How Liberals and Conservatives Think
Excerpt from pages 24-37 of Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think, Second Edition by George Lakoff
I am quite impressed. I think I will buy this man's book.
(from the link above)
Conservatives are largely against abortion, saying that they want to
save the lives of unborn fetuses. The United States has an extremely
high infant-mortality rate, largely due to the lack of adequate
prenatal care for low-income mothers. Yet conservatives are not in
favor of government programs providing such prenatal care and have
voted to eliminate existing programs that have succeeded in lowering
the infant mortality rate. Liberals find this illogical. It appears to
liberals that "pro-life" conservatives do want to prevent the death of those fetuses whose mothers do not want them (through stopping abortion), but do not want to prevent the deaths of fetuses whose mothers do want them (through providing adequate prenatal care programs). Conservatives see no contradiction. Why?
Liberals also find it illogical that right-to-life advocates are
mostly in favor of capital punishment. This seems natural to
conservatives. Why? (and) Liberals support welfare and education proposals to aid children, yet
they sanction the murder of children by supporting the practice of
abortion. Isn't this contradictory? How can liberals support federal funding for AIDS research and
treatment, while promoting the spread of AIDS by sanctioning sexual
behavior that leads to AIDS? In defending gay rights, liberals sanction
homosexual sex; they sanction teenage sex by advocating the
distribution of condoms in schools; they sanction drug abuse by
promoting needle exchange programs for drug users. How can liberals say
they want to stop the spread of AIDS while they sanction practices that
lead to it? How can liberals claim to help citizens achieve the American dream when
they punish financial success through the progressive income tax? How can liberals claim to be for equality of opportunity, when they
promote racial, ethnic, and sexual favoritism by supporting affirmative
action?
To be honest, both sets of questions stumped me at certain points. Questions of the conservative social conception seemed obvious contradictions as did questions of liberal economics. I rank these within my own moral standards and conclude that I affiliate myself with the liberals because I would rather see minute financial success for all than great success for the few. This, of course is oversimplifying, but I hold immediate welfare to be as important as eventual welfare. Remember Jesus being naked, hungry, thirsty, homeless (all temporal states) and his immediate care (or lack thereof) resulted in judgment. I say take care of immediate problems as much as future ones. There needs to be more compassion and less greed and yes, our economy will still function with more not-for-profit companies.
| 
