Why Can't Liberals and Conseravtives Just Sit Down and Talk?

[Canuck You]

'Hey you got a some great points, I like these ideas you have, Lets work out the kinks together?'

 

 

 

 

Edited September 7 by Canuck You

[nuckin_futz]

There's no money in peace. The money is in riling people up and letting them fight and donate. Religion mastered this ages ago. Now the politicians have caught on.

[Drakrami]

1 hour ago, nuckin_futz said:

There's no money in peace. The money is in riling people up and letting them fight and donate. Religion mastered this ages ago. Now the politicians have caught on.

What do they use the money for though? Buy tv ads? That's where most of the money they get go right? In religion, they can build bigger churches, fill them with luxuries, hire more people and have them service themselves. You can't do that in a political party. 

 

The name of your party doesn't matter at all. Left can apply right policies and vice versa as long as they are good policies. People getting fixated on a name is the conspiracy. 

[stawns]

5 hours ago, Canuck You said:

'Hey you got a some great points, I like these ideas you have, Lets work out the kinks together?'

 

 

 

 

 

Because it takes two sides and one side has gone batshit crazy

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

[nux_win]

They do talk.  They just don't listen.  GCG!

[-dlc-]

Two things wrong with the world that could solve a lot of problems if people would ease up on them: greed, power

[sbriggs]

7 hours ago, Canuck You said:

'Hey you got a some great points, I like these ideas you have, Lets work out the kinks together?'

 

 

 

 

Its hard to talk with idiots

[Honkin Hronek]

It has to do with religion, IMO. Conservatism is rooted in traditional values which makes it really appealing to people who are especially religious. However, that means that they use religion to reinforce their beliefs. This means that there's usually no room for compromise, because they literally see it as the devil trying to tempt them away from the path of God.

 

For example, most Catholics don't have an issue with gay people because they believe God doesn't make mistakes. However, they believe that it's "giving into lust" if you decide to date, sleep with, or marry another gay individual. To counter that, throughout history they've urged thousands of gay Catholics to become priests and nuns (which left many of them sexually inept, contributing to them praying on young kids of the same sex throughout time, leading to the present-day memes about priests). They "love" gay people as they do their neighbour, but they don't see gay love as real "love," and the consequence of not following their beliefs is an eternity in hell. 

 

I know to you and I it may seem archaic and silly, but these people grow up fearing God (literal wording in a lot of text/teachings). In their doctrine, they're told over and over again that they have to dedicate their entire lives to living for Him, and failure to do so results in complete pain and suffering. The devil is always trying to trick you, including by possessing other individuals with "unnatural urges." It's your duty to save them if you see the devil at work, and if you're told this enough then eventually you'll believe it. 

 

[Source: a significant amount of research into Catholicism as my girlfriends family is Catholic, including attending a conference back in May] 

 

There's also a lack of interest in real dialogue between the left and right. People are so dead-set in what they believe that they go into conversations looking to change each others mind but that isn't productive. In the end it just results to name-calling and a reinforced belief that the other side is stupid. If you want to have a good conversation, you and the other side MUST come to the conclusion that there is NO RIGHT ANSWER to most topics, that your beliefs have flaws, and you MUST be willing to discuss them without assuming differing ideas are character assassinations. 

[stawns]

30 minutes ago, sbriggs said:

Its hard to talk with idiots

 

Yup

[Zombieksa]

People come from different walks of life, and not everyone has the ability to see what living in someone else's shoes is like, nor do they have the same empathy to feel the hardships that may bring. 

I was listening to a psychology podcast some time ago and so I have to paraphrase as I can't remember the specifics but often Conservatives have just as high level of empathy as liberals, but it is extended to their community from growing up as a child in and around their local church and connected town/families.

On the other hand Liberals grow up with less community direct ties in comparison, which leads to communicating with more foreign communities, peoples and ideas (especially in universities) thus their empathy developes more as a  "general humanity" level. 

I'm in no way saying neither can have levels of empathy for the opposite, but when you think of it that way it creates understanding why one side may have fear of change/others as that fear has a direct link to their high levels of empathy for their community in their backyard.

The problem is this  isn't a black and white scenerio, and doesn't include what kind of media a person consumes, the personal agenda their leaders may have, the level to which their religious beliefs are important to them etc.

Edited September 7 by Zombieksa

[Alflives]

Ever tried reasoning with a moran? 

[stawns]

8 minutes ago, Zombieksa said:

People come from different walks of life, and not everyone has the ability to see what living in someone else's shoes is like, nor do they have the same empathy to feel the hardships that may bring. 

I was listening to a psychology podcast some time ago and so I have to paraphrase as I can't remember the specifics but often Conservatives have just as high level of empathy as liberals, but it is extended to their community from growing up as a child in and around their local church and connected town/families.

On the other hand Liberals grow up with less community direct ties in comparison, which leads to communicating with more foreign communities, peoples and ideas (especially in universities) thus their empathy developes more as a  "general humanity" level. 

I'm in no way saying neither can have levels of empathy for the opposite, but when you think of it that way it creates understanding why one side may have fear of change/others as that fear has a direct link to their high levels of empathy for their community in their backyard.

The problem is this  isn't a black and white scenerio, and doesn't include what kind of media a person consumes, the personal agenda their leaders may have, the level to which their religious beliefs are important to them etc.

 

 

I don't think it has anything to do with small towns or connections to community.  In my opinion, it has to do with religion and a lack of education and/or intelligence........mostly when it comes to social conservatism, imo.

[Master Mind]

Rage-bait is too effective

[the destroyer of worlds]

I had a friend who we would have "debates".  He's post some BS post about how evolution is BS or climate change is BS.  I'd make logical, points with sources.  He'd post crap and then eventually resort to name calling and calling me stupid.  He finally went on a disgusting rant in a PM then blocked and unfriended me.  

 

There were a few members of the old forum who kinda resorted to a similar thing.  

[Ghostsof1915]

And in the early 80's everyone was united against the civil service trying to stop everything. Even the political opponents were civil to each other. 

 

Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister are more of documentaries than a sitcom. 

 

 

[Ghostsof1915]

It's give and take and compromise. The problem is now people won't compromise and think there's only one solution to problems. There also needs to be legislation because look at the world around us. Companies and individuals won't police themselves. So we need a level playing field so that small businesses can grow, not get forced out or simply just absorbed. We need more of a diversified economy so that when one sector is struggling, others will be growing. We need to get our foundations correct. Healthcare, infrastructure, social programs, education. This attitude that the environment is unimportant needs to change. And work at solutions that leads to creating new jobs and new economies that are sustainable, and have a more biodiverse and a world in balance with nature. 

 

I'm in favour if your religion wants to get into politics then that church should lose it's tax-free status. We've seen in places like Iran, it was a progressive, growing nation, until religious nuts took over. Now Iran is decades behind, and it's citizens are oppressed. That's not a sense of community I want to see. That's about control and power. 

[-dlc-]

2 hours ago, Honkin Hronek said:

It has to do with religion, IMO. Conservatism is rooted in traditional values which makes it really appealing to people who are especially religious. However, that means that they use religion to reinforce their beliefs. This means that there's usually no room for compromise, because they literally see it as the devil trying to tempt them away from the path of God.

 

For example, most Catholics don't have an issue with gay people because they believe God doesn't make mistakes. However, they believe that it's "giving into lust" if you decide to date, sleep with, or marry another gay individual. To counter that, throughout history they've urged thousands of gay Catholics to become priests and nuns (which left many of them sexually inept, contributing to them praying on young kids of the same sex throughout time, leading to the present-day memes about priests). They "love" gay people as they do their neighbour, but they don't see gay love as real "love," and the consequence of not following their beliefs is an eternity in hell. 

 

I know to you and I it may seem archaic and silly, but these people grow up fearing God (literal wording in a lot of text/teachings). In their doctrine, they're told over and over again that they have to dedicate their entire lives to living for Him, and failure to do so results in complete pain and suffering. The devil is always trying to trick you, including by possessing other individuals with "unnatural urges." It's your duty to save them if you see the devil at work, and if you're told this enough then eventually you'll believe it. 

 

[Source: a significant amount of research into Catholicism as my girlfriends family is Catholic, including attending a conference back in May] 

 

There's also a lack of interest in real dialogue between the left and right. People are so dead-set in what they believe that they go into conversations looking to change each others mind but that isn't productive. In the end it just results to name-calling and a reinforced belief that the other side is stupid. If you want to have a good conversation, you and the other side MUST come to the conclusion that there is NO RIGHT ANSWER to most topics, that your beliefs have flaws, and you MUST be willing to discuss them without assuming differing ideas are character assassinations. 

The problem with religion (for me) is....people use it to enforce their views/opinion but all too often they don't live by them. So they don't practice what they preach.

 

Religion is also often exploited as a way to gain wealth and power. Those two things that create imbalance and conflict.

[bishopshodan]

Cause there's not only two types of people.

 

Yet, we feel forced to pick one of two teams. 

 

[PureQuickness]

I would argue that the same phenomenon is going on in the United States. Some people didn't like Biden at all, but those same people also didn't like Trump. They were thus forced to pick between two sides they really don't want to vote for, so some of them don't want to vote.

 

I think Trudeau has lived out his welcome. Whatever he needed to get done didn't get done. It's rather terrible PP has seemingly gained ground because if he had tried to seize power during, let's say, the Chrestien (sp?) or Martin period, PP would've been been laughed out and would've boosted supported for the Liberals.

[Bob Long]

[MikeBossy]

Because if we were actually able to debate and see the common things we can agree on we might hold our politicians accountable - both sides want us fighting with each other so they can keep the grift going for the wealthy. The fact is no matter who is in power they continue to make money off the backs of others.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

They did for like umpteen years in government.  They were the Socreds.  At least in BC.

[DSVII]

To hope for that on the internet is a tall order. I'd like to think any of us in person can have a beer with one another.

[Northern_Nuck]

  Because conservatives are often ignorant, disrespectful and have no chill, they just hate, hate, hate and there’s no such thing as a liberal capable of intelligent conversation, they just create echo chambers and circle Jerk their warped views to each other. 
 

 The left is so far left to the point of delusion and the right is so far right that they could easily be walked into a dictatorship  without being aware at all. And the worst part is both sides scream that they’re neutral. It’s actually funnier to sit back and watch with no investment in either side.