After what was said/seen in class today, it should come to nobody’s surprise that I am in favor of the conservative point of view, being a conservative myself. I agree with the points Allen makes; mostly that liberals make politics personal to make their point and if you don’t agree with them, not only are you against their policy preference, but you are personally against whatever “group” they were discussing and the people it concerns. Also, it’s notable that another irksome trait of liberals that Allen mentions is the name-calling they use in an effort to justify their arguments. Liberals attempt to discredit the conservative as being a “bad” person with “bad” policy views, instead of actually looking at policy implications. However, I don’t agree with Allen commenting on how Liberal’s view of politics doesn’t concern religion whatsoever. That is purely by choice and it is a known fact that more liberals are atheists and that shouldn’t be something to hold against them. Focusing first on how things are made personal in politics, looking at Wagman’s article, she states the conservative family’s views would change if they were knocked around by life be it with cancer, loss of a job, or a son dying fighting in a war. So if the matter became personal, then they would become liberals. But isn’t the reverse also true? Were she mugged, might she become more “crime and punishment” oriented? If a family member was the victim of a terrorist attack, might she want to “take the fight to terrorists?” The next point, also seen in Wagman’s article, is Wagman openly calls conservative’s views the equivalent to “thoughtlessness, intolerance, and narcissism.” So, because I don’t agree with her views on the economy all of the sudden I’m thoughtless and only interested in myself? There is no room for rational debate on policy implications. Instead, my motivations are (wrongly) attacked. The final thing, and perhaps the most important summary of the political divide, is how true Allen’s opening statement is: “They think conservatives are evil, while we think they’re silly.” In the conservative response, Allen states her beliefs and how they differ but also states her openness to other views. In the liberal response, Wagman goes from being best friends with her neighbors to hating them and not having respect for them because they don’t agree with her views. It is increasingly difficult for liberals and conservatives to have meaningful dialog, because their world views are increasingly different.
First let me say that I respect the views you have as an individual, and it is your right as a human being to believe such opinions. I admire your passion and dedication, as you are the first one to respond :)
When it comes to the article, I do not believe it is fair to say that "It is increasingly difficult for liberals and conservatives to have meaningful dialog, because their world views are increasingly different." I think it is important to notice that not all liberals are the same, just as not all conservatives are the same. We all as human beings feel emotion and passion when it comes to a topic we believe strongly on. I agree with you when you say that it is hard to carry on a conversation with someone who only believes he or she is right. That's why finding the balance between discussion and acceptance is key. We must accept views of others based upon the given fact that they are human. We should not judge others because of the way they respond to certain questions or topics of discussion. We all need to just take a chill pill and remember that we are not the same person. I can't imagine a life without different perspectives. Do you know how boring that would be? I don't think it is right to name call either. Instead of ridiculing others based upon their different beliefs, praise their individuality.
I just wanted to assure you that not all people will react the same way as you are used to. Hopefully I didn't offend you in any way. I apologize if I did. If you want to continue this discussion, I am more than happy to do so.
Hi Ryan I hope you dont feel as if im about to attack you or anything but i am just a little confused at a certain part of your comment.
When talking about how personal issues and politics intertwine you called out you stated "...looking at Wagman’s article, she states the conservative family’s views would change if they were knocked around by life be it with cancer, loss of a job, or a son dying fighting in a war. So if the matter became personal, then they would become liberals." then you went to ask the same questions directed toward Wagman "But isn’t the reverse also true? Were she mugged, might she become more “crime and punishment” oriented? If a family member was the victim of a terrorist attack, might she want to “take the fight to terrorists?” it sounds very contradictory for you to call out someone about making things personal/putting the person in the other side's perspective then do the exact same thing. If anything here seems unclear dont be afraid to reply wanting to talk in person. Thank you for your consideration
I was not offended at all :). I agree with what you are saying how opinion can differ and how different opinions are necessary in politics. I guess a better way to phrase what I was trying to say is it is hard for extreme left winged and right winged people to communicate. I certainly believe in people's right to different opinions and I think we are in perfect agreement.
I see your point, and I didn't mean to be hypocritical when I wrote that. I could have worded this much more clearly. The point I was trying to make is that of course direct personal involvement can alter a person's view on policies. This can work in either direction. However, conservatives don't want feelings to dictate how a policy develops. There is a reason why some liberals are called "Bleeding-Heart Liberals" and it is because they bring too much emotion into arguments over policies that should be based off more of rational thought than emotion. Now I don't want to make conservatives sound heartless, we know personal experience and emotion are huge determiners in political ideology. We just don't want pure emotional policies. Thank you for catching this for me :).
Hi Ryan! I had an urge to comment because A) your argument has valid points and I don't discredit it, and B) I do want to address the liberal's perspective a bit, as I tend to side with the liberals a little more.
To be honest, I think the conservative article did a better job reaching out to actual political points as opposed to the liberal article that was, in my opinion, mostly complaining. That said, it gives liberals an overly emotional sense of ideology, but that's not always the case. These are extreme representations of each party, but I believe Wagman may have done a bad job representing a lot of liberals. As Isaiah said, we're not all the same, as are conservatives. But keep in mind that personal feelings may be justified. According to the American Conservative Union, "To have an effective policy for the rest of the world, it is essential to first protect the homeland base with effective missile defenses and counter-terrorism efforts". So to set basics, protect our country with military might so we can protect our interests and perhaps those being oppressed by a power we deem to be a threat to us. But then it begs the question, is everyone being protected the right way? Are the poor, the dependent, and the financially incapable that much better off than without another missile to protect us? I get it, having the firepower IS essential to "protecting" us from direct harm and tyranny; but what if it's hard to make a living and/or sustain a family? Are they really protected and provided for, or are only the (dare I say it) elites getting the benefit? Their funds aren't going anywhere, but when welfare gets cut then how can these less fortunate families get back on their feet? There are obligations to meet here before meeting those of other places; I'm not saying we should isolate ourselves again, but there needs to be some reform to ensure the disparity gap isn't so large that it divides the people more so than they already are. You have very valid points, but I think there are other things to consider as to why liberals may be personal, why they are so against conservatives: they love this country too, so we have a duty to our people to protect and provide.
I don’t think Democrats and Republicans will ever get along.
At least not those who lean heavily towards one side. The problem stems from the fact that both sides think they’re right, and that belief is one I disagree with. To me, your view on politics is entirely based on your opinion, your background, and your world view. It’s why I don’t like having debates, because all it comes down to is yelling, and at the end, no one changes their opinion. They just simply like the person they went up against a little less. There is no right answer to what you should believe in. If one side was so obviously right, then we’d have solved this issue years ago.
And with that comes stereotyping. Whenever I listen to people from both sides argue, it quickly devolves into personal attacks, and there’s less focus on the issues, and more about what kind of person you must be if you believe a certain thing. Is every Republican you meet some racist, gun-toting hillbilly? No. Is every Democrat a socialist, anti-American idiot? No. But we have a tendency to stereotype people, see them as extremists because they’re easier to hate, and easier to not pay attention to.
Those in the far-left and in the far-right will probably never see eye to eye. They are simply two completely different people. Our political ideology (whether we’re aware of it or not) is based off the issues that are important to us and our views those issues are what make us who we are.In all honesty, if you’re in one of those two sides, it would probably be easier to just not talk about politics with people on the other side. You won’t get anywhere.
But for the moderates out there, I think it is possible to get along. One just has to get used to the fact that people have different viewpoints. That just because other people have their own opinions, it doesn’t mean that yours are wrong, or that their value is lower. Recently I read an article which stated “When Hurricane Katrina struck, and people lost their jobs, their homes and their lives, the first responders did not ask whether the victims were Democrat or Republican before saving them. They did not see them as leftists or rightists but as human beings”
After reading the two sides of this argument on " why each ideology can't talk to one another', and reflecting on what I figured out about myself in class these past few days, I find myself in sure agreement with both. I have come to the conclusion that I am a Right Libertarian, and in that it means that when it comes to social topics, I lean towards the liberal standpoint. On the contrary, when it comes to economic topics, I am a conservative and at times that side of my tends to overpower my liberal tendencies, hence the "Right" Libertarian. As the article from the viewpoint of the conservative said " libertarians...are up for debating about anything, especially drug legalization", I have to say that describes me perfectly. I can debate about any and all topics but I never find myself getting so mad I rebuke those with opposite viewpoints of me. I think this perfectly gives clarity to how "right" and "left" true conservatives and liberals are. As we saw in the articles and as we see today, these two types of people are so rooted in their beliefs it almost becomes a part of them that if you are against their beliefs, then you are against them and you can no longer be civil with them. Being rational goes out the door when talking with true liberals and conservatives because once you are against their views, you are a "terrorist", a "fascist", a "communist", and the list goes on. It is becoming harder and harder as time goes on for liberals and conservatives to have peaceful discourse, and the more they become divided the worse it will be for our country to unite and find common ground.
As someone who isn't far left or right I don't understand how debates between a liberal and conservative can be so personal, ending in so much hatred that views of each others' relationships can go from good to bad so quickly as described in Wagman's anecdote. How can one lose respect in someone solely based on their political beliefs? Are people so close minded that they can't possibly believe that someone else just has a different opinion? I mean I guess I understand. Like Wagman, there are issues that should be no-brainers to everyone, but clearly are not. However, I don't think I could lose respect for a friend who has opposing views on abortion, gay marriage, etc. Kara Park P. 3
After reading both articles and Ryan’s response, I must say that both of the articles are extremely biased to the point that they aren’t reliable. I really like where Ryan points out that there “is no room for rational debate on policy implications” because I felt the same way after reading how both authors feel that the opposing political party would blow things out of proportion and start using slander to discredit the other. I saw this in Wagman’s argument that the arguments quickly became filled with hate, yet took no credit for the cruel way that they argued. This is also prevalent when Allen accused the liberals of having paper thin skin, and saying that the only defense that liberals have is to brand the conservative anti-woman, homophobic, or any other name to discredit them. I feel that both authors have very strong opinions, and need to work on being more accepting of the opposing side, and that they need to work on their debating skills, because it seems that they both resort to yelling all too easily. I cannot assign too much reliability to either author, because they both use words as a form of mud slinging to hurt the opposing opinion, rather than backing up their own positions with reliable facts or arguments.
I do not believe that people with strong conservative views and people with strong liberal views can get along. As humans we believe what we want to believe and if someone has a different view point than us we tend to argue about it until we prove to them that we are right or we just get tired of arguing with them. Based off of in class discussions and the articles it is obvious that not everyone is going to have the same political ideology and whether one side has a good point or not that doesn't change anyone's mind and the matter that they are arguing upon quickly becomes personal. The only way a conservative is to be friends with a liberal is if they speak nothing of politics or if they are just moderately liberal and vice versa. People have the right to their own opinion and just because it isn't the same as yours doesn't make them wrong. I'm the kind of person who wants to see everyone get along and if a liberal doesn't want to talk to a conservative to keep the peace and vice versa then let them.
Everyone has different opinions and ideologies and the truth is, it is difficult for people to accept and understand opinions that differ from their own. The divide between conservatives and liberals exists due to their contradictory views on social and economic views. Both groups struggle to understand how the other group could possible believe in what they believe in because in their minds their ideologies are the only ones that make sense. According to Allen, “we conservatives think liberals are silly; they think we’re evil” and according to Wagman she regards conservative views with “thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism”. Their strong diction indicates that their opposition of either conservatives or liberals is clearly evident. With this, it is clear that those who have strong liberal or conservative views will never come to an agreement. To liberals failing to agree with their views regarding, for example, gay marriage equates to homophobia and to conservatives liberals only hurting the country with their food stamps and public education. Strong opinions lead to endless arguments and this causes both groups to have a degree of animosity towards each other. As a liberal, I do understand Wagman’s frustrations with her neighbors and their views but I don’t believe that the situation should have escalated the way it did. Although I have certain opinions on social and economic issues I don’t believe in trying to push my opinions as the right opinion and the opposing as wrong but this is not how most people are. And with most people once they have a set opinion on an issue especially one they feel strongly about it is almost impossible to go against it without it causing an argument. It is normal for people to believe that their views are logical and right and this is true for both liberals and conservatives and if others don’t agree with them they lose respect for them and because of this I don’t believe that both sides will ever get along.
According to the article I do not liberals and conservatives will ever get along. Each party has their own views on how the economy and other social issues should be handled. In the article by Diana Wagman she made some valid arguments toward the end of her article about if her conservative neighbor she says, " I wonder what would happen if he woke up one morning to find that his son had been killed in Iraq or that his 15-year-old daughter was pregnant or that his favorite sister was gay. What if he suddenly lost his job, his wife got cancer, there was no insurance and not much food?" Would he change his opinions? I don't know!! Then in the second article Charlotte Allen goes on to explain there is just no way to talk to a liberal you get called all kinds of names, shout overs etc. The both parties just have two completely different views and I don't think they will ever get along.
It is extremely difficult trying to hold a calm conversation with people who have different views. Personally I've experienced several liberals, I'm conservative, going straight to insults, yelling, interrupting and so on. Talking to my sister who had opposite views as me, she will state her side, I will begin my opinion and halfway she tries to interrupt and says I did not let her finish and starts yelling. That is not an intelligent or meaningful conversation. Allen says "Tell a liberal that you hope President Obama will be defeated in the upcoming election, and you'll be branded a racist.". Personally I know this is completely true because someone asked me once my opinion and when I did not support Obama their reaction immediately was "oh because you're white" well one that argument isn't very valid considering I'm only a quarter white and the rest Mexican; however, since my skin is light I'm some white girl who is racist. That's just a completely absurd and a racist view to even say I wouldn't support him because I'm white.
What really bothered me was when Wagman said "But my feelings about them are changed. I cannot respect them as I did before.". This is childlike. Just because someone does not agree with you does not mean you can't respect them. And just because someone seems nice does not mean they have to have the same political ideology. Her argument is very flawed. She states "I wonder what would happen if he woke up one morning to find that his son had been killed in Iraq or that his 15-year-old daughter was pregnant or that his favorite sister was gay. What if he suddenly lost his job...". If he woke up to find his son died serving his country he would be damn proud, yes sad but he died with honor. An irresponsible daughter would not change his views on abortion, killing a baby is wrong. Just because a sister is gay will not change his opinion either. Not supporting something is not equivalent to hatred. "Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone's lifestyle, you must fear them or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don't have to compromise convictions to be compassionate." -Rick Warren. Losing your job does not make you immediately want welfare. It means step it up and go get yourself a new job. I have experience with this because my dad was laid off before. He had a new job in less than a month.
I also agree with all that Ryan had argued.
I do not believe liberals and conservatives can hold an intelligent and meaningful debate or just sharing of views except in rare occasions because the way people act if someone disagrees is just straight up childlike and disrespectful.
It's Isaiah here :) I totally see where you are coming from and I wish your dad luck with his new job. Make sure you tell him I said congratulations.
I just wanted to let you know that not all liberals are the same, nor are all conservatives are the same. That's what makes diversity so beautiful. Change can be hard, but it can also have beautiful outcomes. I don't think it is fair to say that one cannot have a conversation among liberals and conservatives. I think we all mess up sometimes and may get really passionate about something and blow off some steam. I am not saying this is right, but I think it is fair to have some grace and mercy when it comes to people's reactions. I am sorry about your experience you had with your sister. I just wanted to assure you that not all liberals are like that. Some are just more passionate than others. That's why we have a spectrum. I totally agree with you when it comes to respecting one another based upon their beliefs, but to say that you can't have an "intelligent and meaningful" debate with members of different political parties seems a bit hypocritical to me. If you respect someone enough you are willing to accept them for who they are as a person. I don't think we should judge others based upon their political party. We all want to love and be loved. I feel we should embrace one another's differences and love all for who they are.
I just wanted to share with you my opinion. Hopefully I didn't offend you in any way fashion or form. I apologize if I did. If you would like to continue this discussion, I would be more than happy to.
I agree with Isaiah's post and Sarah's. I think Isaiah made a key point. If you have enough respect and consideration for someone, then you will be willing to acknowledge them for who they are as a person, despite their conflicting views. Completely rejected one's views should be considered if the opposing party's philosophy harms the welfare of others, putting them in prevailing peril. Kwasi Gittens
Hi Isaiah, No need to apologize for your opinion, I'm not in any way offended. I know not all liberals are like that as well as not all conservative are like that. I believe you can maintain fine friendships and relationships with people who do not share the same views, and I do currently have relationships like that. I meant that an intelligent and meaningful debate can not be held among these extremes who have blinded themselves into not even caring what the other person says but instead they want to immediately point fingers and use insults. As soon as people start cussing someone out or insulting them then that ends the meaningfulness and intelligence of the conversation, which can happen a lot between the extreme liberals and conservatives or just on certain topics people are very passionate about that are controversial. I agree that people should not be judged based on their political party and I was not trying to say they were. I believe that without the respect for the other person's opinion, a conversation with someone of the opposite ideology will most likely turn into name calling and in that case it's just better not to get into something that will end in hatred and insults but instead shape the conversations around something else. Have a good night, feel free to let me know if I was not clear, I don't disagree with you on this. Sarah Gillen
Well that was intense. To get the gist of that it is basically very hard to reason with someone who has a very strong and different political ideology than yourself. People will stand by what they believe and its really hard to change that. As long as you have questioned what you believe and understand why you choose to believe such things, that is your opinion. I have some of my own political beliefs that I will always stand by and I know exactly why I believe in such things. It seems like common sense, but I know that not everyone will agree or have the same opinion. Once we are programmed with a belief or a particular view, hitting the ctrl, alt, and delete key sequence is practically impossible. Even just being in this class, I'm sure most of us have heard an opinion that is different from what we believe. It seems ridiculously hard to keep an open mind about everything. An example ( the safest one I can think of) is my views towards discrimination. In the workforce, discrimination against any race, gender, or religion etc. is completely unacceptable. If someone where to approach me and say that "Discrimination is awesome! Hooray!", I would be taken aback. What they believe in is completely unfathomable to me as my own beliefs may be to them. I do think that democarts and republicans can get along but it will be quite challenging. The should probably avoid conversations regarding politics. I know I certainly do. The kind of person I believe someone to be is usually not destroyed by what ideology they claim to have because they are not typically extreme. In the article on the other hand, they have really strong opinions about politics. Pure democrats and pure republicans are like oil and water and they will never mix. I feel as though it will always be hard to convey your beliefs onto another; we just have to try to be as open minded and patient as possible. Starlena Dickerson period 5
Obviously both articles come from very biased viewpoints and tell harsh truths. They both emphasize stereotypes of the opposite ideology that can and cannot be true. Maybe the reason why it is hard for pure liberals and pure conservatives to coexist peacefully is because their views are on complete opposite sides of the spectrum. There is no compromising when your right is someone else's wrong. Sneha Anand Period 5
I agree with your post. I think we can both agree on the fact that both articles were pretty different in the sense of two very different and conflicting political ideologies. They were also biased in the fact that they generalized the broad majority of the party they disputed against. But I think some compromising must be allowed in order for both parties to coincide. Yeah, both views greatly differ from each other, and of course you have your radicals, but a think a moderate level of respect would be needed in order for them to compromise. Kwasi Gittens, P2
After reading both of these articles, I think that liberals and conservatives will never get along. They have completely different views on the social and economic world and each will try to prove the wrong by arguing about why their belief is better. As Allen states in the article, "We conservatives think liberals are silly; they think they're evil." They have their own opinions on social and political views. I think that the only way they can agree on views is if they are moderate and agree on some views of the opposing parties. I believe that I am pretty moderate myself. I agree with some liberal views as well as conservative views. In all, I believe that liberals and conservatives will always be opposing each other. However, there will be a time in history when they do, in fact, unite on a common ground.
I can't understand why liberals and conservatives can't get along. My family and friends are, for the most part, from Pakistan. I don't know many people who talk American politics so I don't have much experience in these regards.
If these articles are trustworthy, then we have a major problem in our country. If we want to succeed domestically and internationally, we have to put our heads together. If we divide ourselves, we are only using half of our full potential and we are actively limiting ourselves.
We have no idea what the future holds. World War III could start in the next decade, or we may have sustained peace. To be prepared for all outcomes, we need to help each other and understand each other so we can be more prepared for what lies ahead and respond stronger then we can devided
Liberals and conservatives can’t communicate with one another because neither is willing to listen to the other side. It’s like on Friends when Ross and Rachel broke up, and Ross only saw the “we were on a break” viewpoint while Rachel could only see the “he cheated on me with the girl from the copy place” viewpoint, and so their arguments would always end in screaming matches with no problems being resolved. But on a more serious note, I think both parties can’t see eye to eye because the moment one party proposes their idea to the other, the other immediately disregards it and resorts to name calling and attacking the person rather than the idea. Take social welfare programs for example: conservatives will call liberals lazy people who are just looking for handouts, while liberals will call conservatives selfish people who only care about the rich. Each side is quick to form stereotypes about the other; and even though I’m aware of this, I’m greatly affected by it. For example, I was raised by conservative parents, and so I found it difficult to see things from Wagman’s perspective. But even if it’s hard for me to see eye to eye with a liberal, I think it’s important that we agree to disagree.
While I believe it is great that people can freely express their political ideas, it is sad to see a lack of respect for others' ideology. It's safe to say we've all experienced or seen this, and it is frustrating. This issue, though, seems to be between the more "hard core" or "winged" people. Even though I am conservative and some left-winged ideology may bother me, I find that normal democrats do not bother me nearly as much as extreme liberal ideology. While it is important to stand behind your ideology with vehement, it is equally important to hear other perspectives. From our lessons we've read that college educations tend to expose students to more views and that this is encouraged, which leads to more liberal standards,but who's to say this cannot go for the conservative route as well? By believing that all view points have some credibility and truth to learn from them, but to then accuse any opposite ideas is hypocritical. The mistake people make is that they try to convince the other that their ideas are superior. This can never happen, just like how a theist and an atheist cannot convince the other that there either is or there is not a God. Such arguments are a waste of time and will never arrive to any conclusion. It's sad to admit, but I believe true liberals and true conservatives are incapable of getting along. As the article "Liberals vs. Conservatives" stated, while non-political topics can be agreed upon, topics on politics are inevitable because they are such a fundamental cornerstone of what America and Americans stand for to this day, and such personal beliefs are naturally defended by the owner when an alternative point-of-view is suggested.
Before taking government i never knew which side of the ideology spectrum I was on but always knew that being conservative had a negative connotation. Through this past week i learned that i am a Solid Liberal meaning i am liberal on both social and economic issues. I dont consider myself to be far left because i can understand some conservative points economically and maybe even agree with them. Just because i am a liberal does not mean i will jump to conclusions about a conservative just because their viewpoints are different than mine. Nor do i think of them differently because of their political party/ideology.
I agree with Sneha when she said that the articles are from biased viewpoints and harsh truths. Wagman's article seemed very extreme when she states all the questions at the end and how she "hope[s] it's their weekend to stay home." Cutting people off because they dont agree about something is just petty and unnecessary energy used. Also in Allen's article how she stated that "You can't talk to a liberal, period." is ridiculous. The fact that some people dont think they can talk to me about politics or at all because I'm a liberal is ludicrous. I believe both far ends of the spectrum need to be able to understand that they are different and be comfortable with someone having different views than their own. I think too many people believe that through debate they will somehow someway change what that person has been believing in for almost their entire life which should not be the case. In my opinion debates are about discussing a problem, being open to opinions that are not your own, and MAYBE rethinking about how you view something. To go into a debate without that mentality is setting yourself up for hurt feelings and yelling. In the end both sides just want whats best for America and hopefully a meteor doesn't CRASH into the Earth again before then.
That was definitely something. Honestly just don’t talk about economic/social topics at all if you know it will only end in a heated argument. If it can be avoided, then avoid them. I don’t think it’s possible for a rational discussion between a far left or far right because they would be so close minded and solely focused on what they believe. But maybe it is possible, who knows? Plus things would start to get really personal, like how Wagman wanted her neighbor to consider if his daughter got pregnant, his wife got cancer, etc. That’s taking things way too far, but I can see where she was going with that. Obviously everyone is going to have opposing views and we should be aware of that too. We should be able to respect that and try to not let it affect so much, but I guess some people just can’t help it. We always tend to look for things that support our view and only our view to prove that the other side is wrong. It’s hard to compromise especially when the views are completely opposite from each other.
I am always bothered by the fights and arguments between members of both groups, whether these members be politicians or fellow classmates. The "fight" between liberals and conservatives is one that exists due to the inherent intransigent nature of humans, and misconceptions and the convolution of the terms "liberal" and "conservative". Firstly, humans are often born with the belief that their set of beliefs or morals are the right ones. This applies to those who claim to be a liberal or conservative. They are adamant in their beliefs, and see any conflicting beliefs to be wrong, or in some cases, threatening. When an individual holds a set of beliefs as their guide, but find their may be a different, possibly better way, they may find their beliefs threatened. Liberals and conservatives feel obligated to cling onto their beliefs, regardless of whether or not they truly believe in them with regards to the circumstance or issue in question. The point is, people are inherently stubborn, and there are some liberals who claim to be open-minded, yet they do not feel this way about conservative beliefs. In addition, the terms "liberal" and "conservative" now have very negative connotations. Some consider a liberal to be silly, and call them a socialist to insult them. Some conservatives are called racist and strict, and are even called fascist. This is when the conversation or debate becomes personal and the participants become ignorant. A lack of education leads to ignorance, which in turn leads to a convoluted view of how one views their "opposing group". Liberals and conservatives see themselves to have exact opposite views, when in reality they just believe in different ways to solve the same problems. I strongly believe that labels are not always acceptable. Every human being has a unique set of morals and beliefs, but labels like "conservative" and "liberal" force individuals to adapt their beliefs to fit in with one or the other. Instead, human beings should be interested in believing what they want to believe, without having fear of being placed into a category. I personally want to be more than just a statistic, just a person in a group. I'd rather be a part of my own group, and agree and disagree on issues not based on what group I'm forced into, but rather what I personally believe. Education is extremely important as it broadens our perspective on issues and allows us to change if need be. As humans, our beliefs will possibly change over time, through experiences and education. This debate between liberals and conservatives will only end if both labels are no longer an indicator of what someone should believe in for every issue.
These people are acting like children. If they are not right, no one is right. If they don't get their way, no one gets any way at all. What is the point of arguing with someone in order to try to convince them that your opinion is right? What happened to "let's agree to disagree"? Obviously the friendships these people had were not as important as winning an argument.
Up until this week, I was not aware of where I fell on the political ideology spectrum. When I was taking the quizzes, I was scared that I might make a decision based upon my parent's views or my prior knowledge to each political party. I thought that this quiz was going to determine my future and decide how I was going to live my life. WRONGO! These quizzes are valuable in the sense that they tell you where you are on the spectrum, but they do not define you as who you are as a person. Rather than defining yourself as who you are based upon a political party, define yourself as who you want to be.
When it comes to discussions among political parties, George Washington himself warned the citizens of America to not form political parties. But look what we did. I think we messed up there. But it's okay. Now that we have political parties, it is important to understand and respect each side. Just because not everyone is respectful to your beliefs doesn't mean that others won't be. And it doesn't give you the right to place a stereotype on political parties. Respect is mutual and is not one sided. Just because you respect someone does not mean you have to agree with them. All you have to do is accept them for who they are and what they stand for. I believe the article should not state why political parties can't debate with one another. Rather, I think it is appropriate to argue why political parties CHOOSE not to debate with one another. Everyone is scared of getting their feelings hurt or having someone else say something that completely goes against what he or she stands for. Big deal. Someone disagreed with you. They aren't going to take your birthday away. Let them be them and let you be you. If we were all the same, life would be boring. Imagine going through life only seeing one color. How bland would that be?
Allow others to form their own opinions. Rather than criticizing these opinions, embrace the individuality you share with another person. Don't start making assumptions because someone screwed up and called you a name. Not all Republicans are the same just as not all Democrats are the same. Don't let people walk over you, but don't walk over other people. We as Americans need to love one another for who we are. Not ridicule another human being because they are different. Despite what you believe, we can all come to the conclusion that we all just want to get along.
With a whole nation demanding immediate change constantly, it is easy to find that two sides can have radically different perspectives on how to change America for the better. This is seen time and again in average people talking about politics. It always evolves into an unnecessarily heated (and personal) argument, and most certainly bitters the taste of a harmonious friendship (not to sound like a total hippie). Both articles prove this in the sense that liberals always make political issues personal and conservatives care about making issues benefit them. With that being said, I do not believe that strong liberals and strong conservatives can just “get along” anymore. Those more towards the center of the spectrum, probably. I will concede, though, that both sides are very passionate about their views and hold very steadily to them. Wagman’s article makes quite irrational statements about Republicans by calling them “narcissistic” and neither “empathetic nor kind.” Those are very heavy-handed statements spoken out of personal feelings about the few Republicans that she's spoken to before. Allen’s article went on the defense for conservatives accusing the liberals of being “silly” and that it's “impossible to hold a conversation with them.” Conservatives tend believe that liberals are very naive in their views and that they are incapable of civil conversations. Both sides have overgeneralized their respective opposing parties and immediately assume the worst when there is a challenge to a statement about an issue. At this point, their views on each other are so entrenched in their memories that they can't just “get over” the fact that it is another perfectly logical human being right there exercising their amendment 1 right to freedom of speech. We seem to have forgotten that we are essentially all part of the same compost heap and that it is okay for someone to be different. No, they aren't wrong, and in all honesty, it shouldn't be the deciding factor of the quality of someone’s character. It really shouldn't be this personal. However, when it comes to issues that affect the way our government runs our nation, yes, debate, but it also should be important to keep an open mind.
After reading both views I must say it's very disappointing. Let's just be realistic, in almost every country there is that gap between two political views; a gap that is inevitable. I think this gap or this division is going to exist no mater what especially for those who have extreme, upholding political views from both sides of the spectrum; however, respect is a key that will help us unlock the doors of acceptance and the mentality of "let's agree to disagree" and that it's okay to defend your point of view without offending mine directly or indirectly. I just think disagreements will always exist we just need to cope with them differently in order for this country to move forward and there is no way that will happen if this country is divided with hatred and apathy. There is a thin hair between being passionate and being angry. One can be very passionate but still respectful of others and one can stand and give an angry argument that is full of hate and disrespect. It mostly depends on the words one chooses to express his or her point of view. Those words are like fire they either warm up the other party or burn it that they would feel wounded! and that's when hatred gets planted. Yes division will be inevitable more in the sense of our human nature, we all have different views just like we all have different tastes in styles or in foods. I believe we just need to teach the next generations to just be more acceptable and still have support for their own beliefs for this country to continue to prosper and grow as a world power because hatred leads to a darker hole that will never light through.
After taking the political ideology quizzes last night I was able to see/confirm that I hold more conservative views. Does this mean I can’t get along with or agree with someone who holds more liberal views? In a perfect world liberals and conservatives would be able to discuss politics, listen to each other’s views, and agree to disagree in a peaceful and calm manner. Unfortunately we don’t live in a world like that.
While I do tend to lean conservative, my social views are sometimes aligned with liberal beliefs. Although there are a couple of issues we see eye to eye on, my younger sister (a liberal) and I have come to the decision that it is better if we just don’t discuss politics with each other because, like in the articles, our “discussions” usually end in yelling matches and slammed doors.
I like to think of myself as a pretty patient person, and I always try to listen to someone’s views fully and try to understand before refuting. Often times even though I try reminding myself of this I just get too frustrated when discussing politics with those who have more liberal views than I do. I think that it is okay to disagree with each other on political issues and that if we know that talking politics with someone who has opposing views will make us angry or upset that it is better to just stick to safe topics to maintain some peace. Carly Tighe Period 2
Both authors use anecdotal examples in order to corroborate their general outlook on a political group. These outlooks strive to demonize the adversary or alternate group with bloated descriptions of how these people react to "common sense" or "logic". In retrospect, these outlooks and reactions are ultimately decided by the preferences, views, and beliefs of the individual. The content and material used to describe their “encounters with the enemy” provoked an utter cringe towards the arguments of how these confrontations “ruined friendships” or “made bitter neighbors”. The inability to compromise within a conversation about the subject of politics within their everyday lives could unfortunately correlate to a plausible perpetual struggle of simple compromise within the federal system of politics. As both authors are exercising their freedom of speech, their attempts of propaganda frightens me. These views are individual until they are uttered to the masses and once such views are accepted as “politically incorrect” or “wrong”, the consequences are already in effect.
I honestly found both of these articles very humorous, one because they both strongly exaggerated the other side, and two was how much truth lies within these articles. After taking the polls last night, I learned that I do lean a bit closer towards the liberal side of the spectrum, but I have noticed the aggressive approach of a liberalist. I don't think it should be so difficult to talk to someone who opposes your views, but frankly it is, and these articles prove it. I'm not saying all conservatives and liberals constantly bash the other side, but I find it ridiculous how demeaning people can be just because someone has a different perspective. I understand that people can be passionate with their stance on say abortion or immigration, but a debate should never leave mature terms of a debate. And I find it that many people who get into these heated discussions tend to be ignorant of the other point of view and simply assume, which is a huge problem in politics. A liberal doesn't want the rich to suffer for striking rich, and a conservative doesn't want to bury the poor in the dirt. So next time before you just the other side of the spectrum, try to think about LOGICAL reasons on why they support their opinion. It doesn't hurt to give your input, but keep it appropriate to the topic.
From the two articles, it is very evident that passionate liberals and conservatives have a tough time coinciding. The extremely debatable topics such as gay marriage, abortion, and healthcare are not topics that are expected to have mutually agreeable decisions, of course. A liberal and a conservative are on completely different sides of the border and none intent to succumb to the other's opinions. I find it completely absurd how these two sides are so hostile to each other and none intend to coexist. Also, just because someone has their own opinion, does not mean they should be branded as some evil, corrupt person. These clashing have serious repercussions. For example if you just met a person who was a conservative and you were a liberal, there would already be conflict emanating from the either one of you even though both of you know almost nothing about each other. I believe that people are entitled to their own opinions and they should not be scrutinized.
From what i read of the articles, they see liberals and conservatives are these two different animals that cannot ever coexist. I feel like that just isnt the case. many of my friends are conservative and we have no problems so long as we don't talk too much about political issues. I think these articles make it most evident that there is a huge divide that is literally tearing the country in two .There is no middle ground, you are either conserv. or you are liberal. Both of these authors take the stance that they are eternally right and if you disagree at all you're with the enemy. If you have a real friend then it wont matter their political viewpoints, it'll only matter how they treat you and others around them.
Both articles are very biased and opinionated. These two authors have very strong views on their political ideologies. After reading these articles, I concluded that strong liberals and conservatives are so set on their beliefs that they don't even try to understand the opinions of others. Political and social issues make people so single minded, heated arguments are almost unavoidable. I would consider myself liberal so it is frustrating when discussing issues like abortion, same sex marriage, and legalizing drugs with a conservative. You want them to understand you're view but at the same time you're not really giving them a chance to explain their views either. As humans we think we are always right, and it is very hard to cordially talk to someone who has different views than us. People from opposite sides of the political spectrum are so easy to judge one other on their beliefs that the only way to get along is to just not talk about politics or social issues. Victoria Magana pd 3
I do not believe liberals and conservatives will ever get along, when it comes to politics. Allen made valid points in saying that liberals ostracize conservatives for not sharing their beliefs. Liberals are quick to stick a label on conservative ideals because their opinions do not coincide (which is quite hypocritical, seeing that liberals are for "equality" and "acceptance"). Wagman's argument seems childish in that she is quick to attack her kind neighbors, whom which she previously liked, simply because they have a different set of ideals. To say conservatives have not experienced though times and thus are not sympathetic is ignorant. My parents are both conservatives and grew up with great struggle. My mother grew up in a single mother household with 6 siblings in Compton. At ages 12-16 she had to raise her younger siblings because her mother was in jail and her older siblings were either drug addicts or too irresponsible. From her family, she is the only one to graduate high school, work multiple jobs to better her life and get out of the bad areas. She did all of that through hard work and perseverance. Not once did she collect government aid. My father grew up in East LA, a poor and gang-filled area. His parents were indifferent about him getting an education. In spite of that, he worked hard, graduated from college (which he payed for himself), and is now a top man at his company. Their siblings collect welfare checks, on occasion receive money from my parents, and do not care to work. So saying that conservatives are "thoughtless" or "privileged" is narrow-minded. Thereby, supporting the idea that liberals and conservatives will never get along because they do not care to hear out the reasoning (or background) of the other side. Perhaps both sides could learn a thing or two from libertarians and just simply have the mind to hear each other out. Samantha Martinez Period 5
I just read this back, and I don't want it to come off too biased. So I would like to clarify that conservatives make overgeneralization about liberals as well. They tend to peg liberals as rash and illogical. Neither ideology gives the other the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps these conflicts are just magnified through those who feel passionately about these beliefs, but in the scope of things I only see political turmoil between the two (not necessarily any turmoil regarding day to day social interactions). :) Sam Martinez, p. 5
I do agree with both articles,it's definitely hard to communicate with a person from a different ideology.If that person has a strong belief in his ideology,then the debate/arguments you have with them won't go so far due to their strong opinion.The author made a good point about liberals though is that they turn political issues into personal issues. With that being said, I believe the biggest issue is that we start judge people based on their ideology.For example if someone says he is conservative we start thinking he has to religious,doesn't like the govt to have much power,doesn't want to help the poor.We need to fix that,and also remove the labels such as "fascist" "socialist",and then maybe it will be easier to communicate between people.
After reading the articles and learning from our in class discussion, I have come to the conclusion that Conservatives and Liberals will never really get along. We have such drastically different viewpoints on what should be done socially and economically in this country that it is virtually impossible to come to a compromise. The author's of both articles are very biased in their opinions about their political party but are correct that, when disagreements are found in politics, arguments begin. For the two sides to finally get along about everything, the Earth must be transformed in to a Utopia in order to have a perfect society that does not need fixing. Then we will not have to argue about various political issues because there will be nothing that needs fixing.
I have found it difficult to talk with someone from the opposite end of the political ideological spectrum. The political ideology quizzes last night confirmed what I already knew, I am a steadfast conservative. I have been talking to a neighbor before, the conversation made its way to politics, and we discovered that we differ in our views. When he found out I was a conservative, he said something to the effect of "Oh so you must be like Trump and want to not allow Muslim's in to the country?" Just because I am a conservative does not mean I agree whole-heartedly with every little detail that each candidate says. I have to examine all candidates of the party, find who I support the most, and be sure to show up on election day and vote for that person. I do not support the idea of banning a large group of people from coming to this country; however, I am in support of doing much more extensive checks on all the people coming to this country to do our best to ensure that these people are not coming with bad intentions.
From a more positive aspect, I got to speak with many friends today about their quiz results and learned that I have many conservative friends AND many liberal friends. This showed me that the two sides do have the capability of getting along with matters that don't pertain to political issues. We don't have to ruin our friendships just because we don't see everything the exact same way. That is actually one thing that exists in our society and it is called diversity.
These two articles actually made disappointed in both of the liberal and conservative views on each other. There is always going to be someone who will disagree with you, regardless in what you believe in. However, I don't think I would called someone an 'idiot' or 'preferred if the other one didn't exist' as Wagman stated in her article. As someone who is moderately liberal, you see other views of the conservative and question it. But I have conservative friends and I am still open-minded enough to listen to their reasoning for some. I don't think they are racist, selfish or necessarily 'evil' as certain liberals would say. They believe in individualism which consist of hard work. Hard work does lead into success if the door is open towards it but not everyone will get the same opportunity as other. People are open to believing what they think is best for them. Each belief comes from how their were raised but it can progress overtime. It really does suck to know that each view think so negatively about each other. For example,my mother is conservative and my father is liberal but they are willing to share their belief in each side of the ideology in one household. Does this mean that they can't get along? After 20 years of being married to each other, I know it's possible of accepting one's political ideology instead of bashing it all completely. Beverly Boampong Period 2
I think it is interesting that you can have great friends but as soon as you discover that they are the opposite party from you, they automatically become your enemy. I do think it is difficult to try to understand other people views especially if they go against what you believe in, but I truly believe we can agree to disagree. Unfortunately in today's society that phrase means nothing but a waste of breath because most of us are self-centered, shallow and unable to put our differences aside. We need to realize that we all are human and it is kind of foolish to have arguments about it.
Honestly, when I read the articles I found them to be a little extreme when it comes to how liberals and conservatives argue (or maybe I've just never seen it get that serious). In both articles it seemed like whatever group the article was basing its viewpoint on, it already had a preconceived hate for the opposing group. I think normally the two groups can talk or at least have a heated yet civil debate, as long as you keep an open mind to whoever you're debating with. People need to actually listen to what the other person is saying and realize that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. From the articles, I did see how it got personal, but when arguing about ANYTHING it's hard not to pull arguments out of personal experience, because those experiences are probably what shaped your opinions or beliefs. However, I do think that if you are very hot-headed and don't really care about what others have to say, I'm guessing you're just kind of a hard person to talk to in general. Therefore, I don't think those type of people can just blame it on a difference of ideology. :p
Like Wagman says, some of the views I have are absolute no brainers to me. I, truly and passionately, believe that my views are the best for myself, others, and America and I’m sure a conservative can say the same about their views as well. This is partly why political ideology is so personal to people, whichever side you are on the spectrum, people want what’s best but the differences are found when peoples’ thoughts of what actually is for the better clash. This clash is a wonderful thing! Every time I get into some type of heated argument and I come off a little bitter from it, I instantly remind myself that talking and discussing and arguing is a privilege many others do not have. People elsewhere are KILLED if they speak up. I embrace the differences I have with other people and I enjoy the arguments because I truly appreciate my freedom of speech. So to those saying that not talking about politics is the way to go, I cannot agree. I understand that there’s an extent to which some people need to step away and not talk about these things because sometimes these discussions can lead to nowhere, but to say that we shouldn’t talk at all seems unhealthy. A lack of perspective, which is achieved by not being open-minded and receptive to others’ views, can be a leading cause of division. This division though does not scare me, I, personally, will always say what I think no matter who I am talking to and I will not back down just because someone says something that opposes my beliefs.
Now for my more personal liberal beliefs: In Allen’s article, it says, “Voice your opposition to same-sex marriage, and you're a homophobe,” how is one not homophobic if they oppose gay marriage? I truly do not understand how you can oppose a fundamental right gays and lesbians have but not be a homophobe. (If you do understand, please feel free to explain.) Also, I have a hard time respecting others who want to take away peoples’ rights, more specific and personal to me: my reproductive rights. I know and acknowledge that not all conservatives may believe abortion is wrong but typically they do and this is just one example of when I do not accept someone else’s belief just because it’s their opinion. Yes, everyone has a right to their opinion but if it’s an opinion that oppresses, fuels hatred, and/or is harmful to others, I cannot accept it.
I believe this is how disagreeing with same-sex marriage is not equivalent to being a homophobe or having hatred. "Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate." While yes someone may disagree with the lifestyle and the redefining of marriage, it does not mean they hate them or wish them harm, yes there are extreme people who say they should die or burn in hell but that is an extreme that the majority does not believe. Not agreeing with someone else's decisions is not disrespecting them unless it gets extreme like I said above. As for abortion I do not understand why you say believing abortion is wrong is disrespectful to someone else's existence Feel free to clarify, if the argument is too touchy it's fine not to respond Sarah Gillen
It's obvious that conservatives and liberals will never be able to agree on anything, they are polar opposites. There's no reason to get into a political debate with someone who shares different views than you because all it will end with is name-calling and broken friendships, just like what happened in the liberal article. The liberal family went to the poker game with the Republicans and they loved them and instantly became friends with all of them. They even invited them back to their cabin to hang out. But as soon as they found out their new friends were conservative, they immediately disliked them all because they had different opinions than them. This is why it's hard for two parties to have a reasonable discussion, because it gets personal for each side. Both think they're right, and are too stubborn to agree with anything the other side has to say. Clearly, Democrats and Republicans can't agree on anything and that's why they won't be able to have a reasonable political discussion about anything anytime soon.
I believe people that are very liberal have a hard time getting along with people that are very conservative. After taking the quizes I found out I am a Libertarian who leans a little bit towards the right. I tend to have more liberal views when it comes to social issues and more conservative views when it involves the economy. I can tell you these past two days I have gotten into multiple political debates with my boyfriend who is a democrat. Even though neither of us are extreme ends of either politcal party we have had very different views on policies.I've experienced first hand that when you put two passionate people from different parties in a room and start talking politics, there will be conflict. Alot of people when talking politics somehow take things personally or get defensive over their views which causes problems. I think we should leave the debating to the presidential canidates and save our breath when it comes to talking politics with the opposite party.
I totally agree with the 2nd article. You can't talk to a liberal, period. They always change the subject and talk about politics and criticize when you're wrong!! As I learnt today in class I'm a populists so, economic issue i'm liberal, i am for the govt. helping the poor but ( and i know i will be criticized tomorrow for it) I am pro-life (social issue). so i really do not totally disagree with one party but liberals argue, even in the first article the liberal took it so personal that at the end of the article she said "Next time I drive to our cabin, I'm going to make sure I take everything I could possibly need. I don't want to ask my neighbors for help." Both parties ) especially democrats, need to put politics aside when it comes to socializing and treating people around us. keep your views to yourself and just don't offend others. Sandra Abdelnour Period 2
I understand where you are coming from. Politics can really make people passionate about what they believe in but I just wanted to point out the generalizations you have said in your response. You used superlatives like “always” when stating that liberals change the subject to talk about politics, but that is not true for every single liberal. There are probably many liberals that do not enjoy talking about politics. I can also say that I have seen conservatives do the same of “change[ing] the subject and talk about politics and criticize when you're wrong.” Also, you said “…I really do not totally disagree with one party but liberals argue…” and I was just wondering if you can agree on the fact that conservatives do this as well and that no matter the political ideology, we all exhibit some of the same traits of argumentation and the defensiveness that comes along with it, because we are all human and we are not perfect.
I don’t do not think that extreme liberals and conservatives will ever get along. That’s like mixing orange juice and milk together. I believe that nothing good will ever come out of two entirely different people arguing on a subject. The conversation will just go back and forth and ultimately result in anger. The anger drives people pick irrational arguments that causes an emotional rather than intelligent defense. Both sides are too extreme and stereotypical to be able to make a decent judgment on them. However, there are topics I disagree with the articles. One of the articles stated that you can’t respect the opposing side. That is simply childish and immature. If you knew how to behave and have manners, you will respect others no matter what they believe in even if it’s the exact opposite of what you think. In the end, people are always going to be disagreeing regardless of the topic. It doesn’t even have to be about politics and people will continue to try to bite each others’ heads off.
I find both of these articles silly and extremely biased towards their respective authors' political beliefs. They have made outrageous generalizations of the vague terms "liberal" and "conservative" from a few poor experiences, and their work should be viewed as bitter jokes rather than serious arguments. These are prime examples of how obstinate and dogmatic both sides have become; when a controversial topic is proposed, each side refuses to listen to the other and no progress is made. America was founded through the compromise of people with radically differing beliefs, and this has helped it become the nation it is today. People need to understand that every single person has an opinion, and that they will inevitably differ; in addition, no single opinion can be completely true and therefore each should be comprehended with understanding instead of hostility. So, to answer the central question of the blog, people of differing political ideology can get along, on the condition that they don't immediately judge each other's opinions. While political issues are an important part of life, they do not justify the frustration and name-calling exemplified in these articles.
I am liberal. Very very liberal. However, I disagree with both articles. Even though it can be difficult to talk to someone with different view points than yours, political or not, it is not impossible l. I think that one thing we learned from class the past 2 days is that people fall on complete different places on the political spectrum. Some may be far left, some by far right, but most are within the middle. I think these articles take only the extremes into account. Who's to say that a liberal and a conservative have to disagree on everything? Maybe a pure conservative and a pure liberal, but what about a populist and a liberal? There will be some common ground there. & even if you cannot find some common ground politically does that mean that you have to hate that person? Political ideology is just one part of who you are as a person. I think the biggest problem with both of these articles is that it takes two very extreme people, and tries to apply it to every conservative and every liberal. Yes, some will hate eachother. But some people also choose to hate eachother based on gender, race, ect. That does not apply for the whole population. Overall, I think that liberal's and conservative's can get along if we all remember that we are all people, and all Americans that want we see best for this country. Brittany Barnes Period 3
Why can't we all just get along? Well, unfortunately it appears that if you identify as "liberal" you are a socialist who mooches off the government and if you identify as "conservative" you're a racist fascist who is the epitome of evil. There's no inbetween. You can't believe in anything outside of that ideology because once you have been labeled as a "liberal" or "conservative", peoples views on you will forever be tainted. It was apparent in both articles that the reason the authors had so much difficulty conversing with the other group was because in their minds, they had already created a stereotype of the other group and were completely blinded by their emotions. For example, in Wagman's article she states, "They are a lovely family: husband, wife and four smart, funny, polite children. I was sure they were Democrats" as if being Democrat=kindness and Republican=evil. Thus, the minute her neighbor said ANYTHING contradicting her views, he was no longer a Democrat, thus no longer kind, thus a Republican, thus evil. As mentioned earlier in class, you can be pro-choice and still be conservative. Identifying with one group does not mean that you have to agree with everything that group believes in. It is great to be passionate about your beliefs but that does not mean that everything someone says that doesn't correlate with your ideas is wrong. We have to be open-minded and respectful of other opinions and stop classifying one group with good/bad. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs but no one should be trying to shove their beliefs down peoples throats. This all feels like one of those bad high school movies were people are labeled to be a certain way because of the things they do. Like the jocks don't care about school, the cheerleaders are dumb. THE JOCK AND THE CHEERLEADER CAN BE 4.0 STUDENTS!!! CONSERVATIVES CAN BE PRO-GAY MARRIAGE!!! LIBERALS CAN BE PRO-LIFE!!! Everyone just needs to be open-minded and stop being childish when someone's views are a little different.
Liberals and conservatives not getting along is nothing new. If anything it has gotten better in the last century. I mean (knock on wood) we haven’t had a president assassinated in over 50 years, some political commentators thought that Obama wouldn’t survive his first year in office. In 1856 we had a member of congress beat a fellow member to congress to near death. In the 1950’s we jailed people with dissenting opinions. Our President Andrew Jackson was involved in over 100 duels, killing several men. We had a founding father kill another, Aaron Burr the 3rd Vice President, and Alexander Hamilton the 1st Secretary of Treasury. Not to mention that 800,000 Americans killed each other over politics during the Civil War. I think we can all agree that most of these situations would be unheard of today (with the exception of a presidential assassination). This has been a great success in American culture, but there are still tensions that exist today, however these tensions are mostly healthy and keep America alert about politics. Garret M. Gwozdz Period 2
Being moderately liberal myself, I find a lot of Allen's points to be a little harsh with bits of truth in them. Yes, the extremes of our side can take things too personally; yes, political correctness may sometimes be blown out of proportion; but to group us all as people who think political topics are "drawing blood from the paper-thin epidermis of wounded liberals" is condescending, overgeneralized, and pretty sort-sighted. I get it, the two extremes conflict, but when you bring up topics like welfare and education, conservatives are very quick to make it personal as well. In their defense, it's also not right for Wagman to call conservatives' political views "thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism", but the fact remains that conservatives do tend to favor the side that, at it's core, divides the people and creates disparity, economically and socially. I don't outwardly voice these opinions because I know how quickly it can devolve into the arguments in the articles, but I do want to point out that both sides need to take a broader view and acknowledge the other side before shouting accusations.
After reading the article, I immediately thought of psychology regarding listening. In Wagmans case, his neighbor already made up his mind, so his ear was closed to hear anything else. While this may be seen as ignorant, this is a common issue that we face in American today. With children growing up with a big influence from their parents, they tend to believe in politics in a one-sided way. I believe that even if we do strongly believe one way about a certain political belief, we need to understand other types of beliefs and not throw it off just like that. Wagmans neighbor clearly did not do this and I believe that Wagmans repsonse was no better. If we want to grow as a country, we need to be more open-minded.
The reason why a Liberal and Conservative would not get along is because the more obstinate and loyal each side is, the less they are willing to acknowledge the other and the more vicious they would be when attacking.
No one with an overzealous ego can stand being mauled with an insult-spewing, equally inflated opponent nor aquiesce with the other's seemingly "completely wrong" arguments.
Of course there are liberals and conservatives who are able to get along, but they don't do so by completely disregarding the other's stance or force upon others with insistance of their own "rightful" opinions.
In the end, the best situation for both parties is for them to state their opinions, listen to each other's stance, and then move on.
It's just the "move on" step that people can't seem to do.
I'm at risk of sparking something of controversy here, but when I read these articles, it was a seriously frustrating read. The fact that the views are not only so different (and real) but are SO biased and SO quick to accuse was just so blindly STUPID in my opinion.
Yeah, I get it. The extremes on the liberal side are all equality this, equality that, political correctness, you can label that person as "him" or "her" or WHATEVER. Then you get the other end of the spectrum: independence this, foreign affairs that, let's gung ho the living poop out of them and show 'em who's boss, WHATEVER! Yeah, I severely stereotyped these sides and made it black and white, but the articles just exemplified how quick each side is to judge and generalize ALL liberals or ALL conservatives as the whiners or the narcissists, respectively.
Rant aside, I'll come out and say I'm a moderate liberal, so I find myself a little more in concurrence with Wagman. I think many conservative views are not in favor of the whole; it CAN create (not saying it does) an unhealthy disparity that will ultimately divide the population even more. The poor will have their views, which will create an even bigger gap between those of the rich. Each party has their points, which is why I'm only a moderate, but in all honesty, the lack of equality that the conservative views can bring upon society will really only make things worse and even more disparate. Additionally, being too liberal can cause a loss of identity where everyone is one way or the government wants everyone to be this way, which can be equally dangerous. My point here is that both sides have valid arguments, what really needs to happen is for people to stop being so stubborn with their political viewpoints and broaden perspective, take the time to even consider the other side, the effects of what they can do and what you can do, good and bad. Don't be like Allen and Wagman, so divided that hatred is bread between what can be a solid relationship. Be American, embrace difference and work as a whole.
So because I’m a liberal, I can’t even say the word “Christmas” because it has to do with Jesus? That means I’m an atheist, right? Wrong. Yeah, it may be true that most liberals are atheist, but I’m not and I am completely appalled by both articles. Both authors are refuting one another’s beliefs simply because they believe that they’re right and that the other one is wrong. For them to say that it’s impossible for liberals and conservatives to have a one on one debate baffles me because it is possible. The whole point of having a debate is to not make it personal. The moment people start throwing insults at one another, the debate that they were just having becomes invalid. In my opinion, it’s awesome that we’re entitled to our own opinion, that’s what makes our country great. What doesn’t make our country great is the fact that if we don’t believe what other people believe in, we’re damned. So what if people don’t have the same views? That’s what makes us different, right? What confuses me the most is when Wagman stated that because her neighbors don’t have the same beliefs as her it, “killed her”? That doesn’t make any sense to me whatsoever. In all honesty, if someone doesn’t believe in either their political or social views then, seriously, just look the other way. We can’t make people believe in something that they don’t want to believe in. Sometimes it’s better to agree to disagree. There’s no need for scrutinizing other’s ideological beliefs because no one is either completely right or completely wrong.
Based on the articles, I do not believe that a conservative and a liberal can have a conversation with one another. It is evident with the two stories that it is very difficult for a person of one ideology to be tolerant of one of the opposing ideology. But, I believe this scenario is present only when a left wing liberal and right wing conservative have a conversation. I believe that a conservative and liberal can have a healthy debate on their views, but I do not know if it would benefit either party trying to argue against each other’s views. The beauty of our nation is that we can have so many different views and we can express them freely in our everyday lives but a discussion where one person tries to argue for their views over another’s opposing views could prove very meaningless. It is very hard to find a happy-medium in this ongoing debate because of the endless views of various ideologies.
After reading both of these articles, I am kind of shocked at how a pure liberal views a conservative and vice versa. And I do understand that it can be extremely difficult to talk to someone who does not have the same beliefs that you do, especially if you're so passionate about it. As a libertarian with a pure conservative for a best friend, it can be hard to listen to her bash on a liberal's argument that I happen to agree with. However, I would never want to lose a best friend just because we don't have the same political ideology, so there's some topics that I've learned to just keep out of instead of arguing with her about it--unlike these writers who lose friends that don't have the same political ideology as they do. Maybe we can all get along if we can just let go of all these stigmas that are attached to conservatives and liberals, stop all these childish name-callings, and just respect each other's opinions instead of bash on them.
Reading both articles, I feel as if they concern personal, biased problems. Okay sure, you don't trust liberals. Fine, you do not get along with conservatives. Both authors make some pretty broad generalizations. Why end a relationship just based off of a political ideology? In Wagman's case, okay, your neighbor has a different political view than you. Suck it up and accept that not everyone is the same. Quoted, "We are not the same. I equate Republicans' political views with thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism. They're neither kind nor empathetic." is just stupid in that fact that not all Republicans are like that. Instead, she should of peacefully respected her neighbor's political views, and moved on with her life. With just reading both article's theses, both authors succumb to making really broad and not so distinct generalizations regarding both parties. We all have our differences, that's what makes us all individuals. We should be able to coexist and respect each other's opinions. I don't know. Maybe there was another underlying issue I missed in the articles, but that's what I got out of it. Just two butt-hurt individuals concerned with their own personal dilemmas.
Inevitably, people will have different views and opinions whether it involves the economy or personal interests. However, I find it difficult to understand how different political parties can keep people from being civil and friendly with one another. I personally felt that both of the articles were rather biased and cannot be applied to every liberal and conservative relationship. As stated in the article, people place stereotypes on the opposite political party. This could possibly be a reason for why it is so difficult for liberals and conservatives to agree. People need to understand that everyone is entitled to their own opinion regardless of whether or not it contradicts with their own.
I don't agree much with what Allen stated about liberals, being a moderately liberal myself, because even though some of my views are personal, they make the most sense to me. I believe that preserving the environment will be good for the earth and will create more jobs for many people. Also, there are good and bad factors about being pure liberals and pure conservatives. I dislike the fact that each party have their own description such as liberals being the good ones and conservatives are viewed as the bad ones. With such judgments, both parties will never get along. Both parties have their own broad view and will never make ends meet. But then again never say never.
When reading both articles it seemed absolutely ridiculous to me how extreme the disagreements came to be. I don't see any reason why liberals and conservatives can't get along. In my opinion it is absolutely possible for a liberal and conservative to have an intellectual conversation without any crazy yelling or fights. This all depends on the kind of person the liberal and conservative are. Our society can be a bit extreme when it comes to behavior but we can't stereotype and assume every liberal or every conservative is the same. As we have learned our country is so diverse with so many different opinions that even some liberals can have some conservative views and vice versa. I believe that we can all get along we just have to want to get along. April Cambero Period 2
Both articles are extreme. I wouldn't necessarily identify myself as a socialist, but I'm well into the left wing when it comes to politics. Both central arguments that were brought up in each respective article isn't mostly about the differing political views, but more of the personalities of the people involved. Not every liberal is gonna get butthurt if you don't support social reforms. Not every conservative thinks liberals are the sole issue of America. I think it's less likely that people can become friends with differing political views, but it certainly doesn't make it impossible. For example, Jacob Rodriguez is very conservative but he's still a good friend of mine and we get along just fine. There's always going to be a political division between these two ideologies, but a liberal and a conservative can still be friends with putting politics aside. So we all can just get along, just not politically.
In my experiences, I believe it's best not to debate on topics that involve political ideology when the other person is the complete opposite. I learned that it's almost impossible to change the opinions of those people at the opposite ideological scale. They view their opinions as clear as I do. In the arguments that I've got in with these people, I realized that it was going no where, it was only aggravating both of us, and was only damaging the quality of our friendship. However we have moved on and we both understand at the end of the day we mean no harm to each other, it is still evident that our opinions of each other have drastically changed. Overall, idealogical topics would best be talked about with people of similar interest or moderates, that way you can actually have a productive conversation and not a huge argument. And at the end of the day, its understandable why people have their differences in opinion because we all have different experiences and beliefs.
According to the articles I dont think liberals and conservatives will ever be able to get along. In the articles they go to the absolute extreme differences between the two groups, but I think that they should be able to get along to an extent. Obviously they definitely have there differences when it comes to certain topics, but i still think that they can get along. For instance, we have conservative democrats and liberal republicans this shows that they can still somewhat get along, even though those are pretty rare. So I still think that we have a chance to get along, but it just depends if we want to get along with each other. Drew Kaitz Period 2
I agree that it can be difficult to talk to someone if they have a totally opposite political ideology. However, political ideologies are just personal beliefs and it is normal for one’s personal beliefs to differ or conflict with another’s. I feel that the people in the articles are too radical and are too harsh towards the people of opposite political ideology and their views. According to the three ideology quizzes that I took yesterday, I am a moderate liberal, and I find it difficult to make such radical judgements if I were to put myself in their shoes. I think that any difference in beliefs can make it difficult to talk to someone if you don’t respect the person’s beliefs. There doesn’t need to be agreement with someone’s views, but there needs to be mutual respect.
After reading the two articles, it is evident that there are existing stereotypes within the two. So can a conservative and a liberal ever get along? In my opinion, it all depends on how passionate one is about their views. Some can get along better with the others, some can't. But I find it dumb to base one's relationships with others based on whether they're conservative or liberal.
When I took the ideology tests last night, I got moderate every single time, but I leaned slightly toward conservative. Which I am not to surprised about, considering that my parents are republicans. However, I was never exposed to hot political debate or discussion since my parents never really cared to much to educate me on the topics. As I read the two articles, I felt as if I identified and related to Allen's article. And when reading its opposition, I found it interesting because I kept thinking "that's not what a conservative thinks? Why is this liberal view so harsh" but in reality, that's what liberals must think. It's evidently very difficult for a civil, open minded discussion to take place between an extreme liberal and extreme conservative. Very often, one takes offense and this discussion ends in pointless, derogatory insults and any sense of educated and respecting discuss vanishes. But, I do think it's possible for liberals and conservatives to get all along perfectly fine should politics stay safely away from the discussion at place.
I believe that yes, both parties have separate views on politics but that does not mean that with a couple bad encounters with the opposing political group should be a reason for each to generalize the people of the other party to all be alike. I don't agree with either article because the only main topic that I saw between the two was that each one had a closed mind over the topic they were discussing and did not have the ability to just allow others to state their opinion without them arguing. In my personal conversations over such politics have never gotten out of hand so much due to the fact that both parties are able to voice their opinion without the worry of one or the other automatically being attacked and being told that they are wrong automatically. Though there may be small disputes, I believe that both arguments are not fully accurate based on their biased opinions as well to their own political views being the only right way to go.
After reading this article, I came to the conclusion that everyone has different views on politics, ideologies, etc. Of course sometimes when people are so lenient on their own perspectives, they tend to clash against those with different perspectives because it is difficult to consider another's opinion based on your own beliefs. I feel like the Conservatives and the Liberals think that they are total enemies of each other and each conversation always had to escalate into a heated debate according to the articles. In my opinion, both of the articles were basically roasting each other to the extreme where it may not be necessary. Yeah every person is different and we gotta respect the fact that people have different mindsets, you can't just expect them to understand what you're thinking, trying to persuade them to see from your perspective when they clearly have their own beliefs. I think that Conservatives and Liberals can get along, but it depends on how extreme their views are. It is possible to be civil to one another. Charikka De Leon P. 5
I believe anyone can have an educated debate if they know how to control their temper and are respectful of other peoples' views. I don't believe that either party should try and make the other feel as though their views are wrong and insist on changing their mind set. Liberals and conservatives can peacefully discuss how they feel about certain topics, however, people choose to speak condescendingly towards each other which is why the two parties have difficulty getting along. I personally have a liberal view on specific issues and a conservative view on others, so I was honestly slightly offended when the articles described conservatives as selfish and insensitive and liberals as "silly". I'm sure I am perfectly capable of having a conversation with someone who has completely opposite views than I do without disrespecting them, so it baffles me as to why many adults cannot. Amorette Lopez p.3
The acknowledgement of opinions, beliefs, and views of other people is necessary in order to truly understand their points of views. With that being said we cant let our own biased opinions hinder the process of understanding others.
Both of these articles were very interesting to read. Being the liberal I am, it was slightly irritating to read the second article. I appreciated how the first author included her view points and her neighbor’s viewpoints to show their differences without truly bashing the husband. She complimented his family and said that they were great people, still leaving a positive aspect of her perspective. What I didn’t really like was how the second article seemed to be downsizing the liberal party as a majority. Yes, they did mention how they didn’t hate their liberal family, but they said all liberals are unapproachable. I feel like this is an exaggeration because based off of what we learned in class today, some liberals can have conservative outlooks on some social or economic issues. I truly believe that the day liberals and conservatives get along will be a miracle, but one can hope.
After reading both articles, I couldn't help but to laugh a little only because I don't understand how people can get so upset just cause they do not believe in what they believe in. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and thoughts. Although, both articles made it clear they could not stand the other political party. I consider myself more democratic then republican and my best friend that I grew up with considers herself more republican. I guess I just don't see how a political debate can end friendships and create problems/fights. In long run, any fight or issue will eventually get solved when it is time to vote but that won't change people's opinions on the topic. Kortnee Nelson P.5
The way they act is described in one word: childish. They generalize the people of one party and say they are all alike. Nothing we can do about it. People will change, hopefully.
I hate that there’s a type of dogma that follows both conservative and liberal beliefs. If you’re conservative you don’t care for the welfare of others and if you’re liberal you’re sucking off of the government’s teat. Neither of those stigmas represents any of the beliefs that each party has. As we talked about today, our views and stances of what being a Republican and being a Democrat means has gotten so far away from what the original intent of each party was. The reason there is such a divide between parties and mindsets is because we make it that way. Both arguments are extreme but I have seen people act that way, because now these ideologies have become so personal to each and every one of us. When things become more personal people tend to act more extreme because now it doesn’t feel like you’re attacking the way they see how the government should work but rather their own personal set of moral beliefs. Like people have said, being passionate about these things is an amazing thing, I for one find myself feeling strongly in my beliefs, but when you draw a line saying conservatives and liberals cannot interact civilly is where there a misconception. You restrict yourself from hearing other people’s opinions and when there’s name calling involved both ideals are disrespected. In the end some people may not be able to just get along because to many it’s something bigger than just political ideologies but a way they live their life and a way they set their morals. So I don’t think it’s the fact of just getting along but rather accepting people’s opinions and not discrediting them for not being the same as yours.
The two articles display a possible social awkwardness between individuals due to their beliefs and opinions. I have fortunately never been in a situation where someone's views have made it an obstacle to have a conversation or a relationship with. However, I am not shocked that these opposing views due to conservative or liberal standards are the elephants in the room. Politics represent the day to day situations and problems in society. Every person has their own opinion based on their own perception of the world. So I understand that some people may be against the government health insurance because it will affect the other people in the country who can afford it but as a positive it will allow every single perosn in the country have a safety net when it comes to health. Each person has their own reason due to the fact that each person has had their own journey. Because each person has their own path there will never be a 100% agreement in any circumstance may it be policies socially or economically. But the variety of opinions is what makes our country as it is today. For our country allows every voice to be heard but it is society's, unfortunately, job whether or not to be respectful or hateful of these voices. Such as a conservative not wanting Barak Obama to be President and be claimed racist or how a liberal wants social welfare for all individuals which may increase taxes and put our government in debt.
I find it pretty extreme or unfair to not like someone or stop talking to someone because their opinions do not mirror mine or someone's personally. In the end, we are all citizens who deeply care for our country due to our strong attitudes in politics may it be as a liberal or a conservative.
Although I have never experienced a situation like that mentioned in the two articles, I do understand how opposing views and different political parties can ruin people’s relationships. Ever since our country was founded, people have had different opinions. It is natural to disagree, and these disagreements have caused wars, such as the American Civil War due to disagreement between states, but they are also crucial to the building of this country, such as establishing a two-house legislature that pleases both large and small states while preventing any one party from becoming too oppressive of the other. While I agree with some points mentioned in both articles, both authors have extremist views and overgeneralize that members of the opposing party are all the same, which is not true. The liberal Wagman states that her opinions are “no-brainers to [her], and it kills [her] that [her] neighbor disagrees”, but also stated earlier in the article that her mother “disagreed with their politics and they with hers, but she believed people, no matter how they vote, are basically all the same” showing how although each individual has his or her own opinions, they can still get along. The conservative Allen states that she “love[s] [her] liberal family, friends and academic colleagues, but [tries] to stick to safe conversation topics such as literature, music, food and gossip” as a way to avoid unnecessary fights. Even though it may be easier to befriend those with similar beliefs, it is also perfectly fine to disagree with each other because it points out flaws in both arguments that the person may not have realized before. Both of the situations presented in the article are rare occasions that occurred when talking to extremists of the other party. However, most Americans are more moderate and less consistent with their views. This makes it easier for them to see issues from the other side’s point of view. I am not denying that talking to someone from the opposite end of the political ideological spectrum can be difficult, but I know it is possible even though it can take a little more patience at first.
In all honesty, both of the articles were making either the liberals or the conservatives look like judgmental jerks. There were too many generalizations and stereotypes in both articles. This is America. It's a melting pot of different races, culters, and ideas Everyone's beliefs are not the same. No matter where yo go on this planet that we call Earth, you are going to find a person with different views than. But just because may or may not agree with someone's views or ideas on a topic doesn't mean you generalize them or disrespect them. We all know that liberals rather have equality over liberty and conservatives will rather have liberties over equality. Both of these group are going to clash and argue on who's right or wrong. But the question is: Is there a right or a wrong? You can have many rights and wrongs based on facts and opinions, but does it matter who's right or wrong?
Also, it kind of stupid how the authors were sorta generalizing the opposing group. They didn't even mention moderates. Moderates matter too and they do exist. In conclusion, some people see the world in black and white, others black, white, and gray. Respect there views and get on with your life and quit making a big deal out it. Geez. Some people like chcocolate some people like vanilla. Get over it and quit blowing things out of proportion.
(BTW: If your losing friends because of one disagreement, then that was a waste of time and a waste of a friendship)
As a moderate myself, I was really startled by these articles because of how vividly they both portray a hate towards the opposing side. For those who are extremists on both spectrum, I feel as if they’re too set in their beliefs to be able to be open-minded and understanding towards the opposing side, which fuels the notion that we all “can’t just get along”. To be open-minded is to be willing to have open ears towards beliefs that may not be parallel with your beliefs. You can be open-minded, yet maintain your original beliefs. I feel like most extremists fail to see this, and instead think that one is open-minded if and only if they adopt a portion, or all, of the new beliefs they are presented with—almost as if a conversion in belief needs to occur in order for someone to be classified as “open-minded”.
In regards to the content within the articles, I can see where both sides are coming from, but I feel like the disdain from both sides is fueled by hasty generalizations. For example, in Allen’s article, he states that liberals classify those who oppose same-sex marriage as a homophobe. While some liberals may do so, it does not apply to all, but it has become a popular notion due to hasty generalization that all liberals think like that, which further fuels the divide between the two wings.
Political views shouldn't ruin any relationship—it's not that serious... there's more to a person than his/her political views.
I think both of the articles’ arguments are biased and exaggerated a little too much. All in all, they’re bitter towards one another just because the other side doesn’t believe in their ideology. It’s kind of like saying “Playstation is better than any other gaming console”, and as a result of that opinion you are going to have a massive debate with butthurt nerds arguing which gaming console is better. To me, Republicans and Democrats are really no different; they argue about equality or liberty, gay marriage or terrorism, as if one side needs to win rather than coming to an agreement and meeting somewhere in the middle. I mean, yeah sure, there could be a few ideas or policies from one side that are possibly better than the other in some cases, but most can come to a compromise where ideas from both sides can form a concession where each side is at content. I believe that if people were more receptive to things that are new or different from what they are normally used to, it can open up to a vast array of new ideas that can help progress the country, maybe even the world, into a better position.
In the aspect of can Liberals and Conservatives ever truly get along, I believe anything is possible. However these two articles show the extremes of each side and the arguments/situations that occur when Liberals and Conservatives get together. In the end I believe it wouldn't be hard to get along with Populists or Libertarians but it would be these extreme ends such as the people in these articles who are difficult to persuade and allow compromise. This is coming from my Libertarian standpoint looking at these extremists fight their fight. I just would rather focus my time on other things not so ethically reliant.
The answer to the question posed about whether or not a liberal can talk to a conservative and vice versa is one that depends on who you ask. With moderates, I believe they can have discussions and debates. However, with true conservatives and liberals, I do not think discussion is possible. It all comes down to who we are as a nation and a people. Americans have ALWAYS been extremely stubborn, and when someone challenges our beliefs, we will fight tooth and nail to defend them. For example, there is nothing that anyone on this planet could say that would convince me that abortion is morally correct. When people are passionate about something, they refuse to look at the other side's viewpoint, as seen in the two articles. Unless there is a dramatic shift in American ideology, I don't think liberals and conservatives will ever be able to "talk" with any hope of achieving anything.
We can all get along. On a basic human level. We do it everyday in school; we go about our business without clash or conflict. I hold normal conversations with liberals without drifting into an argument with them. It’s not like the only things we talk about is our views. Our political/social/economical/etc views don’t have to align but we can agree on other things.
Our position or placement on the political ideological spectrum is not the only thing that defines us. There is more to us than our political stance. We shouldn’t let our political views isolate us from other people.
Well, on this article I would have to whole-wholeheartedly with Charlotte Allen's views on how you cannot communicate with liberals. This is for many reasons: 1) You think this way 2) You were raised to think this way 3) you learned it at school. Now this might go vice versa towards conservatism, but in the article Charlotte make a clear point of how liberals take political issues too personal. Just look at this quote from Wagman's post, "He said I needed to get off my butt and take care of myself. I suggested he sign his kids up to die in Iran.." How very personal and inflammatory language. Charlotte also makes a point to say that liberals, once they found out you do not side with them, want to remove all remnants of you from their lives, " But my feelings about them are changed." Finally, its clear that when reading over both articles, Charlotte has the more sophisticated approach to regaling his story with not heated phrases. On the other hand, Wagman makes sure her opinion is voiced many times over in her article without, in my opinion, any sense of rationality.
After reading both articles I was in just utter disbelief. I don't agree with either article. Like many others are stating both articles are completely biased thick skulled individuals that can't have a calm discussion with conservatives/liberals because they are "right". Everyone has their different view points in politics. I believe that liberals and conservatives could get along if no one was so close minded and didn't start yelling and throwing insults at one another after disagreeing over something. -Cristina Cabrera P.3
Wow. Reading both of these articles actually sort of annoyed me. The amount of over generalization of each party in each simply gets on my nerves in that, you cannot judge a person's character or how approachable they may be simply on their political ideology. Both articles seem to be attempting to defend very radical situations but also only show a few personal anecdotes by the authors. As a liberal myself, it's obviously frustrating to read the conservative's viewpoint where they imply that all liberals are terrible people that cannot be trusted or approached ever. Both of these articles, in their own ways, frustrated me to no end.
I do believe that everyone, as humans, are entitled to their own opinion. And I think that the largest reason that liberals and conservatives don't get along is because people of the radical sides tend to start to be a little more narrow-minded (Even I'm making generalizations, though I am calling both sides of radicals narrow-minded, not just one) and don't bother to be open to hearing another perspective. We all get mad when someone else doesn't believe the same thing we do. And it's frustrating, it is! But it shouldn't be something to drive a wedge through friendships or relationships. If people kept an open-mind, no matter how liberal, conservative, or even moderate one is, there should be no problems getting along, especially if both sides realize they may never get to a definite resolution. The point is that you must see someone else's perspective in order to fully understand your own opinion.
I agree with Tiffany wholeheartedly about the fact that political views should not ruin any sort of relationship. There is absolutely so much more to a person than simply their political ideology. It is absolutely possible for liberals and conservatives to be cordial with one another and civilly debate between one another, it is just a matter of how open of a mind people what allow themselves.
(PS Sorry this is so much later than I when I usually blog. We had a drama show tonight and everything was pushed aside for that moment!)
I'll identify as a strong liberal, so I have to agree with Wagman. I'll acknowledge that conservatives can have some decent points at times, but strong conservatives rarely take liberals seriously. Allen said that "We conservatives think liberals are silly; they think we're evil"; we liberals don't necessarily see conservatives in that way, that's a generalized and, quite frankly, rude accusation. We see their views as detrimental to our society, our equality, and inevitably, our freedom. That doesn't make them monsters, I believe it just makes them either ignorant or narrow-minded, maybe even both. The term narrow-minded can ambiguously be applied to our side as well, but the fact that conservatives don't even take our opinion into account and see our reactions to their views as "drawing blood from the paper-thin epidermis of wounded liberals" (that was very rude, by the way) just proves to show that they have this entitlement to being the only one right. No, we're never going to get along, that's just that. They just need to open their eyes and see they're prioritizing the wrong things. Sometimes we liberals can get "carried away" with personal feelings, but we tie them into our views by valuing equality among Americans before equality with the rest of the world. Until conservatives can start to be willing to at least consider a new perspective, I'll have to side with Wagman on this one. The government needs to be involved to help out the less fortunate; supporting the elites and "Americanizing" other countries before dealing with our problems is counterproductive to true equality, political and economic.
I just got home, and am currently tired and in pain, so I will try my best to answer coherently. I read both articles and had things I both agreed and disagreed with on both articles. One thing that I didn't really like about the articles is that they both played themselves as victims simply because they had opinions. I honestly believe that it's not a hard concept to grasp; there is always gonna be someone who disagrees and/or has a different opinion, and you should never be ashamed that your's is also different from theirs. Just because someone sees something differently than me doesn't mean I need to ruin the poker night or the annual family get together. I'm finding out more and more that I am very liberal and have always been very liberal, but I look back on the friends I've had and remember that they weren't always liberal or even all that democratic. So when both articles talked about ending good friendships over political opinions, I got a little more hot and bothered. Who measures friendships in political standings!?!? That sounds crazy to me in my personal opinion. Then the final thing that bothered me is that both articles implied that a liberal talking to a conservative and a conservative talking to a liberal is like the the only thing harder than pulling apart a flat, 1x1, Lego piece. That sounds incredibly childish and stubborn. Just because we have different opinions does not mean that we can't talk like civilized people, and if you think otherwise, then you're just not wanting to try! I'm just...I'm done. I'm out. Please tell me when grown a** adults learn how to speak like grown a** adults. -Cadie Harper Per.3
After reading both of the articles I don't really find myself completely agreeing with either one of them. I think a strong conservative and a strong liberal are capable of having a civil conversation with each other as long as they respect either other. I can admit, with many of the things I feel strongly about, it's hard to stay calm at times. After talking about political ideologies in class and taking the quizzes, I've found that I am more of a libertarian, siding with liberal views on social issues and conservative views on economic issues. That being said, while it may be hard to talk to them about certain things again, I don't think I would lose respect for that person, because everyone has their own opinions, and not all conservatives or liberals are the same. I might see it this way because of the fact that I am more mixed in my opinions, but either way, politics shouldn't ruin any relationship.
I completely disagree with both articles. I truly believe Liberals and Conservatives can get along. I've had an idea about my political ideology for a while. In the summer of 2014, I was able to take an American Politics course at Chaffey College. This was all thanks to RCHS and their amazing staff. I have been a Roman Catholic for 17 years. I have completed Communion and Confirmation. I tend to lean towards the Liberal side. According to isidewith.org I am a moderate Left-Wing Authoritarian, someone who tends to stand up for those that are oppressed. This is accurate because I am the son of Salvadoreño refugees that witnessed a corrupt national government and a civil war that left 500,000 dead. Feel free to criticize me. I do not mind. Criticism is necessary and I will not get offended at all.
The authors of both articles were very biased in my opinion. Both authors do not appreciate the liberties we have in America. We can express the First Amendment without having to worry about a gun to our heads. We can have civil arguments. This is beyond politics. Humans are complex and we will have differences no matter what. For my fellow Catholics, the beatification of martyred Archbishop Óscar Romero (El Salvador) has been completed. Pope Francis wants this man to become a saint. Unfortunately Óscar Romero was assassinated by a sniper while delivering a mass at a cancer hospital in 1980. The death of this man sparked the 12-year Salvadoreño civil war. Romero defended the poor and criticized the corruption that existed in El Salvador. My mother was able to attend one of Archbishop Romero's masses in 1979 before being held hostage for 3 months in San Salvador. President Obama and Pope Francis have both visited Romero's tomb and have described Romero as an inspiration for all the Americas. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/beatification-of-oscar-romero-paves-way-for-martyred-archbishop-to-become-saint-10272569.html
My best friend is Conservative and a Republican. I argue with him all the time but we don't yell at each other. Maybe that's because my best friend is 29, married to a teacher, and is a father of 2 boys. My best friend has known my older brothers and I for 20+ years. We have to be blunt, some Americans get butthurt very easily. In my opinion words can be meaningless and forgettable. Actions is what we should worry about. Words should bounce off every human being. This is how I feel because my parents have instilled the "Survival of the Fittest" mentality into my brain. To summarize, liberals and conservatives need to stop labeling one another. We need to be able to reach compromises.
Rage Against the Machine, a very controversial American rock band is another reason why I tend to be leftist. Zack De La Rocha, Tom Morello, Tim Commerford, and Brad Wilks all taught me the definitions of assimilation, brutality, conformity, complacency, hypocrisy, ignorance, and submission. Soundgarden and Audioslave are great bands you guys should check out too!
Assuming these articles are reliable, this is actually a significant issue. America needs unity and cooperation in order to thrive as a country. Instead of spending time and resources fighting amongst ourselves, we could be utilizing those resources to fix the actual problems at hand. As a country, we constantly attempt to resolve many problems and these attempts could be a lot more successful with a more unified view. Justin Owusu Period 2
I do agree that it is difficult for extreme liberals and extreme conservatives to get along just because it's very difficult to try and open your mind up to opinions that you just fundamentally don't agree with. I believe that both authors did a perfect job at demonstrating that this notion is not a one party thing(even thought they seems to think so). i believe that it is possible for liberals and conservatives to get along and have discussions, it just depends on the people having those discussions. As humans we all have a set of beliefs that we believe are correct based on our experience, which is a large part of why people with vastly different ideologies cannot get along, but not the whole reason. People (SOME PEOPLE) have become increasingly sensitive to issues and tend to make issues quite personal, which makes it very difficult to attempt to have a good discussion. I think as a nation and society we need to work to move away from this type of thinking in order to be able to have these great discussions, because even in class I feel like some people get offended easily and it makes me feel like we can't have these types of discussions, when as long as we are not trying to be offensive, should be something that is allowed to happen. -Cambria Visovsky Estrada
Honestly, WHO CARES. It seems ridiculous that both of these authors have such a change of opinion of their friends simply because of their political views. How pitiful is it that two grown adults can't view each other as friends anymore simply because of which category they fall into politically. "These things are no-brainers to me, and it kills me that my neighbor disagrees" Welcome to the U.s., where everyone can have a different opinion. To these authors, it seems that the other person's humor, talents, etc. no longer matters since their political beliefs differ. Both of these articles commit an injustice by painting a picture that tells people that liberals and conservatives are sworn adversaries and can't even stand the sight of each other. While this is true in some cases, it's definitely not true in most. There's nothing wrong with having a minor debate, but going all out and hating someone for their political stance seems utterly childish. You know what, even minor debates are imbecilic. Leave the debating to the politicians. Because when it comes to your opinion, WHO CARES. Save your opinion for when it truly matters, voting. Wasting your breath telling the other person why you're right and they're wrong is pretty dumb. Don't waste your breath arguing with people who likely will never agree with you. Most of us highschoolers and most people in America show more composure than these adults do. We can still be friends with one-another regardless of our views, which is why it's so funny to read that these adults can't do the same. The way these authors present their scenarios is so unrealistic that it's a little comedic. They talk about the difficulty of speaking to one another, when in reality, it's so simple to speak to someone with opposite views without sparking a political argument. You know what, i'm going to ignore Jacob Rodriguez tomorrow because i can't stand his existence. I can't even look at him because he doesn't agree with me politically. We are now enemies.
This might be irrelevant but I love music. These lyrics from "Tell Me Why' by P.O.D. are very powerful. All my fellow classmates should listen to this beautiful song.
A day with no glory A heart filled with fear Still repeating his-story to make ourselves clear A voice is unheard when it shouts from the hills Your king in his castle never died on these fields There's blood on you hands A smile on your face A wicked intention when there's money to be made A room with no windows and a heart that can't feel Shame with no convictions and a view to a kill.
Tell me why? Why must we fight? And why must we kill in the name of what we think is right? No more! no war! Cause how do you know?
The hate in your eyes The lies on your tongue A hand that kills the innocent So quick to do wrong Your belly is full while we fight for what remains The rich getting richer while the poor become slaves
We kill our own brothers The truth is never told If victory is freedom then the truth is untold Surrender your soul just like everyone else If love is my religion, don't speak for myself
I do believe that there is right way for these two differing parties to actually discuss and it all mainly just comes down to the ability to listen and remain respectful. Republicans and Democrats don't have to agree on certain issues, but if being discussed in an argument then I think it is important to try to understand the opposing point of view as best they can so that they just don't start aimlessly fighting and yelling which honestly goes no where. I do believe that there are also some sort of stigmas surrounding each party which taint our views on them and make us think that every person in that specific party follows a certain set of rules which might not specifically be true. I found this out to be true as I always thought of myself most likely a Republican, but it turns out that my liberal view on the economy balances out my conservative social views, thus making me a populist, which I believe accurately describes me pretty well.
The articles display that both sides of the spectrum are set in their views and cannot tolerate their counterparts oppositions as worded by the authors. It was relatively clear that both over time would have disdain for opposing views and that if noticed would immediately establish contempt upon that individual. Personally I believe that a debate of views can be equitable and not the utter horror as described. Since I reflect more upon the liberal side I sympathize with confusion and frustration of when it comes to social or economic views. This being said I wondered about how a conservative can have a mindset that can seem drastically different from mine. Understandably most people are graced with their beliefs at a young age from family, friends, culture, religion. Every person has a different environment in which they develop. From financial wealth to financial assistance, privilege or discrimination, religious or irreverent. These factors being taken into account should not lead to hatred. Yet establish an understanding as of why and a respect of their being. It should not justify having broken friendships or overall disrespect That behavior displays pettiness and foolishness which is intolerable at any account.
Jacob Rodriguez, period 3 These articles reminded me of a Pew Research survey studying the increasing political polarization in America. It detailed how the country and people are no longer as moderate as they used to be; more and more are people sliding to either side of the spectrum in almost equal numbers. It also suggested that these people are now more openly hostile to people with opposing political ideology. I see examples of this in the articles; and I do think it is difficult for conservatives and liberals to have substantive debates because they see fundamentally different worlds. Debates are hardly ever intellectual anymore; for this reason I can appreciate legitimate arguments from intelligent people with opposing views to mine. Many of them are my good friends; Jake Hovan, Heath Isley, Kingston Murray and a few others. But, because of the large political divides in this country and their growing intersections, I believe we're heading towards a country that is so split by politics that it will see serious infighting of a destructive nature. The only ones who can save us are those ignorant of political ideology.
liberals and conservatives can hash it out all day but in the end different views dont necessarily mean bad views. just because right wingers discourage (for ex) syrian immigration doesnt mean they are selfish or unforgiving. liberals want higher minimum wages shouldnt be assumed to be lazy or greedy either. Also i dont believe in Allen's argument that conservatives cant talk to liberals, "period". yes both ideologies consist of extremely opposing views but with tolerance of others' feelings and opinions, and sufficient intellect on the political issue being discussed, not conservatives and liberals but everyone who can speak and formulate opinions has it in themselves to peacefully debate out of respect for individual views.
I believe that liberals and conservatives can get along, yes there is going to be differences in the way we think because our beliefs but a liberal might be a conservative in one or two aspects and that, for me is one of the reasons why I believe liberals and conservatives can get along. We tend to go over ourselves because we think our beliefs are always the right ones, but in reality we never know, personally I don´t always agree with everything that my friend say in many social or economical issues but as long as I respect them and they respect me we get along pretty well.
Both articles make strong cases of the typical disagreements that may be seen in the eyes of both parties. However after reading each case, I can't say I would agree with why one side has a stronger stand over the other. Like others have mentioned before, the cases do appear to come out in a biased fashion. Both articles kind of trash the opposing political view for their differences and places them on a negative pedestal. I think it is important not to contrast each other based on their political parties. Instead, it is essential to find common ground among varying ideas in order to be able to get along. This is why it may seem easier for moderates of both parties to be able to hold conversation because neither is extremely dedicated to their view. They can appeal in some fashion to the opinions of the opposing party, and fortunately that can offer compromise in this country. Dan Tablac P.3
Honestly, I'm kind of confused as to the importance of this issue? I mean, who really cares that "conservatives can't talk to liberals" or vice versa? Is this really that big of an issue?
For one, the tone of the voice and the treatment of her liberal friend in the conservative perspective and the scene described between the liberal and her neighbor in the liberal perspective indicates that these people do not truly care about which party is better; if they did, they would have a political debate with facts and figures and reliable sources. These people were arguing about their pride. That's why the liberal's argument escalated to a screaming match, and that's why the conservative didn't make up with her friend properly for 6 years: their pride in what they believe in was hurt. A friend is supposed to agree with you no matter what, right? My opinion is right, and you should agree with me. (sarcasm) If they really wanted change in favor of their political party/stance, they would petition, vote, protest, etc. for what they believe in and not involve themselves with petty arguments such as the "liberal vs. conservative" one with their freaking neighbor.
Obviously though, if someone holds views that disrespects your existence, as in if someone tells me they believe that all Muslims should be banned from immigrating to the United States, then yes, there would be some cause for legitimate argument. But the liberal vs. conservative crap? It's reductive and petty, and merely a platform for people with superiority complexes to show off their psuedo-political prowess. Kind of like a, "I know politics too! I'm relevant! Let me vaguely recite the most basic arguments of my party to [Bystander #3], and if they disagree, I'll yell! That'll surely make me seem like I'm knowledgeable."
And besides, though this is just my personal opinion, it doesn't really matter. Who cares if you vote liberal or conservative? Obviously there will be "cosmetic" changes to the country (think the difference between Trump's policies and Sanders's policies), but in the end, American economy is still a capitalistic imperialistic system. Americans will still oppress workers in the Global South, will still invade countries for profit in the name of "democracy," will still devour the lives and souls of the workers of the world to feed its maws. It doesn't matter if there's a Democratic or Republican president; these aspects are the lifeblood of America. They won't change. There's no point in arguing petty debates of "liberal vs. conservative." We need to focus on real issues.
One unique debate is able to capture the essence of American history: Liberal vs. Conservative. After the American constitution was drafted, Liberal Federalists argued for its ratification while Conservative Anti-Federalists argued for a Bill of Rights (they won). Since then, the presidents have had to reconcile their views with the necessities of statecraft. After all, even Jefferson questioned the constitutionality of his own Louisiana purchase. But, blood runs deep and so does animosity. The Liberal vs. Conservative debate persists to today and people continue to barricade their sides with ever-growing walls. Compromises are becoming harder and harder to make due to shared tension as well as a mutual disdain of the mindset of the other side.
Liberals have a tendency to view their conservative counterparts as racist, homophobic, sexist, anti-poor, gun-toting fascists. After all, conservatives have a bit of a negative history in the United States. They are seen as responsible for slavery, Native American conflicts, the KKK, Prohibition, WWII, gender-discrimination, and are now attempting to deny homosexuals the right to marry. However, what liberals do not see is the purpose of conservatism. Conservatives ensure that society does not go too far and that those who are successful are well-rewarded. Naturally, if a man wished to marry his vacuum-cleaner, the conservatives would be right there to stop him. Conservatism provides the balance needed for society to function.
On the other perspective, conservatives often view their liberal counterparts as crackheads, bleeding hearts, communists, socialist, welfare addicts. Yet, they too serve a purpose. Their progressive ideas, while not always correct in practice, drive society forward and prevent conservatives from halting the wheels of change. Of course, a balance must be struck between the two for any true change to occur. If liberals forgive the past and conservatives keep an open mind, then perhaps society will finally be able to better itself.
Seriously? I think both of these authors sound ridiculous. Maybe its because after the four political ideology quizzes I took last night, I came out mostly moderate so both extremes are hard for me to side with. I just do not see what the big deal is. Why not agree to disagree and move on with your lives? If politics that you aren't even directly involved in can tear friendships apart, you are wrong. I don't care which side it is. If you're a liberal that shouts at your Republican neighbors, you're wrong. If you're a Republican that patronizes your Democratic friend, you're wrong too. I just don't think politics should ever be taken THIS seriously.
the ideas of both articles really shocked me. i don't believe that republicans or democrats will ever truly get along, because their ideas are so polar opposite, but what they don't seem to realize is that their opinions aren't that different. they are like two sides of the same coin, yes, they may not agree but they should at least realize that everyone believes in that they think is right, whether it is pro life or pro choice, they will always have positive outcomes, be it for the infant, or the mother, they all are going for the same goal: the betterment of this country and its people.
I don't believe politics should be taken seriously at all in casual conversations, and I think it's ridiculous that it can even go so far as to ruin friendships. If I found out one of my friends had opposing political to mine I wouldn't really care or try to argue with them about it, and I would hope they'd do the same. But, because I can't be sure how someone would react to my political views I try to avoid conversations about politics as much as I can because i'm afraid that it will lead to arguing and possibly ruining relationships. I just don't think that someone's political views should affect your personal view of them. "I don't want to be friends with someone who is a member of the tea party or is a Newt Gingrich Republican." Well, I don't want to be friends with someone who chooses their friends based on political views.
I do see the reasons to why liberals can't talk to conservatives and vice versa. Especially in this generation, we as a people are very hard headed. If one doesn't believe in another's beliefs, it does result in beamed calling, like the one article said. I am a more conservative person, so I do believe in a lot of the things people would call rude and unfair to the people. The only thing that is my main ideology is no matter what your family income is when you are born, we, the United States, have given you all of the tools needed to become wealthy. If one works as hard as they can they will get through life without struggling. Although that is rational and makes sense to me, it might not to others, but it doesn't mean I'm just going to blow off people with their opinions. But that is me personally. Not many people are open minded to be able to hear someone say they are wrong, but that isn't just for politics, it's for everything. If someone would say the Dallas Cowboys suck, I would not listen, that is just how our generation and society is. We need to be more optimistic before people can discuss politics without calling names, fights, and rants only about ignorance.
After what was said/seen in class today, it should come to nobody’s surprise that I am in favor of the conservative point of view, being a conservative myself. I agree with the points Allen makes; mostly that liberals make politics personal to make their point and if you don’t agree with them, not only are you against their policy preference, but you are personally against whatever “group” they were discussing and the people it concerns. Also, it’s notable that another irksome trait of liberals that Allen mentions is the name-calling they use in an effort to justify their arguments. Liberals attempt to discredit the conservative as being a “bad” person with “bad” policy views, instead of actually looking at policy implications. However, I don’t agree with Allen commenting on how Liberal’s view of politics doesn’t concern religion whatsoever. That is purely by choice and it is a known fact that more liberals are atheists and that shouldn’t be something to hold against them. Focusing first on how things are made personal in politics, looking at Wagman’s article, she states the conservative family’s views would change if they were knocked around by life be it with cancer, loss of a job, or a son dying fighting in a war. So if the matter became personal, then they would become liberals. But isn’t the reverse also true? Were she mugged, might she become more “crime and punishment” oriented? If a family member was the victim of a terrorist attack, might she want to “take the fight to terrorists?” The next point, also seen in Wagman’s article, is Wagman openly calls conservative’s views the equivalent to “thoughtlessness, intolerance, and narcissism.” So, because I don’t agree with her views on the economy all of the sudden I’m thoughtless and only interested in myself? There is no room for rational debate on policy implications. Instead, my motivations are (wrongly) attacked. The final thing, and perhaps the most important summary of the political divide, is how true Allen’s opening statement is: “They think conservatives are evil, while we think they’re silly.” In the conservative response, Allen states her beliefs and how they differ but also states her openness to other views. In the liberal response, Wagman goes from being best friends with her neighbors to hating them and not having respect for them because they don’t agree with her views. It is increasingly difficult for liberals and conservatives to have meaningful dialog, because their world views are increasingly different.
ReplyDeleteRyan Falk
Per.5
This is beautiful. Very well said.
DeleteSarah Gillen
Hi Ryan
DeleteFirst let me say that I respect the views you have as an individual, and it is your right as a human being to believe such opinions. I admire your passion and dedication, as you are the first one to respond :)
When it comes to the article, I do not believe it is fair to say that "It is increasingly difficult for liberals and conservatives to have meaningful dialog, because their world views are increasingly different." I think it is important to notice that not all liberals are the same, just as not all conservatives are the same. We all as human beings feel emotion and passion when it comes to a topic we believe strongly on. I agree with you when you say that it is hard to carry on a conversation with someone who only believes he or she is right. That's why finding the balance between discussion and acceptance is key. We must accept views of others based upon the given fact that they are human. We should not judge others because of the way they respond to certain questions or topics of discussion. We all need to just take a chill pill and remember that we are not the same person. I can't imagine a life without different perspectives. Do you know how boring that would be? I don't think it is right to name call either. Instead of ridiculing others based upon their different beliefs, praise their individuality.
I just wanted to assure you that not all people will react the same way as you are used to. Hopefully I didn't offend you in any way. I apologize if I did. If you want to continue this discussion, I am more than happy to do so.
Have a great night :)
Isaiah Tadros
I will be surprised if this response doesn't make it on to Cavanaugh's email with great responses.
Delete-Nevada Chovan P.5
Hi Ryan
DeleteI hope you dont feel as if im about to attack you or anything but i am just a little confused at a certain part of your comment.
When talking about how personal issues and politics intertwine you called out you stated "...looking at Wagman’s article, she states the conservative family’s views would change if they were knocked around by life be it with cancer, loss of a job, or a son dying fighting in a war. So if the matter became personal, then they would become liberals."
then you went to ask the same questions directed toward Wagman "But isn’t the reverse also true? Were she mugged, might she become more “crime and punishment” oriented? If a family member was the victim of a terrorist attack, might she want to “take the fight to terrorists?” it sounds very contradictory for you to call out someone about making things personal/putting the person in the other side's perspective then do the exact same thing. If anything here seems unclear dont be afraid to reply wanting to talk in person. Thank you for your consideration
Anais Moore period 2
To Isaiah,
DeleteI was not offended at all :). I agree with what you are saying how opinion can differ and how different opinions are necessary in politics. I guess a better way to phrase what I was trying to say is it is hard for extreme left winged and right winged people to communicate. I certainly believe in people's right to different opinions and I think we are in perfect agreement.
Ryan Falk P.5
To Anais,
DeleteI see your point, and I didn't mean to be hypocritical when I wrote that. I could have worded this much more clearly. The point I was trying to make is that of course direct personal involvement can alter a person's view on policies. This can work in either direction. However, conservatives don't want feelings to dictate how a policy develops. There is a reason why some liberals are called "Bleeding-Heart Liberals" and it is because they bring too much emotion into arguments over policies that should be based off more of rational thought than emotion. Now I don't want to make conservatives sound heartless, we know personal experience and emotion are huge determiners in political ideology. We just don't want pure emotional policies. Thank you for catching this for me :).
Ryan Falk P.5
Hi Ryan!
DeleteI had an urge to comment because A) your argument has valid points and I don't discredit it, and B) I do want to address the liberal's perspective a bit, as I tend to side with the liberals a little more.
To be honest, I think the conservative article did a better job reaching out to actual political points as opposed to the liberal article that was, in my opinion, mostly complaining. That said, it gives liberals an overly emotional sense of ideology, but that's not always the case. These are extreme representations of each party, but I believe Wagman may have done a bad job representing a lot of liberals. As Isaiah said, we're not all the same, as are conservatives. But keep in mind that personal feelings may be justified. According to the American Conservative Union, "To have an effective policy for the rest of the world, it is essential to first protect the homeland base with effective missile defenses and counter-terrorism efforts". So to set basics, protect our country with military might so we can protect our interests and perhaps those being oppressed by a power we deem to be a threat to us. But then it begs the question, is everyone being protected the right way? Are the poor, the dependent, and the financially incapable that much better off than without another missile to protect us? I get it, having the firepower IS essential to "protecting" us from direct harm and tyranny; but what if it's hard to make a living and/or sustain a family? Are they really protected and provided for, or are only the (dare I say it) elites getting the benefit? Their funds aren't going anywhere, but when welfare gets cut then how can these less fortunate families get back on their feet? There are obligations to meet here before meeting those of other places; I'm not saying we should isolate ourselves again, but there needs to be some reform to ensure the disparity gap isn't so large that it divides the people more so than they already are. You have very valid points, but I think there are other things to consider as to why liberals may be personal, why they are so against conservatives: they love this country too, so we have a duty to our people to protect and provide.
To Vu,
DeleteRead the top 2 comments, I already covered what you are saying :)
Ryan Falk P.5
I don’t think Democrats and Republicans will ever get along.
ReplyDeleteAt least not those who lean heavily towards one side. The problem stems from the fact that both sides think they’re right, and that belief is one I disagree with. To me, your view on politics is entirely based on your opinion, your background, and your world view. It’s why I don’t like having debates, because all it comes down to is yelling, and at the end, no one changes their opinion. They just simply like the person they went up against a little less. There is no right answer to what you should believe in. If one side was so obviously right, then we’d have solved this issue years ago.
And with that comes stereotyping. Whenever I listen to people from both sides argue, it quickly devolves into personal attacks, and there’s less focus on the issues, and more about what kind of person you must be if you believe a certain thing. Is every Republican you meet some racist, gun-toting hillbilly? No. Is every Democrat a socialist, anti-American idiot? No. But we have a tendency to stereotype people, see them as extremists because they’re easier to hate, and easier to not pay attention to.
Those in the far-left and in the far-right will probably never see eye to eye. They are simply two completely different people. Our political ideology (whether we’re aware of it or not) is based off the issues that are important to us and our views those issues are what make us who we are.In all honesty, if you’re in one of those two sides, it would probably be easier to just not talk about politics with people on the other side. You won’t get anywhere.
But for the moderates out there, I think it is possible to get along. One just has to get used to the fact that people have different viewpoints. That just because other people have their own opinions, it doesn’t mean that yours are wrong, or that their value is lower. Recently I read an article which stated “When Hurricane Katrina struck, and people lost their jobs, their homes and their lives, the first responders did not ask whether the victims were Democrat or Republican before saving them. They did not see them as leftists or rightists but as human beings”
Sergio Villazon
P.5
(The quote was paraphrased, sorry I couldn't find the article I was talking about)
DeleteNice argument, I agree
DeleteAfter reading the two sides of this argument on " why each ideology can't talk to one another', and reflecting on what I figured out about myself in class these past few days, I find myself in sure agreement with both. I have come to the conclusion that I am a Right Libertarian, and in that it means that when it comes to social topics, I lean towards the liberal standpoint. On the contrary, when it comes to economic topics, I am a conservative and at times that side of my tends to overpower my liberal tendencies, hence the "Right" Libertarian. As the article from the viewpoint of the conservative said " libertarians...are up for debating about anything, especially drug legalization", I have to say that describes me perfectly. I can debate about any and all topics but I never find myself getting so mad I rebuke those with opposite viewpoints of me. I think this perfectly gives clarity to how "right" and "left" true conservatives and liberals are. As we saw in the articles and as we see today, these two types of people are so rooted in their beliefs it almost becomes a part of them that if you are against their beliefs, then you are against them and you can no longer be civil with them. Being rational goes out the door when talking with true liberals and conservatives because once you are against their views, you are a "terrorist", a "fascist", a "communist", and the list goes on. It is becoming harder and harder as time goes on for liberals and conservatives to have peaceful discourse, and the more they become divided the worse it will be for our country to unite and find common ground.
ReplyDeleteAlexander Wims
Period 3
As someone who isn't far left or right I don't understand how debates between a liberal and conservative can be so personal, ending in so much hatred that views of each others' relationships can go from good to bad so quickly as described in Wagman's anecdote. How can one lose respect in someone solely based on their political beliefs? Are people so close minded that they can't possibly believe that someone else just has a different opinion? I mean I guess I understand. Like Wagman, there are issues that should be no-brainers to everyone, but clearly are not. However, I don't think I could lose respect for a friend who has opposing views on abortion, gay marriage, etc.
ReplyDeleteKara Park P. 3
After reading both articles and Ryan’s response, I must say that both of the articles are extremely biased to the point that they aren’t reliable. I really like where Ryan points out that there “is no room for rational debate on policy implications” because I felt the same way after reading how both authors feel that the opposing political party would blow things out of proportion and start using slander to discredit the other. I saw this in Wagman’s argument that the arguments quickly became filled with hate, yet took no credit for the cruel way that they argued. This is also prevalent when Allen accused the liberals of having paper thin skin, and saying that the only defense that liberals have is to brand the conservative anti-woman, homophobic, or any other name to discredit them. I feel that both authors have very strong opinions, and need to work on being more accepting of the opposing side, and that they need to work on their debating skills, because it seems that they both resort to yelling all too easily. I cannot assign too much reliability to either author, because they both use words as a form of mud slinging to hurt the opposing opinion, rather than backing up their own positions with reliable facts or arguments.
ReplyDeleteAlex Stein
Per. 3
I do not believe that people with strong conservative views and people with strong liberal views can get along. As humans we believe what we want to believe and if someone has a different view point than us we tend to argue about it until we prove to them that we are right or we just get tired of arguing with them. Based off of in class discussions and the articles it is obvious that not everyone is going to have the same political ideology and whether one side has a good point or not that doesn't change anyone's mind and the matter that they are arguing upon quickly becomes personal. The only way a conservative is to be friends with a liberal is if they speak nothing of politics or if they are just moderately liberal and vice versa. People have the right to their own opinion and just because it isn't the same as yours doesn't make them wrong. I'm the kind of person who wants to see everyone get along and if a liberal doesn't want to talk to a conservative to keep the peace and vice versa then let them.
ReplyDeleteRaelene Robles
Per.2
Everyone has different opinions and ideologies and the truth is, it is difficult for people to accept and understand opinions that differ from their own. The divide between conservatives and liberals exists due to their contradictory views on social and economic views. Both groups struggle to understand how the other group could possible believe in what they believe in because in their minds their ideologies are the only ones that make sense. According to Allen, “we conservatives think liberals are silly; they think we’re evil” and according to Wagman she regards conservative views with “thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism”. Their strong diction indicates that their opposition of either conservatives or liberals is clearly evident. With this, it is clear that those who have strong liberal or conservative views will never come to an agreement. To liberals failing to agree with their views regarding, for example, gay marriage equates to homophobia and to conservatives liberals only hurting the country with their food stamps and public education. Strong opinions lead to endless arguments and this causes both groups to have a degree of animosity towards each other. As a liberal, I do understand Wagman’s frustrations with her neighbors and their views but I don’t believe that the situation should have escalated the way it did. Although I have certain opinions on social and economic issues I don’t believe in trying to push my opinions as the right opinion and the opposing as wrong but this is not how most people are. And with most people once they have a set opinion on an issue especially one they feel strongly about it is almost impossible to go against it without it causing an argument. It is normal for people to believe that their views are logical and right and this is true for both liberals and conservatives and if others don’t agree with them they lose respect for them and because of this I don’t believe that both sides will ever get along.
ReplyDeleteMaxine Apoderado
Per. 2
According to the article I do not liberals and conservatives will ever get along. Each party has their own views on how the economy and other social issues should be handled. In the article by Diana Wagman she made some valid arguments toward the end of her article about if her conservative neighbor she says, " I wonder what would happen if he woke up one morning to find that his son had been killed in Iraq or that his 15-year-old daughter was pregnant or that his favorite sister was gay. What if he suddenly lost his job, his wife got cancer, there was no insurance and not much food?" Would he change his opinions? I don't know!! Then in the second article Charlotte Allen goes on to explain there is just no way to talk to a liberal you get called all kinds of names, shout overs etc. The both parties just have two completely different views and I don't think they will ever get along.
ReplyDeleteLane Haywood
Per. 5
It is extremely difficult trying to hold a calm conversation with people who have different views. Personally I've experienced several liberals, I'm conservative, going straight to insults, yelling, interrupting and so on. Talking to my sister who had opposite views as me, she will state her side, I will begin my opinion and halfway she tries to interrupt and says I did not let her finish and starts yelling. That is not an intelligent or meaningful conversation. Allen says "Tell a liberal that you hope President Obama will be defeated in the upcoming election, and you'll be branded a racist.". Personally I know this is completely true because someone asked me once my opinion and when I did not support Obama their reaction immediately was "oh because you're white" well one that argument isn't very valid considering I'm only a quarter white and the rest Mexican; however, since my skin is light I'm some white girl who is racist. That's just a completely absurd and a racist view to even say I wouldn't support him because I'm white.
ReplyDeleteWhat really bothered me was when Wagman said "But my feelings about them are changed. I cannot respect them as I did before.". This is childlike. Just because someone does not agree with you does not mean you can't respect them. And just because someone seems nice does not mean they have to have the same political ideology. Her argument is very flawed. She states "I wonder what would happen if he woke up one morning to find that his son had been killed in Iraq or that his 15-year-old daughter was pregnant or that his favorite sister was gay. What if he suddenly lost his job...". If he woke up to find his son died serving his country he would be damn proud, yes sad but he died with honor. An irresponsible daughter would not change his views on abortion, killing a baby is wrong. Just because a sister is gay will not change his opinion either. Not supporting something is not equivalent to hatred. "Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone's lifestyle, you must fear them or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don't have to compromise convictions to be compassionate." -Rick Warren. Losing your job does not make you immediately want welfare. It means step it up and go get yourself a new job. I have experience with this because my dad was laid off before. He had a new job in less than a month.
I also agree with all that Ryan had argued.
I do not believe liberals and conservatives can hold an intelligent and meaningful debate or just sharing of views except in rare occasions because the way people act if someone disagrees is just straight up childlike and disrespectful.
Sarah Gillen
Period 5
Hi Sarah
DeleteIt's Isaiah here :) I totally see where you are coming from and I wish your dad luck with his new job. Make sure you tell him I said congratulations.
I just wanted to let you know that not all liberals are the same, nor are all conservatives are the same. That's what makes diversity so beautiful. Change can be hard, but it can also have beautiful outcomes. I don't think it is fair to say that one cannot have a conversation among liberals and conservatives. I think we all mess up sometimes and may get really passionate about something and blow off some steam. I am not saying this is right, but I think it is fair to have some grace and mercy when it comes to people's reactions. I am sorry about your experience you had with your sister. I just wanted to assure you that not all liberals are like that. Some are just more passionate than others. That's why we have a spectrum. I totally agree with you when it comes to respecting one another based upon their beliefs, but to say that you can't have an "intelligent and meaningful" debate with members of different political parties seems a bit hypocritical to me. If you respect someone enough you are willing to accept them for who they are as a person. I don't think we should judge others based upon their political party. We all want to love and be loved. I feel we should embrace one another's differences and love all for who they are.
I just wanted to share with you my opinion. Hopefully I didn't offend you in any way fashion or form. I apologize if I did. If you would like to continue this discussion, I would be more than happy to.
Have a great night :)
Isaiah Tadros
I agree with Isaiah's post and Sarah's. I think Isaiah made a key point. If you have enough respect and consideration for someone, then you will be willing to acknowledge them for who they are as a person, despite their conflicting views. Completely rejected one's views should be considered if the opposing party's philosophy harms the welfare of others, putting them in prevailing peril.
DeleteKwasi Gittens
Hi Isaiah,
DeleteNo need to apologize for your opinion, I'm not in any way offended. I know not all liberals are like that as well as not all conservative are like that. I believe you can maintain fine friendships and relationships with people who do not share the same views, and I do currently have relationships like that. I meant that an intelligent and meaningful debate can not be held among these extremes who have blinded themselves into not even caring what the other person says but instead they want to immediately point fingers and use insults. As soon as people start cussing someone out or insulting them then that ends the meaningfulness and intelligence of the conversation, which can happen a lot between the extreme liberals and conservatives or just on certain topics people are very passionate about that are controversial. I agree that people should not be judged based on their political party and I was not trying to say they were. I believe that without the respect for the other person's opinion, a conversation with someone of the opposite ideology will most likely turn into name calling and in that case it's just better not to get into something that will end in hatred and insults but instead shape the conversations around something else.
Have a good night, feel free to let me know if I was not clear, I don't disagree with you on this.
Sarah Gillen
Well that was intense. To get the gist of that it is basically very hard to reason with someone who has a very strong and different political ideology than yourself. People will stand by what they believe and its really hard to change that. As long as you have questioned what you believe and understand why you choose to believe such things, that is your opinion. I have some of my own political beliefs that I will always stand by and I know exactly why I believe in such things. It seems like common sense, but I know that not everyone will agree or have the same opinion. Once we are programmed with a belief or a particular view, hitting the ctrl, alt, and delete key sequence is practically impossible. Even just being in this class, I'm sure most of us have heard an opinion that is different from what we believe. It seems ridiculously hard to keep an open mind about everything. An example ( the safest one I can think of) is my views towards discrimination. In the workforce, discrimination against any race, gender, or religion etc. is completely unacceptable. If someone where to approach me and say that "Discrimination is awesome! Hooray!", I would be taken aback. What they believe in is completely unfathomable to me as my own beliefs may be to them. I do think that democarts and republicans can get along but it will be quite challenging. The should probably avoid conversations regarding politics. I know I certainly do. The kind of person I believe someone to be is usually not destroyed by what ideology they claim to have because they are not typically extreme. In the article on the other hand, they have really strong opinions about politics. Pure democrats and pure republicans are like oil and water and they will never mix. I feel as though it will always be hard to convey your beliefs onto another; we just have to try to be as open minded and patient as possible.
ReplyDeleteStarlena Dickerson period 5
Obviously both articles come from very biased viewpoints and tell harsh truths. They both emphasize stereotypes of the opposite ideology that can and cannot be true. Maybe the reason why it is hard for pure liberals and pure conservatives to coexist peacefully is because their views are on complete opposite sides of the spectrum. There is no compromising when your right is someone else's wrong.
ReplyDeleteSneha Anand
Period 5
I agree with your post. I think we can both agree on the fact that both articles were pretty different in the sense of two very different and conflicting political ideologies. They were also biased in the fact that they generalized the broad majority of the party they disputed against. But I think some compromising must be allowed in order for both parties to coincide. Yeah, both views greatly differ from each other, and of course you have your radicals, but a think a moderate level of respect would be needed in order for them to compromise.
DeleteKwasi Gittens, P2
After reading both of these articles, I think that liberals and conservatives will never get along. They have completely different views on the social and economic world and each will try to prove the wrong by arguing about why their belief is better. As Allen states in the article, "We conservatives think liberals are silly; they think they're evil." They have their own opinions on social and political views. I think that the only way they can agree on views is if they are moderate and agree on some views of the opposing parties. I believe that I am pretty moderate myself. I agree with some liberal views as well as conservative views. In all, I believe that liberals and conservatives will always be opposing each other. However, there will be a time in history when they do, in fact, unite on a common ground.
ReplyDeleteSarang Majmudar
DeletePeriod 2
I can't understand why liberals and conservatives can't get along. My family and friends are, for the most part, from Pakistan. I don't know many people who talk American politics so I don't have much experience in these regards.
ReplyDeleteIf these articles are trustworthy, then we have a major problem in our country. If we want to succeed domestically and internationally, we have to put our heads together. If we divide ourselves, we are only using half of our full potential and we are actively limiting ourselves.
We have no idea what the future holds. World War III could start in the next decade, or we may have sustained peace. To be prepared for all outcomes, we need to help each other and understand each other so we can be more prepared for what lies ahead and respond stronger then we can devided
Aaqib Bickiya
DeleteP.2
Liberals and conservatives can’t communicate with one another because neither is willing to listen to the other side. It’s like on Friends when Ross and Rachel broke up, and Ross only saw the “we were on a break” viewpoint while Rachel could only see the “he cheated on me with the girl from the copy place” viewpoint, and so their arguments would always end in screaming matches with no problems being resolved. But on a more serious note, I think both parties can’t see eye to eye because the moment one party proposes their idea to the other, the other immediately disregards it and resorts to name calling and attacking the person rather than the idea. Take social welfare programs for example: conservatives will call liberals lazy people who are just looking for handouts, while liberals will call conservatives selfish people who only care about the rich. Each side is quick to form stereotypes about the other; and even though I’m aware of this, I’m greatly affected by it. For example, I was raised by conservative parents, and so I found it difficult to see things from Wagman’s perspective. But even if it’s hard for me to see eye to eye with a liberal, I think it’s important that we agree to disagree.
ReplyDeleteNicole Sy, p.5
While I believe it is great that people can freely express their political ideas, it is sad to see a lack of respect for others' ideology. It's safe to say we've all experienced or seen this, and it is frustrating. This issue, though, seems to be between the more "hard core" or "winged" people. Even though I am conservative and some left-winged ideology may bother me, I find that normal democrats do not bother me nearly as much as extreme liberal ideology. While it is important to stand behind your ideology with vehement, it is equally important to hear other perspectives. From our lessons we've read that college educations tend to expose students to more views and that this is encouraged, which leads to more liberal standards,but who's to say this cannot go for the conservative route as well? By believing that all view points have some credibility and truth to learn from them, but to then accuse any opposite ideas is hypocritical. The mistake people make is that they try to convince the other that their ideas are superior. This can never happen, just like how a theist and an atheist cannot convince the other that there either is or there is not a God. Such arguments are a waste of time and will never arrive to any conclusion. It's sad to admit, but I believe true liberals and true conservatives are incapable of getting along. As the article "Liberals vs. Conservatives" stated, while non-political topics can be agreed upon, topics on politics are inevitable because they are such a fundamental cornerstone of what America and Americans stand for to this day, and such personal beliefs are naturally defended by the owner when an alternative point-of-view is suggested.
ReplyDeleteMatthew Harris Period 5
Before taking government i never knew which side of the ideology spectrum I was on but always knew that being conservative had a negative connotation. Through this past week i learned that i am a Solid Liberal meaning i am liberal on both social and economic issues. I dont consider myself to be far left because i can understand some conservative points economically and maybe even agree with them. Just because i am a liberal does not mean i will jump to conclusions about a conservative just because their viewpoints are different than mine. Nor do i think of them differently because of their political party/ideology.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sneha when she said that the articles are from biased viewpoints and harsh truths. Wagman's article seemed very extreme when she states all the questions at the end and how she "hope[s] it's their weekend to stay home." Cutting people off because they dont agree about something is just petty and unnecessary energy used. Also in Allen's article how she stated that "You can't talk to a liberal, period." is ridiculous. The fact that some people dont think they can talk to me about politics or at all because I'm a liberal is ludicrous. I believe both far ends of the spectrum need to be able to understand that they are different and be comfortable with someone having different views than their own. I think too many people believe that through debate they will somehow someway change what that person has been believing in for almost their entire life which should not be the case. In my opinion debates are about discussing a problem, being open to opinions that are not your own, and MAYBE rethinking about how you view something. To go into a debate without that mentality is setting yourself up for hurt feelings and yelling. In the end both sides just want whats best for America and hopefully a meteor doesn't CRASH into the Earth again before then.
Anais Moore
Period 2
That was definitely something. Honestly just don’t talk about economic/social topics at all if you know it will only end in a heated argument. If it can be avoided, then avoid them. I don’t think it’s possible for a rational discussion between a far left or far right because they would be so close minded and solely focused on what they believe. But maybe it is possible, who knows? Plus things would start to get really personal, like how Wagman wanted her neighbor to consider if his daughter got pregnant, his wife got cancer, etc. That’s taking things way too far, but I can see where she was going with that. Obviously everyone is going to have opposing views and we should be aware of that too. We should be able to respect that and try to not let it affect so much, but I guess some people just can’t help it. We always tend to look for things that support our view and only our view to prove that the other side is wrong. It’s hard to compromise especially when the views are completely opposite from each other.
ReplyDeleteApril Cheng
Period 5
I am always bothered by the fights and arguments between members of both groups, whether these members be politicians or fellow classmates. The "fight" between liberals and conservatives is one that exists due to the inherent intransigent nature of humans, and misconceptions and the convolution of the terms "liberal" and "conservative".
ReplyDeleteFirstly, humans are often born with the belief that their set of beliefs or morals are the right ones. This applies to those who claim to be a liberal or conservative. They are adamant in their beliefs, and see any conflicting beliefs to be wrong, or in some cases, threatening. When an individual holds a set of beliefs as their guide, but find their may be a different, possibly better way, they may find their beliefs threatened. Liberals and conservatives feel obligated to cling onto their beliefs, regardless of whether or not they truly believe in them with regards to the circumstance or issue in question. The point is, people are inherently stubborn, and there are some liberals who claim to be open-minded, yet they do not feel this way about conservative beliefs.
In addition, the terms "liberal" and "conservative" now have very negative connotations. Some consider a liberal to be silly, and call them a socialist to insult them. Some conservatives are called racist and strict, and are even called fascist. This is when the conversation or debate becomes personal and the participants become ignorant. A lack of education leads to ignorance, which in turn leads to a convoluted view of how one views their "opposing group". Liberals and conservatives see themselves to have exact opposite views, when in reality they just believe in different ways to solve the same problems.
I strongly believe that labels are not always acceptable. Every human being has a unique set of morals and beliefs, but labels like "conservative" and "liberal" force individuals to adapt their beliefs to fit in with one or the other. Instead, human beings should be interested in believing what they want to believe, without having fear of being placed into a category. I personally want to be more than just a statistic, just a person in a group. I'd rather be a part of my own group, and agree and disagree on issues not based on what group I'm forced into, but rather what I personally believe. Education is extremely important as it broadens our perspective on issues and allows us to change if need be. As humans, our beliefs will possibly change over time, through experiences and education. This debate between liberals and conservatives will only end if both labels are no longer an indicator of what someone should believe in for every issue.
Niall Baig
Period 3
These people are acting like children. If they are not right, no one is right. If they don't get their way, no one gets any way at all. What is the point of arguing with someone in order to try to convince them that your opinion is right? What happened to "let's agree to disagree"? Obviously the friendships these people had were not as important as winning an argument.
ReplyDeleteUp until this week, I was not aware of where I fell on the political ideology spectrum. When I was taking the quizzes, I was scared that I might make a decision based upon my parent's views or my prior knowledge to each political party. I thought that this quiz was going to determine my future and decide how I was going to live my life. WRONGO! These quizzes are valuable in the sense that they tell you where you are on the spectrum, but they do not define you as who you are as a person. Rather than defining yourself as who you are based upon a political party, define yourself as who you want to be.
When it comes to discussions among political parties, George Washington himself warned the citizens of America to not form political parties. But look what we did. I think we messed up there. But it's okay. Now that we have political parties, it is important to understand and respect each side. Just because not everyone is respectful to your beliefs doesn't mean that others won't be. And it doesn't give you the right to place a stereotype on political parties. Respect is mutual and is not one sided. Just because you respect someone does not mean you have to agree with them. All you have to do is accept them for who they are and what they stand for. I believe the article should not state why political parties can't debate with one another. Rather, I think it is appropriate to argue why political parties CHOOSE not to debate with one another. Everyone is scared of getting their feelings hurt or having someone else say something that completely goes against what he or she stands for. Big deal. Someone disagreed with you. They aren't going to take your birthday away. Let them be them and let you be you. If we were all the same, life would be boring. Imagine going through life only seeing one color. How bland would that be?
Allow others to form their own opinions. Rather than criticizing these opinions, embrace the individuality you share with another person. Don't start making assumptions because someone screwed up and called you a name. Not all Republicans are the same just as not all Democrats are the same. Don't let people walk over you, but don't walk over other people. We as Americans need to love one another for who we are. Not ridicule another human being because they are different. Despite what you believe, we can all come to the conclusion that we all just want to get along.
Isaiah Tadros
Period 2
With a whole nation demanding immediate change constantly, it is easy to find that two sides can have radically different perspectives on how to change America for the better. This is seen time and again in average people talking about politics. It always evolves into an unnecessarily heated (and personal) argument, and most certainly bitters the taste of a harmonious friendship (not to sound like a total hippie). Both articles prove this in the sense that liberals always make political issues personal and conservatives care about making issues benefit them. With that being said, I do not believe that strong liberals and strong conservatives can just “get along” anymore. Those more towards the center of the spectrum, probably. I will concede, though, that both sides are very passionate about their views and hold very steadily to them. Wagman’s article makes quite irrational statements about Republicans by calling them “narcissistic” and neither “empathetic nor kind.” Those are very heavy-handed statements spoken out of personal feelings about the few Republicans that she's spoken to before. Allen’s article went on the defense for conservatives accusing the liberals of being “silly” and that it's “impossible to hold a conversation with them.” Conservatives tend believe that liberals are very naive in their views and that they are incapable of civil conversations. Both sides have overgeneralized their respective opposing parties and immediately assume the worst when there is a challenge to a statement about an issue. At this point, their views on each other are so entrenched in their memories that they can't just “get over” the fact that it is another perfectly logical human being right there exercising their amendment 1 right to freedom of speech. We seem to have forgotten that we are essentially all part of the same compost heap and that it is okay for someone to be different. No, they aren't wrong, and in all honesty, it shouldn't be the deciding factor of the quality of someone’s character. It really shouldn't be this personal. However, when it comes to issues that affect the way our government runs our nation, yes, debate, but it also should be important to keep an open mind.
ReplyDeleteRitchelle Andal
Period 3
After reading both views I must say it's very disappointing. Let's just be realistic, in almost every country there is that gap between two political views; a gap that is inevitable. I think this gap or this division is going to exist no mater what especially for those who have extreme, upholding political views from both sides of the spectrum; however, respect is a key that will help us unlock the doors of acceptance and the mentality of "let's agree to disagree" and that it's okay to defend your point of view without offending mine directly or indirectly. I just think disagreements will always exist we just need to cope with them differently in order for this country to move forward and there is no way that will happen if this country is divided with hatred and apathy. There is a thin hair between being passionate and being angry. One can be very passionate but still respectful of others and one can stand and give an angry argument that is full of hate and disrespect. It mostly depends on the words one chooses to express his or her point of view. Those words are like fire they either warm up the other party or burn it that they would feel wounded! and that's when hatred gets planted. Yes division will be inevitable more in the sense of our human nature, we all have different views just like we all have different tastes in styles or in foods. I believe we just need to teach the next generations to just be more acceptable and still have support for their own beliefs for this country to continue to prosper and grow as a world power because hatred leads to a darker hole that will never light through.
ReplyDeleteMai Tawfik
Period 2
After taking the political ideology quizzes last night I was able to see/confirm that I hold more conservative views. Does this mean I can’t get along with or agree with someone who holds more liberal views? In a perfect world liberals and conservatives would be able to discuss politics, listen to each other’s views, and agree to disagree in a peaceful and calm manner. Unfortunately we don’t live in a world like that.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do tend to lean conservative, my social views are sometimes aligned with liberal beliefs. Although there are a couple of issues we see eye to eye on, my younger sister (a liberal) and I have come to the decision that it is better if we just don’t discuss politics with each other because, like in the articles, our “discussions” usually end in yelling matches and slammed doors.
I like to think of myself as a pretty patient person, and I always try to listen to someone’s views fully and try to understand before refuting. Often times even though I try reminding myself of this I just get too frustrated when discussing politics with those who have more liberal views than I do. I think that it is okay to disagree with each other on political issues and that if we know that talking politics with someone who has opposing views will make us angry or upset that it is better to just stick to safe topics to maintain some peace.
Carly Tighe
Period 2
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBoth authors use anecdotal examples in order to corroborate their general outlook on a political group. These outlooks strive to demonize the adversary or alternate group with bloated descriptions of how these people react to "common sense" or "logic". In retrospect, these outlooks and reactions are ultimately decided by the preferences, views, and beliefs of the individual. The content and material used to describe their “encounters with the enemy” provoked an utter cringe towards the arguments of how these confrontations “ruined friendships” or “made bitter neighbors”. The inability to compromise within a conversation about the subject of politics within their everyday lives could unfortunately correlate to a plausible perpetual struggle of simple compromise within the federal system of politics. As both authors are exercising their freedom of speech, their attempts of propaganda frightens me. These views are individual until they are uttered to the masses and once such views are accepted as “politically incorrect” or “wrong”, the consequences are already in effect.
ReplyDeleteI honestly found both of these articles very humorous, one because they both strongly exaggerated the other side, and two was how much truth lies within these articles. After taking the polls last night, I learned that I do lean a bit closer towards the liberal side of the spectrum, but I have noticed the aggressive approach of a liberalist. I don't think it should be so difficult to talk to someone who opposes your views, but frankly it is, and these articles prove it. I'm not saying all conservatives and liberals constantly bash the other side, but I find it ridiculous how demeaning people can be just because someone has a different perspective. I understand that people can be passionate with their stance on say abortion or immigration, but a debate should never leave mature terms of a debate. And I find it that many people who get into these heated discussions tend to be ignorant of the other point of view and simply assume, which is a huge problem in politics. A liberal doesn't want the rich to suffer for striking rich, and a conservative doesn't want to bury the poor in the dirt. So next time before you just the other side of the spectrum, try to think about LOGICAL reasons on why they support their opinion. It doesn't hurt to give your input, but keep it appropriate to the topic.
ReplyDeleteZach Clanton
Period 2
From the two articles, it is very evident that passionate liberals and conservatives have a tough time coinciding. The extremely debatable topics such as gay marriage, abortion, and healthcare are not topics that are expected to have mutually agreeable decisions, of course. A liberal and a conservative are on completely different sides of the border and none intent to succumb to the other's opinions. I find it completely absurd how these two sides are so hostile to each other and none intend to coexist. Also, just because someone has their own opinion, does not mean they should be branded as some evil, corrupt person. These clashing have serious repercussions. For example if you just met a person who was a conservative and you were a liberal, there would already be conflict emanating from the either one of you even though both of you know almost nothing about each other. I believe that people are entitled to their own opinions and they should not be scrutinized.
ReplyDeleteSamir Ali
Period 3
From what i read of the articles, they see liberals and conservatives are these two different animals that cannot ever coexist. I feel like that just isnt the case. many of my friends are conservative and we have no problems so long as we don't talk too much about political issues. I think these articles make it most evident that there is a huge divide that is literally tearing the country in two .There is no middle ground, you are either conserv. or you are liberal. Both of these authors take the stance that they are eternally right and if you disagree at all you're with the enemy. If you have a real friend then it wont matter their political viewpoints, it'll only matter how they treat you and others around them.
ReplyDeleteAustin Boatright period 5
Both articles are very biased and opinionated. These two authors have very strong views on their political ideologies. After reading these articles, I concluded that strong liberals and conservatives are so set on their beliefs that they don't even try to understand the opinions of others. Political and social issues make people so single minded, heated arguments are almost unavoidable. I would consider myself liberal so it is frustrating when discussing issues like abortion, same sex marriage, and legalizing drugs with a conservative. You want them to understand you're view but at the same time you're not really giving them a chance to explain their views either. As humans we think we are always right, and it is very hard to cordially talk to someone who has different views than us. People from opposite sides of the political spectrum are so easy to judge one other on their beliefs that the only way to get along is to just not talk about politics or social issues.
ReplyDeleteVictoria Magana
pd 3
I do not believe liberals and conservatives will ever get along, when it comes to politics. Allen made valid points in saying that liberals ostracize conservatives for not sharing their beliefs. Liberals are quick to stick a label on conservative ideals because their opinions do not coincide (which is quite hypocritical, seeing that liberals are for "equality" and "acceptance"). Wagman's argument seems childish in that she is quick to attack her kind neighbors, whom which she previously liked, simply because they have a different set of ideals. To say conservatives have not experienced though times and thus are not sympathetic is ignorant. My parents are both conservatives and grew up with great struggle. My mother grew up in a single mother household with 6 siblings in Compton. At ages 12-16 she had to raise her younger siblings because her mother was in jail and her older siblings were either drug addicts or too irresponsible. From her family, she is the only one to graduate high school, work multiple jobs to better her life and get out of the bad areas. She did all of that through hard work and perseverance. Not once did she collect government aid. My father grew up in East LA, a poor and gang-filled area. His parents were indifferent about him getting an education. In spite of that, he worked hard, graduated from college (which he payed for himself), and is now a top man at his company. Their siblings collect welfare checks, on occasion receive money from my parents, and do not care to work. So saying that conservatives are "thoughtless" or "privileged" is narrow-minded. Thereby, supporting the idea that liberals and conservatives will never get along because they do not care to hear out the reasoning (or background) of the other side. Perhaps both sides could learn a thing or two from libertarians and just simply have the mind to hear each other out.
ReplyDeleteSamantha Martinez
Period 5
I just read this back, and I don't want it to come off too biased. So I would like to clarify that conservatives make overgeneralization about liberals as well. They tend to peg liberals as rash and illogical. Neither ideology gives the other the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps these conflicts are just magnified through those who feel passionately about these beliefs, but in the scope of things I only see political turmoil between the two (not necessarily any turmoil regarding day to day social interactions). :)
DeleteSam Martinez, p. 5
I do agree with both articles,it's definitely hard to communicate with a person from a different ideology.If that person has a strong belief in his ideology,then the debate/arguments you have with them won't go so far due to their strong opinion.The author made a good point about liberals though is that they turn political issues into personal issues. With that being said, I believe the biggest issue is that we start judge people based on their ideology.For example if someone says he is conservative we start thinking he has to religious,doesn't like the govt to have much power,doesn't want to help the poor.We need to fix that,and also remove the labels such as "fascist" "socialist",and then maybe it will be easier to communicate between people.
ReplyDeletePer 3
Pavly Ibrahim
After reading the articles and learning from our in class discussion, I have come to the conclusion that Conservatives and Liberals will never really get along. We have such drastically different viewpoints on what should be done socially and economically in this country that it is virtually impossible to come to a compromise. The author's of both articles are very biased in their opinions about their political party but are correct that, when disagreements are found in politics, arguments begin. For the two sides to finally get along about everything, the Earth must be transformed in to a Utopia in order to have a perfect society that does not need fixing. Then we will not have to argue about various political issues because there will be nothing that needs fixing.
ReplyDeleteI have found it difficult to talk with someone from the opposite end of the political ideological spectrum. The political ideology quizzes last night confirmed what I already knew, I am a steadfast conservative. I have been talking to a neighbor before, the conversation made its way to politics, and we discovered that we differ in our views. When he found out I was a conservative, he said something to the effect of "Oh so you must be like Trump and want to not allow Muslim's in to the country?" Just because I am a conservative does not mean I agree whole-heartedly with every little detail that each candidate says. I have to examine all candidates of the party, find who I support the most, and be sure to show up on election day and vote for that person. I do not support the idea of banning a large group of people from coming to this country; however, I am in support of doing much more extensive checks on all the people coming to this country to do our best to ensure that these people are not coming with bad intentions.
From a more positive aspect, I got to speak with many friends today about their quiz results and learned that I have many conservative friends AND many liberal friends. This showed me that the two sides do have the capability of getting along with matters that don't pertain to political issues. We don't have to ruin our friendships just because we don't see everything the exact same way. That is actually one thing that exists in our society and it is called diversity.
Nevada Chovan P.5
These two articles actually made disappointed in both of the liberal and conservative views on each other. There is always going to be someone who will disagree with you, regardless in what you believe in. However, I don't think I would called someone an 'idiot' or 'preferred if the other one didn't exist' as Wagman stated in her article. As someone who is moderately liberal, you see other views of the conservative and question it. But I have conservative friends and I am still open-minded enough to listen to their reasoning for some. I don't think they are racist, selfish or necessarily 'evil' as certain liberals would say. They believe in individualism which consist of hard work. Hard work does lead into success if the door is open towards it but not everyone will get the same opportunity as other. People are open to believing what they think is best for them. Each belief comes from how their were raised but it can progress overtime. It really does suck to know that each view think so negatively about each other. For example,my mother is conservative and my father is liberal but they are willing to share their belief in each side of the ideology in one household. Does this mean that they can't get along? After 20 years of being married to each other, I know it's possible of accepting one's political ideology instead of bashing it all completely.
ReplyDeleteBeverly Boampong
Period 2
I think it is interesting that you can have great friends but as soon as you discover that they are the opposite party from you, they automatically become your enemy. I do think it is difficult to try to understand other people views especially if they go against what you believe in, but I truly believe we can agree to disagree. Unfortunately in today's society that phrase means nothing but a waste of breath because most of us are self-centered, shallow and unable to put our differences aside. We need to realize that we all are human and it is kind of foolish to have arguments about it.
ReplyDeleteSandy Lule
P.3
Honestly, when I read the articles I found them to be a little extreme when it comes to how liberals and conservatives argue (or maybe I've just never seen it get that serious). In both articles it seemed like whatever group the article was basing its viewpoint on, it already had a preconceived hate for the opposing group. I think normally the two groups can talk or at least have a heated yet civil debate, as long as you keep an open mind to whoever you're debating with. People need to actually listen to what the other person is saying and realize that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. From the articles, I did see how it got personal, but when arguing about ANYTHING it's hard not to pull arguments out of personal experience, because those experiences are probably what shaped your opinions or beliefs. However, I do think that if you are very hot-headed and don't really care about what others have to say, I'm guessing you're just kind of a hard person to talk to in general. Therefore, I don't think those type of people can just blame it on a difference of ideology. :p
ReplyDeleteCeleste Lauron
period 5
Like Wagman says, some of the views I have are absolute no brainers to me. I, truly and passionately, believe that my views are the best for myself, others, and America and I’m sure a conservative can say the same about their views as well. This is partly why political ideology is so personal to people, whichever side you are on the spectrum, people want what’s best but the differences are found when peoples’ thoughts of what actually is for the better clash. This clash is a wonderful thing! Every time I get into some type of heated argument and I come off a little bitter from it, I instantly remind myself that talking and discussing and arguing is a privilege many others do not have. People elsewhere are KILLED if they speak up. I embrace the differences I have with other people and I enjoy the arguments because I truly appreciate my freedom of speech. So to those saying that not talking about politics is the way to go, I cannot agree. I understand that there’s an extent to which some people need to step away and not talk about these things because sometimes these discussions can lead to nowhere, but to say that we shouldn’t talk at all seems unhealthy. A lack of perspective, which is achieved by not being open-minded and receptive to others’ views, can be a leading cause of division. This division though does not scare me, I, personally, will always say what I think no matter who I am talking to and I will not back down just because someone says something that opposes my beliefs.
ReplyDeleteNow for my more personal liberal beliefs: In Allen’s article, it says, “Voice your opposition to same-sex marriage, and you're a homophobe,” how is one not homophobic if they oppose gay marriage? I truly do not understand how you can oppose a fundamental right gays and lesbians have but not be a homophobe. (If you do understand, please feel free to explain.) Also, I have a hard time respecting others who want to take away peoples’ rights, more specific and personal to me: my reproductive rights. I know and acknowledge that not all conservatives may believe abortion is wrong but typically they do and this is just one example of when I do not accept someone else’s belief just because it’s their opinion. Yes, everyone has a right to their opinion but if it’s an opinion that oppresses, fuels hatred, and/or is harmful to others, I cannot accept it.
~Lauren Smith, P.2
P.S. Another way to say my closing thought is: I'll respect your opinion as long as your opinion doesn't disrespect another existence.
Delete~Lauren S.
I believe this is how disagreeing with same-sex marriage is not equivalent to being a homophobe or having hatred. "Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate."
DeleteWhile yes someone may disagree with the lifestyle and the redefining of marriage, it does not mean they hate them or wish them harm, yes there are extreme people who say they should die or burn in hell but that is an extreme that the majority does not believe. Not agreeing with someone else's decisions is not disrespecting them unless it gets extreme like I said above.
As for abortion I do not understand why you say believing abortion is wrong is disrespectful to someone else's existence
Feel free to clarify, if the argument is too touchy it's fine not to respond
Sarah Gillen
It's obvious that conservatives and liberals will never be able to agree on anything, they are polar opposites. There's no reason to get into a political debate with someone who shares different views than you because all it will end with is name-calling and broken friendships, just like what happened in the liberal article. The liberal family went to the poker game with the Republicans and they loved them and instantly became friends with all of them. They even invited them back to their cabin to hang out. But as soon as they found out their new friends were conservative, they immediately disliked them all because they had different opinions than them. This is why it's hard for two parties to have a reasonable discussion, because it gets personal for each side. Both think they're right, and are too stubborn to agree with anything the other side has to say. Clearly, Democrats and Republicans can't agree on anything and that's why they won't be able to have a reasonable political discussion about anything anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteSpencer Dasher
Period 5
I believe people that are very liberal have a hard time getting along with people that are very conservative. After taking the quizes I found out I am a Libertarian who leans a little bit towards the right. I tend to have more liberal views when it comes to social issues and more conservative views when it involves the economy. I can tell you these past two days I have gotten into multiple political debates with my boyfriend who is a democrat. Even though neither of us are extreme ends of either politcal party we have had very different views on policies.I've experienced first hand that when you put two passionate people from different parties in a room and start talking politics, there will be conflict. Alot of people when talking politics somehow take things personally or get defensive over their views which causes problems. I think we should leave the debating to the presidential canidates and save our breath when it comes to talking politics with the opposite party.
ReplyDeleteSarah P
P5
I totally agree with the 2nd article. You can't talk to a liberal, period. They always change the subject and talk about politics and criticize when you're wrong!! As I learnt today in class I'm a populists so, economic issue i'm liberal, i am for the govt. helping the poor but ( and i know i will be criticized tomorrow for it) I am pro-life (social issue). so i really do not totally disagree with one party but liberals argue, even in the first article the liberal took it so personal that at the end of the article she said "Next time I drive to our cabin, I'm going to make sure I take everything I could possibly need. I don't want to ask my neighbors for help." Both parties ) especially democrats, need to put politics aside when it comes to socializing and treating people around us. keep your views to yourself and just don't offend others.
ReplyDeleteSandra Abdelnour
Period 2
Hi Sandra,
DeleteI understand where you are coming from. Politics can really make people passionate about what they believe in but I just wanted to point out the generalizations you have said in your response. You used superlatives like “always” when stating that liberals change the subject to talk about politics, but that is not true for every single liberal. There are probably many liberals that do not enjoy talking about politics. I can also say that I have seen conservatives do the same of “change[ing] the subject and talk about politics and criticize when you're wrong.” Also, you said “…I really do not totally disagree with one party but liberals argue…” and I was just wondering if you can agree on the fact that conservatives do this as well and that no matter the political ideology, we all exhibit some of the same traits of argumentation and the defensiveness that comes along with it, because we are all human and we are not perfect.
Thanks,
Lauren Smith
Pretty sure we can still talk to liberals. We sit next to one in calc.
DeleteKobe
I don’t do not think that extreme liberals and conservatives will ever get along. That’s like mixing orange juice and milk together. I believe that nothing good will ever come out of two entirely different people arguing on a subject. The conversation will just go back and forth and ultimately result in anger. The anger drives people pick irrational arguments that causes an emotional rather than intelligent defense. Both sides are too extreme and stereotypical to be able to make a decent judgment on them. However, there are topics I disagree with the articles. One of the articles stated that you can’t respect the opposing side. That is simply childish and immature. If you knew how to behave and have manners, you will respect others no matter what they believe in even if it’s the exact opposite of what you think. In the end, people are always going to be disagreeing regardless of the topic. It doesn’t even have to be about politics and people will continue to try to bite each others’ heads off.
ReplyDeleteEmily Le
Period 3
I find both of these articles silly and extremely biased towards their respective authors' political beliefs. They have made outrageous generalizations of the vague terms "liberal" and "conservative" from a few poor experiences, and their work should be viewed as bitter jokes rather than serious arguments. These are prime examples of how obstinate and dogmatic both sides have become; when a controversial topic is proposed, each side refuses to listen to the other and no progress is made. America was founded through the compromise of people with radically differing beliefs, and this has helped it become the nation it is today. People need to understand that every single person has an opinion, and that they will inevitably differ; in addition, no single opinion can be completely true and therefore each should be comprehended with understanding instead of hostility. So, to answer the central question of the blog, people of differing political ideology can get along, on the condition that they don't immediately judge each other's opinions. While political issues are an important part of life, they do not justify the frustration and name-calling exemplified in these articles.
ReplyDeleteElias Ruben
Per. 2
I am liberal. Very very liberal. However, I disagree with both articles. Even though it can be difficult to talk to someone with different view points than yours, political or not, it is not impossible l. I think that one thing we learned from class the past 2 days is that people fall on complete different places on the political spectrum. Some may be far left, some by far right, but most are within the middle. I think these articles take only the extremes into account. Who's to say that a liberal and a conservative have to disagree on everything? Maybe a pure conservative and a pure liberal, but what about a populist and a liberal? There will be some common ground there. & even if you cannot find some common ground politically does that mean that you have to hate that person? Political ideology is just one part of who you are as a person. I think the biggest problem with both of these articles is that it takes two very extreme people, and tries to apply it to every conservative and every liberal. Yes, some will hate eachother. But some people also choose to hate eachother based on gender, race, ect. That does not apply for the whole population. Overall, I think that liberal's and conservative's can get along if we all remember that we are all people, and all Americans that want we see best for this country.
ReplyDeleteBrittany Barnes
Period 3
Why can't we all just get along? Well, unfortunately it appears that if you identify as "liberal" you are a socialist who mooches off the government and if you identify as "conservative" you're a racist fascist who is the epitome of evil. There's no inbetween. You can't believe in anything outside of that ideology because once you have been labeled as a "liberal" or "conservative", peoples views on you will forever be tainted. It was apparent in both articles that the reason the authors had so much difficulty conversing with the other group was because in their minds, they had already created a stereotype of the other group and were completely blinded by their emotions. For example, in Wagman's article she states, "They are a lovely family: husband, wife and four smart, funny, polite children. I was sure they were Democrats" as if being Democrat=kindness and Republican=evil. Thus, the minute her neighbor said ANYTHING contradicting her views, he was no longer a Democrat, thus no longer kind, thus a Republican, thus evil. As mentioned earlier in class, you can be pro-choice and still be conservative. Identifying with one group does not mean that you have to agree with everything that group believes in. It is great to be passionate about your beliefs but that does not mean that everything someone says that doesn't correlate with your ideas is wrong. We have to be open-minded and respectful of other opinions and stop classifying one group with good/bad. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs but no one should be trying to shove their beliefs down peoples throats. This all feels like one of those bad high school movies were people are labeled to be a certain way because of the things they do. Like the jocks don't care about school, the cheerleaders are dumb. THE JOCK AND THE CHEERLEADER CAN BE 4.0 STUDENTS!!! CONSERVATIVES CAN BE PRO-GAY MARRIAGE!!! LIBERALS CAN BE PRO-LIFE!!! Everyone just needs to be open-minded and stop being childish when someone's views are a little different.
ReplyDeleteEli Alvarez P.2
Liberals and conservatives not getting along is nothing new. If anything it has gotten better in the last century. I mean (knock on wood) we haven’t had a president assassinated in over 50 years, some political commentators thought that Obama wouldn’t survive his first year in office. In 1856 we had a member of congress beat a fellow member to congress to near death. In the 1950’s we jailed people with dissenting opinions. Our President Andrew Jackson was involved in over 100 duels, killing several men. We had a founding father kill another, Aaron Burr the 3rd Vice President, and Alexander Hamilton the 1st Secretary of Treasury. Not to mention that 800,000 Americans killed each other over politics during the Civil War.
ReplyDeleteI think we can all agree that most of these situations would be unheard of today (with the exception of a presidential assassination). This has been a great success in American culture, but there are still tensions that exist today, however these tensions are mostly healthy and keep America alert about politics.
Garret M. Gwozdz
Period 2
Being moderately liberal myself, I find a lot of Allen's points to be a little harsh with bits of truth in them. Yes, the extremes of our side can take things too personally; yes, political correctness may sometimes be blown out of proportion; but to group us all as people who think political topics are "drawing blood from the paper-thin epidermis of wounded liberals" is condescending, overgeneralized, and pretty sort-sighted. I get it, the two extremes conflict, but when you bring up topics like welfare and education, conservatives are very quick to make it personal as well. In their defense, it's also not right for Wagman to call conservatives' political views "thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism", but the fact remains that conservatives do tend to favor the side that, at it's core, divides the people and creates disparity, economically and socially. I don't outwardly voice these opinions because I know how quickly it can devolve into the arguments in the articles, but I do want to point out that both sides need to take a broader view and acknowledge the other side before shouting accusations.
ReplyDeleteGrace Cho
Period 3
After reading the article, I immediately thought of psychology regarding listening. In Wagmans case, his neighbor already made up his mind, so his ear was closed to hear anything else. While this may be seen as ignorant, this is a common issue that we face in American today. With children growing up with a big influence from their parents, they tend to believe in politics in a one-sided way. I believe that even if we do strongly believe one way about a certain political belief, we need to understand other types of beliefs and not throw it off just like that. Wagmans neighbor clearly did not do this and I believe that Wagmans repsonse was no better. If we want to grow as a country, we need to be more open-minded.
ReplyDeleteCharlton Davis
Per.2
The reason why a Liberal and Conservative would not get along is because the more obstinate and loyal each side is, the less they are willing to acknowledge the other and the more vicious they would be when attacking.
ReplyDeleteNo one with an overzealous ego can stand being mauled with an insult-spewing, equally inflated opponent nor aquiesce with the other's seemingly "completely wrong" arguments.
Of course there are liberals and conservatives who are able to get along, but they don't do so by completely disregarding the other's stance or force upon others with insistance of their own "rightful" opinions.
In the end, the best situation for both parties is for them to state their opinions, listen to each other's stance, and then move on.
It's just the "move on" step that people can't seem to do.
Amy Zhang
Period 3
I'm at risk of sparking something of controversy here, but when I read these articles, it was a seriously frustrating read.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that the views are not only so different (and real) but are SO biased and SO quick to accuse was just so blindly STUPID in my opinion.
Yeah, I get it. The extremes on the liberal side are all equality this, equality that, political correctness, you can label that person as "him" or "her" or WHATEVER. Then you get the other end of the spectrum: independence this, foreign affairs that, let's gung ho the living poop out of them and show 'em who's boss, WHATEVER! Yeah, I severely stereotyped these sides and made it black and white, but the articles just exemplified how quick each side is to judge and generalize ALL liberals or ALL conservatives as the whiners or the narcissists, respectively.
Rant aside, I'll come out and say I'm a moderate liberal, so I find myself a little more in concurrence with Wagman. I think many conservative views are not in favor of the whole; it CAN create (not saying it does) an unhealthy disparity that will ultimately divide the population even more. The poor will have their views, which will create an even bigger gap between those of the rich. Each party has their points, which is why I'm only a moderate, but in all honesty, the lack of equality that the conservative views can bring upon society will really only make things worse and even more disparate. Additionally, being too liberal can cause a loss of identity where everyone is one way or the government wants everyone to be this way, which can be equally dangerous. My point here is that both sides have valid arguments, what really needs to happen is for people to stop being so stubborn with their political viewpoints and broaden perspective, take the time to even consider the other side, the effects of what they can do and what you can do, good and bad. Don't be like Allen and Wagman, so divided that hatred is bread between what can be a solid relationship. Be American, embrace difference and work as a whole.
Andrew Vu
Period 5
EDIT:
DeleteThe extremes on the liberal side are all ... you *CAN'T* label that person as "him" or "her"...
Just wanted to fix a typo.
So because I’m a liberal, I can’t even say the word “Christmas” because it has to do with Jesus? That means I’m an atheist, right? Wrong. Yeah, it may be true that most liberals are atheist, but I’m not and I am completely appalled by both articles. Both authors are refuting one another’s beliefs simply because they believe that they’re right and that the other one is wrong. For them to say that it’s impossible for liberals and conservatives to have a one on one debate baffles me because it is possible. The whole point of having a debate is to not make it personal. The moment people start throwing insults at one another, the debate that they were just having becomes invalid. In my opinion, it’s awesome that we’re entitled to our own opinion, that’s what makes our country great. What doesn’t make our country great is the fact that if we don’t believe what other people believe in, we’re damned. So what if people don’t have the same views? That’s what makes us different, right? What confuses me the most is when Wagman stated that because her neighbors don’t have the same beliefs as her it, “killed her”? That doesn’t make any sense to me whatsoever. In all honesty, if someone doesn’t believe in either their political or social views then, seriously, just look the other way. We can’t make people believe in something that they don’t want to believe in. Sometimes it’s better to agree to disagree. There’s no need for scrutinizing other’s ideological beliefs because no one is either completely right or completely wrong.
ReplyDeleteCynthia Carranza
Period 5
Based on the articles, I do not believe that a conservative and a liberal can have a conversation with one another. It is evident with the two stories that it is very difficult for a person of one ideology to be tolerant of one of the opposing ideology. But, I believe this scenario is present only when a left wing liberal and right wing conservative have a conversation. I believe that a conservative and liberal can have a healthy debate on their views, but I do not know if it would benefit either party trying to argue against each other’s views. The beauty of our nation is that we can have so many different views and we can express them freely in our everyday lives but a discussion where one person tries to argue for their views over another’s opposing views could prove very meaningless. It is very hard to find a happy-medium in this ongoing debate because of the endless views of various ideologies.
ReplyDeleteTyler Lawson
Period 5
After reading both of these articles, I am kind of shocked at how a pure liberal views a conservative and vice versa. And I do understand that it can be extremely difficult to talk to someone who does not have the same beliefs that you do, especially if you're so passionate about it. As a libertarian with a pure conservative for a best friend, it can be hard to listen to her bash on a liberal's argument that I happen to agree with. However, I would never want to lose a best friend just because we don't have the same political ideology, so there's some topics that I've learned to just keep out of instead of arguing with her about it--unlike these writers who lose friends that don't have the same political ideology as they do. Maybe we can all get along if we can just let go of all these stigmas that are attached to conservatives and liberals, stop all these childish name-callings, and just respect each other's opinions instead of bash on them.
ReplyDeletePauline Lagarde
Period 5
Reading both articles, I feel as if they concern personal, biased problems. Okay sure, you don't trust liberals. Fine, you do not get along with conservatives. Both authors make some pretty broad generalizations. Why end a relationship just based off of a political ideology? In Wagman's case, okay, your neighbor has a different political view than you. Suck it up and accept that not everyone is the same. Quoted, "We are not the same. I equate Republicans' political views with thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism. They're neither kind nor empathetic." is just stupid in that fact that not all Republicans are like that. Instead, she should of peacefully respected her neighbor's political views, and moved on with her life. With just reading both article's theses, both authors succumb to making really broad and not so distinct generalizations regarding both parties. We all have our differences, that's what makes us all individuals. We should be able to coexist and respect each other's opinions. I don't know. Maybe there was another underlying issue I missed in the articles, but that's what I got out of it. Just two butt-hurt individuals concerned with their own personal dilemmas.
ReplyDeleteKwasi Gittens
Period 2
Inevitably, people will have different views and opinions whether it involves the economy or personal interests. However, I find it difficult to understand how different political parties can keep people from being civil and friendly with one another. I personally felt that both of the articles were rather biased and cannot be applied to every liberal and conservative relationship. As stated in the article, people place stereotypes on the opposite political party. This could possibly be a reason for why it is so difficult for liberals and conservatives to agree. People need to understand that everyone is entitled to their own opinion regardless of whether or not it contradicts with their own.
ReplyDeleteBrooke Ristow P.5
I don't agree much with what Allen stated about liberals, being a moderately liberal myself, because even though some of my views are personal, they make the most sense to me. I believe that preserving the environment will be good for the earth and will create more jobs for many people. Also, there are good and bad factors about being pure liberals and pure conservatives. I dislike the fact that each party have their own description such as liberals being the good ones and conservatives are viewed as the bad ones. With such judgments, both parties will never get along. Both parties have their own broad view and will never make ends meet. But then again never say never.
ReplyDeleteRandal Manago P.2
When reading both articles it seemed absolutely ridiculous to me how extreme the disagreements came to be. I don't see any reason why liberals and conservatives can't get along. In my opinion it is absolutely possible for a liberal and conservative to have an intellectual conversation without any crazy yelling or fights. This all depends on the kind of person the liberal and conservative are. Our society can be a bit extreme when it comes to behavior but we can't stereotype and assume every liberal or every conservative is the same. As we have learned our country is so diverse with so many different opinions that even some liberals can have some conservative views and vice versa. I believe that we can all get along we just have to want to get along. April Cambero Period 2
ReplyDeleteBoth articles are extreme. I wouldn't necessarily identify myself as a socialist, but I'm well into the left wing when it comes to politics. Both central arguments that were brought up in each respective article isn't mostly about the differing political views, but more of the personalities of the people involved. Not every liberal is gonna get butthurt if you don't support social reforms. Not every conservative thinks liberals are the sole issue of America. I think it's less likely that people can become friends with differing political views, but it certainly doesn't make it impossible. For example, Jacob Rodriguez is very conservative but he's still a good friend of mine and we get along just fine. There's always going to be a political division between these two ideologies, but a liberal and a conservative can still be friends with putting politics aside. So we all can just get along, just not politically.
ReplyDeleteNafi Choudhury ツ
Period 3
In my experiences, I believe it's best not to debate on topics that involve political ideology when the other person is the complete opposite. I learned that it's almost impossible to change the opinions of those people at the opposite ideological scale. They view their opinions as clear as I do. In the arguments that I've got in with these people, I realized that it was going no where, it was only aggravating both of us, and was only damaging the quality of our friendship. However we have moved on and we both understand at the end of the day we mean no harm to each other, it is still evident that our opinions of each other have drastically changed. Overall, idealogical topics would best be talked about with people of similar interest or moderates, that way you can actually have a productive conversation and not a huge argument. And at the end of the day, its understandable why people have their differences in opinion because we all have different experiences and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteEddie Avellaneda Period. 5
According to the articles I dont think liberals and conservatives will ever be able to get along. In the articles they go to the absolute extreme differences between the two groups, but I think that they should be able to get along to an extent. Obviously they definitely have there differences when it comes to certain topics, but i still think that they can get along. For instance, we have conservative democrats and liberal republicans this shows that they can still somewhat get along, even though those are pretty rare. So I still think that we have a chance to get along, but it just depends if we want to get along with each other.
ReplyDeleteDrew Kaitz
Period 2
sorry
DeletePeriod 5
I agree that it can be difficult to talk to someone if they have a totally opposite political ideology. However, political ideologies are just personal beliefs and it is normal for one’s personal beliefs to differ or conflict with another’s. I feel that the people in the articles are too radical and are too harsh towards the people of opposite political ideology and their views. According to the three ideology quizzes that I took yesterday, I am a moderate liberal, and I find it difficult to make such radical judgements if I were to put myself in their shoes. I think that any difference in beliefs can make it difficult to talk to someone if you don’t respect the person’s beliefs. There doesn’t need to be agreement with someone’s views, but there needs to be mutual respect.
ReplyDeleteSean Tran
Period 2
After reading the two articles, it is evident that there are existing stereotypes within the two. So can a conservative and a liberal ever get along? In my opinion, it all depends on how passionate one is about their views. Some can get along better with the others, some can't. But I find it dumb to base one's relationships with others based on whether they're conservative or liberal.
ReplyDeletekelly mayo
period 2
When I took the ideology tests last night, I got moderate every single time, but I leaned slightly toward conservative. Which I am not to surprised about, considering that my parents are republicans. However, I was never exposed to hot political debate or discussion since my parents never really cared to much to educate me on the topics. As I read the two articles, I felt as if I identified and related to Allen's article. And when reading its opposition, I found it interesting because I kept thinking "that's not what a conservative thinks? Why is this liberal view so harsh" but in reality, that's what liberals must think. It's evidently very difficult for a civil, open minded discussion to take place between an extreme liberal and extreme conservative. Very often, one takes offense and this discussion ends in pointless, derogatory insults and any sense of educated and respecting discuss vanishes. But, I do think it's possible for liberals and conservatives to get all along perfectly fine should politics stay safely away from the discussion at place.
ReplyDeleteElicia Grigf
P. 2
I believe that yes, both parties have separate views on politics but that does not mean that with a couple bad encounters with the opposing political group should be a reason for each to generalize the people of the other party to all be alike. I don't agree with either article because the only main topic that I saw between the two was that each one had a closed mind over the topic they were discussing and did not have the ability to just allow others to state their opinion without them arguing. In my personal conversations over such politics have never gotten out of hand so much due to the fact that both parties are able to voice their opinion without the worry of one or the other automatically being attacked and being told that they are wrong automatically. Though there may be small disputes, I believe that both arguments are not fully accurate based on their biased opinions as well to their own political views being the only right way to go.
ReplyDeleteJoceline Garibay
P. 3
After reading this article, I came to the conclusion that everyone has different views on politics, ideologies, etc. Of course sometimes when people are so lenient on their own perspectives, they tend to clash against those with different perspectives because it is difficult to consider another's opinion based on your own beliefs. I feel like the Conservatives and the Liberals think that they are total enemies of each other and each conversation always had to escalate into a heated debate according to the articles. In my opinion, both of the articles were basically roasting each other to the extreme where it may not be necessary. Yeah every person is different and we gotta respect the fact that people have different mindsets, you can't just expect them to understand what you're thinking, trying to persuade them to see from your perspective when they clearly have their own beliefs. I think that Conservatives and Liberals can get along, but it depends on how extreme their views are. It is possible to be civil to one another.
ReplyDeleteCharikka De Leon
P. 5
I believe anyone can have an educated debate if they know how to control their temper and are respectful of other peoples' views. I don't believe that either party should try and make the other feel as though their views are wrong and insist on changing their mind set. Liberals and conservatives can peacefully discuss how they feel about certain topics, however, people choose to speak condescendingly towards each other which is why the two parties have difficulty getting along. I personally have a liberal view on specific issues and a conservative view on others, so I was honestly slightly offended when the articles described conservatives as selfish and insensitive and liberals as "silly". I'm sure I am perfectly capable of having a conversation with someone who has completely opposite views than I do without disrespecting them, so it baffles me as to why many adults cannot.
ReplyDeleteAmorette Lopez p.3
The acknowledgement of opinions, beliefs, and views of other people is necessary in order to truly understand their points of views. With that being said we cant let our own biased opinions hinder the process of understanding others.
ReplyDeletejenni Ramirez
p.3
Both of these articles were very interesting to read. Being the liberal I am, it was slightly irritating to read the second article. I appreciated how the first author included her view points and her neighbor’s viewpoints to show their differences without truly bashing the husband. She complimented his family and said that they were great people, still leaving a positive aspect of her perspective. What I didn’t really like was how the second article seemed to be downsizing the liberal party as a majority. Yes, they did mention how they didn’t hate their liberal family, but they said all liberals are unapproachable. I feel like this is an exaggeration because based off of what we learned in class today, some liberals can have conservative outlooks on some social or economic issues. I truly believe that the day liberals and conservatives get along will be a miracle, but one can hope.
ReplyDelete-Rachel Guizado
Period 5
After reading both articles, I couldn't help but to laugh a little only because I don't understand how people can get so upset just cause they do not believe in what they believe in. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and thoughts. Although, both articles made it clear they could not stand the other political party. I consider myself more democratic then republican and my best friend that I grew up with considers herself more republican. I guess I just don't see how a political debate can end friendships and create problems/fights. In long run, any fight or issue will eventually get solved when it is time to vote but that won't change people's opinions on the topic.
ReplyDeleteKortnee Nelson
P.5
The way they act is described in one word: childish. They generalize the people of one party and say they are all alike. Nothing we can do about it. People will change, hopefully.
ReplyDeleteGregory Lumban-Gaol
Period 5
I hate that there’s a type of dogma that follows both conservative and liberal beliefs. If you’re conservative you don’t care for the welfare of others and if you’re liberal you’re sucking off of the government’s teat. Neither of those stigmas represents any of the beliefs that each party has. As we talked about today, our views and stances of what being a Republican and being a Democrat means has gotten so far away from what the original intent of each party was. The reason there is such a divide between parties and mindsets is because we make it that way. Both arguments are extreme but I have seen people act that way, because now these ideologies have become so personal to each and every one of us. When things become more personal people tend to act more extreme because now it doesn’t feel like you’re attacking the way they see how the government should work but rather their own personal set of moral beliefs. Like people have said, being passionate about these things is an amazing thing, I for one find myself feeling strongly in my beliefs, but when you draw a line saying conservatives and liberals cannot interact civilly is where there a misconception. You restrict yourself from hearing other people’s opinions and when there’s name calling involved both ideals are disrespected. In the end some people may not be able to just get along because to many it’s something bigger than just political ideologies but a way they live their life and a way they set their morals. So I don’t think it’s the fact of just getting along but rather accepting people’s opinions and not discrediting them for not being the same as yours.
ReplyDeleteMadison Vlasic
Per. 2
The two articles display a possible social awkwardness between individuals due to their beliefs and opinions. I have fortunately never been in a situation where someone's views have made it an obstacle to have a conversation or a relationship with. However, I am not shocked that these opposing views due to conservative or liberal standards are the elephants in the room. Politics represent the day to day situations and problems in society. Every person has their own opinion based on their own perception of the world. So I understand that some people may be against the government health insurance because it will affect the other people in the country who can afford it but as a positive it will allow every single perosn in the country have a safety net when it comes to health. Each person has their own reason due to the fact that each person has had their own journey. Because each person has their own path there will never be a 100% agreement in any circumstance may it be policies socially or economically. But the variety of opinions is what makes our country as it is today. For our country allows every voice to be heard but it is society's, unfortunately, job whether or not to be respectful or hateful of these voices. Such as a conservative not wanting Barak Obama to be President and be claimed racist or how a liberal wants social welfare for all individuals which may increase taxes and put our government in debt.
ReplyDeleteI find it pretty extreme or unfair to not like someone or stop talking to someone because their opinions do not mirror mine or someone's personally. In the end, we are all citizens who deeply care for our country due to our strong attitudes in politics may it be as a liberal or a conservative.
Zehra Naqvi
Period 5
Although I have never experienced a situation like that mentioned in the two articles, I do understand how opposing views and different political parties can ruin people’s relationships. Ever since our country was founded, people have had different opinions. It is natural to disagree, and these disagreements have caused wars, such as the American Civil War due to disagreement between states, but they are also crucial to the building of this country, such as establishing a two-house legislature that pleases both large and small states while preventing any one party from becoming too oppressive of the other. While I agree with some points mentioned in both articles, both authors have extremist views and overgeneralize that members of the opposing party are all the same, which is not true. The liberal Wagman states that her opinions are “no-brainers to [her], and it kills [her] that [her] neighbor disagrees”, but also stated earlier in the article that her mother “disagreed with their politics and they with hers, but she believed people, no matter how they vote, are basically all the same” showing how although each individual has his or her own opinions, they can still get along. The conservative Allen states that she “love[s] [her] liberal family, friends and academic colleagues, but [tries] to stick to safe conversation topics such as literature, music, food and gossip” as a way to avoid unnecessary fights. Even though it may be easier to befriend those with similar beliefs, it is also perfectly fine to disagree with each other because it points out flaws in both arguments that the person may not have realized before.
ReplyDeleteBoth of the situations presented in the article are rare occasions that occurred when talking to extremists of the other party. However, most Americans are more moderate and less consistent with their views. This makes it easier for them to see issues from the other side’s point of view. I am not denying that talking to someone from the opposite end of the political ideological spectrum can be difficult, but I know it is possible even though it can take a little more patience at first.
Tiffany Ling
Period 2
In all honesty, both of the articles were making either the liberals or the conservatives look like judgmental jerks. There were too many generalizations and stereotypes in both articles. This is America. It's a melting pot of different races, culters, and ideas Everyone's beliefs are not the same. No matter where yo go on this planet that we call Earth, you are going to find a person with different views than. But just because may or may not agree with someone's views or ideas on a topic doesn't mean you generalize them or disrespect them. We all know that liberals rather have equality over liberty and conservatives will rather have liberties over equality. Both of these group are going to clash and argue on who's right or wrong. But the question is: Is there a right or a wrong? You can have many rights and wrongs based on facts and opinions, but does it matter who's right or wrong?
ReplyDeleteAlso, it kind of stupid how the authors were sorta generalizing the opposing group. They didn't even mention moderates. Moderates matter too and they do exist. In conclusion, some people see the world in black and white, others black, white, and gray. Respect there views and get on with your life and quit making a big deal out it. Geez. Some people like chcocolate some people like vanilla. Get over it and quit blowing things out of proportion.
(BTW: If your losing friends because of one disagreement, then that was a waste of time and a waste of a friendship)
Ariel Caddell
p.2
As a moderate myself, I was really startled by these articles because of how vividly they both portray a hate towards the opposing side. For those who are extremists on both spectrum, I feel as if they’re too set in their beliefs to be able to be open-minded and understanding towards the opposing side, which fuels the notion that we all “can’t just get along”. To be open-minded is to be willing to have open ears towards beliefs that may not be parallel with your beliefs. You can be open-minded, yet maintain your original beliefs. I feel like most extremists fail to see this, and instead think that one is open-minded if and only if they adopt a portion, or all, of the new beliefs they are presented with—almost as if a conversion in belief needs to occur in order for someone to be classified as “open-minded”.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the content within the articles, I can see where both sides are coming from, but I feel like the disdain from both sides is fueled by hasty generalizations. For example, in Allen’s article, he states that liberals classify those who oppose same-sex marriage as a homophobe. While some liberals may do so, it does not apply to all, but it has become a popular notion due to hasty generalization that all liberals think like that, which further fuels the divide between the two wings.
Political views shouldn't ruin any relationship—it's not that serious... there's more to a person than his/her political views.
Tiffany Jeng
Period 2
I think both of the articles’ arguments are biased and exaggerated a little too much. All in all, they’re bitter towards one another just because the other side doesn’t believe in their ideology. It’s kind of like saying “Playstation is better than any other gaming console”, and as a result of that opinion you are going to have a massive debate with butthurt nerds arguing which gaming console is better. To me, Republicans and Democrats are really no different; they argue about equality or liberty, gay marriage or terrorism, as if one side needs to win rather than coming to an agreement and meeting somewhere in the middle. I mean, yeah sure, there could be a few ideas or policies from one side that are possibly better than the other in some cases, but most can come to a compromise where ideas from both sides can form a concession where each side is at content. I believe that if people were more receptive to things that are new or different from what they are normally used to, it can open up to a vast array of new ideas that can help progress the country, maybe even the world, into a better position.
ReplyDeleteNathaniel Palilio
Period 2
In the aspect of can Liberals and Conservatives ever truly get along, I believe anything is possible. However these two articles show the extremes of each side and the arguments/situations that occur when Liberals and Conservatives get together. In the end I believe it wouldn't be hard to get along with Populists or Libertarians but it would be these extreme ends such as the people in these articles who are difficult to persuade and allow compromise. This is coming from my Libertarian standpoint looking at these extremists fight their fight. I just would rather focus my time on other things not so ethically reliant.
ReplyDeleteConnor Bess
P. 2
The answer to the question posed about whether or not a liberal can talk to a conservative and vice versa is one that depends on who you ask. With moderates, I believe they can have discussions and debates. However, with true conservatives and liberals, I do not think discussion is possible. It all comes down to who we are as a nation and a people. Americans have ALWAYS been extremely stubborn, and when someone challenges our beliefs, we will fight tooth and nail to defend them. For example, there is nothing that anyone on this planet could say that would convince me that abortion is morally correct. When people are passionate about something, they refuse to look at the other side's viewpoint, as seen in the two articles. Unless there is a dramatic shift in American ideology, I don't think liberals and conservatives will ever be able to "talk" with any hope of achieving anything.
ReplyDeleteSean Sedey
Per.2
We can all get along. On a basic human level. We do it everyday in school; we go about our business without clash or conflict. I hold normal conversations with liberals without drifting into an argument with them. It’s not like the only things we talk about is our views. Our political/social/economical/etc views don’t have to align but we can agree on other things.
ReplyDeleteOur position or placement on the political ideological spectrum is not the only thing that defines us. There is more to us than our political stance. We shouldn’t let our political views isolate us from other people.
Kobe Almoite
P.3
Well, on this article I would have to whole-wholeheartedly with Charlotte Allen's views on how you cannot communicate with liberals. This is for many reasons: 1) You think this way 2) You were raised to think this way 3) you learned it at school. Now this might go vice versa towards conservatism, but in the article Charlotte make a clear point of how liberals take political issues too personal. Just look at this quote from Wagman's post, "He said I needed to get off my butt and take care of myself. I suggested he sign his kids up to die in Iran.." How very personal and inflammatory language. Charlotte also makes a point to say that liberals, once they found out you do not side with them, want to remove all remnants of you from their lives, " But my feelings about them are changed." Finally, its clear that when reading over both articles, Charlotte has the more sophisticated approach to regaling his story with not heated phrases. On the other hand, Wagman makes sure her opinion is voiced many times over in her article without, in my opinion, any sense of rationality.
ReplyDeleteKevin A
-p.5
After reading both articles I was in just utter disbelief. I don't agree with either article. Like many others are stating both articles are completely biased thick skulled individuals that can't have a calm discussion with conservatives/liberals because they are "right". Everyone has their different view points in politics. I believe that liberals and conservatives could get along if no one was so close minded and didn't start yelling and throwing insults at one another after disagreeing over something.
ReplyDelete-Cristina Cabrera P.3
Wow. Reading both of these articles actually sort of annoyed me. The amount of over generalization of each party in each simply gets on my nerves in that, you cannot judge a person's character or how approachable they may be simply on their political ideology. Both articles seem to be attempting to defend very radical situations but also only show a few personal anecdotes by the authors. As a liberal myself, it's obviously frustrating to read the conservative's viewpoint where they imply that all liberals are terrible people that cannot be trusted or approached ever. Both of these articles, in their own ways, frustrated me to no end.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that everyone, as humans, are entitled to their own opinion. And I think that the largest reason that liberals and conservatives don't get along is because people of the radical sides tend to start to be a little more narrow-minded (Even I'm making generalizations, though I am calling both sides of radicals narrow-minded, not just one) and don't bother to be open to hearing another perspective. We all get mad when someone else doesn't believe the same thing we do. And it's frustrating, it is! But it shouldn't be something to drive a wedge through friendships or relationships. If people kept an open-mind, no matter how liberal, conservative, or even moderate one is, there should be no problems getting along, especially if both sides realize they may never get to a definite resolution. The point is that you must see someone else's perspective in order to fully understand your own opinion.
I agree with Tiffany wholeheartedly about the fact that political views should not ruin any sort of relationship. There is absolutely so much more to a person than simply their political ideology. It is absolutely possible for liberals and conservatives to be cordial with one another and civilly debate between one another, it is just a matter of how open of a mind people what allow themselves.
(PS Sorry this is so much later than I when I usually blog. We had a drama show tonight and everything was pushed aside for that moment!)
Rebecca Bowdich
Per3
I'll identify as a strong liberal, so I have to agree with Wagman. I'll acknowledge that conservatives can have some decent points at times, but strong conservatives rarely take liberals seriously. Allen said that "We conservatives think liberals are silly; they think we're evil"; we liberals don't necessarily see conservatives in that way, that's a generalized and, quite frankly, rude accusation. We see their views as detrimental to our society, our equality, and inevitably, our freedom. That doesn't make them monsters, I believe it just makes them either ignorant or narrow-minded, maybe even both. The term narrow-minded can ambiguously be applied to our side as well, but the fact that conservatives don't even take our opinion into account and see our reactions to their views as "drawing blood from the paper-thin epidermis of wounded liberals" (that was very rude, by the way) just proves to show that they have this entitlement to being the only one right. No, we're never going to get along, that's just that. They just need to open their eyes and see they're prioritizing the wrong things. Sometimes we liberals can get "carried away" with personal feelings, but we tie them into our views by valuing equality among Americans before equality with the rest of the world. Until conservatives can start to be willing to at least consider a new perspective, I'll have to side with Wagman on this one. The government needs to be involved to help out the less fortunate; supporting the elites and "Americanizing" other countries before dealing with our problems is counterproductive to true equality, political and economic.
ReplyDeleteLeila Ashman
Period 5
I just got home, and am currently tired and in pain, so I will try my best to answer coherently. I read both articles and had things I both agreed and disagreed with on both articles. One thing that I didn't really like about the articles is that they both played themselves as victims simply because they had opinions. I honestly believe that it's not a hard concept to grasp; there is always gonna be someone who disagrees and/or has a different opinion, and you should never be ashamed that your's is also different from theirs. Just because someone sees something differently than me doesn't mean I need to ruin the poker night or the annual family get together. I'm finding out more and more that I am very liberal and have always been very liberal, but I look back on the friends I've had and remember that they weren't always liberal or even all that democratic. So when both articles talked about ending good friendships over political opinions, I got a little more hot and bothered. Who measures friendships in political standings!?!? That sounds crazy to me in my personal opinion. Then the final thing that bothered me is that both articles implied that a liberal talking to a conservative and a conservative talking to a liberal is like the the only thing harder than pulling apart a flat, 1x1, Lego piece. That sounds incredibly childish and stubborn. Just because we have different opinions does not mean that we can't talk like civilized people, and if you think otherwise, then you're just not wanting to try! I'm just...I'm done. I'm out. Please tell me when grown a** adults learn how to speak like grown a** adults.
ReplyDelete-Cadie Harper Per.3
After reading both of the articles I don't really find myself completely agreeing with either one of them. I think a strong conservative and a strong liberal are capable of having a civil conversation with each other as long as they respect either other. I can admit, with many of the things I feel strongly about, it's hard to stay calm at times. After talking about political ideologies in class and taking the quizzes, I've found that I am more of a libertarian, siding with liberal views on social issues and conservative views on economic issues. That being said, while it may be hard to talk to them about certain things again, I don't think I would lose respect for that person, because everyone has their own opinions, and not all conservatives or liberals are the same. I might see it this way because of the fact that I am more mixed in my opinions, but either way, politics shouldn't ruin any relationship.
ReplyDeleteMadelyn Miller
Period 3
I completely disagree with both articles. I truly believe Liberals and Conservatives can get along. I've had an idea about my political ideology for a while. In the summer of 2014, I was able to take an American Politics course at Chaffey College. This was all thanks to RCHS and their amazing staff. I have been a Roman Catholic for 17 years. I have completed Communion and Confirmation. I tend to lean towards the Liberal side. According to isidewith.org I am a moderate Left-Wing Authoritarian, someone who tends to stand up for those that are oppressed. This is accurate because I am the son of Salvadoreño refugees that witnessed a corrupt national government and a civil war that left 500,000 dead. Feel free to criticize me. I do not mind. Criticism is necessary and I will not get offended at all.
ReplyDeleteThe authors of both articles were very biased in my opinion. Both authors do not appreciate the liberties we have in America. We can express the First Amendment without having to worry about a gun to our heads. We can have civil arguments. This is beyond politics. Humans are complex and we will have differences no matter what. For my fellow Catholics, the beatification of martyred Archbishop Óscar Romero (El Salvador) has been completed. Pope Francis wants this man to become a saint. Unfortunately Óscar Romero was assassinated by a sniper while delivering a mass at a cancer hospital in 1980. The death of this man sparked the 12-year Salvadoreño civil war. Romero defended the poor and criticized the corruption that existed in El Salvador. My mother was able to attend one of Archbishop Romero's masses in 1979 before being held hostage for 3 months in San Salvador. President Obama and Pope Francis have both visited Romero's tomb and have described Romero as an inspiration for all the Americas.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/beatification-of-oscar-romero-paves-way-for-martyred-archbishop-to-become-saint-10272569.html
My best friend is Conservative and a Republican. I argue with him all the time but we don't yell at each other. Maybe that's because my best friend is 29, married to a teacher, and is a father of 2 boys. My best friend has known my older brothers and I for 20+ years. We have to be blunt, some Americans get butthurt very easily. In my opinion words can be meaningless and forgettable. Actions is what we should worry about. Words should bounce off every human being. This is how I feel because my parents have instilled the "Survival of the Fittest" mentality into my brain. To summarize, liberals and conservatives need to stop labeling one another. We need to be able to reach compromises.
Rage Against the Machine, a very controversial American rock band is another reason why I tend to be leftist. Zack De La Rocha, Tom Morello, Tim Commerford, and Brad Wilks all taught me the definitions of assimilation, brutality, conformity, complacency, hypocrisy, ignorance, and submission. Soundgarden and Audioslave are great bands you guys should check out too!
Jonathan Bonilla (Lets Go BRONCOS!!!)
Period 5
.
ReplyDeleteAssuming these articles are reliable, this is actually a significant issue. America needs unity and cooperation in order to thrive as a country. Instead of spending time and resources fighting amongst ourselves, we could be utilizing those resources to fix the actual problems at hand. As a country, we constantly attempt to resolve many problems and these attempts could be a lot more successful with a more unified view.
Justin Owusu
Period 2
I do agree that it is difficult for extreme liberals and extreme conservatives to get along just because it's very difficult to try and open your mind up to opinions that you just fundamentally don't agree with. I believe that both authors did a perfect job at demonstrating that this notion is not a one party thing(even thought they seems to think so). i believe that it is possible for liberals and conservatives to get along and have discussions, it just depends on the people having those discussions. As humans we all have a set of beliefs that we believe are correct based on our experience, which is a large part of why people with vastly different ideologies cannot get along, but not the whole reason. People (SOME PEOPLE) have become increasingly sensitive to issues and tend to make issues quite personal, which makes it very difficult to attempt to have a good discussion. I think as a nation and society we need to work to move away from this type of thinking in order to be able to have these great discussions, because even in class I feel like some people get offended easily and it makes me feel like we can't have these types of discussions, when as long as we are not trying to be offensive, should be something that is allowed to happen.
ReplyDelete-Cambria Visovsky Estrada
Honestly, WHO CARES. It seems ridiculous that both of these authors have such a change of opinion of their friends simply because of their political views. How pitiful is it that two grown adults can't view each other as friends anymore simply because of which category they fall into politically.
ReplyDelete"These things are no-brainers to me, and it kills me that my neighbor disagrees"
Welcome to the U.s., where everyone can have a different opinion. To these authors, it seems that the other person's humor, talents, etc. no longer matters since their political beliefs differ. Both of these articles commit an injustice by painting a picture that tells people that liberals and conservatives are sworn adversaries and can't even stand the sight of each other. While this is true in some cases, it's definitely not true in most. There's nothing wrong with having a minor debate, but going all out and hating someone for their political stance seems utterly childish. You know what, even minor debates are imbecilic. Leave the debating to the politicians. Because when it comes to your opinion, WHO CARES. Save your opinion for when it truly matters, voting. Wasting your breath telling the other person why you're right and they're wrong is pretty dumb. Don't waste your breath arguing with people who likely will never agree with you. Most of us highschoolers and most people in America show more composure than these adults do. We can still be friends with one-another regardless of our views, which is why it's so funny to read that these adults can't do the same. The way these authors present their scenarios is so unrealistic that it's a little comedic. They talk about the difficulty of speaking to one another, when in reality, it's so simple to speak to someone with opposite views without sparking a political argument.
You know what, i'm going to ignore Jacob Rodriguez tomorrow because i can't stand his existence. I can't even look at him because he doesn't agree with me politically. We are now enemies.
-Kingston Murray Per.3
This might be irrelevant but I love music. These lyrics from "Tell Me Why' by P.O.D. are very powerful. All my fellow classmates should listen to this beautiful song.
ReplyDeleteA day with no glory
A heart filled with fear
Still repeating his-story to make ourselves clear
A voice is unheard when it shouts from the hills
Your king in his castle never died on these fields
There's blood on you hands
A smile on your face
A wicked intention when there's money to be made
A room with no windows and a heart that can't feel
Shame with no convictions and a view to a kill.
Tell me why?
Why must we fight?
And why must we kill in the name of what we think is right?
No more! no war!
Cause how do you know?
The hate in your eyes
The lies on your tongue
A hand that kills the innocent
So quick to do wrong
Your belly is full while we fight for what remains
The rich getting richer while the poor become slaves
We kill our own brothers
The truth is never told
If victory is freedom then the truth is untold
Surrender your soul just like everyone else
If love is my religion, don't speak for myself
[chorus]
Jonathan Bonilla
Period 5
I do believe that there is right way for these two differing parties to actually discuss and it all mainly just comes down to the ability to listen and remain respectful. Republicans and Democrats don't have to agree on certain issues, but if being discussed in an argument then I think it is important to try to understand the opposing point of view as best they can so that they just don't start aimlessly fighting and yelling which honestly goes no where. I do believe that there are also some sort of stigmas surrounding each party which taint our views on them and make us think that every person in that specific party follows a certain set of rules which might not specifically be true. I found this out to be true as I always thought of myself most likely a Republican, but it turns out that my liberal view on the economy balances out my conservative social views, thus making me a populist, which I believe accurately describes me pretty well.
ReplyDeleteDiego Nevarez
DeleteP.5
The articles display that both sides of the spectrum are set in their views and cannot tolerate their counterparts oppositions as worded by the authors. It was relatively clear that both over time would have disdain for opposing views and that if noticed would immediately establish contempt upon that individual. Personally I believe that a debate of views can be equitable and not the utter horror as described. Since I reflect more upon the liberal side I sympathize with confusion and frustration of when it comes to social or economic views.
ReplyDeleteThis being said I wondered about how a conservative can have a mindset that can seem drastically different from mine. Understandably most people are graced with their beliefs at a young age from family, friends, culture, religion. Every person has a different environment in which they develop. From financial wealth to financial assistance, privilege or discrimination, religious or irreverent. These factors being taken into account should not lead to hatred. Yet establish an understanding as of why and a respect of their being. It should not justify having broken friendships or overall disrespect That behavior displays pettiness and foolishness which is intolerable at any account.
Samantha Arias
Deletep.5
Jacob Rodriguez, period 3
ReplyDeleteThese articles reminded me of a Pew Research survey studying the increasing political polarization in America. It detailed how the country and people are no longer as moderate as they used to be; more and more are people sliding to either side of the spectrum in almost equal numbers. It also suggested that these people are now more openly hostile to people with opposing political ideology. I see examples of this in the articles; and I do think it is difficult for conservatives and liberals to have substantive debates because they see fundamentally different worlds. Debates are hardly ever intellectual anymore; for this reason I can appreciate legitimate arguments from intelligent people with opposing views to mine. Many of them are my good friends; Jake Hovan, Heath Isley, Kingston Murray and a few others. But, because of the large political divides in this country and their growing intersections, I believe we're heading towards a country that is so split by politics that it will see serious infighting of a destructive nature. The only ones who can save us are those ignorant of political ideology.
liberals and conservatives can hash it out all day but in the end different views dont necessarily mean bad views. just because right wingers discourage (for ex) syrian immigration doesnt mean they are selfish or unforgiving. liberals want higher minimum wages shouldnt be assumed to be lazy or greedy either. Also i dont believe in Allen's argument that conservatives cant talk to liberals, "period". yes both ideologies consist of extremely opposing views but with tolerance of others' feelings and opinions, and sufficient intellect on the political issue being discussed, not conservatives and liberals but everyone who can speak and formulate opinions has it in themselves to peacefully debate out of respect for individual views.
ReplyDelete- Jason Perez
Period 2
I believe that liberals and conservatives can get along, yes there is going to be differences in the way we think because our beliefs but a liberal might be a conservative in one or two aspects and that, for me is one of the reasons why I believe liberals and conservatives can get along.
ReplyDeleteWe tend to go over ourselves because we think our beliefs are always the right ones, but in reality we never know, personally I don´t always agree with everything that my friend say in many social or economical issues but as long as I respect them and they respect me we get along pretty well.
Cristopher Ochoa
P:3
Both articles make strong cases of the typical disagreements that may be seen in the eyes of both parties. However after reading each case, I can't say I would agree with why one side has a stronger stand over the other. Like others have mentioned before, the cases do appear to come out in a biased fashion. Both articles kind of trash the opposing political view for their differences and places them on a negative pedestal. I think it is important not to contrast each other based on their political parties. Instead, it is essential to find common ground among varying ideas in order to be able to get along. This is why it may seem easier for moderates of both parties to be able to hold conversation because neither is extremely dedicated to their view. They can appeal in some fashion to the opinions of the opposing party, and fortunately that can offer compromise in this country.
ReplyDeleteDan Tablac P.3
Honestly, I'm kind of confused as to the importance of this issue? I mean, who really cares that "conservatives can't talk to liberals" or vice versa? Is this really that big of an issue?
ReplyDeleteFor one, the tone of the voice and the treatment of her liberal friend in the conservative perspective and the scene described between the liberal and her neighbor in the liberal perspective indicates that these people do not truly care about which party is better; if they did, they would have a political debate with facts and figures and reliable sources. These people were arguing about their pride. That's why the liberal's argument escalated to a screaming match, and that's why the conservative didn't make up with her friend properly for 6 years: their pride in what they believe in was hurt. A friend is supposed to agree with you no matter what, right? My opinion is right, and you should agree with me. (sarcasm)
If they really wanted change in favor of their political party/stance, they would petition, vote, protest, etc. for what they believe in and not involve themselves with petty arguments such as the "liberal vs. conservative" one with their freaking neighbor.
Obviously though, if someone holds views that disrespects your existence, as in if someone tells me they believe that all Muslims should be banned from immigrating to the United States, then yes, there would be some cause for legitimate argument. But the liberal vs. conservative crap? It's reductive and petty, and merely a platform for people with superiority complexes to show off their psuedo-political prowess. Kind of like a, "I know politics too! I'm relevant! Let me vaguely recite the most basic arguments of my party to [Bystander #3], and if they disagree, I'll yell! That'll surely make me seem like I'm knowledgeable."
And besides, though this is just my personal opinion, it doesn't really matter. Who cares if you vote liberal or conservative? Obviously there will be "cosmetic" changes to the country (think the difference between Trump's policies and Sanders's policies), but in the end, American economy is still a capitalistic imperialistic system. Americans will still oppress workers in the Global South, will still invade countries for profit in the name of "democracy," will still devour the lives and souls of the workers of the world to feed its maws. It doesn't matter if there's a Democratic or Republican president; these aspects are the lifeblood of America. They won't change. There's no point in arguing petty debates of "liberal vs. conservative." We need to focus on real issues.
One unique debate is able to capture the essence of American history: Liberal vs. Conservative. After the American constitution was drafted, Liberal Federalists argued for its ratification while Conservative Anti-Federalists argued for a Bill of Rights (they won). Since then, the presidents have had to reconcile their views with the necessities of statecraft. After all, even Jefferson questioned the constitutionality of his own Louisiana purchase. But, blood runs deep and so does animosity. The Liberal vs. Conservative debate persists to today and people continue to barricade their sides with ever-growing walls. Compromises are becoming harder and harder to make due to shared tension as well as a mutual disdain of the mindset of the other side.
ReplyDeleteLiberals have a tendency to view their conservative counterparts as racist, homophobic, sexist, anti-poor, gun-toting fascists. After all, conservatives have a bit of a negative history in the United States. They are seen as responsible for slavery, Native American conflicts, the KKK, Prohibition, WWII, gender-discrimination, and are now attempting to deny homosexuals the right to marry. However, what liberals do not see is the purpose of conservatism. Conservatives ensure that society does not go too far and that those who are successful are well-rewarded. Naturally, if a man wished to marry his vacuum-cleaner, the conservatives would be right there to stop him. Conservatism provides the balance needed for society to function.
On the other perspective, conservatives often view their liberal counterparts as crackheads, bleeding hearts, communists, socialist, welfare addicts. Yet, they too serve a purpose. Their progressive ideas, while not always correct in practice, drive society forward and prevent conservatives from halting the wheels of change. Of course, a balance must be struck between the two for any true change to occur. If liberals forgive the past and conservatives keep an open mind, then perhaps society will finally be able to better itself.
Michael Yoakam P.3
Seriously?
ReplyDeleteI think both of these authors sound ridiculous. Maybe its because after the four political ideology quizzes I took last night, I came out mostly moderate so both extremes are hard for me to side with.
I just do not see what the big deal is. Why not agree to disagree and move on with your lives? If politics that you aren't even directly involved in can tear friendships apart, you are wrong. I don't care which side it is. If you're a liberal that shouts at your Republican neighbors, you're wrong. If you're a Republican that patronizes your Democratic friend, you're wrong too.
I just don't think politics should ever be taken THIS seriously.
the ideas of both articles really shocked me. i don't believe that republicans or democrats will ever truly get along, because their ideas are so polar opposite, but what they don't seem to realize is that their opinions aren't that different. they are like two sides of the same coin, yes, they may not agree but they should at least realize that everyone believes in that they think is right, whether it is pro life or pro choice, they will always have positive outcomes, be it for the infant, or the mother, they all are going for the same goal: the betterment of this country and its people.
ReplyDeleteRiley Smith
Period 5
I don't believe politics should be taken seriously at all in casual conversations, and I think it's ridiculous that it can even go so far as to ruin friendships. If I found out one of my friends had opposing political to mine I wouldn't really care or try to argue with them about it, and I would hope they'd do the same. But, because I can't be sure how someone would react to my political views I try to avoid conversations about politics as much as I can because i'm afraid that it will lead to arguing and possibly ruining relationships. I just don't think that someone's political views should affect your personal view of them. "I don't want to be friends with someone who is a member of the tea party or is a Newt Gingrich Republican." Well, I don't want to be friends with someone who chooses their friends based on political views.
ReplyDeleteBrandon Hager
Period 3
I do see the reasons to why liberals can't talk to conservatives and vice versa. Especially in this generation, we as a people are very hard headed. If one doesn't believe in another's beliefs, it does result in beamed calling, like the one article said. I am a more conservative person, so I do believe in a lot of the things people would call rude and unfair to the people. The only thing that is my main ideology is no matter what your family income is when you are born, we, the United States, have given you all of the tools needed to become wealthy. If one works as hard as they can they will get through life without struggling. Although that is rational and makes sense to me, it might not to others, but it doesn't mean I'm just going to blow off people with their opinions. But that is me personally. Not many people are open minded to be able to hear someone say they are wrong, but that isn't just for politics, it's for everything. If someone would say the Dallas Cowboys suck, I would not listen, that is just how our generation and society is. We need to be more optimistic before people can discuss politics without calling names, fights, and rants only about ignorance.
ReplyDeleteJoey Mendoza
Per 3