The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-01-2012, 05:53 PM   #46
Blueflare
Hand-of-Kindness Extender
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Suffolk, UK
Posts: 130
I think saying people who hold the views discussed above are sociopathic is to go too far. I think it's misguided and based on high-minded notions with no relevance to reality, but then so are most political beliefs.
There is one main problem with the attitude that if people want to be rich, then they should work hard, and if they are poor, then clearly they just didn't try hard enough.
Pretty much anyone can do it, if they try really hard. Margaret Thatcher came from a humble background. However, saying that anyone can do it isn't the same as saying that everyone can do it. Because that is obviously not the case. Some people will always be poor. Not everyone gets to come first in a race as long as they run as fast as they can.
This is what I think a lot of privileged people fail to grasp. Who exactly do they think will come round to clean their house if everybody lifts themselves up from the bottom? It's simply impossible.
Therefore, there will always need to be something provided for the poorest people, so they are not living in poverty.
__________________
"Never trust quotes you find on the internet." - Abraham Lincoln
Blueflare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:48 PM   #47
piercehawkeye45
Franklin Pierce
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibram View Post
Yeah. Trying to argue that they're literally all sociopaths is obviously false. Arguing that their worldview and policy positions take a stance that fundamentally sociopathically disregards the suffering of others - strangers - is one that, whether you agree or not, is logically sound.
It is logically sound just in the same way that it is logically sound to state liberals (leftists in general) are thieves who steal money since technically the money we earn is our property. The problem with both arguments is its framing. Every political philosophy has its positive and negative aspects and how you view a philosophy largely depends on you personally look at it. So yes, we can look at the glass half empty and assume that the mindset associated with economic conservatism is selfish and be logically sound. Yet, that only paints half the picture. The other half is looking at economic conservatism from another way. Some people truly believe that the best way to help someone is to let them accomplish something themselves. Give a someone a rod and not a fish type mindset. This, I am the first to admit, has pitfalls but it also makes a lot of sense in many other situations. Helping people can create dependencies and there is some truth to the idea that if we let everyone on the boat, everyone drowns.

People with those of mindsets are not necessarily selfish people. Some of these are the most giving people but they would rather give on their own accord and not have government intervention.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormieweather
What I actually said was that this attitude "borders on sociopathic"...the, I got mine, screw you, attitude.
Sociopathic behavior is a gradient and people's behavior is very dynamic in that sense so their isn't that much difference. It isn't a black and white divider between sociopathic and borderline sociopathic (which is a real thing) behavior.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaC
I remember very clearly, Margeret Thatcher, the doyenne of British conservative politics, and still the beating heart of the party in terms of its political views, telling us that: 'There is no such thing as society'

That is a sociopathic political stance.
How is that exactly sociopathic? I understand how sociopaths could gravitate towards that but I don't see how it sociopathic itself?
__________________
I like my perspectives like I like my baseball caps: one size fits all.
piercehawkeye45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 10:15 PM   #48
Ibby
"She", not "he", guys
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: "the high up north"
Posts: 6,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 View Post
It is logically sound just in the same way that it is logically sound to state liberals (leftists in general) are thieves who steal money since technically the money we earn is our property. The problem with both arguments is its framing. Every political philosophy has its positive and negative aspects and how you view a philosophy largely depends on you personally look at it. So yes, we can look at the glass half empty and assume that the mindset associated with economic conservatism is selfish and be logically sound. Yet, that only paints half the picture. The other half is looking at economic conservatism from another way. Some people truly believe that the best way to help someone is to let them accomplish something themselves. Give a someone a rod and not a fish type mindset. This, I am the first to admit, has pitfalls but it also makes a lot of sense in many other situations. Helping people can create dependencies and there is some truth to the idea that if we let everyone on the boat, everyone drowns.

People with those of mindsets are not necessarily selfish people. Some of these are the most giving people but they would rather give on their own accord and not have government intervention.
Yeah, I agree. While I find conservatism, especially in its least compromising iterations - think Ayn Rand - more or less reprehensible, I understand that there are definitely respectable groundings of the philosophy. That's sort of what I meant by logically sound - you can defend the position logically, but not necessarily while accurately doing the other side justice. That's why I tend to stay away from attacking conservative ideology - I take after my utter idol Rachel Maddow in trying to make it a conversation about POLICY, and INSTITUTIONS, and all of that sort of stuff, without necessarily making the conversation about the foundations of the ideology.
Ibby is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:13 AM.

Help fill the mug... click to donate
"Earlier, Mike Smith, another frequent caller to IBM SIG BBS, didn't fair so well. He got into numerous verbal battles with other callers, and he used religious and ethnic insults as weapons. About a year and half ago, he was banned from calling the BBS."
-City Paper, issue #386, January 3, 1992

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.