![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]") |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Christina
Deerslayer
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 27 2002
Status: offline
|
 Posted - February 12 2004 : 6:43:37 PM
|
Here's a question I'll throw out for discussion as a philosophical topic, NOT as a specific political one.
Why do Americans feel the need/desire/etc. to label each other constantly as either "liberal" or "conservative?" When for the most part, many of us are mixes of both "philosophies" if that's what you want to call them. I ask this question from my perspective as a religious journalist. Every day I deal with ministers, priests, rabbis, imams, and lay people who are intriguing mixes of these two so called thought systems. Many of them in this area, for instance, are extremely "conservative" on issues such as abortion, premarital sex, homosexuality, pornography etc. yet would be interpreted as raving "liberals" by some when asked what they think about issues such as the war in Iraq, the welfare system, etc. etc. How can you give a label, for instance, to a Baptist minister who preaches weekly against gambling and abortion, opposes higher taxes, but also vocally opposed the war in Iraq? (Yes, we have several ministers who fit that exact description right here in Columbia.) Why is it at this time in our history when it seems most necessary to work together toward common goals do we as a country seem to feel this need to polarize each other further? Why do we feel the need also to "demonize" another side just because they feel different from us? Why aren't we able to see the multi-faceted person instead of a "liberal" or a conservative" -- is it because we're unable or unwilling?
I'm just throwing these questions out because they intrigue me. And because about 99.9% of the folks I know, heedless of race, creed, color, class, upbringing, sexual preference, etc. are a true mix of both of these thought processes. As Linda Richman used to say on Saturday Night Live, discuss...
|
See this face? This is the face of a woman on the edge.
Whoopi Goldberg, "Jumping Jack Flash"
|
|
report to moderator
|
|
|
susquesus
Mad Hermit of the North Woods
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 03 2003
Status: offline
|
Posted - February 13 2004 : 12:14:54 AM
|
| I think that it has to do with globalism and 24 hour news. All of a sudden we see all the horrific things that happen all over the world instantly, close-up and in slow motion. We feel like we're at some nexus in human history and that the decisions that we make on a daily basis will either save or damn our culture eternally. We can't handle all of the information and start to make black and white choices, ignoring the gray areas and seeing only absolutes. We are overloaded. We are surrounded by our enemies. The last election was nearly 50/50. We want to know who's 'on our side', friend or foe. These days you're either a right-wing nut or a flaming liberal. We're not encouraged to be in the middle though our leaders try to be all things to all people. What we need is a viable third party. A party that will either draw equally from both parties bases or mobilize a massive new electorate. Mandate a vote from every adult, citizen, non-felon in the country. No vote, no driver's license. |
report to moderator  |
|
|
richfed
Sachem
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 13 2002
Status: offline
Administrator |
Posted - February 14 2004 : 11:47:19 AM
|
Susquesus - I think you have it backward. We are moving away from the absolutes ... and more into the grey areas. Anything goes, it sometimes seems. Little by little, I see erosion of the distinction between right & wrong. I often think that many people have no moral standard - or a weak one, at best - upon which to base their stances on issues. Thus, Democrat or Republican; Conservative or Liberal - party lines. It doesn't matter what the issue as much as how it fits the chosen mold. Oh for the days of "Leave it to Beaver"!
Off the track, I guess.
Excellent point, though, Christina - one I have several times contemplated inserting into a post, but failed to ... As I see it, anyone who insists on compartmentalizing constantly - as so very many do [the media generally being the greatest culprit and, in turn, passing that on to the masses] - is doing a great disservice to the complexities of the human mind & spirit.
This phenomena - of labeling - has always been the curse of me, to personalize this a bit. Except for the gray & wrinkles, my personal appearance has changed very little since I was 16 years of age. Yet, as most of us do, my thoughts & opinions - how I see life - have evolved immeasurably through the years. Matured, I hope. So, while my appearance has been static, my views have not. Yet, when people meet me, they often times assume they know me, based on my looks. They think I'm a "liberal," right off, and accept me or not based on that erroneous assumption. Especially in the case of those who "like" me based on that, I notice an eventual sense of betrayal because I don't quite live up to their pre-judgments of me.
I used to actually consider myself liberal - radical, even - Conservatism was the enemy. I've talked about this in previous posts over the years - my anti-Vietnam war stance, SDS, working for George McGovern, pro-abortion views, etc., etc.
Things change, yet I'm still the same person. I am a blend of all sorts of things and don't consider myself liberal or conservative. Traditional, in many respects, which many would label as "conservative," I'm quite sure.
Well, today, all things being the same, I would still be against the Vietnam war. Yet, I'm a staunch supporter of our war on terror - including the Iraqi conflict. I see no contradiction in that.
I am vehemently against abortion. Why, on this Earth, does that get a "conservative" label? What is "conservative" about not killing babies? I'm also against the death penalty. Liberal? Not to me. Though I'd be the first to say "let's kill the bastard" if someone were to molest, or worse, one of my kids - and fully understand the vigilante attitude of those who have had family members murdered - that, to me, shouldn't be what laws are made of - emotion. I see no inconsistency there, either. Let God be the judge.
I am very traditional when it comes to the family [conservative?] and oppose this nonsense going on in Massachusetts right now regarding same-sex "marriages" - I'm not "anti-gay", whatever that means, but certainly don't feel society should condone it. Marriage is the beginning of family by procreation. On the other hand, I strongly support legitimate welfare for the needy [liberal?].
Here's an issue - if anyone wishes to discuss it, start a new thread - I support, 100%, the right of anyone - state governments included - to fly the Confederate flag. I am not, by any stretch of the imagination, a racist - to use an old cliché, "some of my best friends are black," as anyone who has known me through the years very well knows. So, does that make me liberal or conservative?
I could go on and on ...
I consider myself a complex-hybrid, and, as I see it, that's how it should be. Most all of us are, though we don't all see that. To me, that is the most liberal of all thoughts. We should use labels very cautiously. They are dangerous.
Long live Sam and John Adams! Get me drift?  |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Scott Bubar
Colonial Militia
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 17 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - February 15 2004 : 07:21:49 AM
|
I think you may just have made Susquesus' point for him, Rich.
What you describe is people ignoring your own shades of grey and pigeonholing you.
I'm inclined to agree that there's been an increased sense of polarization in our country. I'm not so sure I'd lay it at the feet of the media, though. It's certainly happened in the past long before we had our current forms of media.
When someone is forced, or feels they are being forced, to make a choice acrimony and hostility are likely to result. Psychologists have know for years that the "forced choice" questions on tests that ask you to identify with statements generate hostility. You don't have to be a psychologist to know this--all of us have had to take tests or fill out forms where none of the choices is satisfactory.
That's why I'm a bit taken aback by Susquesus' idea of making voting mandatory, which is the ultimate "forced choice". I think it's a perfectly horrendous idea. I cherish my right to not vote at least as much as my right to vote. Personally, I think we ought to require a "No" vote on the ballot. If "No" gets the most votes, it's back to the drawing board.
I do, however, think both the news media and this medium we're on right now tend to filter out the complexities and present an abstraction. I've sometimes felt I'm being pigeonholed one way or the other on the basis of a few comments on the internet, and I'm sure others have experienced this as well.
I'm afraid I don't have any simple answers for it, but I'll chew it over. Interesting question, Christina.
I suppose it's a bit early for a Sam Adams ...
|
~~Aim small, miss small. |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Wilderness Woman
Watcher of the Wood
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
November 27 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - February 15 2004 : 09:42:57 AM
|
Yes, indeed, Christina... very interesting topic, and everyone has brought forth some valid comments and viewpoints.
You know, I think it is a very basic part of our human nature to label or pigeon-hole people about all kinds of issues. As Susquesus said, it is a way of determining who is friend and who is foe, and it's a very primal response that serves the purpose of self-protection.
As far as political pigeon-holing, none of us are totally identical in our beliefs and views. Reading Rich's post, I found myself thinking... Yep, that's me... Uh-huh, me too... on nearly everything. But, the key here is "nearly." We are all different, and I don't like being labeled as a "Conservative" or a "Liberal" because I am really neither.
By the same token, I have always disliked having to identify with a particular political party in order to be able to vote in the primary elections. I don't want to be labeled as a "Republican" or a "Democrat", or even as "Other." I want to be just... an American Voter.
And I'm sorry, Susquesus, but I would not want to be told that I have to vote in order to received other priviledges. That goes against everything this country stands for. I'm not ashamed to admit that I don't always go to the poll and vote, and it's not because it is inconvenient. There are times when I do not consider myself well enough educated about a certain issue or candidate, and I prefer not to "guess-vote." I would rather not vote at all than take a chance on choosing the wrong option because I voted randomly, or for my party's candidate.
Off on a brief tangent here: Do any of you know that it is nearly impossible for a blind person to vote privately... which is a basic American right? In New York State, there are no Braille ballots, or large-print ballots. There are no blind-accessible voting machines. Currently, a blind person has three options: 1. Use an absentee ballot, and have someone read it to them and mark it for them. (Not private!) 2. Take a friend or family member to the poll with them and have them read the choices and pull the levers. (No privacy here!) 3. Go to the poll and have two complete strangers enter the booth and have them read the choices and pull the levers. I say two because there must be one Republican and one Democrat! (It's getting a little crowded in that booth, and very un-private!) These people don't even have the right to be labeled privately, if they so desire. End of tangent.
I think we should all leave "Pigeon-holing" to the... well... the pigeons! |
| report to moderator |
|
|
susquesus
Mad Hermit of the North Woods
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 03 2003
Status: offline
|
Posted - February 15 2004 : 1:41:14 PM
|
Mandate a vote from every adult, citizen, non-felon in the country. No vote, no driver's license.
-me
Agreed, absurdly extreme. I'll file it in the "Moon Prison" and "Martian Pyramid" folder. |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Ilse
The Dutch Trader
Netherlands
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 17 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - February 15 2004 : 6:39:26 PM
|
Scott said:
quote:
That's why I'm a bit taken aback by Susquesus' idea of making voting mandatory, which is the ultimate "forced choice". I think it's a perfectly horrendous idea. I cherish my right to not vote at least as much as my right to vote. Personally, I think we ought to require a "No" vote on the ballot. If "No" gets the most votes, it's back to the drawing board.
Excellent thought! What if nobody inspires any confidence? Over the last 20 years there have been a couple of times I thought about how nice it would be if nobody came out to vote at all. I think that would send politicians a message. |
OH HAI!
Blessinz of teh Ceiling Cat be apwn yu, srsly.
http://www.lolcatbible.com/index.php?title=Main_Page |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Christina
Deerslayer
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 27 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - October 19 2004 : 11:38:42 AM
|
The discussion under "Why I'm voting for Bush" brought up the issue of labelling as "liberal" or "conservative" and just to reinforce how ridiculous I think all this gratuitous labelling is, I'd like to share an experience I had a couple of weeks ago:
I was spending the night at a close friend's house (I'm temporary supervisory custodian of her two sons, my godsons -- long story as to why) and it happened to be the Friday night of the second Bush-Kerry debate (the "town hall" format one). My 10-year-old godson, who is extremely smart for his age, asked if he could watch the debate with me. I said fine and I would be prepared to ask any questions he had. Shortly before the debate started, he looks at me and goes, "Well, I know who is going to win. Bush is going to win." I told him, well, let's wait and see. He says, "No, Bush is going to win because he's right. He's a conservative Republican. John Kerry is a liberal Democrat. He's wrong. I'm a conservative Republican. That's what my dad says I am." (his father is, indeed, a conservative Republican.)
What then ensued on and off during the debate, between his question and answers, was a discussion where I tried to explain to him that at 10, he is much too young to understand any labels at all and should just try to learn as much as he can about American history, our political process and what it means to be a good citizen. He asked a bunch of good questions but on and off throughout the rest of the night, he kept coming back to the idea of "I'm a conservative Republican." I finally had to tell him, "Honey, you don't know what you are yet. Just like we tell you not to label your friends as one thing or another, you really shouldn't label yourself as one thing or another or label others for their beliefs until you really understand the issues." That seemed to satisfy him but it disturbed me that a 10-year-old, who hasn't even studied the American Revolution yet, is running around mouthing the political labels we all feel it so necessary to stick each other with in this day and age.
I'm sick and tired of "liberal=bad, conservative=good," or the vice-versa mentality. All the talking heads, pundits, radio guys, -- and yes, all of us -- from both sides ought to think about the young minds that might be listening in as we gratuitously label each other these days.
Christina |
See this face? This is the face of a woman on the edge.
Whoopi Goldberg, "Jumping Jack Flash"
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - October 20 2004 : 10:07:41 AM
|
I tend to think of myself as a conservative (on most issues), and I do not mind the label. If your beliefs are strong and based on facts, you do not mind what others may label you as. Although, I do like the labels created by Trey Parker (Co-creator of 'South Park' and 'Team America: World Police'), in a recent magazine interview he listed them as follows:
1) Sissies
2) Jerks
3) Psychos
His theory is that the 'Jerks' need the 'Sissies' to keep them in check. The 'Sissies' need the 'Jerks' to protect them from the 'Psychos'. Of course, the 'Psychos' just need to be neutralized, in order to protect the civilized world created by the 'Jerks' and 'Sissies'. As for me, well under this system, I am most certainly a 'Jerk'.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Christina
Deerslayer
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 27 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - October 20 2004 : 11:10:00 AM
|
I think Trey Parker is hilarious and that's a funny system. And I think it's great if adults are willing to label themselves and know what's behind those labels. That's an adult's right. My problem is when kids who aren't even in middle school yet start throwing out political labels when they don't have any clue what they mean and why they're used. Hearing Jack do the "conservative Republican' thing reminded me of how idiotic some kids in my Catholic school back in the '70s acted. It was 1976 and Carter was running against Ford. We did a "mock election" in the classroom (this was during third grade) and there was a group of kids whose parents were Ford fans who decided to beat up on and yell at the kids in the class who "voted" for Carter. I don't think they're doing this at Jack's school, but just the insanity of kids 10 and under talking about "liberal" and "conservative" shows me how ridiculous all this labelling can be when taken too far.
|
See this face? This is the face of a woman on the edge.
Whoopi Goldberg, "Jumping Jack Flash"
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - October 20 2004 : 3:34:05 PM
|
quote:
Christina noted: My problem is when kids who aren't even in middle school yet start throwing out political labels when they don't have any clue what they mean and why they're used...
Well Christina, as you noted in your post, kids have been calling each other names and teasing since the beginning of time. In my old neighborhood this was called 'wolfing' or 'fronting', and it is perfectly normal among young men.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Christina
Deerslayer
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 27 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - October 20 2004 : 5:14:14 PM
|
Trust me,the good folks I grew up with were NO strangers to the fine art of picking on each other! It took a long time for ME to develop my very thick skin because trust me, in South Carolina, it's an ART FORM!!!!
It's also true that being picked on can be a sign that the people like you or care for you. I hated my job when I first got here a few years ago because nobody here knew me well enough to pick on me about anything...
oh well, I just hope I don't have to explain the finer points of something like "trickle down economics" to Jack this weekend...
|
See this face? This is the face of a woman on the edge.
Whoopi Goldberg, "Jumping Jack Flash"
|
| report to moderator |
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!] |
© 1997-2025 - Mohican Press |
|
|
| Current Mohicanland page raised in 0.39 seconds |
 |
|
Liberals and conservatives...why the labels?
