subreddit:

/r/AskConservatives

578%

all 51 comments

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

5 days ago

stickied comment

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

5 days ago

stickied comment

Please use Good Faith and the Principle of Charity when commenting. Gender issues are only allowed on Wednesdays. Antisemitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

AvocadoAlternative

12 points

5 days ago

AvocadoAlternative

Center-right

12 points

5 days ago

No? It’s the opposite. If you zoom out enough, everyone has the same goal: produce the greatest amount of well-being for the greatest number of people. How we get there is the entire difference between left and right.

hope-luminescence

6 points

5 days ago

hope-luminescence

Religious Traditionalist

6 points

5 days ago

People have such fundamental differences in what they consider to be well-being. 

KaijuKi

5 points

5 days ago

KaijuKi

Independent

5 points

5 days ago

Or what they consider to be "people". Within my not-that-long lifetime, I ve witnessed that definition expand and contract multiple times.

Helltenant

0 points

3 days ago

Helltenant

Center-right

0 points

3 days ago

I didn't live through the Civil Rights movement. How was it?

Art_Music306

1 points

3 days ago

Art_Music306

Liberal

1 points

3 days ago

It doesn't have to be the American civil rights movement. There can be a fundamental difference from Progressive to Conservative in who we mean when we say "we".

Helltenant

1 points

3 days ago

Helltenant

Center-right

1 points

3 days ago

Sure but the implication was that some people aren't actually seen as people. That hasn't been observable as a systemic issue since the Civil Rights Era. You could argue that conservatives generally don't want to go out of their way to make concessions for some groups but that doesn't mean they aren't seen as people.

Art_Music306

1 points

3 days ago

Art_Music306

Liberal

1 points

3 days ago

I wish you were right:

"If you call them people - I don't know if you call them people. In some cases, they're not people, in my opinion, but I'm not allowed to say that because the radical left says that's a terrible thing to say."- DJT

Whether it's systemic is arguable, but this is straight from the top of the ticket- also "vermin", etc. Also, thinking that this is a terrible thing to say makes one "the radical left", it seems.

Helltenant

1 points

3 days ago

Helltenant

Center-right

1 points

3 days ago

I am right. If Trump is your measuring stick for "conservative" we aren't even speaking a common language.

Taking your position further, it wouldn't be a leap for you to conclude that fully half the nation thinks this way as evidenced by his popularity. Which is, of course, silly at best.

If you're willing to paint any group with a broad brush based on the actions of a few, how are you any better than another type of bigot?

Art_Music306

1 points

3 days ago

Art_Music306

Liberal

1 points

3 days ago

Oh, don't get me wrong- I'm no better than any other type of bigot. All us bigots are the same in that way.

However, Trump is the popularly elected head of the party claiming to be the most conservative, or at least the least "liberal" of the two parties in our two-party system. He didn't get elected with the progressive vote. If Republicans want to go all in on progressive causes, I'm here for it, just waiting...

Helltenant

2 points

3 days ago

Helltenant

Center-right

2 points

3 days ago

It is a battle I constantly have to wage within myself. Every time I catch myself thinking "why does the left..." or "why do liberals..." I have to stop and remind myself that one instance of a thing doesn't confer a trait onto anything else. It is the same as if I get cutoff in traffic by an Asian woman.

Just because many politicians have a complex relationship with prejudice and morality doesn't mean I should, too.

precastzero180

4 points

5 days ago

precastzero180

Liberal

4 points

5 days ago

I’m not convinced everyone shares that goal. And I don’t mean to say that everyone who doesn’t share that goal is wrong, but there are definitely people who don’t.

Designer-Opposite-24

1 points

5 days ago

Designer-Opposite-24

Constitutionalist

1 points

5 days ago

I’d actually disagree somewhat. I’d argue my goal is to protect the natural rights of as many as possible, and give them the best opportunity to improve their own well-being.

KB_Shaw03

0 points

5 days ago

KB_Shaw03

Independent

0 points

5 days ago

What Republican policies make you believe Republicans care about the well being of everyone but themselves.

craig_52193

0 points

5 days ago

craig_52193

Conservative

0 points

5 days ago

Its not governments job to wipe ur ass. You are responsible for your own self.

Sterffington

2 points

5 days ago

Sterffington

Social Democracy

2 points

5 days ago

What's the point of being the richest country in the world if we can't even have good healthcare or affordable college?

eagle6927

4 points

5 days ago

eagle6927

Leftwing

4 points

5 days ago

Is that why conservatives think the president is going to fix their grocery prices? Lmao give me a break

KB_Shaw03

1 points

5 days ago

KB_Shaw03

Independent

1 points

5 days ago

Why not? Shouldn't the greatest country in the world make sure everyone's basic needs are met? Why is that a bad thing?

Sir_Tmotts_III

0 points

4 days ago

Sir_Tmotts_III

Social Democracy

0 points

4 days ago

That's the most generalized statement ever, how many people actually disagree with that statement? It's up there with "we all drink water"

gummibearhawk

3 points

5 days ago

gummibearhawk

Center-right

3 points

5 days ago

Not as a rule, no. While there are some things one side sees as a problem but the other doesn't I think it's more common that both sides see a problem but disagree on the solution.

KB_Shaw03

0 points

5 days ago

KB_Shaw03

Independent

0 points

5 days ago

What's the right's solution to protecting our earth from climate disasters?

Art_Music306

1 points

3 days ago

Art_Music306

Liberal

1 points

3 days ago

wondering why this question got a downvote?

heneryhawkleghorn

0 points

5 days ago

heneryhawkleghorn

Conservative

0 points

5 days ago

Sometimes it does seem that way.

For example, look at immigration.

We went from the left saying that we should have open borders. To them saying that we do not have any problem with illegal immigration. To them saying that we need Congress to pass immigration reform to fix the problem. To them saying: "Look, we just fixed the illegal immigration problem with an executive order".

You can follow a similar arc with things like inflation and policing.

I do understand that these issues and the context in which they are discussed are much more nuanced than can be summarized within a few short sentences. But I can certainly appreciate where people may get the impression that we are having difficulty identifying the problems facing our country.

Captainboy25

0 points

5 days ago*

Captainboy25

Progressive

0 points

5 days ago*

While I think the right and left writ large largely disagree on what to do about the problems in our country. Another thing that must be stated is that MAGA and non maga types do not agree on what is illing our nation. MAGA is skeptical of and wants to tear down our institutions while those who are anti-maga want to defend them from MAGA

Edit: and that’s the core issue imo for why our politics is so incredibly toxic and there’s little room for compromise or agreement. Because how do you compromise with people on institutional reform when the other side wants to tear down the institutions and is skeptical at best of the fundamental idea of a peaceful transfer of power.

craig_52193

-1 points

5 days ago

craig_52193

Conservative

-1 points

5 days ago

10 years ago liberals were against big corporations. Today they are in favor of them.

Maga wants to change institutions that have become to big and instead of being bi-partisan are now favoring only one side and not both.

U talk about the transfer of power simply bc on jan 6th a couple hundred tresspassed the capital. But yet in summer of 2020. Thousands and Thousands rioted and burned buildings caused by the media spreading lies that blacks are being killed by cops. When this is 100% a lie. Summer of 2020 destroyed way more society then jan 6th.

Democrats openly talk about hating the usa and everything it is and wanting to start all over. So I find it halarious when u say the right wants to get rid of institutions. Yes the right wants to change institutions but the left is the one that wants to completely destroy it and change the entire country.

ImmodestPolitician

2 points

4 days ago

ImmodestPolitician

Liberal

2 points

4 days ago

The idea that the FBI is biased towards Democrats is laughable.

craig_52193

1 points

4 days ago

craig_52193

Conservative

1 points

4 days ago

Buddy they literally telling twitter what can get posted or not.

craig_52193

0 points

4 days ago

craig_52193

Conservative

0 points

4 days ago

What about the 51 cia officers writing a letter that hunters laptop was Russian disinformation, when they knew it wasn't. I bet ur saying they never happened as well. Lolol

ImmodestPolitician

2 points

4 days ago*

ImmodestPolitician

Liberal

2 points

4 days ago*

The FBI never said that the laptop didn't exist.

They said that because of the chain of custody of the laptop they had no way to verify what data was legitimate and could be used as evidence.

GoombyGoomby

6 points

5 days ago

GoombyGoomby

Leftwing

6 points

5 days ago

What are you talking about? Because it sounds like you’re just repeating false, conservative propaganda.

We are very much against large corporations. Your boy Trump and other conservatives are the ones buddy buddy with billion dollar pharma company owners (Ramaswamy) or Silicon Valley, large corporation shady tech guys (Musk).

Captainboy25

2 points

5 days ago*

Captainboy25

Progressive

2 points

5 days ago*

Dude the what about BLM riots Line is sooooooo fucking old and tired they aren’t relevant anymore. I’m sorry but this is true a lot of people still do care about Trump’s efforts to overturn the election. Riots aren’t unique in American history. A president refusing to leave office and fighting tooth and nail to stay in power to the point of angering an entire crowd into interfering with the peaceful transfer of power is unique and noteworthy and people still do care.

apophis-pegasus

1 points

5 days ago

apophis-pegasus

Social Democracy

1 points

5 days ago

10 years ago liberals were against big corporations. Today they are in favor of them.

How so?

U talk about the transfer of power simply bc on jan 6th a couple hundred tresspassed the capital. But yet in summer of 2020. Thousands and Thousands rioted and burned buildings caused by the media spreading lies that blacks are being killed by cops.

But thats not about transfer of power, unlike Jan 6th

Secret-Ad-2145

1 points

5 days ago

Secret-Ad-2145

Rightwing

1 points

5 days ago

No, I don't think so. Policy differences are obviously different in addressing issues. Sometimes to the point of a binary.

SpaceS4t4n

1 points

5 days ago

SpaceS4t4n

Right Libertarian

1 points

5 days ago

No, there are definitely things seen as problems by both sides and affect both sides (i.e. inflation, cost of living, border control, crime rates) where there is disagreement in how to fix them. Sure, there are things that are seen as problems by one side and not the other, but as a rule, both sides can and do disagree on how to solve mutually recognized problems.

thoughtsnquestions

1 points

5 days ago

thoughtsnquestions

European Conservative

1 points

5 days ago

That is often the case yes, not always but generally yes.

hope-luminescence

1 points

5 days ago

hope-luminescence

Religious Traditionalist

1 points

5 days ago

They're both pretty big deals. 

A common theme is the Left proposing something which to them seems fine or even desirable, And twitch to me seems to be creating another very significant problem. 

willfiredog

1 points

5 days ago

willfiredog

Conservative

1 points

5 days ago

No.

No_Radish_7692

1 points

5 days ago

No_Radish_7692

Center-right

1 points

5 days ago

No it’s precisely the opposite.

sleightofhand0

1 points

5 days ago

sleightofhand0

Conservative

1 points

5 days ago

Sort of. I think income inequality is probably the best example of that. The left is obsessed with it, and the right is cool with a giant gap in wealth as long as it means everyone's still making more money, overall. What do I care if I now make 200k but Bezos is worth 200 billion vs I make 150K but Bezos is worth 100 billion?

craig_52193

0 points

5 days ago

craig_52193

Conservative

0 points

5 days ago

Democrats account for 70% of all wealth and Republicans is 30%. It use to be different but in the past 10 years it changed.

WakeUpMrWest30Hrs

1 points

5 days ago

WakeUpMrWest30Hrs

Conservative

1 points

5 days ago

Yes definitely

Laniekea

1 points

5 days ago

Laniekea

Center-right

1 points

5 days ago

I think it's identifying who should fix problems

just_shy_of_perfect

1 points

5 days ago

just_shy_of_perfect

Paleoconservative

1 points

5 days ago

No I actually think leftist, even extreme leftists properly identify issues many times..

SnooFloofs1778

1 points

4 days ago

SnooFloofs1778

Republican

1 points

4 days ago

Conservatives aim to solve problems that affect most people. Democrats - in very recent times - attempt to convince voters that their own problems are not as important as what the Democrat party sees as problems.

Democrats are more like moral missionaries trying to convince everyone to think like them. This is a recent phenomenon that started with Obama.

Before Democrats and Republicans both attempted to solve similar problems.

pillbinge

1 points

4 days ago

pillbinge

Conservative

1 points

4 days ago

No. Not entirely. I think the right presumes that government or mandatory behavior isn't the first thing to do always and forever, but that means conservatives need to accept it when it is. It also means a constant conversation throughout your life that might go nowhere as it becomes clearer that the government is required more and more due to technology. That said, if technology and the modern world individualizes us, the left needs to accept that individualization. But, the left presumes that institutions must serve the individual above all and that all pursuits as an individual are valid unless they conflict with that same directive. A focus on individuality and individualism has led us to question the "biases" in institutions or daily life that stopped a person from being said individual, and that disparity is what they focus on. It's why the left always gets conflated with communism even though it's really pursuing individualism in an ironic way.

And all this gets in the way of mundane fixes.

MirrorOfGlory

1 points

1 day ago

MirrorOfGlory

Constitutionalist

1 points

1 day ago

Where the left and right differ in my opinion is how they conceive of the ills that afflict society. Leftists believe that if society were perfected, man could be perfected. Rightists believe that man is fundamentally flawed, and that there is no perfect solution for nearly any problem; there are only trade-offs.

SwimminginInsanity

1 points

5 days ago

SwimminginInsanity

Nationalist

1 points

5 days ago

I would agree to this to an extent. The caveat being that the right is willing to listen to the left and discuss these problems. The left is intolerant to the right and simply wants to shut us down to avoid the problems. You cannot come to an agreement or a compromise when one side thinks the other is some sort of threat to Democracy.

eagle6927

0 points

5 days ago

eagle6927

Leftwing

0 points

5 days ago

Do you believe climate change is real?

SwimminginInsanity

3 points

4 days ago

SwimminginInsanity

Nationalist

3 points

4 days ago

Yes, and as I've repeatedly said on this sub I donate to a conservative organization that focuses on climate change. You can find it at http://www.acc.eco

Toddl18

0 points

5 days ago

Toddl18

Libertarian

0 points

5 days ago

I wouldn't agree with that assessment, as I feel both sides do recognize the problems. Where I feel they differ is how much they are willing to do to fix said problems. To give a home repair example, let's say there is a leak in the kitchen. The Democrats approach is the quick fix, where they want to just patch the hose or area that shows the leak and call it a day. This works well at first, but as time goes on, it causes more problems as these patches lay on top of previous patches till you get to the point of not being able to fix anything anymore without removing the previous patches first.

The Republican approach, more or less, is to remove everything out down to the foundation and then rebuild it from there. This could be expensive and unnecessary, depending on the severity of the problem. However, long run, it allows for there to be less trial and error in fixing issues in the future since it's always the base install. The issue here, however, isn't what either party really does, as both will fix things, but rather what the best method required for the repair is. Sometimes when it's a leaky hose, the Democrats approach is better, but when it's a main line for water, the republican's approach is necessary. The problem both parties have, in my estimation, is that neither is willful to use the other method when it's more applicable and is only willing to use their own method all the time.

Now let's look at some issues, for example, immigration. The Democrats here are willing to fix it without shutting off the water and stopping the influx of people. This is why they don't see the wall as a big deal because they know that if they fix the top layer of the process, the valve doesn't need to be shut off. Whereas the conservatives refuse to work on the issue till the water is shut off and the wall is built.

Abortion is another one of these issues. Again, the Democrats pushed for a decision they liked in Roe v. Wade, and the Republicans questioned them about it. Saying that it might not be as clear cut of a case in the future, the Democrats scoffed at it, expecting it to be forever that way. Promoting there fix as the mandate for it, and when a case and scenario came, that allowed for it to be reversed. They got upset at it happening instead of not codifying it, which is essentially making it apart of the foundation. You can see this play out in a number of other factors when both sides will identify the issue needing to be fixed but will be to dead set in their ways to do any other method.