5 ms·

This is entirely the fault of conservatives. There is no such thing as legitimate conservative thought in the US any longer. The entire movement has been hijack

This is entirely the fault of conservatives. There is no such thing as legitimate conservative thought in the US any longer. The entire movement has been hijacked by fundamentalist Christians and racist rich people. Aligning yourself with such an ideology rightfully has a serious social cost now. As a brown person, do you know what my first thoughts of someone who describes themselves as "conservative" are? I'll give you a hint: it has nothing to do with fiscal policy. You can't blame people for not wanting to be made uncomfortable in that way.

jitl 9y ago
I think there’s a wide difference between “classical” conservatism of the likes of George H. W.; and the tea party/trump/nazi ideology soup. I think the first kind is fine and welcome to an extent. It’s racism that’s not.
- aphextron 9y ago
  >I think there’s a wide difference between “classical” conservatism of the likes of George H. W.; and the tea party/trump/nazi ideology soup. I think the first kind is fine and welcome to an extent. Precisely. We need conservatism. We need that part of our conscience which says "well, hold on a minute", or "hey we can't afford that" in order to function properly as a democracy. It's loss is a tragedy, and the corruption of those ideals over the past 30 years into what it has become is breaking our country.
  - irhd 9y ago
    > We need conservatism I disagree at this point honestly. course all I've ever seen of american conservatism is the current republican party.
    - pwinnski 9y ago
      This seems like an instance of SV's bias toward the young biting SV in the collective butt. People who remember the 70s and 80s remember a different political environment.
      - RickJWag 9y ago
        Yes, true. When things seem overwhelming, I like to remind myself that in the 60s things seemed worse. (To me, the 80s and 90s were very good.)
- deadmetheny 9y ago
  The problem is that the first group is lumped into the second one. I live in the Midwest, which by all rights is a very conservative region of the country even in the urbanized areas, and conservatives are generally regarded by liberals as bumpkins that accidentally wandered into the city, even when re-iterating their disapproval of racism, sexism, and the alt-right until blue (ha) in the face. This is what's driving classical conservatives into the closet, and potentially causing them to actually embrace the more extremist ideologies.
  - irhd 9y ago
    > The problem is that the first group is lumped into the second one. Why wouldn't they be? The "crazy" ones aren't being elected by no one. They rose to power because voters embraced them. If you don't want to be lumped in as crazy then quit supporting crazy. > potentially causing them to actually embrace the more extremist ideologies. I really, really hate this argument. It's just trying to absolve people of their responsibility for choosing white nationalism and other reprehensible ideas. If you joined up because some arrogant jerk offended you one day then maybe you weren't a very good person to begin with. Besides, how many liberals do you see pushing hateful ideologies and communism because they are sick of being called arrogant elites?
    - deadmetheny 9y ago
      >Why wouldn't they be? The "crazy" ones aren't being elected by no one. They rose to power because voters embraced them. If you don't want to be lumped in as crazy then quit supporting crazy I don't disagree that the Republican party has been hijacked. Personally, I am non-partisan and generally will vote for whichever candidates lean more towards a liberal-libertarian platform, be they R or D. Lately, that's been a lot more D than R. >If you joined up because some arrogant jerk offended you one day then maybe you weren't a very good person to begin with Hatred and ostracization make people go to very dark places. A lot of people are lumping people who ideologically believe in lower taxes and fewer government services with white supremacists. I'm obviously not condoning people going to those places, but acting like putting these people on blast and calling them awful because their beliefs partially overlap with those of a genuinely awful group of people is at the least not constructive.
- anthmcc 9y ago
  The republicans have been marching towards the tea party side of things for a long time. So even if a person is reasonable themselves their is a very good chance they support unreasonable people. Personally I think who you vote for is a damn good indicator of who you are as a person.
amoorthy 9y ago
There are many news outlets that provide high-quality conservative viewpoints. e.g. The American Conservative, Reason, Washington Examiner etc. The insightful and different viewpoints here help me understand an issue better. Several of my friends are conservatives - and they span ethnicities, religions and economic classes. I find conversations with these folks quite insightful and fun. A bit harder to find these folks in Silicon Valley but not impossible. ps: I'm brown too :)
- moosey 9y ago
  Do their points of view represent anyone that has their hands on the lever of power in the US? If one were to argue that 'high quality' means that it represents the views and policy of those currently in government, then which publications would you select?
  - amoorthy 9y ago
    Excellent question. The 3 periodicals I mention above represent a more classical conservative viewpoint, i.e. Paul Ryan rather than Trump. But those two overlap at times so the distinction isn't clear. What I like is that these sites help me understand the other side of questions like gun rights/control. I may not agree with it but I'm less belligerent about my views because I appreciate their sincere alternative viewpoints.
- poke111 9y ago
  Don't forget National Review, which IMO has the best and brightest conservative writers
  - RickJWag 9y ago
    Yes, and also let's please highlight the great Thomas Sowell and Dr. Ben Carson. Two great conservative contributors (who are also men of color.)
sunnynshiny 9y ago
As a litmus test, how do you feel about this statement? It is ok to be white!
Libturd 9y ago
Lol, you're fucking dumb, kid.
RickJWag 9y ago
You are totally offensive and your ignorance is striking. You should go meet with some conservatives and have a good conversation or two. If you don't come away changed, then you haven't been looking in the right places.
- irhd 9y ago
  I think you're the ignorant one if you can't see the point that person is making.
  - RickJWag 9y ago
    Really? Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Let's make the sentence read: " The entire movement has been hijacked by sexual deviants and people who don't want to work for a living. Aligning yourself with such an ideology rightfully has a serious social cost now." Does it seem more offensive to you now? Failure to look for the merit in the other person's point of view is a mistake. There are good conservative as there are good liberals. Using inflammatory rhetoric (as the author did) does nothing to disprove one's ignorance of the other person's point of view.
    - cortesoft 9y ago
      I get what you are saying, and it is indeed problematic. I feel like so much of political discussion these days is focused on arguing against the worst of the other side. Even more insidious, though, is a pattern I have seen from both liberal and conservative corners of the internet: Someone makes a satirical tweet or image about the other side, usually some absurd extreme example of an ideology taken too far (e.g. 'I am a feminist and all men should be locked in jail' or 'I am a conservative and we all need guns to shoot these evil immigrants') Someone then posts the satirical image or tweet with some comment like "Look at what these crazy liberal/conservatives believe!" The forum will circlejerk about how crazy the other side is, and how anyone who believes these things is clearly unstable. Then, some people will start pointing out that the image or tweet is satire. Inevitably, the response will be, "Well, yeah this one might be satire, but I could totally see a liberal/conservative posting something like that!" Since the post fits in the readers worldview, the fact that it is satire doesn't really matter. In the end, everyone ends up just mocking and arguing with absurd viewpoints that almost no one actually has.

jitl 9y ago

I think there’s a wide difference between “classical” conservatism of the likes of George H. W.; and the tea party/trump/nazi ideology soup. I think the first kind is fine and welcome to an extent. It’s racism that’s not.

aphextron 9y ago
>I think there’s a wide difference between “classical” conservatism of the likes of George H. W.; and the tea party/trump/nazi ideology soup. I think the first kind is fine and welcome to an extent. Precisely. We need conservatism. We need that part of our conscience which says "well, hold on a minute", or "hey we can't afford that" in order to function properly as a democracy. It's loss is a tragedy, and the corruption of those ideals over the past 30 years into what it has become is breaking our country.
- irhd 9y ago
  > We need conservatism I disagree at this point honestly. course all I've ever seen of american conservatism is the current republican party.
  - pwinnski 9y ago
    This seems like an instance of SV's bias toward the young biting SV in the collective butt. People who remember the 70s and 80s remember a different political environment.
    - RickJWag 9y ago
      Yes, true. When things seem overwhelming, I like to remind myself that in the 60s things seemed worse. (To me, the 80s and 90s were very good.)
deadmetheny 9y ago
The problem is that the first group is lumped into the second one. I live in the Midwest, which by all rights is a very conservative region of the country even in the urbanized areas, and conservatives are generally regarded by liberals as bumpkins that accidentally wandered into the city, even when re-iterating their disapproval of racism, sexism, and the alt-right until blue (ha) in the face. This is what's driving classical conservatives into the closet, and potentially causing them to actually embrace the more extremist ideologies.
- irhd 9y ago
  > The problem is that the first group is lumped into the second one. Why wouldn't they be? The "crazy" ones aren't being elected by no one. They rose to power because voters embraced them. If you don't want to be lumped in as crazy then quit supporting crazy. > potentially causing them to actually embrace the more extremist ideologies. I really, really hate this argument. It's just trying to absolve people of their responsibility for choosing white nationalism and other reprehensible ideas. If you joined up because some arrogant jerk offended you one day then maybe you weren't a very good person to begin with. Besides, how many liberals do you see pushing hateful ideologies and communism because they are sick of being called arrogant elites?
  - deadmetheny 9y ago
    >Why wouldn't they be? The "crazy" ones aren't being elected by no one. They rose to power because voters embraced them. If you don't want to be lumped in as crazy then quit supporting crazy I don't disagree that the Republican party has been hijacked. Personally, I am non-partisan and generally will vote for whichever candidates lean more towards a liberal-libertarian platform, be they R or D. Lately, that's been a lot more D than R. >If you joined up because some arrogant jerk offended you one day then maybe you weren't a very good person to begin with Hatred and ostracization make people go to very dark places. A lot of people are lumping people who ideologically believe in lower taxes and fewer government services with white supremacists. I'm obviously not condoning people going to those places, but acting like putting these people on blast and calling them awful because their beliefs partially overlap with those of a genuinely awful group of people is at the least not constructive.
anthmcc 9y ago
The republicans have been marching towards the tea party side of things for a long time. So even if a person is reasonable themselves their is a very good chance they support unreasonable people. Personally I think who you vote for is a damn good indicator of who you are as a person.

amoorthy 9y ago

There are many news outlets that provide high-quality conservative viewpoints. e.g. The American Conservative, Reason, Washington Examiner etc. The insightful and different viewpoints here help me understand an issue better. Several of my friends are conservatives - and they span ethnicities, religions and economic classes. I find conversations with these folks quite insightful and fun. A bit harder to find these folks in Silicon Valley but not impossible. ps: I'm brown too :)

moosey 9y ago
Do their points of view represent anyone that has their hands on the lever of power in the US? If one were to argue that 'high quality' means that it represents the views and policy of those currently in government, then which publications would you select?
- amoorthy 9y ago
  Excellent question. The 3 periodicals I mention above represent a more classical conservative viewpoint, i.e. Paul Ryan rather than Trump. But those two overlap at times so the distinction isn't clear. What I like is that these sites help me understand the other side of questions like gun rights/control. I may not agree with it but I'm less belligerent about my views because I appreciate their sincere alternative viewpoints.
poke111 9y ago
Don't forget National Review, which IMO has the best and brightest conservative writers
- RickJWag 9y ago
  Yes, and also let's please highlight the great Thomas Sowell and Dr. Ben Carson. Two great conservative contributors (who are also men of color.)

sunnynshiny 9y ago

As a litmus test, how do you feel about this statement? It is ok to be white!

Libturd 9y ago

Lol, you're fucking dumb, kid.

RickJWag 9y ago

You are totally offensive and your ignorance is striking. You should go meet with some conservatives and have a good conversation or two. If you don't come away changed, then you haven't been looking in the right places.

irhd 9y ago
I think you're the ignorant one if you can't see the point that person is making.
- RickJWag 9y ago
  Really? Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Let's make the sentence read: " The entire movement has been hijacked by sexual deviants and people who don't want to work for a living. Aligning yourself with such an ideology rightfully has a serious social cost now." Does it seem more offensive to you now? Failure to look for the merit in the other person's point of view is a mistake. There are good conservative as there are good liberals. Using inflammatory rhetoric (as the author did) does nothing to disprove one's ignorance of the other person's point of view.
  - cortesoft 9y ago
    I get what you are saying, and it is indeed problematic. I feel like so much of political discussion these days is focused on arguing against the worst of the other side. Even more insidious, though, is a pattern I have seen from both liberal and conservative corners of the internet: Someone makes a satirical tweet or image about the other side, usually some absurd extreme example of an ideology taken too far (e.g. 'I am a feminist and all men should be locked in jail' or 'I am a conservative and we all need guns to shoot these evil immigrants') Someone then posts the satirical image or tweet with some comment like "Look at what these crazy liberal/conservatives believe!" The forum will circlejerk about how crazy the other side is, and how anyone who believes these things is clearly unstable. Then, some people will start pointing out that the image or tweet is satire. Inevitably, the response will be, "Well, yeah this one might be satire, but I could totally see a liberal/conservative posting something like that!" Since the post fits in the readers worldview, the fact that it is satire doesn't really matter. In the end, everyone ends up just mocking and arguing with absurd viewpoints that almost no one actually has.