Question:
Do you think part of the divide in American politics is that each side thinks the other's agenda...?
scrapiron.geo
2014-05-29 16:45:09 UTC
is just a cover for a nefarious plan to destroy democracy and seize control over everyone, with the difference being the mechanism?

The Left think the Right wants everyone to be a corporate wage slave(or actual slave) working under a Christian theocracy.

The Right thinks the Left wants us under an atheistic communist regime with people classed by race with whites and Christians being the bottom rung of society.

Do you think the distrust of the other sides motives is a major problem in our current politics?
Fourteen answers:
Andy F
2014-05-29 17:03:11 UTC
I don't know, to be honest.



But then, I really don't trust the motives of about 75% of the Republicans, and about 50% of the Democrats.



I don't trust the motives of almost ANY of the party hacks and professional campaign consultants who work for both parties. I think the rise of "sound bite" politics and big-bucks negative TV advertising has created a professional class of political campaign advisors who who say and do almost anything to get their clients elected.



And as a democratic socialist who sees both major parties being heavily controlled by the richest 1 percent of the population -- even though I see the Republicans as being worse about this -- I really distrust people who ask, "why can't the 2 parties cooperate more?"



Because if the 2 parties "cooperate more," I think it will be the richest Republican elitists and the richest Democratic elitists who do the cooperation. Ordinary Americans in both major parties will just be sidetracked as the richest capitalists make deals with each other, IMO.



But cynical as I am about the "motives" of our political elite and our political parties, I'm not sure that bad motives are the main problem that America faces.



What's really threatening the economic future and political future of the United States, I believe, are BAD IDEAS and IGNORANCE that affect people in both major parties. Regardless of whether they mean well or not.



"Communism" may be bankrupt, and even "socialism" European-style may not be working so well these days. But in the age of "economic globalization" that we're living through, the nasty truth is that American capitalism and global capitalism ALSO are breaking down -- at least in terms of guaranteeing good jobs, good wages, and economic security for the majority of US citizens.



Capitalism and the blessed "free market," however well they may have worked 40 years ago, are today shifting good-paying industrial jobs from the US to South Asia. They are providing fast food jobs and low-wage jobs in retail to millions of US college graduates who went into debt hoping for much better careers. They are apparently unable to fix global climate change, to invent a new, renewable energy sector for the US in the place of of the old, destructive energy sector that depends on coal, oil, and natural gas.



And "free market" capitalism also has proven unable to keep the biggest US banks from speculating in totally imaginary investments and pushing the world banking system to the verge of collapse.



Somehow, if Americans want to fix the terrible economic mess we're in, we need to think much harder about "capitalism" and how it works and doesn't work. We don't need "communism," and there may not be any kind of "socialism" that's right for us, not yet. But we need to reject our old, out of date beliefs about "free market capitalism." Yet US politics is dominated by a kind of mythology that says capitalism can't be questioned.



Politicians and special interest groups with bad motives, therefore, are a problem for the US, but our national "free market capitalist" mythology is a much, much bigger problem. Whatever our motives, we need to free ourselves from economic myths and start facing economic reality -- or this country is headed into the toilet.
2014-05-29 16:46:33 UTC
speaking of agendas, phil robertson will be speaking at the republican leadership conference
Sam
2014-06-13 16:05:44 UTC
The only thing we know right now is that we have a liar in the white house. Thats the only facts we have at this time.
mollyblue55
2014-05-29 18:07:33 UTC
Absolutely - unfortunately Reagan did away with "Truth in Advertising Laws" so anyone with enough money can spout whatever BS they want. A United America is not what the politicians and special interest groups want, and neither is an educated electorate.
The Duke
2014-05-29 17:25:45 UTC
I think the problem is that most seem to stereotype the other group. Every conservative hates fags, women, babies, and dogs. All liberals are whinny, selfish, lazy, entitled boobs that want to sponge off the govt.



Those are far from the truth more times than not, yet we all spew the same crap in different forms. Then everyone gets their undies in a wad and starts being all defensive. It doesn't help that our 'leaders' are the worst offenders whenever they get their ugly mugs in front of a tv camera.



There's no civility, compromise, or respectful sharing of ideas. If you don't agree with me your a racist hick or some liberal halfwit.



If folks would simply stop and breathe for a few minutes and look to do what's best for the country, not the individual parties best interest or some interest groups best interest, we'd be alright. But when you've got the leader and his cronies going on TV blasting the opposition and then the opposition blasting back with worthless rhetoric we get where we are. No one on either side trusts the other to do anything so nothing gets done. When nothing gets done our country runs itself into the gutter.



Thank you 'leaders' of this great country. Your egos and stubbornness have screwed us.



Duke.
?
2014-05-29 17:09:57 UTC
I do not believe that about liberals, and I assume that not all liberals are stupid enough to believe that about conservatives either. I don't get why people can't comprehend this, but we conservatives are not about social issues. We are all about limiting the government. Liberal or conservative, I think we can all agree that our government is out of control, and we need to control a large portion of that. Some of us want for it to be around 20% and some of us want it to be around 5%. I personally believe that the percent of which government has power should be around 9-10%.



Conservative economics have been proven to be more successful, and it has to be ALL conservative. You can't have a conservative president and liberal Congress, or a liberal president and conservative Congress. For example, Bill Clinton was fiscally conservative, and he was in a deficit when liberals were in Congress, but when conservatives took over Congress, we were in a surplus.



Conservative economics are an ABSOLUTE essential for keeping a country in good financial health.
?
2014-05-29 17:00:43 UTC
What you need to understand is that there aren't "two sides" in this game. There is one party with different actors and different scripts, but almost all of them have the same agenda.
2014-05-29 16:52:59 UTC
That's probably accurate.
Sean
2014-05-29 16:48:46 UTC
As an American I don't want to live under the tyranny of the State or any other institution. Under the present corporatism the State and crony corporations are joined at the hip, good time for the people to push them both off a cliff.
Mother Hubbard
2014-05-29 16:46:51 UTC
not really.

You get that pro wrestling is fake, right? so is Democrat/Republican fighting.
yogicskier
2014-05-29 16:48:46 UTC
The problem is that both sides have gerrymandered their districts so effectively that they have to pander to the most extreme elements of their constituencies.



There's usually no threat from the other party, so they only have to fight within the party to get elected. That means the people who are elected have to always be on guard against their extreme right (if GOP) or extreme left (if Democrat) instead of being on guard against the other party. Since extremists are more motivated to vote than moderates, you don't get much traction by appealing to the moderates.



That leads to more-extreme positions in Congress and an unwillingness to compromise, which could lead to being labeled a (gasp!!) RINO or DINO.
2014-05-29 16:47:11 UTC
The sad part is that one of those is actually 'closer' to truth than the other.



Ill leave it to you to decide which.
Anonymous
2014-05-29 16:46:45 UTC
http://youtu.be/rdHkRkwJvww
the watchman
2014-05-29 16:47:58 UTC
Keen observation


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...