I know, because I omitted words like “most” or “on average”.
A nazi I guess. Aren’t you guys far-right?
Oh, no, no, no. Why would I eeever want to touch on conservatism and liberalism by bringing up the psychology of conservatives and liberals.
Makes no difference to me whether you think it’s a stereotype or you find it useful. If you don’t think it explains anything, you don’t get the analogy (TBH, I’m kinda shocked how few people are getting it). It’s meant to highlight what I think is a fundamental truth about human nature.
They have virtues?
No.
It’s what I learnt in school.
The teacher represents government. She has enough authority to come down on the bullies and the rowdies when she catches them bullying or being rowdie. This is true even in democracies or republics. The government has enough authority to come down on those breaking the law (rowdies) or abusing others (bullies); and liberals will often go to government in order to legislate new laws in order to control behaviors they don’t like (smoking bans for example).
We’re talking about human nature. In any society, there will be those who want freedom from government in order to do what they want, and those who want a more powerful government in order to provide security against the latter… and of course, there’s everyone in between. The analogy is more than an analogy. Bullies, rowdies, nerds, and wimps are real people. Just go to any high school and you will find them (…and everyone in between). They are real because this is a real phenomenon. And it doesn’t stop once they graduate… it just moves into politics.
Conservatists call those guys “libertarians” (at least Ucci did). You can consider them radical conservatists. But the moderate conservatists (from what they tell me) only want to minimize government (to its proper roll), not get rid of it (that would be silly ).
Don’t be fooled by the names. They don’t mean anything. The only answer I have is from what a few conservatives told me: that the conservatives used to call themselves liberals but then the other guys appropriated the name just to make themselves sound like they’re all about freedom… or so I’m told. I’m also told liberals do this all the time: borrow terms for window dressing, like calling themselves “progressive” in order to make it sound like the liberal agenda equals progress. But “isms” are just a label for identifying a group of people. I’m constantly amazed at how little a group’s actually ideology and value system matches the “ism” they attach to themselves. And I really shouldn’t be amazed. It’s to be expected. A group’s ideology and values will go wherever group-think takes them. A group’s ideology/values might start out at a certain position but then over the years migrate to a completely different position. It’s like a herd of “northerners” who migrate to the south and still call themselves “northerners”. And why shouldn’t they? No one really cares about changing the name until it starts to become detrimental.
Somebody else’s declaration.