4 ms·

It is socially corrosive. However, "family values" have traditionally been framed as a conservative value in the USA/UK/AUS at least. So, how do we move "love

It is socially corrosive. However, "family values" have traditionally been framed as a conservative value in the USA/UK/AUS at least. So, how do we move "love and human relationships" back into a progressive position in a time when entrenched power profits from lonliness and division?

thriftwy 3y ago
[flagged]
- Retric 3y ago
  US conservatives have nothing to do with maintaining or returning to historic norms. From massive government subsidies and radical tax policies to wild spending sprees they’ve completely abandoned past stances only keeping the name. Similarly modern democratic politicians have no real connection to the glass of water theory and similar stances. Voters on each side are extremely diverse to the point there’s little universal on either side. As should be obvious from the two party system.
  - Retric 3y ago
    To be clear I am not saying those stances are good or bad just different. Historically heroine was legal and women couldn’t vote. That’s not part of what people mean by conservatives, it’s a modern political ideology. Similarly, Democrats stances on tariffs etc have changed through the years. They aren’t particularly tied to 100+ year old ideas either.
  - Spooky23 3y ago
    They are authoritarian, not conservative. The family values crap is just bread and circus for the religious zealots.
    - _heimdall 3y ago
      Both parties in the US are fairly authoritarian. They've dine an excellent job at riling up the public into picking sides while the parties themselves sure seem to be one and the same. Sure they get into public debates and throw political mud at each other, but at the end of the day they agree on direction and end up only debating details. For example, both parties want to shut down the southern border and only debate how to do it. Both parties want larger government with more regulations, they just occasionally debate which regulations to add. Both want to spend like there's no tomorrow, debating only who to give the newly printed money/debt to. They both agree that banks and many large corps are too big to fail. They both continue to pull more power to the federal level, only pulling state-level stunts when its a political show. They both lean heavily on executive power when in charge, wielding more and more power from the Oval Office and circumventing congress. The list goes on, but from where I sit we aren't offered the choice between a more liberal or conservative party, we're offered to pick one of two sides in a fight that is largely chummed with political hot topics that keep us all arguing with each other while the politicians largely do whatever they want.
      - Spooky23 3y ago
        I didn’t mention any political party. Kindly don’t put words in my mouth.
        _heimdall 3y ago
        You didn't, no. Though you were replying to a comment specifically about US conservatives and that is generally considered to be the Republican party. I should have clarified though, and wasn't even meaning it as a comment directly or argumentatively at you so much as a comment on our current political system.
        Spooky23 3y ago
        Conservative democrats are really common, especially in the northeast. Lots of Catholics. Federal monitoring of voting rights wasn’t just for red states like Mississippi. Places like NYC required the same scrutiny.
- nonrandomstring 3y ago
  Thanks, great link and concept. Think I heard Peterson remark on this Bolshevik dehumanisation of relations before, but this is a memorable handle on it. edit: also, while we're talking of glasses, that whole conservative-progressive axis is through the looking glass now. A lot of what looks "progressive" now is simply restorative to common sense.
- sapphicsnail 3y ago
  Conservative doesn't necessarily == old. I'm a woman who loves other women, we've been around forever, but conservatives want to make it difficult for us to have relationships.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - shiroiushi 3y ago
    Conservative means old-fashioned, not old. More specifically, it means returning to some halcyon (usually mythical) "good old days" when things weren't "degenerate". Sure, homosexuals have been around forever, but societal acceptance of homosexual relationships is relatively new. Conservatives (in the US) want to turn the clock back on that, and make those relationships socially unacceptable or even illegal. Of course, conservatives have certain ideas of when exactly the "good old days" were. Homosexuality was very accepted (even encouraged) in ancient Greece, for example, but Christian US conservatives obviously don't want to go back to those days.
    - _heimdall 3y ago
      The definition of conservative isn't nearly as black and white, especially in the US. What is conservative, in the sense of wanting things not change, is a constant moving bar and requires more context. Conservative, in the sense of going back to something in the past, requires context of how far you want to go back. > Of course, conservatives have certain ideas of when exactly the "good old days" were. Homosexuality was very accepted (even encouraged) in ancient Greece, for example, but Christian US conservatives obviously don't want to go back to those days. This is a perfect example of the latter. Anyone in the US that considers removing protections for sexual identity must first pick a time in the past where the laws and norms fit their preferences. That can be called conservative, but is it really? For the former, my generation's big push was to finally make gay marriage legal. It was progressive for sure, and classically liberal in the sense that we were trying to further protect individual rights and freedom to choose. Once it passed, though, does it become conservative? Personally I prefer the definition of conservative that is more present focused, preferring to leave things as they are today unless we have a very good reason to change it. In that sense, protecting gay marriage and similar protections on the books today would be very conservative and trying to remove them would fall into some other bucket that likely doesn't have a name (reductivist? destructionist?).
StillBored 3y ago
Well, in the USA, for the past at least 50 years, "family values" means "fundamentalist Christian" rather than supporting families/childrearing/parenting/etc. This is why "family values" politicians are usually against family leave, prenatal programs, early childhood programs, or well any social programs designed to support poor families
rayiner 3y ago
Progressivism in the west has decided to take the track of individualism rather than collectivism, and this is the result. If people are lonely, it’s not “power and profits” causing that. It’s the decline of what used to be the strongest forces bonding people and communities together: religion and kinship. And progressivism has helped achieve that decline, by making social liberalism a core part of the platform—and indeed the most important part. When you tell people that they’re unique individuals and self actualization is the highest virtue, there’s little room for family.
- ozim 3y ago
  Decline of kinship and religion has also its roots in abuse caused by toxic religion and toxic kinship. Kinship and religion has its downsides. Will it swing back? Because now we see other toxic stuff showing up that comes from individualism. Loneliness epidemic, scammers because lonely people are easier targets. I wonder if there is a sweet spot somewhere in between.

thriftwy 3y ago

[flagged]

Retric 3y ago
US conservatives have nothing to do with maintaining or returning to historic norms. From massive government subsidies and radical tax policies to wild spending sprees they’ve completely abandoned past stances only keeping the name. Similarly modern democratic politicians have no real connection to the glass of water theory and similar stances. Voters on each side are extremely diverse to the point there’s little universal on either side. As should be obvious from the two party system.
- Retric 3y ago
  To be clear I am not saying those stances are good or bad just different. Historically heroine was legal and women couldn’t vote. That’s not part of what people mean by conservatives, it’s a modern political ideology. Similarly, Democrats stances on tariffs etc have changed through the years. They aren’t particularly tied to 100+ year old ideas either.
- Spooky23 3y ago
  They are authoritarian, not conservative. The family values crap is just bread and circus for the religious zealots.
  - _heimdall 3y ago
    Both parties in the US are fairly authoritarian. They've dine an excellent job at riling up the public into picking sides while the parties themselves sure seem to be one and the same. Sure they get into public debates and throw political mud at each other, but at the end of the day they agree on direction and end up only debating details. For example, both parties want to shut down the southern border and only debate how to do it. Both parties want larger government with more regulations, they just occasionally debate which regulations to add. Both want to spend like there's no tomorrow, debating only who to give the newly printed money/debt to. They both agree that banks and many large corps are too big to fail. They both continue to pull more power to the federal level, only pulling state-level stunts when its a political show. They both lean heavily on executive power when in charge, wielding more and more power from the Oval Office and circumventing congress. The list goes on, but from where I sit we aren't offered the choice between a more liberal or conservative party, we're offered to pick one of two sides in a fight that is largely chummed with political hot topics that keep us all arguing with each other while the politicians largely do whatever they want.
    - Spooky23 3y ago
      I didn’t mention any political party. Kindly don’t put words in my mouth.
      - _heimdall 3y ago
        You didn't, no. Though you were replying to a comment specifically about US conservatives and that is generally considered to be the Republican party. I should have clarified though, and wasn't even meaning it as a comment directly or argumentatively at you so much as a comment on our current political system.
        Spooky23 3y ago
        Conservative democrats are really common, especially in the northeast. Lots of Catholics. Federal monitoring of voting rights wasn’t just for red states like Mississippi. Places like NYC required the same scrutiny.
nonrandomstring 3y ago
Thanks, great link and concept. Think I heard Peterson remark on this Bolshevik dehumanisation of relations before, but this is a memorable handle on it. edit: also, while we're talking of glasses, that whole conservative-progressive axis is through the looking glass now. A lot of what looks "progressive" now is simply restorative to common sense.
sapphicsnail 3y ago
Conservative doesn't necessarily == old. I'm a woman who loves other women, we've been around forever, but conservatives want to make it difficult for us to have relationships.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- shiroiushi 3y ago
  Conservative means old-fashioned, not old. More specifically, it means returning to some halcyon (usually mythical) "good old days" when things weren't "degenerate". Sure, homosexuals have been around forever, but societal acceptance of homosexual relationships is relatively new. Conservatives (in the US) want to turn the clock back on that, and make those relationships socially unacceptable or even illegal. Of course, conservatives have certain ideas of when exactly the "good old days" were. Homosexuality was very accepted (even encouraged) in ancient Greece, for example, but Christian US conservatives obviously don't want to go back to those days.
  - _heimdall 3y ago
    The definition of conservative isn't nearly as black and white, especially in the US. What is conservative, in the sense of wanting things not change, is a constant moving bar and requires more context. Conservative, in the sense of going back to something in the past, requires context of how far you want to go back. > Of course, conservatives have certain ideas of when exactly the "good old days" were. Homosexuality was very accepted (even encouraged) in ancient Greece, for example, but Christian US conservatives obviously don't want to go back to those days. This is a perfect example of the latter. Anyone in the US that considers removing protections for sexual identity must first pick a time in the past where the laws and norms fit their preferences. That can be called conservative, but is it really? For the former, my generation's big push was to finally make gay marriage legal. It was progressive for sure, and classically liberal in the sense that we were trying to further protect individual rights and freedom to choose. Once it passed, though, does it become conservative? Personally I prefer the definition of conservative that is more present focused, preferring to leave things as they are today unless we have a very good reason to change it. In that sense, protecting gay marriage and similar protections on the books today would be very conservative and trying to remove them would fall into some other bucket that likely doesn't have a name (reductivist? destructionist?).

StillBored 3y ago

Well, in the USA, for the past at least 50 years, "family values" means "fundamentalist Christian" rather than supporting families/childrearing/parenting/etc. This is why "family values" politicians are usually against family leave, prenatal programs, early childhood programs, or well any social programs designed to support poor families

rayiner 3y ago

Progressivism in the west has decided to take the track of individualism rather than collectivism, and this is the result. If people are lonely, it’s not “power and profits” causing that. It’s the decline of what used to be the strongest forces bonding people and communities together: religion and kinship. And progressivism has helped achieve that decline, by making social liberalism a core part of the platform—and indeed the most important part. When you tell people that they’re unique individuals and self actualization is the highest virtue, there’s little room for family.

ozim 3y ago
Decline of kinship and religion has also its roots in abuse caused by toxic religion and toxic kinship. Kinship and religion has its downsides. Will it swing back? Because now we see other toxic stuff showing up that comes from individualism. Loneliness epidemic, scammers because lonely people are easier targets. I wonder if there is a sweet spot somewhere in between.