Are conservative parties hateful?

[Sanghyeok]

They are still socialist, there is no way you can deny if they are left wing or not.

Well, as far as I'm concerned... the CCP is in another universe from the leftist parties that Sanghyeok was probably thinking of (and the parties that would come to most of our minds).

The Democratic Party in the US, the Labour Party in New Zealand (Jacinda Ardern's party) or any garden-variety centre-left/progressive party in Europe are what comes to mind when I hear "mainstream left parties" (Sanghyeok's words)... and they seem to not rally around hate as much as accommodating a variety of people groups. Of course, you all may have different perceptions of the left.

To answer the original question:
I can only speak to the United States, and my answer would be no, although it can seem that way. Our conservative party (the Republican Party) appears to be most concerned with preserving the status quo. Individual supporters of the party seem to be pretty unforgiving, though. That's how I would characterize them.

I'd like to read more posts from this thread though because the question is actually interesting IMO and it helps shine a light on how people of different political leanings think about stuff...

I wouldn't count the Democratic Party from the US as leftist, but compared to their counterparts they are "leftist".

[Telconi]

Why is it hateful?

Hating gay people isn't hateful? Interesting.

Strawmen are always hateful tho.

[Celritannia]

They are still socialist, there is no way you can deny if they are left wing or not.

Well, as far as I'm concerned... the CCP is in another universe from the leftist parties that Sanghyeok was probably thinking of (and the parties that would come to most of our minds).

The Democratic Party in the US, the Labour Party in New Zealand (Jacinda Ardern's party) or any garden-variety centre-left/progressive party in Europe are what comes to mind when I hear "mainstream left parties" (Sanghyeok's words)... and they seem to not rally around hate as much as accommodating a variety of people groups. Of course, you all may have different perceptions of the left.

To answer the original question:
I can only speak to the United States, and my answer would be no, although it can seem that way. Our conservative party (the Republican Party) appears to be most concerned with preserving the status quo. Individual supporters of the party seem to be pretty unforgiving, though. That's how I would characterize them.

I'd like to read more posts from this thread though because the question is actually interesting IMO and it helps shine a light on how people of different political leanings think about stuff...

The US Democratic Party is not left wing in anyway.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Why is it hateful?

Hating gay people isn't hateful? Interesting.

Oh, it is hateful. But the point is, I think, that both sides hate. In their own way.

[Sanghyeok]

Hating gay people isn't hateful? Interesting.

Strawmen are always hateful tho.

Except it's quite clear that conservative parties are indeed interesting in targeting LGBT people.

[Aureumterra III]

This thread is ridiculous in it's own sense, both extremes are hateful, but not moderates. It's like saying all people on the left are communists or all people on the right are monarchists, it's just stereotyping and grouping. This is ridiculous.

I agree with this as well

[Dumb Ideologies]

Seems like they're both about stopping people expressing themselves.

No, as I said there is a difference in terms of hatefulness. Conservatives would happily do the latter, which is hateful.

If you felt that homosexuality harmed society I'm sure you'd find it pretty hateful towards you and people like you if some self-appointed group of moral arbiters started saying that you are no longer to articulate your deeply held beliefs and started throwing around slurs like "bigot".

[Telconi]

Strawmen are always hateful tho.

Except it's quite clear that conservative parties are indeed interesting in targeting LGBT people.

And liberal parties are intent on targeting religious people, gun owners, business owners, wealthy people, etc.

Why are these views not hateful?

[Muralos]

Well, as far as I'm concerned... the CCP is in another universe from the leftist parties that Sanghyeok was probably thinking of (and the parties that would come to most of our minds).

The Democratic Party in the US, the Labour Party in New Zealand (Jacinda Ardern's party) or any garden-variety centre-left/progressive party in Europe are what comes to mind when I hear "mainstream left parties" (Sanghyeok's words)... and they seem to not rally around hate as much as accommodating a variety of people groups. Of course, you all may have different perceptions of the left.

To answer the original question:
I can only speak to the United States, and my answer would be no, although it can seem that way. Our conservative party (the Republican Party) appears to be most concerned with preserving the status quo. Individual supporters of the party seem to be pretty unforgiving, though. That's how I would characterize them.

I'd like to read more posts from this thread though because the question is actually interesting IMO and it helps shine a light on how people of different political leanings think about stuff...

I wouldn't count the Democratic Party from the US as leftist, but compared to their counterparts they are "leftist".

No, they're not leftist! But I would call them "on the left" on the US political spectrum... or, in the big scheme of things, somewhere in the center and still to the left of the conservative parties that Sanghyeok referred to, I believe.

(I am from the US so my ideas of "left" and "right" are quite skewed, I'm sure.)

[Odreria]

Only in American terms. By European standards she's definitely on the right

I thought the CDU was centre-right by EU terms and the CSU was right, at least based on their policies?

They've been pretty centrist but they're going to move right when Merkel leaves and the grand coalition breaks up.

[Sanghyeok]

No, as I said there is a difference in terms of hatefulness. Conservatives would happily do the latter, which is hateful.

If you felt that homosexuality harmed society I'm sure you'd find it pretty hateful towards you and people like you if some self-appointed group of moral arbiters started saying that you are no longer to articulate your deeply held beliefs.

If you honestly believe that "gay people shouldn't marry because they're gay", then yes I would say that's hateful. I would also argue that not allowing that hateful view is not hateful.

[Chestaan]

No, as I said there is a difference in terms of hatefulness. Conservatives would happily do the latter, which is hateful.

Your ideology is equally hateful, you just think it's good to hate the people you hate.

Such bullshit haha. We don't have to be tolerant towards intolerance and equating those who are gay with homophobic bigots is beyond absurd.

[Sanghyeok]

I wouldn't count the Democratic Party from the US as leftist, but compared to their counterparts they are "leftist".

No, they're not leftist! But I would call them "on the left" on the US political spectrum... or, in the big scheme of things, somewhere in the center and still to the left of the conservative parties that Sanghyeok referred to, I believe.

(I am from the US so my ideas of "left" and "right" are quite skewed, I'm sure.)

Yes, I agree with you there.

[Celritannia]

I wouldn't count the Democratic Party from the US as leftist, but compared to their counterparts they are "leftist".

No, they're not leftist! But I would call them "on the left" on the US political spectrum... or, in the big scheme of things, somewhere in the center and still to the left of the conservative parties that Sanghyeok referred to, I believe.

(I am from the US so my ideas of "left" and "right" are quite skewed, I'm sure.)

Not even slightly left. The main branch of the Democrats are Centre, with a handful of centre-left individuals in it.

[Dollystana]

Some are, some aren’t. The US Republican Party is an example of one that is.

[Odreria]

Anyway to answer the question I think there's about an equal amount of hate on both sides right now.

[Saiwania]

gotta love the tories

It appears to be true that in a broad sense, intermittent fasting or having fewer calories on a regular basis is correlated with more longevity.

Children however, are perhaps too young to where them lacking the nutrition they need is more negative than positive in terms of their physical development if they're still in the growing stage biologically. Wealthy countries usually have too many calorie rich foods available to begin with by default. I doubt any children are going to be harmed too much if their school doesn't provide for lunch. They surely have food at home or should.

[Celritannia]

This thread is ridiculous in it's own sense, both extremes are hateful, but not moderates. It's like saying all people on the left are communists or all people on the right are monarchists, it's just stereotyping and grouping. This is ridiculous.

I agree with this as well

I might be mistaken, but I think the OP is refering to regular conservative parties, not extreme conservative parties (which I would put UKIP and the Brexit Party under).

[The Marlborough]

Politics is the designation of in groups and outgroups and the justifications for violence against the outgroup.

Who is us, who is them, and why is it okay for us to hurt them.

Everything else is window dressing. This is not merely a feature of the right wing, but of all politics. Often the violence being justified becomes so normalized the debate then centers around the extent of it rather than the enactment of it.

That’s a cynical take...

It's accurate though.

[Odreria]

No, they're not leftist! But I would call them "on the left" on the US political spectrum... or, in the big scheme of things, somewhere in the center and still to the left of the conservative parties that Sanghyeok referred to, I believe.

(I am from the US so my ideas of "left" and "right" are quite skewed, I'm sure.)

Not even slightly left. The main branch of the Democrats are Centre, with a handful of centre-left individuals in it.

Economically yes, but on social issues they are solidly progressive for the most part.

[Dollystana]

Well, as far as I'm concerned... the CCP is in another universe from the leftist parties that Sanghyeok was probably thinking of (and the parties that would come to most of our minds).

The Democratic Party in the US, the Labour Party in New Zealand (Jacinda Ardern's party) or any garden-variety centre-left/progressive party in Europe are what comes to mind when I hear "mainstream left parties" (Sanghyeok's words)... and they seem to not rally around hate as much as accommodating a variety of people groups. Of course, you all may have different perceptions of the left.

To answer the original question:
I can only speak to the United States, and my answer would be no, although it can seem that way. Our conservative party (the Republican Party) appears to be most concerned with preserving the status quo. Individual supporters of the party seem to be pretty unforgiving, though. That's how I would characterize them.

I'd like to read more posts from this thread though because the question is actually interesting IMO and it helps shine a light on how people of different political leanings think about stuff...

I wouldn't count the Democratic Party from the US as leftist, but compared to their counterparts they are "leftist".

The Democratic Party is centrist with slight left leanings.

[Spodehaven]

Except it's quite clear that conservative parties are indeed interesting in targeting LGBT people.

And liberal parties are intent on targeting religious people, gun owners, business owners, wealthy people, etc.

Why are these views not hateful?

Well being all of those things is voluntary for a start, besides the fact that liberals generally don't care about messing with religious people or business owners. Wealthy people.....maybe. Gun owners definitely.

[Sanghyeok]

gotta love the tories

It appears to be true that in a broad sense, intermittent fasting or having fewer calories on a regular basis is correlated with more longevity. But children however, are perhaps too young to where them lacking the nutrition they need is more negative than positive in terms of their physical development if they're still in the growing stage biologically. However, wealthy countries have too many calorie rich foods available to begin with by default. I doubt any children are going to be harmed too much if their school doesn't provide for lunch. They surely have food at home or should.

Denying poor children a school lunch doesn't sound like something that "wouldn't harm too much". The Tories may not be hateful in my view- at least not publicly- but that is rather disturbing,

[Chestaan]

gotta love the tories

It appears to be true that in a broad sense, intermittent fasting or having fewer calories on a regular basis is correlated with more longevity.

Children however, are perhaps too young to where them lacking the nutrition they need is more negative than positive in terms of their physical development if they're still in the growing stage biologically. Wealthy countries usually have too many calorie rich foods available to begin with by default. I doubt any children are going to be harmed too much if their school doesn't provide for lunch. They surely have food at home or should.

These kids don't have food at home. That's why it's provided to them. These school meals are literally the only proper meal they get in the day.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

gotta love the tories

It appears to be true that in a broad sense, intermittent fasting or having fewer calories on a regular basis is correlated with more longevity. But children however, are perhaps too young to where them lacking the nutrition they need is more negative than positive in terms of their physical development if they're still in the growing stage biologically. However, wealthy countries have too many calorie rich foods available to begin with by default. I doubt any children are going to be harmed too much if their school doesn't provide for lunch. They surely have food at home or should.

You probably don’t know this but both in the UK and the US there are kids living in poverty and the only way they have their meals is because of school and after school meal programs. They often do not have that food at home.