this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
577 points (94.5% liked)
Asklemmy
43948 readers
745 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As a species we need a mix of progressive and conservative people. Progressives act as a sort of antennae force finding new ways to approach the world while conservatives are there for if we progress in a way that is ultimately harmful. Finding the right balance and control system is the hard part, not fitting everyone into a progressive or conservative ideology
Conservatives are entirely driven by prejudice and to maintain power structures. Conservative ideology was literally created by English and French aristocrats who saw the writing on the wall for the monarchy and nobility and needed to ensure that the aristocracy continue to be in charge. Today they serve to ensure that white cishet men remain in power. We absolutely 1000% do not need conservatives in society. This both sides are valid nonsense only serves to further entrench power structures and oppress minorities
I used to think that as well. Now I think that modern conservatism is founded on a rejection of modernity. Conservatives do not want to be a break to make sure progress is slow but steady. They want to turn the car around and drive the other way. People who are willing to try new things aren't above pointing out something was a mistake. Progressives can try a new idea and then reject it based on new evidence. Progressives do no need a mechanism that is constantly trying to wrench the steering wheel out of their hands and turn the car around in an endless exercise of driving in circles.
What a mix of progressive and conservative people actually leads to is an absolute deadlock in government. Conservatives are not simply hesitant to try new things. They would rather die than see the world change. And they would rather blame their problems on immigrants, people of color, lgbtq+ people, anyone other than their political views that are derailing our economy and the planet's environment.
We can have disagreements on policy and implementations. Two sides to an argument can allow a person to walk down the middle. But that's not what we have currently with progressives and conservatives. There is plenty of room for discussion on how to go about solving a problem like climate change. But that isn't the kind of discussion we are having with conservatives. Conservatives are fundamentally opposed to the idea that there are existential problems that need to be solved. And the only problems that they do see are other people.
Yes you're right about our current conservative population but the problem is still that they have too much power to limit progressives from taking actions to fix things or try solutions at best
We need less progressives and less conservatives. What we need more of is radicals.
You're thinking in terms of political ideology a radical progressive is someone taking out all the stops to fix things. It's a bell curve not a checkbox saying what alignment you are
"Progressive" is merely another word for reformist... ie, people who will (at best) achieve absolutely nothing except the continuation of "business as usual."
What meagre labor protections (for instance) the working class in the west has wasn't won because of reformists... it was won in spite of them by militant and thoroughly radical labor organising.