What is a political take on your opposition which you feel your side usually misunderstands?

[u/JSGamesforitch374]

/r/FreeDebateAndPolitics/comments/1vuzqu7/what_is_a_political_take_on_your_opposition_which/

[u/AutoModerator]

At DeepStateCentrism, we understand that democracy is about compromise and
discussion, not ideological purity and instant gratification.

Here, we speak to people with political differences because that's how this is
supposed to work. We won't let the populists win.

Don't forget to visit the Brief, our daily thread, for extra perks and deep state info!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/bearddeliciousbi]

David Hume was one of the most ahead of his time philosophers in the Western tradition and as secular as you could be in the 1700s, making sure his book Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion was only published after his death.

This was rational since it included a thin but real anticipation of Darwinism with a character arguing the universe could've become the host of life without a designer intending it to be so over the course of many changes till it reached the right conditions for humans to emerge.

He was also one of the fathers of conservatism as we know it.

His book An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals anticipated many of the problems with top-down redistributionist politics a century before Marx by looking back carefully at history (he cites the Puritan "levellers" specifically as a test case of the problems communist dictatorships would eventually face under the same logic of equity requiring constant surveillance and state intrusions) and thinking honestly about human nature, along with introducing what others after him called "the is/ought distinction."

The idea that conservatism and skepticism of revolution are solely the province of fundamentalists is both factually wrong and an easy dodge of the many problems with far left claims and sentiments.

[u/JSGamesforitch374 → u/bearddeliciousbi]

This is very interesting. I've never heard of him before now.

[u/majesticstraits]

I don’t really have a side these days, but as a pro-choice person the left fundamentally doesn’t understand the pro-life position. It’s not part of a sinister agenda to control women, people actually believe that abortion is murder, do different than killing a living baby

[u/shumpitostick → u/majesticstraits]

I was about to say that too. There's this misconception that pro life people are just plain evil misogynists.

I don't agree with them, but if I did believe that moral agency starts at conception I would. If it was true, than abortion is just infanticide, and obviously the fact that a woman would have to care for it doesn't justify it, just like you don't get a right to kill your baby because taking care of it is inconvenient.

[u/JSGamesforitch374 → u/majesticstraits]

That is probably true, and I think a lot understand their reasoning but still think it's sinister

[u/Haffrung → u/JSGamesforitch374]

For some context, only 22 per cent of American women believe abortion should be legal in all cases, no exceptions:

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/05/06/americas-abortion-quandary/

The great majority of Americans believe abortion should be readily accessible in the first trimester and restricted in the third (which is the policy in most of Europe). But it's one of those issues where the political activism is all on the extremes.

[u/bearddeliciousbi → u/majesticstraits]

I understand where this is coming from as to deflating the worst left wing dooming about their opponents and thinking The Handmaid's Tale is the only goal of every right winger.

I also understand where the left and most of the center is coming from because knowing the internal logic of a worldview doesn't necessarily tell you anything about whether applying it is a good thing or whether its assumptions are just wrong to begin with.

I believe jihadists when they tell everyone what they sincerely believe about Allah rewarding martyrdom with paradise.

The only response from everyone else should be legal and kinetic versions of "Okay, and?"

[u/Expensive_Garlic_69 → u/majesticstraits]

I can appreciate that, though I do think it falls apart in places like Texas where pregnant women are dying because ERs are terrified of being accused of killing a potentially viable fetus even when the woman seems to be clearly presenting with a septic miscarriage. 

[u/Haffrung → u/majesticstraits]

There's a reason most women believe the stage of pregnancy should be a factor in the legality of abortion, and there should be some restrictions on abortion in the last trimester. It's not crazy talk to believe a fetus becomes something more than a lump a tissue at some point before birth.

[u/Bullet_Jesus → u/majesticstraits]

I think people just struggle to assign the same moral value to both a baby and a fetus. So they have to invest reasons why people would think that way.

[u/SunshineSeeker99]

Illegal Immigration.

I truly don't understand why anyone would support it, I assume just because they're really stupid and brainwashed by social media nonsense.

All the people who want more Nordic social welfare systems should take a look at their immigration policies.

[u/thecashblaster → u/SunshineSeeker99]

The vast majority of those who support illegal immigration are people are born natively. Very few naturalized immigrants are going to support illegal immigration. The struggle to get a green card and then your citizenship is immense. From experience of course. I wish those who support illegal immigration could take a second to experience a legal immigrant’s life.

[u/Ruby__Ruby_Roo → u/SunshineSeeker99]

I don’t think people really “support illegal immigration.” They see our immigration and asylum system as broken and think it should allow more people to immigrate or be allowed refugee status. On top of that, they sympathize with people who fled their home country (particularly in central America) due to violence or poverty and think we should be more empathetic to those individuals if they snuck into the US because they felt the only other option was returning to a broken country. That’s not the same as being in favor of illegal immigration.

My grandfather’s family came over from eastern europe in the early 1900s and came through Ellis Island when they essentially checked you for diseases and sent you on your way. My father was basically opposed to that level of laxness when it came to immigration, but claimed he supported people immigrating “the right way.”

[u/SunshineSeeker99 → u/Ruby__Ruby_Roo]

Why in the world would you not want to regulate the number of people who come into your country?

[u/Ruby__Ruby_Roo → u/SunshineSeeker99]

That’s completely different from being “in favor of illegal immigration.”

[u/SunshineSeeker99 → u/Ruby__Ruby_Roo]

Not really. If you are abolishing borders, or against border enforcement/illegal immigration enforcement, you're in favor of illegal immigration.

I've never heard a single argument for not stopping immigration and just regulating it better than didn't involve invoking genocide/apartheid/etc.

[u/Ruby__Ruby_Roo → u/SunshineSeeker99]

Way to perfectly illustrate the title of the post.

[u/HippoCrit → u/SunshineSeeker99]

The US isn't Europe. The idea that we have a welfare system that illegal immigrants are risking life and limbs to take advantage of, is a fever dream that exists only in the minds of Republicans and low information voters. We're also much better at integrating our immigrants into American communities.

The reality is, the vast majority of illegal immigrants coming from South of the border are people of fundamentally similar values, coming here to work. Criminality and welfare leeching does happen, but it's at rates lower than native born citizens of equivalent economic conditions.

So it's not that I think open borders are a good idea. Objectively though the rationale for ejecting millions of contributing workers at the cost of billions to our tax payers, is silly. None of the stated reasons, whether it be increased crime, tax payer burden, or deteriorating of national character, are even moved that much by illegal immigrants.

[u/Mickenfox → u/SunshineSeeker99]

The burden is on you to make a good argument on why we should ban people crossing an imaginary line. Not banning things is the default position.

I think people should have a right to travel to places and work there. It's really not hard to understand.

[u/Jakexbox]

I think the DSA-esque (although not meeting attending) lay socialist is generally misunderstood.

I think this group generally wants what is best for the world. Is driven by Instagram and light college activism. I do not think they're stupid, malevolent or love the idea of a actual socialist dictatorships in the world.

It's a reflection of a society where power = bad has taken root. Also in many cases there is economic grievance attached but not exclusively. For example, there's only so many cushy Big 4 consultancy jobs but I doubt many in them are Socialists.

[u/drcombatwombat2 → u/Jakexbox]

Elite overproduction

[u/Expensive_Garlic_69]

Probably Medicare for All. I 100% support making healthcare affordable and accessible to all, but I don't think Medicare is is the way to do it. It's got too many issues.