5 ms·

And again, you've completely caricatured anyone with a more conservative view point. The vast majority of people who criticize BLM or any other leftist issue a

And again, you've completely caricatured anyone with a more conservative view point. The vast majority of people who criticize BLM or any other leftist issue are not racists. They are people who see problems with a movement that has good intentions and terrible execution. Thats pretty much the standard conservative criticism of liberal politics: Good intentions, horrible execution that lots of times backfires. You need to realize that for the most part everyone wants the same things. We just disagree about how to get there.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> The vast majority of people who criticize BLM or any other leftist issue are not racists. The vast majority of right-wing criticism of BLM is grounded in (sometimes quite overt) racism, as is, frankly, much of the left-wing criticism of BLM. It's true that criticism of certain things on the left is not dominantly grounded in racism; e.g., while capitalism certainly has racial impacts, the defense by the right of capitalism against socialism and other post-capitalist alternatives isn't grounded primarily in racism, nor is the right-wing assault on feminism grounded in racism. That's not to say that the dominant basis of those right-wing positions isn't as bad as racism, but it's certainly different from racism. > You need to realize that for the most part everyone wants the same things. It may be that most everyone has similar values, but the thought leaders crafting and selling positions (on the right or the left or anywhere else) aren't a representative sample of the population, but a fairly narrow elite, and I guarantee you that the thought leaders of the right and left do not want the same things and differ only on means. But I also think that the idea that everyone for the most part wants the same things is, at best, inadequately supported and contrary to the readily available indications. There is every indication that there are, on many politically salient issues, fundamental conflicts of basic values and goals, not merely on optimal mechanisms for achieving shared goals.
- JoHawth31 8y ago
  People most definitely DO NOT have similar values, and this almost entirely explains the left/right divide within the United States. Most Americans have been brought up to believe in shared beliefs like individual liberty, equality before the law, basic human rights, etc. This is the common vision we are striving to achieve. But beliefs are not the same as values. The divide comes in how we prioritize our values in achieving those goals. Jonathan Haidt has done a lot of important work in this area, I recommend you check him out. Our moral foundations are based on: Harm/care, Fairness/reciprocity, Ingroup/loyalty, Authority/respect, and Purity/sanctity. Lefties really only care about the first two, conservatives care about all 5, and harm/care + fairness/reciprocity typically rank lower than the other values. Look at the FIRST comment on this thread. Then look at the list of values. It is really easy to see what our arguments are about once you know why people think the way they do. I disagree strongly with your last point. Almost everyone wants to be happy, avoid suffering, have healthy and harmonious relationships, to live life as they choose, have a sense of purpose, etc. Our fights are typically about how to achieve that for every citizen. If you can find a LARGE population of people that does not want those things I will happily retract my statement.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Most Americans have been brought up to believe in shared beliefs like individual liberty, equality before the law, basic human rights, etc. This is less true when you get beyond platitudes to what each one of those means in substance. There is a very significant disagreement over what “liberty”, for instance, means, and over what things are “basic human rights”, among people who agree that “liberty” and “basic human rights” are important goals. > But beliefs are not the same as values. Well, beliefs include both fact and value beliefs, but the ones you enumerate are, in fact, values. > The divide comes in how we prioritize our values in achieving those goals. Values are root goals, not means of achieving goals. > I disagree strongly with your last point. Almost everyone wants to be happy, avoid suffering, have healthy and harmonious relationships, to live life as they choose, have a sense of purpose, etc. Taking that as true, for the sake of argument, that's not wanting the same things, even if people might use the same words. It is a different thing for Alice to be happy, avoid suffering, have harmonious relationships, live as she chooses, and have a sense of purpose than it is for Bob to have those things; it may even—depending on, e.g., what makes Alice and Bob each happy—be mutually incompatible things.
    - JoHawth31 8y ago
      You are conflating real world policy execution with values. Substance can't be mapped onto reality without prioritizing values and deciding accordingly. The belief of individual liberty is shared throughout America, its real world execution will vary depending on the value system of the population in question. We have the same belief, but disagree about how to get there. I think you're sort of on the right track about values being root goals. Values come first, then we execute policy based on those values. One goal may come at the expense of another. And some lefties might not even recognize a trade off if statistically they don't value something that conservatives value very highly. Or vice versa. Your last point is in alignment with everything I've said before. We have the same over arching goal (happiness), we just disagree about how to get there. The two paths to the goal are mutually incompatible, not the goal itself. The path is what is in question and conflict, not the goal. This is why it is so important that the path is discussed honestly and openly. Good intentions do not automatically lead to good outcomes, and if we as a society choose the wrong path we are f*. So to bring it full circle, this is EXACTLY why we need more conservatives on campus: to discuss the other paths and evaluate them objectively so that the best path may win.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> The vast majority of people who criticize BLM or any other leftist issue are not racists. The vast majority of right-wing criticism of BLM is grounded in (sometimes quite overt) racism, as is, frankly, much of the left-wing criticism of BLM. It's true that criticism of certain things on the left is not dominantly grounded in racism; e.g., while capitalism certainly has racial impacts, the defense by the right of capitalism against socialism and other post-capitalist alternatives isn't grounded primarily in racism, nor is the right-wing assault on feminism grounded in racism. That's not to say that the dominant basis of those right-wing positions isn't as bad as racism, but it's certainly different from racism. > You need to realize that for the most part everyone wants the same things. It may be that most everyone has similar values, but the thought leaders crafting and selling positions (on the right or the left or anywhere else) aren't a representative sample of the population, but a fairly narrow elite, and I guarantee you that the thought leaders of the right and left do not want the same things and differ only on means. But I also think that the idea that everyone for the most part wants the same things is, at best, inadequately supported and contrary to the readily available indications. There is every indication that there are, on many politically salient issues, fundamental conflicts of basic values and goals, not merely on optimal mechanisms for achieving shared goals.

JoHawth31 8y ago
People most definitely DO NOT have similar values, and this almost entirely explains the left/right divide within the United States. Most Americans have been brought up to believe in shared beliefs like individual liberty, equality before the law, basic human rights, etc. This is the common vision we are striving to achieve. But beliefs are not the same as values. The divide comes in how we prioritize our values in achieving those goals. Jonathan Haidt has done a lot of important work in this area, I recommend you check him out. Our moral foundations are based on: Harm/care, Fairness/reciprocity, Ingroup/loyalty, Authority/respect, and Purity/sanctity. Lefties really only care about the first two, conservatives care about all 5, and harm/care + fairness/reciprocity typically rank lower than the other values. Look at the FIRST comment on this thread. Then look at the list of values. It is really easy to see what our arguments are about once you know why people think the way they do. I disagree strongly with your last point. Almost everyone wants to be happy, avoid suffering, have healthy and harmonious relationships, to live life as they choose, have a sense of purpose, etc. Our fights are typically about how to achieve that for every citizen. If you can find a LARGE population of people that does not want those things I will happily retract my statement.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > Most Americans have been brought up to believe in shared beliefs like individual liberty, equality before the law, basic human rights, etc. This is less true when you get beyond platitudes to what each one of those means in substance. There is a very significant disagreement over what “liberty”, for instance, means, and over what things are “basic human rights”, among people who agree that “liberty” and “basic human rights” are important goals. > But beliefs are not the same as values. Well, beliefs include both fact and value beliefs, but the ones you enumerate are, in fact, values. > The divide comes in how we prioritize our values in achieving those goals. Values are root goals, not means of achieving goals. > I disagree strongly with your last point. Almost everyone wants to be happy, avoid suffering, have healthy and harmonious relationships, to live life as they choose, have a sense of purpose, etc. Taking that as true, for the sake of argument, that's not wanting the same things, even if people might use the same words. It is a different thing for Alice to be happy, avoid suffering, have harmonious relationships, live as she chooses, and have a sense of purpose than it is for Bob to have those things; it may even—depending on, e.g., what makes Alice and Bob each happy—be mutually incompatible things.
  - JoHawth31 8y ago
    You are conflating real world policy execution with values. Substance can't be mapped onto reality without prioritizing values and deciding accordingly. The belief of individual liberty is shared throughout America, its real world execution will vary depending on the value system of the population in question. We have the same belief, but disagree about how to get there. I think you're sort of on the right track about values being root goals. Values come first, then we execute policy based on those values. One goal may come at the expense of another. And some lefties might not even recognize a trade off if statistically they don't value something that conservatives value very highly. Or vice versa. Your last point is in alignment with everything I've said before. We have the same over arching goal (happiness), we just disagree about how to get there. The two paths to the goal are mutually incompatible, not the goal itself. The path is what is in question and conflict, not the goal. This is why it is so important that the path is discussed honestly and openly. Good intentions do not automatically lead to good outcomes, and if we as a society choose the wrong path we are f*. So to bring it full circle, this is EXACTLY why we need more conservatives on campus: to discuss the other paths and evaluate them objectively so that the best path may win.