• crackgammon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t know if I agree that they can be equally right and incompatible. I think there can be shreds of truth scattered throughout different ideas and that you can pick them out and use that to construct an actual truth, though, so I guess I agree with your overall sentiment. I also agree with the fact that open conversation and an exchange of ideas is for the best, but I haven’t found many conservative ideas to hold water under scrutiny even if the conversation is ultimately helpful.

    • dropte_eth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think there are times when your values dictate your opinion rather than the facts.

      There’s a reason logic isn’t what sells cars, skin care and fashion.

      We’re emotional creatures.

      A strong opposition should help reign in excesses of either side, and we should crave it.

      There are ideas that originate on the right and are embraced in the left - universal basic income comes to mind.

      • Riskable@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s a reason logic isn’t what sells cars, skin care and fashion.

        Two things:

        • Yes it does. It sells a lot of cars, skin care, and fashion. Just look at the sales numbers for off-brand, never-advertised cosmetics (e.g. Walmart’s Equate), generic clothes (which outsell brands by enormous amounts every year), and why it’s incredibly difficult to actually buy a new electric car right now (they’re sold out everywhere; enormous waiting lists).
        • Those things aren’t government! Running a government based on feelings is likely the worst possible way for a democracy to govern itself. It’s also the worst possible way to select a candidate! Look at they’re policies and their history and especially the outcomes of their policies. Both the likely outcomes (researched by fact-based organizations that study study things) and the historic outcomes. Then select a candidate.

        Aside: To this day it still baffles me that conservatives are still pushing abstinence-only education when study after study has shown conclusively that such programs increase teen pregnancy rates, STD transmission rates, and are overall very bad for society at large. Like, I get that you think your daughter will be fine without comprehensive sex ed but do you think the same of the kids down the street?

        If you’re trying to say that liberals are trying to sell government based on science and reason while conservatives are trying to sell government based on feelings and faith, I’d agree with you.