The Differences Between Left and Right: Part I

Frontpagemag.com ^ | 5-27-2015 | Dennis Prager

[servo1969]

Most Americans hold either liberal or conservative positions on most matters. In many instances, however, they would be hard pressed to explain their position or the position they oppose.

But if you can’t explain both sides, how do you know you’re right?

At the very least, you need to understand both the liberal and conservative positions in order to effectively understand your own.

I grew up in a liberal world — New York, Jewish and Ivy League graduate school. I was an 8-year-old when President Dwight Eisenhower ran for re-election against the Democratic nominee, Adlai Stevenson. I knew nothing about politics and had little interest in the subject. But I well recall knowing — knowing, not merely believing — that Democrats were “for the little guy” and Republicans were “for the rich guys.”

I voted Democrat through Jimmy Carter’s election in 1976. He was the last Democrat for which I voted.

Obviously, I underwent an intellectual change. And it wasn’t easy. Becoming a Republican was emotionally and psychologically like converting to another religion.

In fact, when I first voted Republican I felt as if I had abandoned the Jewish people. To be a Jew meant being a Democrat. It was that simple. It was — and remains — that fundamental to many American Jews’ identity.

Therefore, it took a lot of thought to undergo this conversion. I had to understand both liberalism and conservatism. Indeed, I have spent a lifetime in a quest to do so.

The fruit of that quest will appear in a series of columns explaining the differences between left and right.

I hope it will benefit conservatives in better understanding why they are conservative, and enable liberals to understand why someone who deeply cares about the “little guy” holds conservative — or what today are labeled as conservative — views.

Difference No. 1: Is Man Basically Good?

Left-of-center doctrines hold that people are basically good. On the other side, conservative doctrines hold that man is born morally flawed — not necessarily born evil, but surely not born good. Yes, we are born innocent — babies don’t commit crimes, after all — but we are not born good. Whether it is the Christian belief in Original Sin or the Jewish belief that we are all born with a yetzer tov (good inclination) and a yetzer ra (bad inclination) that are in constant conflict, the root value systems of the West never held that we are naturally good.

To those who argue that we all have goodness within us, two responses:

First, no religion or ideology denies that we have goodness within us; the problem is with denying that we have badness within us.

Second, it is often very challenging to express that goodness. Human goodness is like gold. It needs to be mined — and like gold mining, mining for our goodness can be very difficult.

This so important to understanding the left-right divide because so many fundamental left-right differences emanate from this divide.

Perhaps the most obvious one is that conservatives blame those who engage in violent criminal activity for their behavior more than liberals do. Liberals argue that poverty, despair, and hopelessness cause poor people, especially poor blacks — in which case racism is added to the list — to riot and commit violent crimes.

Here is President Barack Obama on May 18, 2015:

“In some communities, that sense of unfairness and powerlessness has contributed to dysfunction in those communities. … Where people don’t feel a sense of hope and opportunity, then a lot of times that can fuel crime and that can fuel unrest. We’ve seen it in places like Baltimore and Ferguson and New York. And it has many causes — from a basic lack of opportunity to some groups feeling unfairly targeted by their police forces.”

So, poor blacks who riot and commit other acts of violence do so largely because they feel neglected and suffer from deprivations.

Since people are basically good, their acts of evil must be explained by factors beyond their control. Their behavior is not really their fault; and when conservatives blame blacks for rioting and other criminal behavior, liberals accuse them of “blaming the victim.”

In the conservative view, people who do evil are to be blamed because they made bad choices — and they did so because they either have little self-control or a dysfunctional conscience. In either case, they are to blame. That’s why the vast majority of equally poor people — black or white — do not riot or commit violent crimes.

Likewise, many liberals believe that most of the Muslims who engage in terror do so because of the poverty and especially because of the high unemployment rate for young men in the Arab world. Yet, it turns out that most terrorists come from middle class homes. All the 9/11 terrorists came from middle- and upper-class homes. And of course Osama bin Laden was a billionaire.

Material poverty doesn’t cause murder, rape or terror. Moral poverty does. That’s one of the great divides between left and right. And it largely emanates from their differing views about whether human nature is innately good.

[rlmorel]

I think liberals would be hard pressed to define why they feel the way they do, other than relying on emotionally based rationales.

Most conservatives I know understand fully why they are conservative.

[rlmorel]

"...Material poverty doesn’t cause murder, rape or terror. Moral poverty does. That’s one of the great divides between left and right. And it largely emanates from their differing views about whether human nature is innately good..."

Simply, in a nutshell.

[Yosemitest]

"The Left" is a "CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER" to the United States.
They are incapable of making a correct decision about the security of this nation.

Here's something to consider about liberals, and conservatives.

The liberal's problem is psychological projection.

Liberals do this all the time.
Here's a definition.
Freudian Projection

The following is a collection of definitions of projection from orthodox psychology texts.
In this system the distinct mechanism of projecting own unconscious or undesirable characteristics onto an opponent is called Freudian Projection.

• "A defense mechanism in which the individual attributes to other people impulses and traits that he himself has but cannot accept.
  It is especially likely to occur when the person lacks insight into his own impulses and traits."
  
  
• "The externalisation of internal unconscious wishes, desires or emotions on to other people.
  So, for example, someone who feels subconsciously that they have a powerful latent homosexual drive may not acknowledge this consciously, but it may show in their readiness to suspect others of being homosexual."
  
  
• "Attributing one's own undesirable traits to other people or agencies, e.g., an aggressive man accuses other people of being hostile."
  
  
• "The individual perceives in others the motive he denies having himself.
  Thus the cheat is sure that everyone else is dishonest.
  The would-be adulterer accuses his wife of infidelity."
  
  
• "People attribute their own undesirable traits onto others.
  An individual who unconsciously recognises his or her aggressive tendencies may then see other people acting in an excessively aggressive way."
  
  
• "Projection is the opposite defence mechanism to identification.
  We project our own unpleasant feelings onto someone else and blame them for having thoughts that we really have."

And here's a problem with honest people.

(General) Projection

Here projection is assuming that others act or perceive similarly – according to this definition it is not necessary for a projected trait to be undesirable or unconscious.
Projection is probably inherent in social animals and the single most important psychological mechanism.
The following are given as examples:

1. Individual A assumes that B sees the colour red as he does, until informed that B is colour-blind;
   
   
2. Someone who never lies is easy to deceive because he projects his truthfulness onto others, assuming that others are honest also;
   
   
3. ‘It takes one to know one’;
   
   
4. An inept con-man fears that others are trying to cheat him, signals his fear and alerts others;
   
   
5. (Freudian) An individual who possesses malicious characteristics, but who is unwilling to perceive himself as a protagonist, convinces himself that his opponent feels and would act the same way.

Liberals constantly project their own vile values onto conservatives, intentionally or unintentionally,
and they need to called on it, shamed on it, and laughed at to scorn, when they do it.

We MUST get rid of these evil people.

[fireman15]

In fact, when I first voted Republican I felt as if I had abandoned the Jewish people. To be a Jew meant being a Democrat. It was that simple. It was — and remains — that fundamental to many American Jews’ identity.

I still have only one friend who is Jewish and a conservative. His daughter lives in Israel. I think that Obama’s Muslim roots and anti-Israel policies pushed him over the edge.

[Leaning Right]

I think liberals would be hard pressed to define why they feel the way they do, other than relying on emotionally based rationales.

Some liberals want to be controlling. They want to tell others how to live, and what to do. And liberalism is their vehicle to do that.

But most liberals of my acquaintance are not like that. They are liberal because of a childlike desire to help the "underdogs". The irony, of course, is that most liberal policies only worsen the conditions of the underdogs.

[fireman15]

But most liberals of my acquaintance are not like that. They are liberal because of a childlike desire to help the “underdogs”.

We live in a very liberal part of the country and I find that to be the case with most of my liberal acquaintances also. Many of them actually are quite sincere, but it is extremely frustrating how easily they are manipulated by the press and liberal politicians. When one tries to counter with solid facts and figures they are able to parrot leftist talking points with great ease and are generally not willing to hear any opposing view points.

[Doug Loss]

So in essence leftists think people are children and must be taken care of by their enlightened betters (who just happen to be the leftists who hole this position), while conservatives believe people are adults who must beheld responsible for their own actions.

[NFHale]

RE “...But I well recall knowing — knowing, not merely believing — that Democrats were “for the little guy” and Republicans were “for the rich guys.” ...”

I recall that fallacy as well.

[TangibleDisgust]

i can actually save Prager some time here... the short and sweet answer is that liberals see the world through an emotional lens. conservatives see the world through a rational lens. this is the critical difference and why it’s hard to find common ground on most issues.

[SECURE AMERICA]

I’ll cut through the BS and get to the point.
Right is right
Left is wrong.
Not anymore complicated then that............

[ncpatriot]

Yeah, I like that quote from article.

[Responsibility2nd]

Material poverty doesn’t cause murder, rape or terror. Moral poverty does. That’s one of the great divides between left and right. And it largely emanates from their differing views about whether human nature is innately good.

 

Good stuff from Dennis Prager here. Part I? I will ping out Parts II, III, etc....

 

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail Responsibility2nd or wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list. FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search [ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[JimRed]

We MUST get rid of these evil people.

Libs...can't live with 'em, can't kill 'em!

[JimRed]

They are liberal because of a childlike desire to help the "underdogs".

Not exactly; they want the "underdogs" helped at the expense of others who may or may not wish to help.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

The left can’t explain anything they believe. That’s why they’re forced to censor debate and name-call.

[GOPJ]

I’m looking forward to future installments...

[Yosemitest]

Yes we can (but don't get caught).