Why I am a social conservative but an economic liberal (or why I am a moderate Republican)

[greybeta]

Eventually, any blogger who is interested in politics must give away his or her own politics in her writing. Most of my fine friends know that I am a registered Republican, yet I neither walk nor quack like a bigoted conservative. Since I am someone who is afraid of what people think of my true opinions likes to hide their true thoughts, I can appear to waffle on almost every political subject. That's what I get for trying to listen to both sides. The problem with saying you'll listen to both sides is that you appear weak. Kerry lost because he seemed to be wishy-washy while Bush at least pretended that the Republicans knew what was best for the country. Appearances count for a lot in our fast food American culture.

I was a lot closer to Kerry in political ideals but Bush convinced me to vote for him.

bonerici taught me something about writing on politics. Politics is something where people are emtionally charged. You may not always be able to use pure reason and logic to win arguments. Sometimes, you purposely have to p*ss off the enemy to get them off base and let them fall into your hands. Ferrett-sensei once wrote that you should try to write more to the left or right than you really are because you will learn more about yourself that way. That's because we often know more about our enemies than our friends. Mrs. Ferrett once wrote that we often forget about the Silent Majority when it comes to politics. The Silent Majority are people like me who'd prefer to keep their political opinions unknown.

You can only make enemies by talking religion and politics.

On those political memes, I usually score close towards the middle. Something like 55% conservative and 45% liberal. This fits right into my moderate Republicanism. On the political memes with the four quadrants, I think I scored as Totalitarian, or whatever one was in Quadrant III for my algebraicly proficient friends. This labeled me as a social conservative but an economic liberal.

How is it even possible to be a social conservative but an economic liberal?

Let's see here, my parents grew up in a traditional Asian family. Many traditional Asian philosophies jive with conservative philosophies, namely the respect for authority. My parents also had some irrational hatred of the Kennedys, so the Republican party it was for them. And they're exactly the type of voters Bush likes: Straight-ticket voters. Yep, when my mom and dad see that R next to someone's name, they're checking it. I mean the Republican candidate could have been arrested for murdering his opponent and my parents would still vote for the guy with the R next to his name. They believe in an all-or-nothing philosophy; either you believe in your party or you don't.

I also grew up in a Southern Baptist church, which as most people know is one of the most conservative denominations in Protestantism. The Southern Baptist Convention does not allow women clergy and they even once unsuccessfully tried to ban Disney from their congregations due to the fact that Disney hired gay employees. Teenager mothers are stigmas in a Brimstone Baptist church, as are gays, lesbians, transsexuals, polyamorites, etc. Sunday dress is a big deal with Brimstone Baptists because one should put on his or her best face in front of the Almighty Lord (i.e., boys should not wear earrings, girls should wear skirts that go past their knees, and goth wear in general is fronwed upon). Never forget your Bible, which is the immutable Word of God. Sinners go to hell each week, so make sure you and your loved ones are saved. Friends, too. No dancing, drinking, or watching naughty movies. Anything with witchcraft or Satanic imagery is contraband, so no Harry Potter or Magic: The Gathering. Do not allow your children to watch blaspheming shows like The Simpsons, Family Guy, or South Park. Baptists put all their vices into their casseroles (that's why they taste so good).

Through my education, I have become an economic liberal. I want to be a teacher, so it saddens me to see No Child Left Behind backfiring. It was a good idea in theory, but now many teachers are leaving their profession simply because it's not worth putting up with the pressure of preparing kids to deal with standardized tests. You know what? Standardized tests a life do not make. There's more to education than just grades. Grades and tests only function as indicators of success. Basing federal funding is insisting too much on instant results. It's like major league baseball (Bush was once owned part of a MLB team, after all). Major League Baseball has a 162 game season (it's a looooong season, often boring to those who only casually follow baseball). Inevitably, there is some team like the Oakland Athletics who struggle at the start. Fans call for a general firing and lament that the owners do not spend enough. But then by season's end Oakland has righted the ship and the general manager, Billy Beane of Moneyball fame, looks like a genius. Oakland did not throw more money at the problem...they took their lumps developing inexperienced players and fielded a competitive team. Right now, No Child Left Behind is like the Yankees throwing a bunch of money on a Randy Johnson and losing anyways because they're overspending on everything.

Welfare is another subject where I am liberal on. I think most conservatives hate giving "free rides" to people. Why can't most people get a job instead of living off the state? Taxpayers' dollars could be going into more worthwhile projects. The example that I've always heard is one about a drug addict. Would you rather just give the addict a one hundred dollars or do you make him work for it? In both cases, there's a good chance the addict finds a way to get his drugs but at least in the latter you make him a productive member of society. But there are just too many fringe cases where it's not that clear cut. Plus, I believe one's health should be provided for by the state.

There's more to it than this, but I've been trying to limit myself to the point. I'm like most people in that I think your vote doesn't count (hence the icon). The Democrats and Republicans are so entrenched in the two party system that I don't foresee that being broken up until America loses a major war. Also notice that my definitions may not be what most people think of conservative or liberal. That's because I believe both terms have been hijacked from their true meaning. I do know that I am a social conservative and economic liberal, however.

Try to tell me that I am wrong.

Comments

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

It needs tearing back down to the roots, and no one's got the guts to do it.
I think we also have the ironic situation of the people who might have the guys to do fix the system are far from being put in a position to do so.

Bad writing. You discuss the arguments of others, then just make a statement and go on.
Yeah...I need to start breaking my two page limit to explain things better.

I also note that you talk about "how you was raised," but do not state your own feelings on Harry Potter, the Simpsons, or alternative lifestyles. From other things I've read, I suspect you are more of a social moderate than conservative.
To be completely honest, I'm probably close to a social and economic moderate. However, in our two party system, you often get diametrically opposed choices. Apparently, being pro-life, for capital punishment, and in support of banning gay marriage makes me a social conservative.

But I'm still going to watch my Simpsons and Family Guy, Southern Baptist Convention be danged. ;)

[zoethe.livejournal.com]

No, you don't have to break your two-page limit. You need to focus your arguments and not try to fit a huge topic under one umbrella.

And you are not alone in being a mix of pros and antis. A lot of people are.