The Cost of Disagreement

The state of current political discourse unfortunately can be summed up as such:

Express a conservative view? You are now (choose one, at least):

  1. Homophobic
  2. Xenophobic
  3. Islamophobic
  4. Sexist
  5. Racist
  6. Intolerant
  7. Bigoted

This is, of course, a generalization. There are still many civilized people who can have an intellectual debate about topics without resorting to Ad Hominem attacks. I know several people who do not debate in this way at all. Also, in no way am I trying to claim this is 100% exclusive to one side or the other. However, if you read around, you’ll find this to be overwhelmingly true with much of rhetoric from Left-wing radio such as Air America, and overwhelmingly dominating online discussion as well as what is known as ‘The Far Left’ (DailyKos, HuffPo,, Media Matters, Olbermann, etc – the list goes on and on…).

I think that the reason for this phenomenon has to do with the fact that conservative values and viewpoints are highly marginalized by modern culture, and in general, completely misunderstood. The reason for this misunderstanding is because our culture is overwhelmingly left of center. You don’t have to dig around to learn what the Liberal viewpoint is, as we are bombarded with it every day (this acts as subtle brainwashing, by the way). Movies, TV, and our education system (especially college) all lean significantly to the left. Think I’m crazy? Consider this: If you are a Christian, when was the last time our culture (which is predominantly secular) accurately or fairly portrayed your belief system? This same thing happens with conservative values.

Sadly, the only knowledge most people have of conservative viewpoints are handed to them by left leaning sources. These sources do not, I repeat, do not try to understand. They only exist to make points. But making points does nothing more than divide and lead to misunderstanding. If you truly wish to understand conservatives – you cannot rely on Hollywood, TV shows, and your average college professor to give conservative positions a fair shot. You must get down to the source.

If you truly seek to understand someone – you must learn their point of view FROM THEM, not from people who disagree with them.

I think that this flooding of one sided opinion has led to a crucial difference: Conservatives believe that the Left, are wrong. The Left believe that conservatives, are bad.

Heck – before I understood conservative values, I thought ‘they’ were bad. I remember the fetching Mrs. Wtc would ask me what my stance was on various issues (big government or small, taxes, gun control, national defense, American sovereignty, welfare, etc. etc.). It turned out, I actually held fairly conservative views – but for some reason I didn’t want to be ‘a conservative’. Though I held traditional conservative ideals, I resisted calling myself conservative for at least a couple of years. Why? Because I had this bogus notion that they were bad and evil – that if I was conservative, then I would suddenly have to 100% agree with Pat Robertson, or that I would be a pawn of ‘Evil Corporations’, or that I would have to support burning the rain forest, or some horse-crap like that.

The question was – how did I get these ridiculous ideas? Why did I have such a fear of being ‘one of those conservatives?’ The reason was because the only thing I knew about conservatives had been fed to me through movies, TV and school. You know, where the CIA, Oil companies, and Big Business owners are always the real bad guys. Or where people who questioned environmentalism were portrayed as evil ‘deniers’. Or maybe it was all the children’s cartoons where the evil characters were hunters, “the white-men”, or simply just: Pollution:

The Last Rainforest?

This is why I am now so much more passionate about conservative ideas. I don’t believe that Liberal ideas should be squelched or drowned out – I simply want conservative ideas to be understood and given a fair chance.

As it is, the current portrayal of traditional and conservative values, is based on nothing more than labeling and marginalization. It does no-one any good, and it doesn’t help promote honest debate – something this divided country desperately needs. Good discourse relies on debate over the grounds upon which decisions are made – not just calling a group names based on preconceived stereotypes because you happen to disagree.

So the moral to the story is: Make an attempt to understand what people who you disagree with think. But get that information from them. Then, and only then, will you be able to have an intelligent and sophisticated discussion. And remember, clarity is of far more value than agreement.

Some definitions:

  • Homophobic: prejudiced against homosexual people
  • Xenophobic: having abnormal fear or hatred of the strange or foreign
  • Islamophobic: a controversial neologism defined by some as a prejudice against or demonization of Muslims.
  • Sexist: discriminatory on the basis of sex (usually said of men’s attitude toward women)
  • Racist: a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others
  • Intolerant: unwilling to tolerate difference of opinion (That’s the real definition – not what common usage has come to mean: A person who has a difference of opinion.)
  • Bigoted: blindly and obstinately attached to some creed or opinion and intolerant toward others

7 Responses to “The Cost of Disagreement”

  1. Matt Turkington Says:

    Another big thing I’ve noticed, related to those definitions, is that simply disliking or disagreeing with a group gets you labeled as a “hater.” This is probably most prevalent in regard to homosexuality, though I could say the same about Islam. I do not agree with either. More strongly than that, I believe they are morally wrong and blatant, willful perversions of life as God intended. That does not, however, mean I am homophobic or….Islamophobic (really?). I do not have an abnormal fear or hatred of either group, I simply believe they are dead wrong. And I am entitled to that position without being marginalized as a -phobe or hater. See also: tolerance. It means I can disagree with you.

  2. whatthecrap? Says:

    Immigration is exactly the same. How does being against illegal immigration = anti-immigrant? Robot voice:DOES NOT COMPUTE!. I am absolutely pro-immigration and absolutely anti illegal immigration. They are different things entirely.

    And, Yes – you are describing the perversion of the word “Tolerance.” The word itself implies that a disagreement exists. There must be one for someone to “tolerate.” But the modern usage of intolerant implies a person who disagrees. It is then a suicidal statement to label someone who disagrees with you intolerant. You yourself just failed to tolerate their difference in opinion. You disagreed! Why don’t people get that?

  3. The Real Obama « What The Crap? - Says:

    […] town folk xenophobic gun-toten’ fundamentalists. For some reason, xenophobia has become a label often applied to conservatives and I think it has a lot to do with this next […]

  4. C.S. Lewis on -soft- Tyranny « What The Crap? - Says:

    […] Back to what Lewis was saying. Whether we elect John McCain or Barack Obama this year, the country is not going to immediately spiral into tyranny. However, some of the ideas that BOTH McCain and Obama are pushing are small steps in this direction. Do not be fooled into feeling guilty when it comes to social issues by the nice (morally imperative) way that they are packaged: “It’s for the children, the elderly, the environment, fill in the blank… (One real world example: Al Gore has stated that the climate problem is not a political issue, it’s a moral issue. Thus, people who disagree, or might question his position aren’t just wrong, they’re immoral. I wrote a whole post about this topic called The Cost of Disagreement.) […]

  5. Gotta get ‘um when they’re young… « What The Crap? - Says:

    […] can read my original Fern Gully post here. Posted in Absurd Crap, Controversial Crap, Eviro Crap, Factual Crap. Tags: anthropomorphic […]

  6. Senate Majority Leader - Connecting Fannie Mae Exec to Obama is Racism « What The Crap? - Says:

    […] already written about this pathetic labeling at great length. This looser tactic is for intellectual cowards that can’t mount a good argument or […]

  7. Financial Affirmative Action and ACORN Voter Fraud « What The Crap? - Says:

    […] By contrast – conservative ideas are never well intentioned – even if they somehow miraculously end up making sense and doing something good. More here. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: