Conservative

480 readers

655 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago

212

Why Are Conservatives More Susceptible to Believing Lies? (slate.com)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

68 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Many conservatives have a loose relationship with facts. The right-wing denial of what most people think of as accepted reality starts with political issues: As recently as 2016, 45 percent of Republicans still believed that the Affordable Care Act included “death panels” (it doesn’t). A 2015 poll found that 54 percent of GOP primary voters believed then-President Obama to be a Muslim (…he isn’t).

Why are conservatives so susceptible to misinformation? The right wing’s disregard for facts and reasoning is not a matter of stupidity or lack of education. College-educated Republicans are actually more likely than less-educated Republicans to have believed that Barack Obama was a Muslim and that “death panels” were part of the ACA. And for political conservatives, but not for liberals, greater knowledge of science and math is associated with a greater likelihood of dismissing what almost all scientists believe about the human causation of global warming.^___^

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't understand the distinction you make on restrictions.
You have no choice than to respect those rules, or you will be fined or sent to jail. How is this not a restrictions on what you can decide?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago

i think i see where the misunderstanding lies.

so, if the state says that being in gay relationships is allowed.. for me as a gay person, that changes nothing. all it does for me in a gay relationship is that the state wont be in my way because of my choice of partners.

now if u as an individual had an issue with my relationship, the state would (ideally) restrict u from attacking me on that grounds.

so, ig i agree that in that sense, the state will restrict an individual on how much power they can exert on other individuals. as the saying goes: ur freedom ends where mine begins.

How is this not a restrictions on what you can decide?

so as an individual, i may decide what gender i want to be in a relationship with, because the state wouldnt get in my way.

but if i wanted to decide for someone else what their relationships should look like, then the state would intervene.

on that point, as an openly queer person myself, i dont really see the state in a protective role of me in that way. if i got in a situation where im attacked on these grounds.. empathy, warmth, solidarity, from bystanders and from friends, would be what i need. cops and other state actors are more likely to be the cause of discrimination, than the thing that stops it and heals the wounds.

so to ur original point that progressive countries still want to impose restrictions on ppl.. i think that is a point where leftists would split between those who think a state is necessary to fight discrimination and power imbalance, and those who think states are the perpetuators of discrimination and imbalances of power.

and in my opinion, with the definition of authoritarianism that i gave, any ideology that necessitates a state will be inherently authoritarian, although a progressive one perhaps less so than a conservative one.