On Liberals and Conservatives: An Analogy

Conservatives are like the bullies and the rowdies in the classroom… always beating on the nerds and wimps, and generally getting into trouble. The nerds and the wimps are the one’s getting beat up by the bullies. The bullies and rowdies like it when the teacher leaves the room. The rowdies get to ride the ruler like a horse while the bullies get to give the nerds and wimps horrible wedgies. The nerds and wimps in turn want teacher to stay. They feel more comfortable when the bullies are being watched and they are being protected. In fact, giving the teacher as much power as possible to keep the bullies and the rowdies in line couldn’t make them happier. Now, not everyone on the conservative sides wants to beat up the nerds and wimps–the rowdies just want to get crazy and have fun–but otherwise don’t really care about the nerds and wimps. And likewise, on the liberal side, not all nerds and wimps want to rat out the rowdies. Many of them are just thankful the rowdies tend to leave them alone–but then there are “teacher’s pets”, those who seek the teacher’s approval by ratting out not only the bullies but the rowdies too. ← These ones are doing more than just leveraging teacher to get out from under the bullies’ thumbs, but to gain favor by ratting out ALL those who teacher wants exposed.

While in elementary school, republican jocks sometimes bully democratic nerds, in college and university, where republicans are a minority, and bullying is more organized and sophisticated, it’s the other way round, but ultimately, they’re both victims of the establishment unbeknownst to each of them.

Democrats are more victims of the state and women/minorities, and republicans are more victims of the church and corporations, but ultimately, democrats and republicans alike are victims of all four of these entities, because the two parties differ very little in practice.

I don’t understand the original post of this thread at all.

Reminds me of:

Where bikers stare at cowboys
Who are laughing at the hippies
Who are praying they’ll get outta here alive

Can you can find more conservative than David Allan Coe? :confused:

youtube.com/watch?v=0n_HuvNKVGg

In a metaphorical sense, both conservatives and liberals bully each other–my analogy points out the different ways each one does it. The bullies bully directly and more or less literally, whereas the nerds and wimps ‘bully’ through the teacher. I’m not sure how bullying works at the university level, but I don’t imagine the nerds and the wimps are literally beating the snot out of the jocks on college football team. No, they’re probably doing it at the level of administration (university professors are no longer symbolic of government in this case; often, they are the victims of administration bullies who tell them they can’t say this or that lest they lose their jobs; and predictably, administration does it at the behest of liberal activist students).

The people choose their political parties like they choose their favorite football team. Though we can’t rule out the differences that exist between different teams, a football team is a football team, and we choose a side because, well, you gotta choose a side (otherwise, what’s wrong with you?). I don’t think government really stands for anything except the lust for power–just as the teacher doesn’t really take sides except that she favors the students who favor her, supporting her rule and helping to weed out the descenters. No, liberals and conservatives are made of the people, not the government.

Not too bright, are you?

I’m a HUGE David Allan Coe fan.

So you’re basically generalizing whole political groups of people between bullies and victims then calling others not bright in understanding the generalizations you propose. :laughing:

Wow. :laughing:

Hey, when you say you don’t get an analogy, then you look stupid in the eyes of someone who does.

That’s your retort? That’s it? I liked you better when you were drinking because this newer sober you is a real buzz kill not to mention annoying. You’re getting intellectually lazy man. What happened to the old critical thought and analysis Gib? Will we ever see him again?

Your long hair can’t cover up your red neck either? :smiley:

I get what you’re saying. It is a generalization subject to limitation, but I can see value in it. It’s funny how those same bullies don’t seem to contribute to the gun violence statistics and I’ve been interested in learning why since the Vegas shooting since that’s when it dawned on me that dogmatic people (conservatives) are generally very trustworthy.

Have we met before? I’ll have you know I’m drunk right now. Haven’t abstained from alcohol since the Summer of 2017 (I think). I just finished a two month stint of no cannabinoids and no caffeine, but there was definitely alcohol.

Nah, man, don’t worry about me. I just decided that I’m gonna be a complete asshole to all of you (except Mags) for these remaining four months; then I’m gonna be completely sober (July 1). And you know what? That’s when I’m gonna be a real buzz kill. I’m gonna be so much of a buzz kill that you won’t even feel my presence because I probably won’t even be here. I really have no desire to frequent ILP without my caffeine fix.

But I definitely won’t be intellectually lazy. I’ll always think critically about pretty much everything in life because that’s just what I do. I just wouldn’t waste my energy being intellectually scrupulous at a fucking waste dump like ILP. When I stop coming here after July 1 2018, ILP will fall and will be forgotten. No one will even remember it existed. You know why? Because I am the pillar upon which ILP stands. That’s right. Me! I am the backbone and the essence of ILP (ask Carleas, he knows it’s true).

Actually, that’s not entirely true. I do plan on completing my Rick and Morty thread and at the rate I’m going now, that’s probably gonna be another two years; and I also want to start a thread on Canadian politics, but there’s no way in hell I’m starting that one here at ILP. I’ll start it somewhere else, and if I feel like being nice, I post a link to it here.

I might continue PMing a few of you… but I definitely will not have the motivation to actually engage in discussions here.

Anyway, do you wanna actually have a discussion on liberals and conservatives? We can. What do you not understand about my analogy of students in the classroom?

Yes, I am the ex-anarchist now national socialist autocrat once known as the Joker amongst other aliases. Perhaps you’ve heard of me before? :wink: :laughing:

You’re going to come here full of piss and vinegar or not?! Make up your mind already. :sunglasses:

You can’t be actively involved and not be at the same time. Sorry I am going to have to call you out on that. Looking forward to your reply, please pour yourself the finest glass of Canadian whiskey before replying though. :wink: Let’s really make things interesting! :sunglasses:

Zero changes political positions like a woman changes her shoes.

No, not really. Was an anarchist for a decade, obviously not anymore. I am only 31 so there’s that also.

I don’t do anything on a whim or lightly that’s for sure.

At least I try to be loyal to an ideal by comparison.

You on the other hand, aren’t you a democratic civic nationalist that doesn’t really believe in democracy so much as you see it as a form divide and conquering the plebs as you’ve stated in the past? :wink: It’s clear you only care about yourself that’s for sure.

Yes, I’ve found it best to consume reasonably high quantities of alcohol when visiting this “philosophy” site.

Ok, let’s… how we gonna do that?

I think this analogy is focused on the wrong things. 1. It’s more about psychology, not about liberalism qua liberalism or conservatism qua conservatism 2. It seems to be focused on the lowest common denominator, if based at all on any representative sample (i.e. most people are pretty average - simple wimps and bullies). What would be a more interesting question is: what is the strongest possible conception of a liberal and what is the strongest possible conception of a conservative - what analogy illustrates the two?

Here’s one I find intriguing: the omnivore’s dilemma as applied to general human motivation - i.e. let’s say there are two main competing motivations in political life: the conservative desire for order and well-defined boundaries (b/c experimentation with new foods, or ideas, can risk exposure to contamination and potentially deleterious effects) vs. the liberal desire to seek out diversity and push boundaries (b/c new food sources, or ideas, mitigate the the potentially fatal risk of strains that go bad or become depleted) – both historically necessary for a balanced survival strategy.

That’s right. It’s about the psychology of liberals and conservatives.

And? How else you gonna characterize a group than by the lowest common denominator? Most kids in the classroom fall somewhere in the middle of the bell curve–neither wimps nor bullies–but the same is true of politics–most people fall somewhere in the middle between liberals and conservatives.

I think my analogy works just fine. :smiley:

Well, you can conceptualize liberals and conservatives any way you like–seems there are as many different conceptualizations as there are people–but I’m sticking with the classical definitions: conservatives are those who want to minimize government in order to maximize individual freedom whereas liberals are those who want to maximize government in order to maximize security and equality.

Teacher represents the government in my analogy. The nerds and the wimps want teacher to be present, and go to teacher whenever they’re being harassed, because they know teacher is an authority and has the power to keep the bullies and rowdies in line. The bullies and rowdies, on the other hand, want teacher to leave the classroom so that they can be rowdie or pick on the nerds and wimps.

Well, I’m still waiting for an in-depth explanation of your original post for starters.

How 'bout my explanation to fuse: