Ask Lemmy

Translation: "The limits and bounds of my intelligence are the same as that of an LLM."

They pine for the Blue Dogs and haven't updated their policy preferences since the early 90's.

I think "You're a fucking liar".

"I smoke weed but think you're lazy if you make less money than me"

Probably racist but hides it

yeah. whatever.

"I haven't thought about politics for more than 30 seconds in my entire life but I don't want to admit that and don't want to sound like a complete asshole" is about the most charitable way I can translate that sound bite.

Likes lgbtq, doesn't like spending money.

I don't know if I've ever heard the quote IRL, but I've known libertarians and they've seemed fine. If all you disagree about is the particulars of economic theory it's not really worth getting worked up about.

I imagine this person being young and male, and possibly liking cryptocurrencies.

It depends what country they are in

"I'm discriminating towards poor people".

They do not want anyone to have authority over them in any capacity. They want to fuck who they want, do what drugs they want, shoot what they want, exploit financially anyone they want, hire and fire anyone they want, control and manipulate markets however they want. They do not want any limitations placed on them by law, regulation, ethics, or morality. They feel no responsibility to anyone but themselves, do not value others that do not benefit them directly, and see society only as a means to serve their interests. They are the definition of narcissists.

I'm someone who actually calls myself socially liberal but fiscally conservative, and that's because my primary concern (in the terms of moral foundations theory) is the liberty/oppression axis. In other words, I think leaving people alone is a good thing, and while it's not the only good thing and it needs to be balanced against other concerns, we should still be doing it more than we are now.

Two caveats:

1. I'm socially liberal because a free society requires tolerating even the people you hate. This is hard, and even many people who consider themselves tolerant because they simply don't hate a particular group aren't (and often don't want to be) tolerant in this sense.

2. I'm economically conservative because the freedom to act without government interference even in an economic context has great inherent worth (but I'll repeat here that I don't value it to the exclusion of all else) but also because the free market usually does a better job than central planning at making everyone prosperous. I don't care much about wealth inequality - a world in which I have two dollars and you have two million dollars is a better place than a world in which we both have just one dollar.

Edit: in practice I always end up voting for moderate Democrats at the national level, both because I think social issues are generally more important than economic issues and because neither party usually does what I would want regarding economic issues. However, I have more options at the state and local level.

I think we have countless words. We should use our words.

We all have a spectrum of social and economic and other ideals.

Those who want to lead us have theirs too, and they’re the ones who need us to commit and compartmentalize into ideologies and macro definitions that get twisted.

This is my father. Like, I'm happy that he doesn't hate me because I'm bi and poly. He's pretty open about how he thinks the Republican party is cruel and shitty.

His problem is that he associates fiscally progressive policies with California's creaking and inefficient bureaucracy. In his career, he spent a lot of time interacting with various CA governmental departments and he grew to loathe them intensely. Whenever I discuss progressive policies with him, he always relates it back to his experiences living and working in California and then just shrugs and says "I hate both parties for different reasons."

It's funny, because like, shit man, I kinda agree with him on a superficial level. California's state and local governments sucks at their jobs in a lot of ways (see the notorious San Francisco public bathroom). I agree that unions (of which there are many in California) can sometimes impede quick and efficient work (although I don't fucking care, I just chill out and am patient with folks and the shit gets done eventually. The process would be more efficient if the company tried to have a more harmonious relationship with the union).

He just doesn't seem to understand that as far as progressive polities go, California is a terrible example. There are plenty of places around the world that that have implemented progressive and socialist policies while still preserving the things he cares about (efficiency and relative frugality), but he's never been to those places. He hasn't engaged with those governments. All he can think of is the "progressive" state that caused him so much anger.

So basically, I think most people like this are fundamentally nice and decent, but they're ignorant and are blind to the underlying dissonance between their social and fiscal philosophies. My dad has never voted for Trump (he wrote in a friend's name which was basically a vote for Trump, but fuck man, it's at least a little better), but I don't believe he'll ever accept that voting according to his fiscal philosophy directly contradicts his social philosophy.

EDIT: apologies if this is rambling or poorly written. I'm sleep deprived and distracted and very stressed, and I probably shouldn't have commented at all.

Depends on if they mean capital C conservative or not

'You're lying to either me, yourself, or both. You're a full on conservative and don't want to admit it.''

Isn't this kind of a roundabout way of saying "I'm a libertarian that isn't into wearing tinfoil hats?"

It means "i'm not a racist, but i still prefer billionaires getting all the money"

"I'm a liar, pretending to be a libertarian. Fund the police so they can shut down the protests for things I don't like."

“US politics new speak, can't relate.”

opposite of me I guess

"You've been duped". Because people like this never acknowledge the amount of corporate welfare going on in America, if you want to be fiscally conservative, stop paying for profit companies from government coffers. Don't go after food stamps, that is just veiled prejudice

My friend who managed to be as right as it could even be in a political compass test which I thought was impossible, the man was a hyper capitalist

"I don't like being held responsible for the outcomes of the fiscal policies I fully support"

To an extent, you can make an argument for each individually. But they don't mix. After a while, you'd be a walking contradiction. For a fun *exercise, try to imagine the opposite.

“i vote MAGA, but im too much of a wuss to admit it out loud.”

Conservativism, in all forms, is not a real ideology. It's narcissism. A conservative will redefine conservative values based on their own identity.

So the "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" idiot is lying to themselves about who they are. They want fiscal policies that benefit themselves, and they don't want to be labelled a bigot, but they are fine with bigots in office as long as they get the fiscal policies that benefit themselves.

Ask them what they mean by "fiscal conservative," and they will probably vaguely gesture and say "lower taxes." What they mean is "lower taxes for me." Fiscal conservatives still want to spend government money on programs they like. They want boondoggles in their backyard, earmarks and pork barrel projects, and social safety nets as long as they are the recipient (Medicare, Social Security, Veteran benefits, etc.)

They want to frame it as responsible restraint. Pull funding from programs they don't understand, like scientific research, or don't like, like foreign aid (except of course if strong ties to their home country).

And when they say lower taxes, when pressed, they will describe how their property tax or income tax or capital gains tax or death tax is really bad "for the economy." They want good schools and roads and infrastructure, but they want someone else to pay for it.

Calling themselves conservative gives them license to be as selfish as they want to be without having to admit that they don't actually have any values.