Cynical Nation

You're absolutely correct, Barry. We're part of the unrepresented third party.

I used to think that meant being independent, but I'm registered to vote republican because they closer match my views on the issues in which I believe gov't should be involved.

The problem is that both of the major party deal in absolutes. On both sides you're penalized if you break from the asigned party mindset. It's politically safer so we wind up with a bunch of extreme archetypes on each side and noone representing a balanced view.

Regarding the problem with absolutism: Absolutely.

I've never understood how conservative and liberal have come to be seen as mutually exclusive and diametrically opposed.

I want to "conserve" the accumulated wisdom of preceding generations, but that doesn't mean I am to opposed social evolution.

The classic definition of "Liberalism" (Merriam Webster Online) is: "a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties." That sums up my philosophy pretty well, yet most "liberals" who post here would consider me a neandrathal conservative.

My views on social order are very libertarian, which is not at all the same thing as moral relativism.

I want less government, not weak government, and I want it closer to home where I can keep an eye on it.

I cannot understand how economic revisionism (the sanctity of the factory job and hard money) has come to be associated with "progressivism."

It's not so much the lables as the myopia of the true believers wearing those lables that boggles my mind.

Gore is an idiot ... but he still would have been 100 times better than a traitor like Bush.

“I've never understood how conservative and liberal have come to be seen as mutually exclusive and diametrically opposed.” – withoutfeathers

I think to a large degree you can thank Rush Limbaugh. It seems as if he is one of the initial seed points. He began generalizing certain things as “liberal” or “conservative” and over time built up these false constructs. I don’t blame him alone, he tapped into the generalizations that both parties exploit to win elections and over time affixed them as permanent labels. Others picked up on this and ran with it.

I really believe that people enjoy being on a team, or part of a group, tribe, club etc. It’s in our nature. Once they’re on a team they like to ascribe symmetric belief and behavior patterns to both their own group and the opposing group. You see it all the time with sports, people identify with a team early on, usually when they’re young, and they become fans for life no matter what the team does. The entire team might change, the managers might change, the owners, etc. My father used to like the Brooklyn Dodgers, even now he has a soft spot for the LA Dodgers – even though there is nothing about tha team that’s at all the same.

I think that’s the way the majority of us approach politics, certainly not all of us, and most of the present company is excluded. I’m talking about the masses.

I really think that’s a big part of it.

zilla: "I think to a large degree you can thank Rush Limbaugh. It seems as if he is one of the initial seed points. He began generalizing certain things as “liberal” or “conservative” and over time built up these false constructs. I don’t blame him alone, he tapped into the generalizations that both parties exploit to win elections and over time affixed them as permanent labels. Others picked up on this and ran with it."

OK, well now I know that you are a lot younger than I because I have very clear memories of the great "liberal/conservative" divide predating Rush Limbaugh by two decades.

In 1964, no one was publicly even contemplating comparing Barry Goldwater or Lyndon Johnson to Hitler. By 1968 the far left was already replacing the "x" in Nixon with little swastikas on signs at Nixon/Agnew campaign stops.

"I really believe that people enjoy being on a team, or part of a group, tribe, club etc. It’s in our nature. Once they’re on a team they like to ascribe symmetric belief and behavior patterns to both their own group and the opposing group." (GZ)


Certainly that mindset exists, but it's also true that that mindset existed way before Limbaugh ever arrived on the scene.

One of the most severe examples of that mindset I've ever seen was from a buff who used to ride with 44-Engine (now a Haz-Tech Engine)...he's a sociology professor at Princeton University and his wife is an heir to some large fortune...and she's a State Senator from that Upper East Side District.

They're both so Liberal, they're virtual Marxists. He used to always say, "If the Republicans ran a reasonable candidate and the Democrats put a monkey on the ticket, I'd still vote for the monkey."

This in a firehouse where one of the Lieutenants once famously told a female passerby, who saw the firefighters responding to a medical call for a homeless guy on the street, asking asked, "Can't we do something for him," with the line, "Yeah, ya can vote Republican."

Here's what I see, this wealthy woman and this sociology professor don't really understand politics or economics at all.

I doubt either of them has ever had anything close to an original thought in those areas...and yes, I've spoken to both at length.

The impression that I got from both of them is that they are victims or dupes of a pernicious Liberal media. They read some inane pablum in the NY Times or hear the constant barrage of Left-wing garbage on NBC, ABC or CNN and swallow it hook, line and sinker and dutifully regurgitate it back out.

The guy, couldn't answer any questions I asked him that involved very basic economics.

Now, in their case, socialism would serve their best interests well. The wealthy under socialism never have their wealth absconded and divided up, instead they are seen as the primary employers, so those established businesses and banks are protected by socialist governments in the name of "protecting jobs."

What's better than that for fat, dumb and increasingly lazy wealthy people - the government basically freezing the Capitalist free-for-all, while they're ahead, by regulating their competition out of the market?

Still, I don't think either of these two people were smart enough to realize even that basic bit of self-interest. I honestly don't.

After speaking with them, it seems clear that they seem to merely regurgitate the opinions they read in places like the NY Times, etc.

I think that kind of thinking went on way before Limbaugh. Only thing was, there was a "Dark Ages" where our entire media was dominated by out-and-out Leftist ideologues, from Cronkite through Rather.

Thankfully that dark veil has been lifted along with the Left's once stranglehold on the MSM.

“OK, well now I know that you are a lot younger than I because I have very clear memories of the great "liberal/conservative" divide predating Rush Limbaugh by two decades.” – withoutfeathers

I’m not sure what age has to do with anything. You don’t have to have lived through an era to understand history. I never suggested that Rush Limbaugh created the divide, I’m saying he exploited it, and to an extent recharacterized it. He changed it into dogma. Others picked up on this and followed suit. Flash forward to today and we have two terms (liberal and conservative) that no longer hold the same meaning, at least as they are commonly thrown about.

They’re often used as blanket terms now without any clarifiers.

“In 1964, no one was publicly even contemplating comparing Barry Goldwater or Lyndon Johnson to Hitler. By 1968 the far left was already replacing the "x" in Nixon with little swastikas on signs at Nixon/Agnew campaign stops.” – withoutfeathers

And those on the far right were marching around in Klan uniforms. There are extremists on all sides.

“Certainly that mindset exists, but it's also true that that mindset existed way before Limbaugh ever arrived on the scene.” – JMK

Certainly, I agree. As I said to WH above I’m not trying to say Limbaugh created the divide, simply that he perceived it and exploited it, and in the process he transformed the terms as his listeners perceived them. That transformation was carried over by all those who followed suit and jumped on the conservative talk bandwagon.

I don’t disagree that there are idiots on the left (as well as the right) that just pull the lever for their party without any thought.
I’d also suggest that the lieutenant in your firehouse who said "Yeah, ya can vote Republican." Is among them. There’s no guarantee that a republican will do anything better than a democrat. In fact it could be argued that our Republican president hasn’t done all he can by way of funding local fire departments.
My father always said to vote out the encumbent. That sounds like a sound policy to me.

“Thankfully that dark veil has been lifted along with the Left's once stranglehold on the MSM.” – JMK

I’m glad you see that the current MSM is anything but left wing. I realize there are leftist elements, but it’s hardly what it’s been made out to be.

"And those on the far right were marching around in Klan uniforms. There are extremists on all sides." (GZ)


That bolsters my position on today's Leftist radicals. Back then, the government did everything it could to silence KKK radicals, even going so far as to infilitrate those groups, encourage illicit activities and then bust them for them. Often charges were "trumped up," to get the job done.

And yes, the same thing was done to Left-wing radical groups - there were reports that FBI infiltrators instigated some of the acts that resulted in many of the most prominent arrests and prosecutions during the sixties.

I think that was, overall, to the good.

There's no need to wait on extremists. If you have to go in and even encourage some acts, I'd say all those infiltrators did was to "speed along the process" a bit.

I only wish we still did that today, instead of handing down limp-wristed sentences to the likes of "Taliban Johnny" (20 years?!) and Lynne Stewart.

That recent anti-war demonstration in Portland, Oregon, with chants of "Fascist war is nothing new, it's not just Bush, but the soldiers too," THAT'S the real face of the radical Left - that's today's KKK.

In fact, our priorities seemed more in order, all around bac then.

In the '40's & '50's we allowed many former Nazi scientists, but Communists were barred entry to America.

Why?

Because those in our government recognized a basic truth, that while many people became nazis out of fear for thier own survival (Werner van Braun's biography mentioned that U.S. officials seemed much more concerned about his views on socialism than any nazi racial views, and that makes sense, because while few people actually fully embrace racial ideologies, many do succumb to the far more pernicious faux egalitarianism of Communism/Socialism.

I'd still support barring anyone from immigrating to this country holding socialistic/communistic views, just I'd support treating socialists/communistsa within America the way we treated the KKK and other extremists back in the 1960s.

I still believe that economic bigotry/terrorism is as vile (or perhaps even more so) and even more pervasive because its rationalized, than is racial bigotry/terrorism.

zilla: "I never suggested that Rush Limbaugh created the divide..."

Well, actually what you said was (my emphasis): "I think to a large degree you can thank Rush Limbaugh. It seems as if he is one of the initial seed points. He began generalizing certain things as “liberal” or “conservative” and over time built up these false constructs." I think that could be taken as somewhat more than a suggestion.

zilla: "And those on the far right were marching around in Klan uniforms." Actually, I think if you pay a little more attention to history you will find that those examples of the "far right" were almost entirely Democrats and tended to be populists more than conservatives.