Top | Newest First | Oldest First
TinyViolins · 31-35, M
In the United States, to a significant degree. A lot of right-wing rhetoric just falls flat in the face of academic research in a variety of fields.
Topics from economics (tax cuts do not work. redistributing wealth is not socialism), to earth sciences (humanity is contributing to climate change), to biology (yes, there are more than 2 genders. yes, vaccines work. no, life does not begin at conception), to history (the second amendment was intended to protect the government, not to defend against it).
That isn't to say that left-wing rhetoric is exactly 100% fact-based itself, since it does take a lot of liberties with social sciences. But comparing the two as objectively as one can, the left actually gets a lot more right than the right
Topics from economics (tax cuts do not work. redistributing wealth is not socialism), to earth sciences (humanity is contributing to climate change), to biology (yes, there are more than 2 genders. yes, vaccines work. no, life does not begin at conception), to history (the second amendment was intended to protect the government, not to defend against it).
That isn't to say that left-wing rhetoric is exactly 100% fact-based itself, since it does take a lot of liberties with social sciences. But comparing the two as objectively as one can, the left actually gets a lot more right than the right
View 1 more replies »
TinyViolins · 31-35, M
@Burnley123 When I was in school, economics was broken up into both a liberal arts curriculum and a scientific one based around statistics. One mainly dealt with policy and theory, while the other dealt more with data collection, modelling, and regression analysis.
I dabbled in both, but ultimately got the degree in liberal arts. But you're right on that last point. A lot of economists can't help but design their models and data collection methods around an ideology, and so the results they get tend to reflect their biases.
I dabbled in both, but ultimately got the degree in liberal arts. But you're right on that last point. A lot of economists can't help but design their models and data collection methods around an ideology, and so the results they get tend to reflect their biases.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@TinyViolins
That is true. I'd take it even further and say that economists need to be humble and see the bigger picture. All conventional economists missed the 2007/08 financial crash because their models did not take account of 'systemic risk'.
The data they were basing their predictions on did not take into account the whole picture and were based on the (ideological but not knowingly ideological) assumptions of constant growth. Their models were based on a belief that their information was perfect, which it wasn't.
The Post-Keynesians had the theory of economic cycles that was historical and effectively factored in mass psychology too. They were right but I also think it is true that human society is too complex for a perfect model. Empiricism and data absolutely have their place but economists need to know that there are too many variables (inc some always hidden) for their discipline to be like natural science.
A lot of economists can't help but design their models and data collection methods around an ideology, and so the results they get tend to reflect their biases.
That is true. I'd take it even further and say that economists need to be humble and see the bigger picture. All conventional economists missed the 2007/08 financial crash because their models did not take account of 'systemic risk'.
The data they were basing their predictions on did not take into account the whole picture and were based on the (ideological but not knowingly ideological) assumptions of constant growth. Their models were based on a belief that their information was perfect, which it wasn't.
The Post-Keynesians had the theory of economic cycles that was historical and effectively factored in mass psychology too. They were right but I also think it is true that human society is too complex for a perfect model. Empiricism and data absolutely have their place but economists need to know that there are too many variables (inc some always hidden) for their discipline to be like natural science.
TinyViolins · 31-35, M
@Burnley123 Yeah, I'm right there with you.
deadgerbil · 26-30
If one looks at reality as it relates to religion, it definitely does have a left wing bias. Creationism, the earth being 10,000 or so years old, etc are really exclusively believed by people who have a very conservative interpretation of their texts.
More sophisticated interpretations will identify various passages as metaphors and that represents a 'liberal' flavor of said faith, where not it's not bound to a literal reading and taking stuff at face value.
More sophisticated interpretations will identify various passages as metaphors and that represents a 'liberal' flavor of said faith, where not it's not bound to a literal reading and taking stuff at face value.
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
I think it's more that what we consider left-wing is really sort of centrist. Folks on the right keep moving further to the right, and they call anybody who doesn't a commie socialist lefty fascist.
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@MartinII I sincerely hope that you're right. This movement, to put it generously, threatens everything good about America.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@MartinII It depends on what you mean. The story of the 80s, 90s and 00s was that the right won the war on economics but the left won the war on culture.
MartinII · 70-79, M
@Burnley123 Yes, good point.
bijouxbroussard · F
Based on what right-wingers believe, it would seem so.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@bijouxbroussard SW is great at further entrenching this view in me. 😂
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
In classical political thought, right of centre thinking is grounded in social realism and empiricism and certainly would have more of a claim to 'reality' than left wing utopianism. Today I am not certain that either side of the political spectrum pays much attention to the problem in front of them. It seems that cultural identity matters more than evidence and intellectual integrity. Liberalism, with a decent sprinkling of compassion universal humanity and pragmatism, is the most honest approach. No sacred cows, no cultural hinterland, and the intoxicating thrill of completely reversing your world view for no reason other than your ears, eyes and mind are always open 🙂
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@SunshineGirl Cultural identity means nothing to me and I would say my approach is honest
In terms of pragmatism, I've seen plenty of centrist liberals lack it and have their own sacred cows. I'm thinking especially of the People's Vote campaign. It was angry, unwilling to compromise and did not have a realistic strategy for overturning Brexit. A lot of these people were guilty of the same behaviours that they accuse the left of. It's always different when it's your own sacred cow.
For me, it's about behaviour more than it's about ideology. That sone centrists to think they have a monopoly on pragmatism is a belief loaded with ideological assumptions.
You have to engage with people where they are, not where you think they should be. 'Winning' arguments by virtue signaling is at best a waste of time. And yes, many on the left get this wrong too.
In terms of pragmatism, I've seen plenty of centrist liberals lack it and have their own sacred cows. I'm thinking especially of the People's Vote campaign. It was angry, unwilling to compromise and did not have a realistic strategy for overturning Brexit. A lot of these people were guilty of the same behaviours that they accuse the left of. It's always different when it's your own sacred cow.
For me, it's about behaviour more than it's about ideology. That sone centrists to think they have a monopoly on pragmatism is a belief loaded with ideological assumptions.
You have to engage with people where they are, not where you think they should be. 'Winning' arguments by virtue signaling is at best a waste of time. And yes, many on the left get this wrong too.
SW-User
Yes absolutely
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@SW-User @Burnley123 I am fully convinced that true center is what our friends on the right call left.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@LordShadowfire The true centre of public opinion is generally left of where politicians and media consider it to be. The right also points to anyone not them as extreme (to psychologically project their own extremism).
Having said that, I am to the left, whichever way you cut it.
Having said that, I am to the left, whichever way you cut it.
SW-User
@LordShadowfire I mean the political scale is a very abstract and broad attempt of meassuring political allignment but I do think you make a point there.
In the end politics is just a response to our environment and the question is who is closer to recognizing structures, problems and solutions in society.
In the end politics is just a response to our environment and the question is who is closer to recognizing structures, problems and solutions in society.
BohemianBabe · M
Conservatives often say academia has a left-wing bias, but when you get them to talk about specific topics that they think academia is biased about, it's really just that they don't believe in facts. They think climate change isn't real, homosexuality is a choice, gender traits are biological, the Earth is less than a billion years old, poverty doesn't cause crime, and on and on.
These aren't opinions, these are just objectively wrong beliefs.
These aren't opinions, these are just objectively wrong beliefs.
OhIsMe · 36-40, M
I work in social care with very vulnerable, impressionable people. Most of them vote for UKIP or the Tories if they vote at all because that's what they've seen on the news and in the papers and on social media from their family members. It's the most extreme example of a group voting for their own destruction by government because that's what they've been told by the media.
Wiseacre · F
My reality does...we are all hypocrites, more or less.
Roundandroundwego · 61-69
Totally. But denialiism wins.
Fukfacewillie · 56-60, M
I would say reality is radically indifferent.
Fukfacewillie · 56-60, M
@Burnley123 Ironically, coolness as a modern aesthetic originated with oppressed blacks in America.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@Fukfacewillie Now its found its true home in white middle-aged centrist dads.
Fukfacewillie · 56-60, M
@Burnley123 Cargo shorts make the man...