Post: #1

I had this conversation with a co-worker a few years ago. We're both creative musician types that ended up in the corporate grind obviously for the steady money. He mentioned how much he liked California and how Silicon Valley is full of hippies and they have a different way of working and interacting in the corporate world.

It seems like a contradiction to be a free wheeling hippy yet be working in that environment. Yet the further I go down this road I find that the truly smart and hard working types tend to be liberal and creative types. My boss is a long haired pot smoking coke sniffing hippy dude. Cool as hell. Works 16+ hours a day and brought in 25 million a year in work last year.

The conservative type guys I work with conversely are the biggest pretentious pricks. Maybe my situation and work environment is unique. But somehow I don't think so.

Any tech jobs I've had in the burbs tend to be full of pricks. I fucking hate the burbs. If you're a smart, creative techy type of person make your way to the cities. You won't be disappointed in your personal and professional life.

Post: #2

Can one be liberal and conservative at the same time?

Sure, if one does wish to conserve the liberal ideology.

Post: #3

Not really sure if you're using the current definitions of liberal conservative or not, but...

You either believe the government should make decisions for people or not on any given issue... So yeah you could believe they should make decisions for us on water usage but not on car insurance

When actual issues come up like ballot proposals, in the US people generally vote for less government these days. Government expansion over the last 60 years has been mostly by things not voted on by citizens directly

Post: #4

The word "conservative" is mostly meaningless, since it does not specify that which is to be conserved.

2014 U.S. conservatives would be considered liberal degenerates and extremists in 1914 Prussia.

Post: #5

Post deleted.

Post: #6

I define a conservative as someone with a traditional family that works a boring 9-5, banks most of his money and never has any fun.

Post: #7

(07-14-2014 08:10 AM)Parlay44 Wrote:  I define a conservative as someone with a traditional family that works a boring 9-5, banks most of his money and never has any fun.

I'd define that someone as a square. But, hey! It's hip to be square...

Post: #8

No.
You can however hold liberal views and conservative views simultaneously.

Important distinction.

Post: #9

(07-14-2014 08:25 AM)Vicious Wrote:  No.
You can however hold liberal views and conservative views simultaneously.

Important distinction.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not sitting on my ass waiting for a handout. I understand the importance of work. But at the same time I feel people should be free to live like they please.

Post: #10

Dennis Duffy: Social conservative, fiscal liberal

Post: #11

(07-14-2014 02:02 PM)Checkmat Wrote:  Dennis Duffy: socially liberal, fiscally conservative

I don't believe in separating the social and fiscal spheres. If you let people do whatever they want because they have "rights" and "freedom", then society will slowly decay, and trying to fight decay will usually lead to higher taxation.

This is why culture matters so much. A strong culture is a decentralized and distributed invisible police force that protects people from themselves and from others. When a strong culture is lacking, the State may try to intervene (i.e., the police force becomes visible), which leads to authoritarianism. If the State does not intervene, and neither does the Church, then your society decays to Third World levels within a couple of generations. You paid low taxes and gave people "freedom", but now your real estate is worthless and you can't go for a walk without getting mugged by the spawn of some skanky single mom and the Devil himself.

Post: #12

Political philosophy wise, no not really.

Post: #13

People misinterpret politics and subculture, though these two can often be connected.

I'm a conservative guy. No, not that annoying type of conservative libertarian. I have nothing against community, state intervention or light to moderate collectivism. I'm conservative about values that need be protected from vanishing under force of free market economy and global "culture" of dollar and spending and anything that goes hand to hand with those. I'm also very critical of idea that man is the absolute master of everything.

Still, that does not prevent me from smoking pot, or listening to rap music or even doing those activities that are usually attributed to liberals, however, I have a clear idea in my mind in what ind of society i would like to live, and how much I'm willing to invest into those ideas, and how much I am willing to suffer for them.

When it comes to conservatives and liberals in general, associating with people is not my primary concern, nor do i ever do things in a way that i desire anybody to like what i do, or what i think. Call me an elitist and hipster, but whenever wide audience approves of what i think, i usually consider myself on wrong path.

Post: #14

The media feeds this crap about how liberals are cool and conservatives are boring old white guys. Im very conservative and I think Im pretty fucking cool.

Everyone is somewhat of a mix not everyone sticls to the party line on every subject. I'm a huge pothead which isnt really a conservative talking point though it should be since conservatives seem to want government out of our lives.

Anyone who is self reliant, and entrepreneur or makes money should have some conservative views.

Its funny how Al Gore and all these other people who wanna be up my ass telling me how to live live one way and tell the rest of us to live another. Al Gore tells us to rode a bike and has multiple houses with giant electric bills and drives around in caravans of suvs. All these liberals say rich people don't pay their fair share but instead of ponying up money still keep money overseas and make sure they get every tax break.

Dont use one professor and your image the medias given you as conservatives to paint the world with such a broad brush

Not only do we all have a mix of liberal, conservative and libertarian views but some people are fiscally conservative while socially liberal

Post: #15

(07-14-2014 02:06 PM)Icarus Wrote:  

(07-14-2014 02:02 PM)Checkmat Wrote:  Dennis Duffy: socially liberal, fiscally conservative

I don't believe in separating the social and fiscal spheres. If you let people do whatever they want because they have "rights" and "freedom", then society will slowly decay, and trying to fight decay will usually lead to higher taxation.

This is why culture matters so much. A strong culture is a decentralized and distributed invisible police force that protects people from themselves and from others. When a strong culture is lacking, the State may try to intervene (i.e., the police force becomes visible), which leads to authoritarianism. If the State does not intervene, and neither does the Church, then your society decays to Third World levels within a couple of generations. You paid low taxes and gave people "freedom", but now your real estate is worthless and you can't go for a walk without getting mugged by the spawn of some skanky single mom and the Devil himself.

I believe the empirical evidence shows that state intervention itself leads to cultural decay. The more responsibilities shifted from the individuals to governments, the less pride and personal accountability those individuals will have.

Those skanky single mothers who raise criminals never had to pay the real price for their choices. They were able to choose a man who wouldn't stick around to help raise the child because the state stepped in and took on the financial role of the father. The real victims end up being the children. They have no father figures at home giving them moral guidance, so a lot of them end up in gangs where there are father figures.

Before the Great Society, the black family and community in the US was stronger and closer knit than the white family. Once the need to band together was taken away from them by entitlement expansions, a lot of their communities fell apart. Black unemployment used to be on par with white unemployment, now look at it. It took just a few years for state intervention to decimate a beautiful culture.

As far as the need for a strong culture, I completely agree with you. However I think that culture will naturally arise from the willingness of free people to self-organize. You see it all throughout small towns in the US. Communities in which people all know each other and willingly support those who are in financial woes. Major metropolitan areas are a different story. I'll have to find the study again, but it basically showed that people who reside in smaller communities have more friends than people who live in large cities. In a small town, there's a good chance you know most all of the people in your neighborhood, and almost certainly those on your block. In a big city, you probably don't know most of the people who live in your apartment building.

Post: #16

(07-14-2014 05:41 PM)Katatonic Wrote:  I believe the empirical evidence shows that state intervention itself leads to cultural decay. The more responsibilities shifted from the individuals to governments, the less pride and personal accountability those individuals will have.

I would say that state intervention is usually a symptom of decay itself, and it often leads to further decay. Further decay then leads to more state intervention. Positive feedback is dangerous.

Between individuals and the state there should be communities. Communities should be self-policing, to make state intervention unnecessary in most cases. A way for a community to police itself is to have a solid value system, to judge harshly those who deviate from it, and to ostracize those who violate it blatantly.

An example would be slut-shaming. A spineless white-knighting beta tool is the proud eunuch who says "I don't judge!!". However, I do judge. I judge because shame brings people back to the right path. Abstaining from judgement is to give up on other people. Or, alternatively, it is to be too narcissistic to care about other people and give others freedom from judgement just as long as they extend the same freedom to you.

Post: #17

In many ways, modern conservatives are more liberal than the leftists who incorrectly call themselves liberal.

The leftists ideology has nothing to do with liberty.

Post: #18

(07-15-2014 03:06 AM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  In many ways, modern conservatives are more liberal than the leftists who incorrectly call themselves liberal.

The leftists ideology has nothing to do with liberty.

This pretty much.
The labels nowadays are pretty useless.
"Conservatives" are classical liberals. "Liberals" are illiberal statists. At least in the U.S.
And even these labels have different meanings in other nations/cultures.

It would be more accurate to see things as a continuum between individualism/collectivism or libertarianism/authoritarianism.

Post: #19

I like how hippies and hobos are right next to each other

Post: #20

As an individual, yes. Viewing issues as liberal versus conservative (black and white... as you probably realize, this is not a mention of skin color) is inversely proportional to a man's intellectual growth.

Assuming a man approaches various issues with as much of an open mind as he can muster, he will begin to notice a lot of "gray area."

Take the OP's views on liberals versus conservatives in the workplace:

There are plenty of liberals that are essentially state dependents, driving around in a (non-union made) Toyota Prius with a bumper sticker that says "UNIONS: THE ORGANIZATION THAT BROUGHT YOU THE WEEKEND." Right.

At the same time, there are some liberal dudes who may not be into any type of formalities, don't own any suits, but will outwork damn near everyone they know and have the money to show for it.

There are no shortage of conservative pricks, affluent or otherwise. You have the "America's going to hell" talk radio listener who can't control how much he eats and spends. He's 80 lbs overweight and half-assedly trying to dig himself out of debt that's somehow Obama's fault. You also have the "baller" who inherited the family business, delegates the management, and looks down on those "lazy" pieces of shit who can't, ahem, "pull themselves up by their bootstraps."

At the same time, you've got that guy who follows the line, who put in the time and effort to gain leverage. In short, woe unto you if you're on other other side of him in a negotiation. He never partied much, he might think homosexuality is a disease, but damn if he isn't providing and making serious coin. He locked down a near-virginal wife when they both were young and they now have like 8 grandchildren.

Gray area.... The media takes the the loudest sides of both issues and presents them as if they're our only choices. Seeing past the "black and white" is evidence of a growing, independent, intellect.

Post: #21

Life experience has taught me that being "liberal" (whatever that means) or "conservative" (whatever that means) has very little to do with ideology itself and everything to do with tribalism.

If some of your beliefs are considered "liberal", if you realize that most of your friends and people you admire are also considered "liberal", if you think "conservatives" are evil morons, then you become a "liberal", and then you start hating "conservatives", because that is what "liberals" are supposed to do to "make the world a better place".

If the media introduces the meme that "liberals" are supposed to support gay marriage and fight climate change, then you will support gay marriage and fight climate change, and you will call yourself "open-minded" non-ironically. You join the "liberal" tribe because of ideological affinity, and membership in the tribe dictates and reinforces what your entire ideology is. Over time, your identity becomes tied to the tribe.

Same happens for "conservatives". It's not about really about ideology. For instance, if you tell average people that many U.S. conservatives some 100 years ago used to support gun control and conservationism (which is not the same as environmentalism), said average people will find it incomprehensible. If you then add that such conservatives also opposed non-Nordic immigration and supported eugenics, confusion will quickly dissipate.

Post: #22

I feel like being labeled a "liberal" or "conservative" is just too limiting to me. My political views aren't ideologically clustered. I'm against illegal immigration, but also think single payer healthcare is a good idea. I don't like feminism and political correctness and the gay movement. But I strongly agree in protecting the environment, I believe in global warming and overpopulation. I'm not a libertarian because I don't like their economic views. I believe in a more European style socialism and less disparity in wealth and strong unions.

I guess the closest thing to me is a conservative European. They have some of the conservative views I have on immigration, gay marriage, defending the language and culture, but they aren't into the American gun culture, don't deny global climate change, believe in single payer healthcare. They are much more fiscally liberal than their conservative American counterparts.

Post: #23

removed

Post: #24

A rubric I've been personally aware of lately when meeting someone for the first time:

Given a survey of 50 political issues, if I can rapidly predict their response to 49 or 50 of their answers, it's a sign they're a tribal drone (for lack of a better phrase, referring to the tribalism Icarus brought up).

Shouldn't my score be way lower if you're at all intellectually honest about these issues? There have got to be some smart people on all sides of issues who don't adhere to a tribe. They are usually the worthiest conversational partners and are typically never posting "wow. just wow. [issue + stance]" memes on social media.

Post: #25

A lot of modern conservatives are only conservative in that they wish to re-experience the earlier, more transitional forms of essentially liberal projects (like the United States in 1955). This is both incoherent and doomed. A true conservative is a traditionalist, and this goes back pre-Englightenment.

tl;dr? What we call "liberalism" started a long, long time ago.