4 ms·

In a sense I agree with you. What the person you are responding to is trying to say, I assume, is the new status quo is liberalism. As in lgbt, blm, van life, c

In a sense I agree with you. What the person you are responding to is trying to say, I assume, is the new status quo is liberalism. As in lgbt, blm, van life, cannabis culture, casual dating, multiculturalism, secularism, etc. I labelled the above idea space “liberalism” but I’m not convinced it’s the right term. I am just lacking a better one. In any case, if we assume the to be the status quo, which I think we mostly can, people trying to preserve these values and bolster them are conservative. They enjoy the status quo, wish to keep it and wish to reinforce it. They wish to prevent progress ( as in movement ) towards a different direction. There is also another idea space, generally associated with christian identity, belief in God, the existence of two biological sexes with clear roles to fulfil, european heritage, abortion is murder, sex strictly within marriage, no homosexuality, gun rights, etc This would be called conservatism. But, as in the “liberalism” mentioned above, it’s not really the best term. If we just take it as an idea space and assume liberalism to be the status quo, this would definitely be a counter culture. It dislikes the current status quo, wishes to undermine it and shift it in a different direction. And, in this sense, I agree with the person you responded too. “Conservative” is the new counter culture.

satao 4y ago
You’re mistaken if you think “liberalism” is the status quo. It might be in the internet, but real life is not the same as Twitter. Just look at the push against abortion, or the massive incarcerated population, or the constant killing of poor people by the police. Or the raising of the interest rate to freeze salaries in detriment of bigger unemployment which won’t target the rich people? Honestly saying that being conservative is a counter-culture just shows how alienated conservatives are.
zzo38computer 4y ago
> In any case, if we assume the to be the status quo, which I think we mostly can, people trying to preserve these values and bolster them are conservative. They enjoy the status quo, wish to keep it and wish to reinforce it. They wish to prevent progress ( as in movement ) towards a different direction. It is true, but there is not only one or two directions, and it must be necessary to consider that there is no only one or two directions. People can believe in God or not as they wish, and might or might not be Christian (and there is many different Christians anyways, as well as many different non-Christians, and you need not only necessarily one religion, also). Either way can result people do good things and bad things. Furthermore, "God exist" is not even very clearly defined. They shouldn't shame people for believe in God, although to say that it is right or wrong to believe in God can be mistaken because many people fail to consider that it is not really well defined. Although two biological sexes do have clear roles to fulfil (specifically, mother vs father), that is a simplification and also is sometimes expanded too much (especially in the past, more often than today). That fails to consider intersex, and also people who do things differently from each other, you can do such things which are not part of biological sex. Some people have some European heritage but not necessarily all. However, "European" is not very specific compared with e.g. "Italian", I think. Homosexuality is not such a bad thing and even if you do not like it, it is not what should be illegal. (But, they should not force you to like it or to hate it.) About gun rights, I think that you should need right to have weapons (especially unpowered and improvised weapons, rather than guns, but guns too) and other devices (including clothing, pencil/paper for writing, etc), and the right to not have weapons and other devices (including clothing) in case you do not want it, but that they should not just sell guns to everyone without proper safety training, etc. Proper safety training is important. However, if you make up your own weapons and other devices then you can do that; the government should not get in the way of everything. However, such a thing should not mean that you can just shoot everyone or bring guns everywhere; the law would still need to prevent against such a thing, which they already do anyways. There are some Canadian laws relating to guns. Some of these things seems like good ideas but should not be mandatory, and are often more restrictive than they should be. Furthermore, even if guns are legal should not mean that they should be encouraged. Use of weapons should normally be discouraged, not encouraged. (I do not want any guns and I do not like guns, but that is just my opinion.) Too often they say they either want gun rights or gun restrictions, either yes or no, and fail to consider a more nuanced possibility. Cannabis, also, they fail to consider a more nuanced possibility. Now, smoking marijuana is legal, and I also do not think they should make the drugs illegal, but unfortunately they can still harm the air outside, and make smell even inside someone else's house right next to it too, so there still need to be the restriction of that. But, usually the people just consider yes or no instead of the more complicated possibility like I have described. Abortion also is complicated, often both side they fail to consider the nuance. Ideally, I think it should be something to be avoided (it is better to start to not be pregnant, if possible), but conditions are not ideal and never are ideal. If it is your body then you will have the right to do with it (although you should still consider whether or not it is a good idea; just because something is or should be legal does not necessarily mean that it is a good idea), and can be self-defense from your own body (in case you would die otherwise), but the government should not make it difficult by getting in the way. And then, there are some things that neither "liberal" nor "conservative" governments tend to consider, or that both do.

satao 4y ago

You’re mistaken if you think “liberalism” is the status quo. It might be in the internet, but real life is not the same as Twitter. Just look at the push against abortion, or the massive incarcerated population, or the constant killing of poor people by the police. Or the raising of the interest rate to freeze salaries in detriment of bigger unemployment which won’t target the rich people? Honestly saying that being conservative is a counter-culture just shows how alienated conservatives are.

zzo38computer 4y ago

> In any case, if we assume the to be the status quo, which I think we mostly can, people trying to preserve these values and bolster them are conservative. They enjoy the status quo, wish to keep it and wish to reinforce it. They wish to prevent progress ( as in movement ) towards a different direction. It is true, but there is not only one or two directions, and it must be necessary to consider that there is no only one or two directions. People can believe in God or not as they wish, and might or might not be Christian (and there is many different Christians anyways, as well as many different non-Christians, and you need not only necessarily one religion, also). Either way can result people do good things and bad things. Furthermore, "God exist" is not even very clearly defined. They shouldn't shame people for believe in God, although to say that it is right or wrong to believe in God can be mistaken because many people fail to consider that it is not really well defined. Although two biological sexes do have clear roles to fulfil (specifically, mother vs father), that is a simplification and also is sometimes expanded too much (especially in the past, more often than today). That fails to consider intersex, and also people who do things differently from each other, you can do such things which are not part of biological sex. Some people have some European heritage but not necessarily all. However, "European" is not very specific compared with e.g. "Italian", I think. Homosexuality is not such a bad thing and even if you do not like it, it is not what should be illegal. (But, they should not force you to like it or to hate it.) About gun rights, I think that you should need right to have weapons (especially unpowered and improvised weapons, rather than guns, but guns too) and other devices (including clothing, pencil/paper for writing, etc), and the right to not have weapons and other devices (including clothing) in case you do not want it, but that they should not just sell guns to everyone without proper safety training, etc. Proper safety training is important. However, if you make up your own weapons and other devices then you can do that; the government should not get in the way of everything. However, such a thing should not mean that you can just shoot everyone or bring guns everywhere; the law would still need to prevent against such a thing, which they already do anyways. There are some Canadian laws relating to guns. Some of these things seems like good ideas but should not be mandatory, and are often more restrictive than they should be. Furthermore, even if guns are legal should not mean that they should be encouraged. Use of weapons should normally be discouraged, not encouraged. (I do not want any guns and I do not like guns, but that is just my opinion.) Too often they say they either want gun rights or gun restrictions, either yes or no, and fail to consider a more nuanced possibility. Cannabis, also, they fail to consider a more nuanced possibility. Now, smoking marijuana is legal, and I also do not think they should make the drugs illegal, but unfortunately they can still harm the air outside, and make smell even inside someone else's house right next to it too, so there still need to be the restriction of that. But, usually the people just consider yes or no instead of the more complicated possibility like I have described. Abortion also is complicated, often both side they fail to consider the nuance. Ideally, I think it should be something to be avoided (it is better to start to not be pregnant, if possible), but conditions are not ideal and never are ideal. If it is your body then you will have the right to do with it (although you should still consider whether or not it is a good idea; just because something is or should be legal does not necessarily mean that it is a good idea), and can be self-defense from your own body (in case you would die otherwise), but the government should not make it difficult by getting in the way. And then, there are some things that neither "liberal" nor "conservative" governments tend to consider, or that both do.