What percentage of machinists are conservative?

Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is aesthetics, are dominated by liberals. Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.
I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal. I would assume that most machinists are conservative.
But here on rec.crafts.metalworking, I am reading some posts by liberals who are interested in metalworking. What gives here? Are liberals just looking for forums to argue?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think the real question is why people who supposedly can think would ever be ideologically conservative or liberal? Or, especially, libertarian? d8-)
--
Ed Huntress




Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Self-confidence
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Self-delusion.
--
Ed Huntress





Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The socially pernicious self-delusion of liberals is denying that others can acquire the life skills and self reliance which they haven't bothered to learn.
I read an analysis of the demographics of reality show viewers which observed that conservatives like Dancing With the Stars etc because it shows the contestants succeeding by their own efforts, while liberals preferred to feel superior to dysfunctional people.
Libertarians may have interesting parties ("I thought they said libertine party") but I can't agree with their conclusions.
jsw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What in the world are you talking about?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

His new bong.
--



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I would like to question Jim's assumption and ask him where did he get this idea, that liberals are not as self reliant.
I would, personally, think that anyone with enough brains to think about political questions, and arrive at a liberal, or some other well thought out worldview, would generally be sufficiently smart to be self reliant.
Though some would call me a liberal, I am personally, for example, able to take care of myself and my family and am quite self reliant, spending well below my income.
I often hear a stereotype that "liberals are mooches of society" and how "liberals are unable to take careof themselves" and so on.
Based on everything I know, such as this Pew report:
http://people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/242.pdf
liberals are generally well to do as far as incomes are concerned.
I think that this stereotype of liberals being social leecges, was invented as an intimidation tool, so that people would be afraid to identify themselves as liberals.
Personally, I do not identify myself as being liberal, because my opinions come from analysis of issues, and not from ideology. My thoughts align with liberals or conservatives purely by accident and not because I source my opinions from a particular ideologue.
If anything, the median liberal is more affluent than a median "conservative".
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Commentary/2007/11/Democrats-wake-up-to-being-the-party-of-the-rich
This is perfectly explainable, since a large number of self identifying "social conservatives" are basically poor people.
i
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Wilkins wrote:

I've never seen this show so I have no way to tell who would watch or why.
But I thought it had been established by the OP as a matter of empirical fact that dancers were all liberals.
Is that not so?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Rush says that most TV formats are shrinking, but football is growing. He attributes this to the fact that football is unscripted, and so cannot be liberal propaganda.
My favorite TV show is "The First 48", which has no liberal propaganda. I don't know how much longer the TV industry can tolerate that TV show without liberal propaganda every few seconds.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Oh, horse manure. To lean left or right is one thing; a product of one's attitudes, experiences, and so on, and part of the normal distribution of human thinking and behavior. But to be ideologically liberal or conservative is a kind of abdication of thinking about complexities in the world.
People adopt strong ideological stances as a compensation, a foil against a world that they find too confusing, frustrating, or threatening, unless they have an ideological shield to protect themselves from argument or the angst that those people feel as a result of uncertaintly. Adopting an ideological shield is their escape from uncertainty.
Once you have that shield around you, you can devote yourself to belittling and demonizing the other side, which further pumps up your own self-esteem and which allows you to dehumanize those who don't agree with you. You know what I'm talking about.

Watching Dancing With the Stars is a good indication that you're ready for bread and circuses. Republicans, if not conservatives (the distinction wasn't surveyed) are typically 20% - 25% more likely than Democrats to watch pro sports -- another passive activity that involves watching someone *else* do something while you sit on your ass.

That's a good sign. <g>
--
Ed Huntress



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/1/2011 10:52 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Do you believe that people who can think must therefore be authoritarian?
Authoritarian means, among other things, believing that you have the right to think for others. I don't happen to need or want that.
David
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope. Nor do they believe in the market tyrrany that ideological libertarians would impose, in which poor people are at the whim and mercy of handouts for medical care, and in which banksters run the world by controlling all of the money, with no restrictions on monopoly or collusion among them. Only those who could afford it would get an education ("principle" 2.8 of the platform). Those are among the mindless reductionisms that the Libertarian Party platform provides for, if you read it with a critical eye.
That's where thinking comes in. Libertarianism can be a mindless ideology like all other ideologies. In the case of libertarianism, the mindlessness results in this, inevitably: It takes power away from democratically elected government and turns it over to money, in the form of monopolies, cartels, and oligopolies. Astute observers have recognized this since the time of Adam Smith.
Now, that's libertarianism as an ideology. Conservatism, liberalism, and any other ideology you can think of has equally disastrous failings.
Most people who call themselves conservative, or liberal, or libertarian do not really buy into the ideologies. Their postures most often reflect an attitude and a leaning. On a scale, they lie somewhere between dead center and the ideological extreme, and the closer they are to the true center of political and economic thought they are, the more thoughtful and insightful they're likely to be.
There's nothing wrong with leanings and attitudes. That diversity of persepective and opinion is essential to a democratic society if it is to avoid falling into a static and entropic state. Further, as I've said many times, most Americans, including myself, have a greater or lesser streak of libertarian attitude. But not ideology. That's for the people who can't deal with the anxiety and challenge of the real, and very messy, world, including contradictory facts and ideas that are equally true.

Hardly anyone does.
--
Ed Huntress

>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/2/2011 6:09 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

You oversimplify. That's libertarian right. Just as there are authoritarian left and right, so there are also two sides to libertarianism.

Yet the authoritarian left and right seem to need to do that for everyone. And they do it so poorly!
David
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, you may be just the guy to clear up something for the rest of us. You're suggesting that there is a side to libertarianism other than "libertarian right." I was basing the words above on the Libertarian Party platform, which says, among other things:
"The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society." (principle 2.0)
"We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade." (principle 2.1)
That's an invitation to monopoly and collusion to control markets, to predatory pricing to strangle new market entrants, etc. Someone at the Party office got carried away with the music of their words and didn't think about what they mean. They forgot about Standard Oil, the Steel Trust, and other monopolies of the late 19th century, and how they came about. They also forgot about quack doctors and snake oil drug salesmen.
Now, does your flavor of libertarianism (what do you call it, "liberal libertarian"?) hold to those principles, too? And if not, what is it about your position that can be called "libertarian"?

One of the two basic strains of conservatism in America is highly authoritarian ("law and order" conservatives -- the traditional type, who have morphed into what we now call "social conservatives."). The other is what's being called "libertarian" today. What they are, in their pure form, is what Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalists." That was a term of approval by Rothbard, by the way, and it was in use for 12 or 15 years before the invention of modern "libertarianism" and the Libertarian Party.
Now, how do you differ from that conservative type of libertarian? Do you somehow restrict commerce or contracts to differentiate yourself from the conservatives? Are there other differences between you and them?
--
Ed Huntress



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ed, he is probably one of these types of libertarian: http://www.leftycartoons.com/the-24-types-of-libertarian /
(How many of these folks frequent this group?)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HA-ha! Those are good. I think we have at least 20 of those types here. <g>
--
Ed Huntress



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/2/2011 10:18 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is less concerned about economics and more focused on individual rights, but also less inclined to politics.

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the authoritarian left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and Reps, as they represent the authoritarian left and right, are becoming indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous indignation, but they end up serving the same interests.
David

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"Emphasis" is all well and good, but I'm asking about which specific policies a left libertarian would support or not. Maybe you can clear it up with few examples. Does a left libertarian support the idea that we should not have state-supported education, that every parent is responsible to pay for the education of his kids, in a private-school market? And, second, does a left libertarian support a completely free banking market, in which anyone can set up a bank, issue credit at will and trade in derivatives under the table, with no government oversight of securities markets? Third, does a left libertarian support selling food and drugs with no Pure Food and Drug Act in place, no inspection of meat, and no certification of pharmaceuticals?
Those are key points of contention between the people who usually call themselves libertarian and the rest of us. It sounds like you're saying that those are "right" libertarian positions. Are they also left libertarian positions?
--
Ed Huntress



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/3/2011 8:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

I've noticed you usually read what you reply to, why not this time?

I don't speak for those who "call themselves libertarian", just myself.

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions. Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell what their positions should be.
David
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.