Without any snark or sarcasm list things you respect about the ideology opposite of yours.

[Jack V Savage]

Hey now, JVS was able to extend the olive branch so let's not ruin it and not get bogged down in "But Hillary"

The question was about ideology rather than practice. I've had this discussion with @Devout Pessimist before, but intelligent, traditional conservatives don't really have influence on the GOP anymore.

And Clinton, unlike her husband, seems like someone a traditional conservative would support. Honest, hard-working, religious, good mother, loyal wife, etc. Unfortunately support for traditional values in practice these days just means, "being an asshole to gays and transgendered folks."

 

[abiG]

While I see republicans and democrats as the greatest danger to our republic, I respect the fact that they believe they are acting in ways to a more positive future.

 

[irish_thug]

I admire the intentions behind most of the left's crusades. Most of them being humanitarian in nature, it's hard to argue with the intent.

 

[bobgeese]

Their hearts are in the right places.


Unfortunately they spend the bulk of their time defending parasites that contribute nothing to society.

 

[Jack V Savage]

"without any snark or sarcasm"

There was no snark or sarcasm intended there. See my most recent post previous to this one.

 

[Judge]

If you can’t do this there is a problem.

1. I respect that the right isn’t idealistic to a fault and recognizes the importance of party loyalty.
2. I admire the ability of people on the right to enjoy pop culture (film, music, art etc) that is generally dismissive of their beliefs.

I respect that their followers have stayed out of the line of my sights.

 

[S-dot]

I’ve been on the right and left in my younger days, now I don’t feel like I’m a part of either exclusively. I generally just try to listen to all ideas and work towards what works best. So I don’t really have an ideology, and as a result don’t have an opposite. So I’ll just say briefly what I admire about the best of both sides-

Left- empathetic, equality-minded, want to improve things for everyone, drive progress, empower the weak, ethical, devoted.

Right- strong, rational, effective, inspiring, pragmatic, competent, keep things rooted in what works, moral, self-sufficient, loyal, cohesive.

 

[Kframe]

It’s a prime example of why we can’t hand Hollywood over to the right .

What is so bad about it??

 

[Neph]

If you can't honestly see or admit the good with the other sides argument you are a hopeless case locked blindly into ideology. That goes equally to both sides. I don't even know why you'd be on a discussion forum as it is clear you have nothing to discuss.

 

[Trotsky]

The question was about ideology rather than practice. I've had this discussion with @Devout Pessimist before, but intelligent, traditional conservatives don't really have influence on the GOP anymore.

And Clinton, unlike her husband, seems like someone a traditional conservative would support. Honest, hard-working, religious, good mother, loyal wife, etc. Unfortunately support for traditional values in practice these days just means, "being an asshole to gays and transgendered folks."

Can you elaborate on your perceived distinction between Hillary and Bill in the should-be eyes of conservatives?

Personally, I agree that she is more worthy of respect than Bill according to a lot of my values, but I'm not sure I can impute that to "traditional conservatives." Are you just saying that along the lines of Bill's infidelities?

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

I respect that they can separate religiosity from political focus.

 

[Trotsky]

Their hearts are in the right places.


Unfortunately they spend the bulk of their time defending parasites that contribute nothing to society.

Just curious: what proportion of those "parasites" being redeemable toward productivity would be enough to excuse defending them to you?

I can only presume you're talking about the lower class, including welfare recipients, the homeless, persons in prison, etc. Do you not feel there is sufficient data showing that those masses respond positively to downward wealth distribution and providing of economic opportunity? Surely there is enough to at least create some doubt about their being naturally parasitic, no?

 

[Letssnuggle]

I respect the lefts ability to protest in the streets. They’re leap years ahead of righties.

 

[Literally Bricked]

Seems to be more open about certain points of science.

Is seemingly far less religious.

Seems to be more interested in moving to one world order.

Open to being entrepreneurial with people’s vices.

 

[Rusk]

I honestly cant think of anything.

If it was up to me anyone left of center would be ostracized the same way National Socialists are ostracized today. For me leftiesm is synonymous with degeneracy.

I guess if i ever will become addicted to porn i will probably thank lefties for shemale and cuckold genres. So there is that... at least one "positive" thing.

 

[ithinktheymad]

I don't know. I just want to be left alone and both sides insist on being in my business.

 

[Harry Flashman]

I like that the left (in theory) have interest is stemming the flow of money upwards to the one percent and have interest in addressing pollution. Without going full commo, these are important goals.

 

[bobgeese]

Just curious: what proportion of those "parasites" being redeemable toward productivity would be enough to excuse defending them to you?

I can only presume you're talking about the lower class, including welfare recipients, the homeless, persons in prison, etc. Do you not feel there is sufficient data showing that those masses respond positively to downward wealth distribution and providing of economic opportunity? Surely there is enough to at least create some doubt about their being naturally parasitic, no?

My mother worked for years in mental health, drug/alcohol emergency care, etc.

There are some people, no matter how much you’re willing to help them, refuse to help themselves.

It has nothing to do with lower class. Shit, I grew up in the PJ’s and had my bike stolen as a kid. Just like every family that started in that position, by working hard, and not throwing our lives away, we took advantage of the opportunities America offered us, and improved our lives substantially, despite both my parents facing major health issues. They simply refused to fail. That is the difference between success and failure in America, the determination to improve.


My comment was mostly directed at criminals, terrorists, and people who refuse to help themselves, and blame their problems on other people. Might as well throw degenerates and people who hate themselves, and everyone/everything else in there too. Fuck’em all.


Now, back to the homeless problem. Half of them are just lazy pieces of shit. The other half have legitimate mental illnesses that prevent them from leading a normal life. I’m all for helping these folks and have seen the diminishing resources spent on this issue.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

I don't love the phrasing of the question because to the extent that I admire or agree with aspects of thought that I don't generally accept, I just incorporate it into my own thinking.

And there are a lot of aspects of traditionally right-wing thinking I do that for. For example, I think that we should tread very carefully with regard to making changes in society (and that policy with good intentions often has bad results); that people are happiest when they have a place in society and social connections that are bigger than the family (the most important one, however) and friends, and smaller than political units (churches would be the classic example here); that free markets are generally the best way to distribute goods and services in a country, and that free markets have done more to lift people out of poverty than anything else yet devised; that freedom without responsibility and structure is a curse; and that we should hold political leaders up to the highest moral standards.

Yeah, it seems people are saying what PEOPLE aligned with their general ideology do worse than the ones aligned with the opposite ideology.
For example, I realize there is a huge distrust in science among the right that usually falls into absurd conspiracy theories or pure idiocy(Alex Jones), but I wouldn't consider young earth creationism type right wing ideology to be my ideology. I believe I fall to the right because I believe people are fundamentally different and I believe authoritarianism has its place, in certain situations, not because I think global warming is fake or Pizzagate is true.
Following your example I believe the conservation of environment is crucial, that despite innate differences in ability people should have some needs paid for by the government (especially when it's simply more effective, like in healthcare), that many crimes related to drugs should be abolished, and that big corporations can be attacked or even dismantled if it serves a larger societal purpose.

 

[Trotsky]

My mother worked for years in mental health, drug/alcohol emergency care, etc.

There are some people, no matter how much you’re willing to help them, refuse to help themselves.

It has nothing to do with lower class. Shit, I grew up in the PJ’s and had my bike stolen as a kid. Just like every family that started in that position, by working hard, and not throwing our lives away, we took advantage of the opportunities America offered us, and improved our lives substantially, despite both my parents facing major health issues. They simply refused to fail. That is the difference between success and failure in America, the determination to improve.


My comment was mostly directed at criminals, terrorists, and people who refuse to help themselves, and blame their problems on other people. Might as well throw degenerates and people who hate themselves, and everyone/everything else in there too. Fuck’em all.


Now, back to the homeless problem. Half of them are just lazy pieces of shit. The other half have legitimate mental illnesses that prevent them from leading a normal life. I’m all for helping these folks and have seen the diminishing resources spent on this issue.

How do you suggest the left abandon the degenerates without throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

It seems to me that the right, such as in the area of welfare drug testing, wants to knowingly increase administrative costs in excess of what would be spent on said degenerates (resulting in lower spending efficiency and higher taxes) and also incidentally harm good, worthwhile people, just to send a message by excluding those degenerates, etc.