Are conservative parties hateful?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Almost as if there's a difference, huh. If I could just wildly speculate, maybe that Jews aren't destroying the planet and making millions of people suffer but the rich are.

And furthermore, the left doesn't hate the rich, it simply wants to remove the existence of such classes and remove exploitation.

Are you sure, 100%, that liberalism doesn’t engage in exploitation too? Ever?

[Kiu Ghesik]

Time to appropriate this thread and turn it into Marxism III.

Well, I think we should go back to topic (as much as I would like Marxism III).

Mmm, fine...

[Sanghyeok]

And furthermore, the left doesn't hate the rich, it simply wants to remove the existence of such classes and remove exploitation.

Are you sure, 100%, that liberalism doesn’t engage in exploitation too? Ever?

Liberalism absolutely engages in exploitation- although I was talking about leftism as a force for removing exploitation. I think liberalism is not as hateful as conservatism, which is why it is a lesser of the evils.

[Albrenia]

And furthermore, the left doesn't hate the rich, it simply wants to remove the existence of such classes and remove exploitation.

Are you sure, 100%, that liberalism doesn’t engage in exploitation too? Ever?

All sides of the political spectrum have their own share of guilt to carry.

[Rio Cana]

In answering the OP's question. It all depends on the right wing ideology they are pushing. Some are more civil while others can be too over the top. But you got to admit, some of those conservative parties do have catchy jingles and propaganda which more then likely gets people to support them even though there message is not really to there benefit. Same goes for the left.

Warning - do not watch if you hate right wing jingles/propaganda. For example, the following from mid-20 century Spain which still today brings so called national pride to some people. Video comes with English subtitles - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4qvZT_y2g4

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Are you sure, 100%, that liberalism doesn’t engage in exploitation too? Ever?

Liberalism absolutely engages in exploitation- although I was talking about leftism as a force for removing exploitation. I think liberalism is not as hateful as conservatism, which is why it is a lesser of the evils.

From where I’m standing, I don’t vouch for any ideology. At all. Everything is corruptible. *shrug* I mean, reading the progression of this thread proved that so well. All sides are capable of being hateful. The difference is who you think is worse, but that mentality can also be your undoing.

[Celritannia]

Ehhhh, I'd argue David Harper was quite centrist.

Stephen*??

edit: lol ik this could be a joke. who’s David though?

Ha, not entirely sure

Anyway, edited now.

[Saiwania]

Well, why the assumption that hatred is a flaw or bad to begin with? I'd say it is better to be with what you stand for than against it. If you're too empathetic or compassionate, that is inherently a position of weakness. It is like leaving yourself open for an attack during a fight. What people should know best is to go with their tribe or faction and stay within it.

[Albrenia]

Well, why the assumption that hatred is a flaw or bad to begin with? I'd say it is better to be with what you stand for than against it. If you're too empathetic or compassionate, that is inherently a position of weakness. It is like leaving yourself open for an attack during a fight. What people should know best is to go with their tribe or faction and stay within it.

Which worked out really great for all those native tribes who stood against united empires.

[Major-Tom]

Stephen*??

edit: lol ik this could be a joke. who’s David though?

Ha, not entirely sure

Anyway, edited now.

A portmanteau of David Cameron and Stephen Harper, perhaps?

[Celritannia]

Ha, not entirely sure

Anyway, edited now.

A portmanteau of David Cameron and Stephen Harper, perhaps?

Quite possibly.
Cameron was indeed quite centrist too.

[The Emerald Legion]

Which is why increasingly the left has pushed to eliminate people with religious beliefs from the government, and tried to normalize forcing religious people to violate their beliefs if they want to work.

And, no. They just paint their eugenics programs as not eugenics programs.

Moving the goalposts a little now, I see. It's gone from 'religious people from society' to 'religious beliefs in government'.

Anyway, religious beliefs should be personal and sacred, but never enforced on others. Discrimination in general is illegal for everyone too, not just the religious.

Not really. They stayed right where they were because it's not just religious people in government they want gone. It's religion period. You're allowed to observe your religion insofar as it doesn't conflict with standards largely drafted by an irreligious authority. Which means in most cases you can't actually practice your religion in any real way.

Much like if I tried to tell you that you're allowed to be gay, but you can only have heterosexual sex, you would call foul.

[Albrenia]

Moving the goalposts a little now, I see. It's gone from 'religious people from society' to 'religious beliefs in government'.

Anyway, religious beliefs should be personal and sacred, but never enforced on others. Discrimination in general is illegal for everyone too, not just the religious.

Not really. They stayed right where they were because it's not just religious people in government they want gone. It's religion period. You're allowed to observe your religion insofar as it doesn't conflict with standards largely drafted by an irreligious authority. Which means in most cases you can't actually practice your religion in any real way.

Much like if I tried to tell you that you're allowed to be gay, but you can only have heterosexual sex, you would call foul.

I'll agree that some of my more enthusiastic irreligious fellows do indeed take it too far, most of us secularists fully support such things as being able to wear religious garb (minus face concealing stuff where that can cause problems, in some cases), take religious time off for prayer or particular events, talk openly about their beliefs, and so on.

If your religion involves things which are illegal for the rest of us though, that is just too bad. You don't get to break the law because your religion says it's ok. You must indeed suffer a witch to live.

Unless you get enough support to change the law I guess, but then it's not a matter of 'only Christians can burn witches', it's a case of witch burning being legal.

[Crockerland]

Because exterminating those who routinely vote for you and offending the majority of the population is totally their goal.

Unless we're not talking about authoritarian communism, in which case yeah, fuck them.

Which is why increasingly the left has pushed to eliminate people with religious beliefs from the government, and tried to normalize forcing religious people to violate their beliefs if they want to work.

Weren't Leftists the ones who just recently made it permissible to wear a Hijab in congress?

Anyways, If your religious beliefs violate other people's rights (IE: The Quran says it's okay to kidnap women and rape them), you shouldn't expect to be above the law just because you can say "God told me I can do this."

[Major-Tom]

Which is why increasingly the left has pushed to eliminate people with religious beliefs from the government, and tried to normalize forcing religious people to violate their beliefs if they want to work.

Weren't Leftists the ones who just recently made it permissible to wear a Hijab in congress?

Anyways, If your religious beliefs violate other people's rights (IE: The Quran says it's okay to kidnap women and rape them), you shouldn't expect to be above the law just because you can say "God told me I can do this."

It's hard to tell where you're going with this.

One can wear a Cross in Congress the same way one can wear a Hijab, I don't think that is an overly partisan thing, it's just...well, freedom of expression? I've seen you provide some effective rebuttals before, but this seems to be grasping entirely at straws and is predicated on a narrative of "Left like Islam, so Left Hateful."

[Crockerland]

Weren't Leftists the ones who just recently made it permissible to wear a Hijab in congress?

Anyways, If your religious beliefs violate other people's rights (IE: The Quran says it's okay to kidnap women and rape them), you shouldn't expect to be above the law just because you can say "God told me I can do this."

It's hard to tell where you're going with this.

One can wear a Cross in Congress the same way one can wear a Hijab, I don't think that is an overly partisan thing, it's just...well, freedom of expression? I've seen you provide some effective rebuttals before, but this seems to be grasping entirely at straws and is predicated on a narrative of "Left like Islam, so Left Hateful."

Who was making this argument? I'm saying the victimhood complex some right-wing religious people have in the US for not being treated as above the law based on their religion is ridiculous.

[Disgraces]

Conservatives are stuck in the past. Therefore, yes.

[Empirical Switzerland]

Conservatives are stuck in the past. Therefore, yes.

How? Tbh this response is very...unsupported...and kinda just straightup false in my opinion.

[Disgraces]

Conservatives are stuck in the past. Therefore, yes.

How? Tbh this response is very...unsupported...

It's literally in the name

[Kexholm Karelia]

Conservative parties are built on love, loving God, Jesus, our country, liberty, and equality of oppertunity

Far leftist parties on the other hand are built on hate, every single far left party that has ever come to power has managed to create a genocide and kill millions of people, and the world’s most evil organization today, the Chinese Communist Party, continues to be cheered on by its overseas useful idiots

[Imperium of Dragonia]

Ah yes, the "anyone who values common sense, morality, and basic fucking human decency is a bigot" thread. This is only the hundredth one in the past five years.
Anyways, no, they aren't hateful. They are perceived as hateful by people who have a very narrow viewpoint and are utterly unwilling to see what the other side has to say. The same people who call conservative parties hateful also crack down on wrong-think has more layers of irony than the file sizes of Hunter Biden's laptop.

[Fahran]

How? Tbh this response is very...unsupported...

It's literally in the name

Ben Shapiro?

[Albrenia]

Ah yes, the "anyone who values common sense, morality, and basic fucking human decency is a bigot" thread. This is only the hundredth one in the past five years..

Those things aren't the defining characteristics of Conservatism, to be fair. Trumpism rather goes to prove that.

[The Orion Islands]

As a proud Catholic Republican, I find a party that wants the best for all Americans. We don't have hate towards any group, but instead a desire for all Americans to be able to chart their own course, with a small government that only interferes when it is necessary to keep someone from unnatural harm. It is our desire to create a color blind America. We set the slaves free. We fought for decades against Southern Democrat obstructionism in the struggle for civil rights. We want a just America. Calling us racist is just a scare tactic, used by the left to keep blacks and Hispanics from discovering what we really are and how we can help them.

[Kexholm Karelia]

Ah yes, the "anyone who values common sense, morality, and basic fucking human decency is a bigot" thread. This is only the hundredth one in the past five years.
Anyways, no, they aren't hateful. They are perceived as hateful by people who have a very narrow viewpoint and are utterly unwilling to see what the other side has to say. The same people who call conservative parties hateful also crack down on wrong-think has more layers of irony than the file sizes of Hunter Biden's laptop.

good one