Understanding the Liberal Mindset

[Lithrael]

I've had arguments on the board in the past that seemed to me to amount to saying that you can't run a society if you try to accomodate the people who are at the ends of whatever bell curve of traits, those who don't fit their expected stereotype.

So what if 1% of x are a different way, they should be ignored because it's too wasteful/dangerous/etc to give every x the chance to see whether they are already a different way or would like to be a different way if they tried it. If some particular x cares that much it's up to them to try going against the grain. Things weren't too hard for (famous x) were they?!

This has been an argument against DEI style efforts to get more x into various programs they are not typically encouraged to try and/or are underrepresented in.

It's probably my biggest personal baseline disagreement with the right wing mindset, and it seems to be relevant to the 'oh no, muslims' argument in that it doesn't seem to matter how many muslims aren't misogynist criminals and don't want to take over your country and sharia you into the stone age, because if you try to accomodate the people who don't fit the stereotype, your society will be destroyed.

I do see the point about worrying about people who do want to eff up your way of life getting a voting majority going in your country but uh... so far, for me, that hasn't been the muslims

 

[theprestige]

Lazy people talk in bumperstickers.

Bit of an own goal, I think.

 

[arthwollipot]

I've been seeing this argument a lot recently:

They are utterly convinced they are always the good guys, that they are the final arbiter of right and wrong, and that anyone who doesn't think the way they do are the bad guys.

It seems to be the latest low blow in the culture war, and I've thought about it a fair bit.

I've come to the conclusion over the course of my now 56 years on this planet that compassion and empathy for others is a moral good. Human rights are a moral good. Kindness to those less fortunate is a moral good. Those people who don't recognise this, who don't show kindness, empathy, and compassion to all human beings, are not morally good people. They cannot be. There are some things that good people can disagree on, but this isn't one of them.

I think this is a truth that is as close to being objective as any truth can be: all human lives have intrinsic value. All human beings by virtue of their existence deserve a baseline level of respect. If someone cannot respect them for their existence alone, then that person is not a morally good person.

I'm sorry if this moral stance of mine makes anyone uncomfortable. And I'm sorry that you have to frame it as "anyone who doesn't think like me is a bad guy". I don't think that is particularly fair or thoughtful. It shows neither empathy nor kindness. It is antagonistic and aggressive. I don't want to fight anyone, and I would rather that they did not pick fights with me. We can't make the world a better place for everyone's children if we're always picking fights.

So yes, to a certain extent I think that the quote above is basically correct, though I think it is articulated in a way that is intended to provoke discord and distrust. I would like to help people become more morally good, as I think that too is a moral good, but I can't while they're being deliberately provocative.

 

[Trausti]

I've come to the conclusion over the course of my now 56 years on this planet that compassion and empathy for others is a moral good. Human rights are a moral good. Kindness to those less fortunate is a moral good. Those people who don't recognise this, who don't show kindness, empathy, and compassion to all human beings, are not morally good people. They cannot be. There are some things that good people can disagree on, but this isn't one of them.

This is all very wonderful. But what do you do when others don't share this viewpoint and nonetheless exploit your compassion and empathy? Do you think it's virtuous to be a sucker?

 

[arthwollipot]

This is all very wonderful. But what do you do when others don't share this viewpoint and nonetheless exploit your compassion and empathy? Do you think it's virtuous to be a sucker?

What is your purpose in asking this question? Is it to seek an answer, or is it to mock?

 

[Trausti]

What is your purpose in asking this question? Is it to seek an answer, or is it to mock?

Maybe both. An oft critique of modern progressives is that they exhibit suicidal empathy.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I've been seeing this argument a lot recently:


It seems to be the latest low blow in the culture war, and I've thought about it a fair bit.

I've come to the conclusion over the course of my now 56 years on this planet that compassion and empathy for others is a moral good. Human rights are a moral good. Kindness to those less fortunate is a moral good. Those people who don't recognise this, who don't show kindness, empathy, and compassion to all human beings, are not morally good people. They cannot be. There are some things that good people can disagree on, but this isn't one of them.

I think this is a truth that is as close to being objective as any truth can be: all human lives have intrinsic value. All human beings by virtue of their existence deserve a baseline level of respect. If someone cannot respect them for their existence alone, then that person is not a morally good person.

I'm sorry if this moral stance of mine makes anyone uncomfortable. And I'm sorry that you have to frame it as "anyone who doesn't think like me is a bad guy". I don't think that is particularly fair or thoughtful. It shows neither empathy nor kindness. It is antagonistic and aggressive. I don't want to fight anyone, and I would rather that they did not pick fights with me. We can't make the world a better place for everyone's children if we're always picking fights.

So yes, to a certain extent I think that the quote above is basically correct, though I think it is articulated in a way that is intended to provoke discord and distrust. I would like to help people become more morally good, as I think that too is a moral good, but I can't while they're being deliberately provocative.

Interesting. I've come to a similar principle: I believe that all the actual evil of which humanity is capable is just forms of selfishness.

 

[Trausti]

Concepts and implications of altruism bias and pathological altruism

 

[427 Cobra]

I like the way one can pin down the entire worldview of a large section of society simply by labelling them, then argue against the perception of their worldview without having any contestation.

Yeah, putting a chunk.of the political spectrum in black and white kind of ignores all the individuals that possibly are included. No group is that cohesive in thought and plan.

Isn't it great when someone posts a ridiculous strawman pulled out of their ass? Especially when they use vague generalizations.

Cookie cutter stereotypes are excellent for avoiding having to think about what one is saying and having to decide if any of it is actually true. Lazy people talk in bumperstickers. Stupid people ask someone to read the bumpersticker to them.

I find it fascinating that the people that routinely label all conservatives as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., get upset when someone applies labels and stereotypes on them.

 

[acbytesla]

Maybe both. An oft critique of modern progressives is that they exhibit suicidal empathy.

There is nothing suicidal about empathy. The understanding that we are all in this together. That everything isn't a zero sum game. That kindness and civility is important. In 50 years of being involved in politics I have only seen a few occasions where Republicans actually promoted any policies that were empathetic to anyone other than the wealthy.

If after WW2, rebuilding Europe and Japan to the degree that the US did wasn't based on empathy I don't know what is. If creating the GI Bill and sending soldiers to college wasn't empathetic I don't know what is. America treated POWs far better than any other country during WW2. If that wasn't based on empathy, I don't know what is.

And NONE of these acts were suicidal. Neither is helping the poor, the infirm, the immigrant, or minorities. My experience in life is that selfishness offers only short term gains. But selflessness pays dividends for life.

 

[acbytesla]

I find it fascinating that the people that routinely label all conservatives as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., get upset when someone applies labels and stereotypes on them.

I don't label all conservatives as those things. Only the ones that are. Trump is ALL of those things. But I don't consider Trump a conservative.

 

[acbytesla]

Concepts and implications of altruism bias and pathological altruism

As opposed to caring only about yourself?

 

[angrysoba]

I find it fascinating that the people that routinely label all conservatives as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., get upset when someone applies labels and stereotypes on them.

You sure showed him!

 

[AmyStrange]

I'm a Liberal. I'm a progressive. I'm also a conservative. A capitalist and a socialist. If that all sounds contradictory, it generally is. But aye there's the rub. General terms are nonsensical.

This rant paints with a broad brush and then argues that it applies to specific nuanced issues. The Middle East and Israel is a cluster ◊◊◊◊. And it has been all of my life. As well as all of my father's life. And it starts with the parties of God. The batcrap crazy Muslims fighting for their stupid moronic prophet. Then you have the insane American preachers using all their political might helping the Jews steal as much of Muslim's land so they can bring on the second coming.

I agree, but I call them Blanket Statements instead (or BS), and as anyone who has more than two brain cells to rub together knows that blanket statements are usually (if not always) based on lies, misinformation, or mischaracterizations.

And before anyone complains that my use of "Maga Weirdoes" is BS, my definition of MW (which I've defined at least a couple times in this forum) is anyone who believes (and still believes) everything that the fat clown says is a fact and not a lie.


ETA: And if anyone thinks that MWs don't exist, just go to any MSN or Fox forum and you'll find lots of them.

 

[jt512]

Liberal Progressives (Lib-Progs) ... claim to believe in freedom of speech....

Really? That's news to me. They don't even pretend to be in favor of free speech.

 

[AmyStrange]

Really? That's news to me. They don't even pretend to be in favor of free speech.

Who exactly are "they"?

 

[arthwollipot]

Really? That's news to me. They don't even pretend to be in favor of free speech.

If I were a mod, I would not ban you for saying this.

You are free to say all the immoral disgusting things you want, as long as you don't cross over into hate speech and incitement to violence. I may think some of the things you say are morally repugnant, but I do not want the government to forbid you from saying them.

Can you give any example where I have said that your speech should be banned? I don't think you can.

Remember, the right to free speech only means that the government can't put you in jail for saying things (except, as I said, hate speech and incitement to violence). It doesn't insulate you from the social consequences of what you say.

 

[AmyStrange]

Really? That's news to me. They don't even pretend to be in favor of free speech.

The reason I ask is because your use of the word "they" infers that you think ALL liberal/progressives are pretending to be in favor of free speech, and that is not only a blanket statement but also false, egregious, ignorant, and insulting.

I know this because even though I'm a registered republican, I also consider myself a liberal/progressive, and I believe in free speech, and that proves your blanket statement is false.

 

[arthwollipot]

This is all very wonderful. But what do you do when others don't share this viewpoint and nonetheless exploit your compassion and empathy? Do you think it's virtuous to be a sucker?

This is another question that is framed in a spirit of hostility. I have never been harmed because I showed compassion and empathy. I have, however, been mocked.

 

[steenkh]

This is all very wonderful. But what do you do when others don't share this viewpoint and nonetheless exploit your compassion and empathy? Do you think it's virtuous to be a sucker?

You generalise too much. It is possible to think differently about some Muslims/poor/whatever who are not exploiting you, and those Muslims/poor/whatever who try to exploit you. You don't have to be a sucker in order to show compassion and empathy.