• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Social Conservatism v. Economic Conservatism

Liberals/Leftists, which is worse: Social Conservatism or Economic Conservatism (libertarianism)


  • Total voters
    24

Geoist

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
34,914
Reaction score
26,681
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.

With social conservatism we are faced with culture wars, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc.

With economic conservatism (in the form of right-libertarianism) we have growing wage gaps, less worker bargaining power as unions are destroyed, and a worsening of the climate crisis.

Personally, I have to go with economic conservatism being worse, but curious what others think.
 
Social conservatism is a cancer. Economic conservatism is fine -- I may not agree with everything but I probably agree with more than I disagree with.

I wouldn't say the climate crisis is a result of economic conservatism. We haven't taken any action on the climate because it has become socially partisan and also because words aside, most people aren't willing to pay the immediate cost to prevent future disaster.
 
Easily social conservatism. Countries can, have, and do survive economic conservatism. The US is ostensibly one of the most economically conservative developed nations.

They do not survive social conservatism.

Liberal democracy does not survive when social conservatism has political power. Civil rights do not survive when social conservatism has power. For all of our shortfalls, the United States is a very socially progressive country for the time being. It is absolutely critical we remain so. As @Cameron wisely pointed out global warming is a result of economic conservatism and does pose an existential threat and is probably the best argument for changing my vote, but looking towards the immediate future I stand by my argument.
 
This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.

With social conservatism we are faced with culture wars, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc.

With economic conservatism (in the form of right-libertarianism) we have growing wage gaps, less worker bargaining power as unions are destroyed, and a worsening of the climate crisis.

Personally, I have to go with economic conservatism being worse, but curious what others think.
At the end of the day, economic conservatism and its championing of the rich at the expense of everyone else ultimately is the foundation of and fertile ground for social conservatism and the blaming of the 'other' per right wing populism as the poor and middle class continue to be squeezed by its policy prescriptions; this is a large part of why MAGA is a thing in the first place: ineffectual, pro-corporate Dems that have failed to help their constituencies either willfully or otherwise, and strongly encouraged them through this inaction to take a chance on a manchild retard per sustained frustration and economic duress. Then, there is also the historic example of Nazi Germany, which came about from economic stresses experienced by the masses (though they were not a product necessarily of economic conservatism, save per fairly broad definitions I suppose; the core point is that economic conservatism engenders and creates those radicalizing stresses by other means), and the French Revolution, and Russian Revolution, etc.

Essentially economic oppression and rampant inequality are some of the most compelling and predictive requisites for social collapse and instability, and economic conservatism that favours the rich and powerful is consistently the harbinger/genesis of these things in turn.
 
Last edited:
Social conservatism is worse since one can largely escape (evade?) economic conservatism with self-employment.
 
Social conservatism is worse since one can largely escape (evade?) economic conservatism with self-employment.
I agree with this with the edit that one can escape social conservatism through wealth accumulation, not self-employment. Being self employed doesn't even come close to guarantee economic security (in fact often the opposite for small business owners). It certainly doesn't guarantee healthcare, or retirement, or education.

This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.
Welcome to the left btw @ttwtt78640! We are glad to have you. Freedom of gender expression is on the left and universal healthcare to the right. Enjoy your paid time off.
 
This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.

With social conservatism we are faced with culture wars, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc.

With economic conservatism (in the form of right-libertarianism) we have growing wage gaps, less worker bargaining power as unions are destroyed, and a worsening of the climate crisis.

Personally, I have to go with economic conservatism being worse, but curious what others think.

Both.

Both forms of conservatism believe in picking and choosing winners and losers instead of giving everyone a fair chance.

It's like conservatives looked at the religious belief of predestination and said to themselves, hey, that's a great idea! Let's do that. 🤦‍♂️
 
I agree with this with the edit that one can escape social conservatism through wealth accumulation, not self-employment. Being self employed doesn't even come close to guarantee economic security (in fact often the opposite for small business owners). It certainly doesn't guarantee healthcare, or retirement, or education.

OK, but neither does accepting a McJob.
 
It's like conservatives looked at the religious belief of predestination and said to themselves, hey, that's a great idea! Let's do that.
Fundamentally deep conservatism is rooted in a belief that the world is inherently the way it is. The differences between men and women are genetically, divinely, and spiritually ingrained into the fabric of reality. Society and history are decided and shaped by great men who were destined to be important historical figures due to some inherent characteristics. Criminals are inherently and possibly spiritually bad people, driven to criminality due to deep moral failings and not external social forces. If you go far enough off the deep end, they believes the differences between races are just an expression of genetic inferiority/superiority.

They believe there is a natural way the world just "is" and work to create that world. Any deviation from how the world "is", homosexuality, women doing "mens jobs", certain races being in positions of political power...is all just an unnatural aberration to the divine order of the universe.
 
This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.

With social conservatism we are faced with culture wars, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc.

With economic conservatism (in the form of right-libertarianism) we have growing wage gaps, less worker bargaining power as unions are destroyed, and a worsening of the climate crisis.

Personally, I have to go with economic conservatism being worse, but curious what others think.
In the year 2022, both are incompatible with the era, the history leading up to it, and in consideration of the facts.

Economic conservatism is probably the more extreme of the two, especially because in the example of libertarianism, no consideration
seems to be given to the most influential promoters of it, the Koch brothers, one surviving along with the widow of the other, are
the 20th wealthiest individuals in the U.S. and widow Koch is the wealthiest female in New York.

I would think any practical turn toward a government restructuring favoring libertarian principles would require a revamp somewhere
between starting from scratch as far as individual household wealth and connections... political, lobbying, legal, think tanks, MSM ownership,
board seats, foundations, so as to avoid the heaviest promoters of libertarianism achieving what their messaging has been about since Fred Koch of 75 years ago, concentration of wealth, the influence it buys, and elimination of many regulations that are to the benefit of the
least wealthy and powerful.

How does being a medicare recipient square with a conservative economic orientation, especially with G.O.P. diversion to wedge issues
to avoid any discussion of taxing wealthiest G.O.P. donors required to meet government's obligation to fiscally stabilize medicare, ssdi.
and SS retirement further than the coming fiscal year?

Social conservatism seems centered on exacting revenge on least wealthy fornicators, especially on females and generally on unmarried poorer people and on same sex relationships. It is not 1955, anymore. Mercifully, time will tend to weed out the most vociferous reactionaries behind this new puritanism!

We don't know where we're going until we examine where we are and where we've been. This proposal is 46 years old.

"...
Our economy is at a crucial turning point. The problems of skyrocketing energy and food costs and the inability of the free market to function effectively have led me to conclude that recent policy failures are the result of an outdated view of the American economy. Therefore, I am proposing the establishment of a Temporary National Economic Committee -- similar to the Committee established by President Roosevelt in 1938 -- to publicly investigate the concentration of economic power in America today.

If economic power is too heavily concentrated in the hands of a few, then we need stronger anti-trust action.
I want the free enterprise system to work."

Republicans defunded the last inquiry and sealed the records of the congressional investigation. Open those records
and use them as a blue print for leads in a new inquiry as proposed 46 years ago!

Records of the Temporary National Economic Committee ...
https://www.archives.gov › guide-fed-records › groups
Records of the Temporary National Economic Committee [TNEC] ... 645 cu. ft. Overview of Records Locations. Table of Contents. 144.1 ADMINISTRATIVE HISTORY; 144.2 ...

Temporary National Economic Committee - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Temporary_National_...
"...established by a joint resolution of the United States Congress on June 16, 1938 and operated until its defunding on April 3, 1941....
Many records of the TNEC are still under seal according to the US National Archives: As specified by the SEC, no one, except government officials for ...
 
Last edited:
This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.

With social conservatism we are faced with culture wars, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc.

With economic conservatism (in the form of right-libertarianism) we have growing wage gaps, less worker bargaining power as unions are destroyed, and a worsening of the climate crisis.

Personally, I have to go with economic conservatism being worse, but curious what others think.
I think your definitions are faulty.

For example, Trump could be considered an economic conservative and during his term, people's wages grew.
 
Easily social conservatism. Countries can, have, and do survive economic conservatism. The US is ostensibly one of the most economically conservative developed nations.

They do not survive social conservatism.

Liberal democracy does not survive when social conservatism has political power. Civil rights do not survive when social conservatism has power. For all of our shortfalls, the United States is a very socially progressive country for the time being. It is absolutely critical we remain so. As @Cameron wisely pointed out global warming is a result of economic conservatism and does pose an existential threat and is probably the best argument for changing my vote, but looking towards the immediate future I stand by my argument.
The main problem I have with this thesis is that economic conservatism and its resulting economic stresses are what overwhelmingly engender and birth the worst of social conservatism: people get angry, desperate, frustrated, society breaks down, and then they tend to scapegoat an 'other', or otherwise become vulnerable to similar manipulative predations by rabblerousers; this is a pattern that has happened incessantly throughout all of human history.

I cannot imagine Trump even being considered as an option were people happy with their governments, representation and economic station as opposed to being historically dissatisfied, frustrated and distrustful as inequality came to rival and even surpass the notorious Gilded Age.
 
Both.

For Economic conservatism: Austerity has negatively impacted lives on a larger scale.

But, the ugly side of social conservatism is the KKK. So, both.
 
There can be actual reasons to argue for economic conservatism.

Social conservatism is just some guy yelling at kids telling them to stay off his lawn.
 
The main problem I have with this thesis is that economic conservatism and its resulting economic stresses are what overwhelmingly engender and birth the worst of social conservatism: people get angry, desperate, frustrated, society breaks down, and then they tend to scapegoat an 'other', or otherwise become vulnerable to similar predations by rabblerousers; this is a pattern that has happened incessantly throughout all of human history.

I cannot imagine Trump even being considered as an option were people happy with their governments, representation and economic station as opposed to being historically dissatisfied, frustrated and distrustful as inequality came to rival and even surpass the notorious Gilded Age.
Historically in my opinion economy depravity is a crapshoot. It seems just as likely to generate a French Revolution a Mussolini. Hell, Margret Thatcher was so hated she moved the UK left economically for decades because nobody wanted to be associated with her.
 
Historically in my opinion economy depravity is a crapshoot. It seems just as likely to generate a French Revolution a Mussolini. Hell, Margret Thatcher was so hated she moved the UK left economically for decades because nobody wanted to be associated with her.
While I might agree that economic depravity doesn't always result in extreme social conservatism, what it does almost invariably result in are the worst horrors and slaughters humanity has ever experienced, and it can take direct credit for most social conservative extremes in history that have ended in such.
 
This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.

Oh well, I'm going to comment anyway.

With social conservatism we are faced with culture wars, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc.

With economic conservatism (in the form of right-libertarianism) we have growing wage gaps, less worker bargaining power as unions are destroyed, and a worsening of the climate crisis.

Personally, I have to go with economic conservatism being worse, but curious what others think.

Your own definitions contradict each other, in that social conservatism cannot exist with what you call "economic conservatism".

Consider the issue of abortion. A social conservative wants abortion severely restricted or banned. However an economic conservative ( as you define as right libertarianism) would support a free market in healthcare with no licensing of doctors, and hence it would be impossible to restrict abortion in any way, since the state would have no power to do so.

The error you are making is thinking that there's a difference between personal freedom and economic freedom. There isn't.
 
and hence it would be impossible to restrict abortion in any way, since the state would have no power to do so.
What if everyone was just sexist or deeply religious and all the largest medical firms refused to offer abortions?
 
This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.

With social conservatism we are faced with culture wars, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc.

With economic conservatism (in the form of right-libertarianism) we have growing wage gaps, less worker bargaining power as unions are destroyed, and a worsening of the climate crisis.

Personally, I have to go with economic conservatism being worse, but curious what others think.
American style unions did it to themselves, and please say man made climate crisis, and not climate crisis (that drives me nuts, no one believes the climate doesn't change)
 
I think your definitions are faulty.

For example, Trump could be considered an economic conservative and during his term, people's wages grew.

People's wages grew because of the demand for workers later in the pandemic. Wages have still been growing under Biden (though that may change if we get a recession).
 
Easily social conservatism. Countries can, have, and do survive economic conservatism. The US is ostensibly one of the most economically conservative developed nations.

They do not survive social conservatism.

Liberal democracy does not survive when social conservatism has political power. Civil rights do not survive when social conservatism has power. For all of our shortfalls, the United States is a very socially progressive country for the time being. It is absolutely critical we remain so. As @Cameron wisely pointed out global warming is a result of economic conservatism and does pose an existential threat and is probably the best argument for changing my vote, but looking towards the immediate future I stand by my argument.
I tend to agree, as long as we recognize that the social agitation is usually a cudgel for economic centralization and oligarchy.
 
People's wages grew because of the demand for workers later in the pandemic. Wages have still been growing under Biden (though that may change if we get a recession).
Wages were growing BEFORE COVID.

The wage growth under Biden has been eaten up by Biden's inflation. The result is a LOSS in buying power.
 
This poll is directed to fellow leftists/liberals.

With social conservatism we are faced with culture wars, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc.

With economic conservatism (in the form of right-libertarianism) we have growing wage gaps, less worker bargaining power as unions are destroyed, and a worsening of the climate crisis.

Personally, I have to go with economic conservatism being worse, but curious what others think.
i believe that social conservatism results in economic conservatism......
 
Wages were growing BEFORE COVID.

The wage growth under Biden has been eaten up by Biden's inflation. The result is a LOSS in buying power.
'Biden's inflation'......that is the way it works.....the buck always stops at the desk of the potus.......in reality inflation is the result of a free market system......it's called peaks and valleys......it's capitalism.....prices go up when demand goes up......ie gas prices......unfortunately gas prices affects the price of everything else......it's called trickle down.....you can bet that if Biden were to enact price controls on the oil companies all hell would result from the right (and the left) because he would be interfering with the free market......we are in for a recession......it's inevitable and is just another valley that will ultimately be superseded by another peak
 
Back
Top Bottom