to another culture if needed would be my most conservative stances. im mostly liberal / center left.

Also not sure about some finance laws... i think thats a whole can of worms im not knowledgeable to form good opinions on
 
S

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Mysterious said:
I believe in universal health care but I don't believe in universal basic income.
Click to expand...

I used to not, but some of my (very conservative) economist friends have moved me towards believing this is an inevitable end-solution to certain societal problems that are starting to creep up.

You could likely fund such an effort with some kind of tax on efficiency gains by globalization/outsourcing and automation efforts.

This is less and less going to be a conservative/liberal issue and more an eventuality as economic disparity continues to grow in the developed world.
 
S

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
I have a bunch of conservative economic philosophies but the current GOP doesn't. It's either naked bribery or unworkable libertarian rubbish. The only thing they're consistently "conservative " is meddling with people's private social lives - oh wait no they want to seal up vaginas too.

The current GOP doesn't have a single rationally conservative principle.
 
S

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Stinkles said:
I have a bunch of conservative economic philosophies but the current GOP doesn't. It's either naked bribery or unworkable libertarian rubbish. The only thing they're consistently "conservative " is meddling with people's private social lives - oh wait no they want to seal up vaginas too.

The current GOP doesn't have a single rationally conservative principle.
Click to expand...

I think this is the reality. An actual Rockefeller Republican or Eisenhower Republican could probably sway me with an economic argument, but the current GOP seems to think small or non-functional government is the new definition of 'conservative'. I think this is an eventuality that Reagan started and we've wound up in a place where things like regulations and a social safety net are "too much government".

The GOP has at this point been taken over by big-money donors who simply want a non-functional government so as not to enforce existing laws and regulations against them (see every Vegas casino owner and the Koch brothers) and a weird mix of super socially conservative and economic Randians have taken over large chunks of the GOP, especially their youth movement.

I used to regularly cross party lines to vote for Kay Bailey Hutchison. And instead I've now got fucking Ted Cruz as my Senator.
 
P

PlayALLtheGames

Banned
shintoki said:
Quite a few I feel.

I don't inherently believe the country people are immigrating too, should have to respect all the cultural traditions from the immigrant. There are some like the Burqa, that simply are bullshit and do not belong at all in the world. Nor should those ideals be allowed to spread. The idea that you have to be 100% culturally tolerant is bullshit.
Click to expand...

Of course. You don't have to respect any tradition from any culture. That's normal. But what you're talking about is a non-issue, at least in the U.S. and I'm pretty sure Europe too. Here in the States you can wear a Burqa but not when you're getting your picture taken for a government ID, as an example. And past that it has never been a controversy. People can wear Burqas like 98% of the rest of their lives here if they wish, just not in certain situations.

But that has nothing to do with cultural intolerance. We can be 100% culturally tolerant; doesn't mean every single one of that culture's traditions will be permitted by law. There's no evidence things like that will change so the fear that some country will suddenly be invaded by a completely different culture's standards and their laws turned upside down to accommodate the immigrants is paranoid bullshit.

Also: you can't stop "those ideals" from being spread so not sure what you're talking about there. If these are immigrants then those ideals are adopted early in their home countries.

shintoki said:
It's similar to language, where I do like the idea of an official language since it would make everything much easier. Of course, I do believe ESL classes should be freely given alongside students being forced to learn a second language from K thru 12.
Click to expand...

The establishment of an official language in of itself does nothing. If you want to start a public system that teaches immigrants a language, obviously subsidized by the gov't, fine, but even then there's no forcing people to sign up. In the US, it makes more sense to give people an option to do things in their native language. There are so many Spanish-speaking people here, connecting them with other Spanish-speaking people to get shit done is logical and most efficient.

But really, I'm all about public programs to teach people who want to learn English. It'd probably be a relatively small investment. We could just divert money from, you know, all the stupid shit we spend trillions of dollars on. It's beneficial to social value; you've automatically raised the working potential of a person by making them at the least bilingual, and there's the added benefit that the brain-dead, white trash who complain incessantly about immigrants who can't speak English will finally shut the fuck up.
 
Q

QuantumSquid

Member
hmm

i think guns are cool, and that mentally stable people should be allowed to shoot them at inanimate objects for fun in designated locations

i don't know if that qualifies as conservative though
 
C

Cyframe

Member
Grug said:
It's not a conservative thing as such but as a liberal, I am bothered by other "liberals" who fall down black holes of cultural relativism.

Certain human rights are universal and can't be explained away because "well you have to see it through their cultural/religious lens".

I'm also a bit uncomfortable with how some on the left are trying to redefine "free speech". I despise hate speech and bigotry but at the same time I don't know how you can claim to have "free speech" when you want to make saying racist or ignorant things a crime.

I believe that unless they are actively trying to incite violence or harrass/intimidate you should be allowed to say what you like without breaking the law. It doesn't mean that what you say is okay, just not illegal. It also certainly doesn't doesn't mean you are immune from consequences... you must be willing to wear the social and professional suicide that you can inflict upon yourself in doing so, as well as the condemnation of your peers. Anti-discrimination and libel laws are sufficient to punish the ancillary behaviours linked to these views.

The same free speech laws that allow bigots to express their idiotic views are the same laws that allow me to call them ignorant, fascist pieces of shit. The rider on this is that I am a white male, and have had very little experience being on the end of this sort of abuse. I am certainly sensitive to those who want to protect people from it, but I just don't believe this is the way to do it. If you weaken these sort of fundamental rights, it can come back to burn you big time when the tables turn.
Click to expand...

There isn't a lot of accountability when it comes to someone who is racist or homophobic. We see cases where someone is fired but that's certainly not the norm. They get away with that behavior, laws or no laws.

Now, when the marginalized have a voice and speak up for ourselves, we're seen as trying to silence someone or trying to change the definition of freedom of speech, we aren't.

Look at the reaction to safe spaces. Minorities using the freedom to assemble and it's viewed as a type of segregation akin to something like Jim Crow. Thoughts of, "I wonder why they feel that way" and "I wonder what I could do to make things easier for them" aren't the first thoughts for people. They view it as separation being bad, erasing all context from marginalized groups assembling.

I support freedom of speech but things like hate speech honestly aren't taken seriously enough. People died on the hill of that Milo person even though he violated title IX protections while he targeted a transgender student. They dropped that argument of free speech when he expressed sympathy for pedophiles though.

I think many marginalized groups wouldn't feel so on edge if people actually defended us when bad behavior towards us occurred. The general reaction is either indifference or telling us to stop being so sensitive. With that being the common attitude it's no wonder why some feel on edge and out of patience. I know I've felt that way, and voice it as such. But honestly, us speaking up is seen as trying to stifle free speech and we're just using the same rights everyone else has and it's so frustrating.
 
V

Vanillalite

Ask me about the GAF Notebook
I'm okay with securing our borders, but I think the Wall is the dumbest idea ever.

I also think we need to overhaul our legal immigration system so it doesn't take a gazillion years and a gazillion hoops to get in legally.

I think we should grant citizenship for the people already here, but kicking the can down the road doesn't actually solve anything.

No reason that the US as a nation shouldn't expect people to come into the country through official channels. Let's just make it so there isn't some kind of hellish backloged system in place to do so while also expecting people to come in legally after we grant citizenship to the ones here.

I also am for a smaller government in some ways. We have waaaayyy to many social programs trying to accomplish similar things. Better off giving people a lump sum vs having a gazillion programs trickling out assistance in various ways.

Idk if these make me more conservative than most liberals or vice versa?
 
N

NCSOFT

Member
Magic Mushroom said:
I disagree. Even without the risk of killing innocents, I think killing people, including criminals, is morally reprehensible.
To quote Camus: "Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders."

America should be ashamed it still exists.
Click to expand...

Exactly, the killing of an innocent and the cost arguments are all good and reasonable, however, I never resort to them because the issue is a simple one for me, there's no ambiguity whatsoever :
The state should not be in the business of committing premeditated 1st degree murder against citizens.
 
J

Jobbs

Banned
I think political correctness demanded in the way we speak can sometimes go too far. There are also some liberal issues I just don't feel too strongly about one way or another. Eg gun control, death penalty.

I'm strongly for things like universal health care and programs to buy food for the poor.
 
CampbellzSoup

CampbellzSoup

Member
Practical and comprehensive immigration- a free for all border is something I don't support like at all. The cheeto in command does it all wrong.

I can't think of anything else I'm on board with them with
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

How do you change careers when you're middle aged?
39
2K
WoJ replied
  • Locked
So, I've been pondering over this for a bit. Do you think US Football being our dominant sport is why we have so much gun violence?
Social Opinion
24
2K
AJUMP23 replied
NISA has announced that they will publish the dark action RPG by FuRyu, Reynatis, for a Western release on PS4, PS5, Switch, and PC in Fall 2024
News 2
53
4K
nial replied
How do you spend your time?
26
4K
Tams replied
What do you do when you can't sleep?
2 3
110
4K
Putonahappyface replied
Top Bottom