Does anyone else think the modern struggle between conservative and liberal ideology. . .

[night_son]

. . . is a clash between good and evil?

Philosophically speaking, of course. . . .



In my opinion, philosophically, the sum total ideology of radical Leftism--excluding political or religious qualities--can be summed up best as a paradigm of evil euphemisms, each one being equally deceitful and engineered to encapsulate as means of lurid, attractive disguise, the true madness within their cores.

For example: the transgender movement. Radicalized Leftist party public relations mouthpieces would have the American people believe the transgender movement is about equality and social acceptance for all Americans. When in truth it is a two sided coin of amoral, anti-American violence against the most innocent and deletion of individual Constitutional rights.

Imagine the horror of the child who is convinced by teacher and guidance counselor or movement activist educator, that he can become a she with hormone treatment and surgery, who after said procedures now must live with a mutilated body as he ages into the realization of the terrible things done to him.

On the coin's other side, think of the woman who after working out in public at the Gym retires to its women's locker room to shower and change, only to have a biological man, pretending to be a woman in all its muscular superiority, barge in and get naked before her eyes. The euphemism for equality, civil rights and acceptance is, in fact, a euphemism for legal butchery of biological sexual identity, and removal of right and expectance of privacy and fear of being assaulted or raped.

Then, there's the molten-hot-iron Leftist-radical-feminist ideology of abortion on demand. Again we see the Leftist publicity spun euphemism for women's rights to unhindered control over their bodies, access to women's healthcare, for mercy of a child of parents with no financial means, because: death penalty and all the other common euphemistic justifications. What all of them really mean after shedding of their disguise, is: population control, child sacrifice, ultimate selfishness, utter lack of personal responsibility, blaming the unborn for the pregnancy, and a lucrative industry of death disguised as convenience and mercy.

And now, lets move "up" to the philosophical and psychological . . .

Radical Leftist philosophy includes many disturbing branches devised primarily for the purpose of removing empathy, God, sense of individualism, forgiveness and personal freedom of thought from our lives, in support of conversion of the sacredly held facts and beliefs of our forefathers into pure intellectual obedience.

For example, the concept of Antipositivism, which is the antithesis of Positivism Antipositivism is a philosophical and psychological approach to studying both the natural world and human social interaction by means of non-scientific methods such as rationalization and inference; in other words, it is a means of investigating, understanding and interacting with the world by means of simply thinking about it. On a more metaphysical level, and a completely hypocritical one in the face of atheism's desire to remove God from our minds--Antipositivism is about examination of, for and by, the higher, abstract, purely of the mind force of intellect; thought conducted on a plane of the psyche . . . and one could even argue--the religious or supernatural.

A long running psychological obsession of the radical Left is measurement, and thereby prediction, of authoritarian behaviors in the average individual. Without getting into excessive detail, more information can be found around the Web by Googling: The Authoritarian Personality and the California F-scale--which is a actual test to measure predisposition to Fascism. I'll only add that controversy over the F-scale arose over Left leaning subjects tending to score higher than Right leaning ones.

In closing, the radical Left's ideology is to me clearly one of enforced deceit, submission, loss of individuality, loss of Constitutional rights and blatant lies about governments ran by the People which are actually run by authoritarian party councils or dictators. Further, radical Leftist ideologies are about mass addiction to government enforced benefits, political correctness over free speech, the murder of the unborn, destruction of religion, enforced Party line conformity, and use of cultural violence--to name but a few of its naked realities.

So what say you?

Conservatism vs. modern Liberalism = Good vs. Evil?

Commentary from all sides welcome--along with all the vitriol this thread can eat (joking, surely).

 

[Kosh]

It could be looked at that way, the far left sees anything against it's religious dogma as evil.

Thus being part of the problem.

They just should admit that they support terrorism, do not want borders or countries and just admit they do need people to be adversaries. They do not want peace, they do not want liberty for all, they just want to rule over chaos.

 

[ozro]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No.

It's a clash between the authoritarian, reactionary right fearful of change, diversity, and dissent and those who embrace change and celebrate diversity.

 

[night_son]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

 

[Kosh]

No.

It's a clash between the authoritarian, reactionary right fearful of change, diversity, and dissent and those who embrace change and celebrate diversity.

And you see a far left religious zealot comes in and proves my comments correct!

Obama did more divide the country and they celebrated it.

 

[ozro]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

 

[night_son]

No.

It's a clash between the authoritarian, reactionary right fearful of change, diversity, and dissent and those who embrace change and celebrate diversity.

Then you believe the inverse of the thread topic: liberalism, historically, is the freer of mankind's bodies and minds, while conservatism is the philosophical chain and ball of civilization? Primal Mother vs. primal Father? Universal acceptance for all human behaviors vs. wrath over the perceived moral wrongdoing?

 

[night_son]

No.

It's a clash between the authoritarian, reactionary right fearful of change, diversity, and dissent and those who embrace change and celebrate diversity.

And you see a far left religious zealot comes in and proves my comments correct!

Obama did more divide the country and they celebrated it.

Can you expand--philosophically? Thanks.

 

[Votto]

. . . is a clash between good and evil?

Philosophically speaking, of course. . . .



In my opinion, philosophically, the sum total ideology of radical Leftism--excluding political or religious qualities--can be summed up best as a paradigm of evil euphemisms, each one being equally deceitful and engineered to encapsulate as means of lurid, attractive disguise, the true madness within their cores.

For example: the transgender movement. Radicalized Leftist party public relations mouthpieces would have the American people believe the transgender movement is about equality and social acceptance for all Americans. When in truth it is a two sided coin of amoral, anti-American violence against the most innocent and deletion of individual Constitutional rights.

Imagine the horror of the child who is convinced by teacher and guidance counselor or movement activist educator, that he can become a she with hormone treatment and surgery, who after said procedures now must live with a mutilated body as he ages into the realization of the terrible things done to him.

On the coin's other side, think of the woman who after working out in public at the Gym retires to its women's locker room to shower and change, only to have a biological man, pretending to be a woman in all its muscular superiority, barge in and get naked before her eyes. The euphemism for equality, civil rights and acceptance is, in fact, a euphemism for legal butchery of biological sexual identity, and removal of right and expectance of privacy and fear of being assaulted or raped.

Then, there's the molten-hot-iron Leftist-radical-feminist ideology of abortion on demand. Again we see the Leftist publicity spun euphemism for women's rights to unhindered control over their bodies, access to women's healthcare, for mercy of a child of parents with no financial means, because: death penalty and all the other common euphemistic justifications. What all of them really mean after shedding of their disguise, is: population control, child sacrifice, ultimate selfishness, utter lack of personal responsibility, blaming the unborn for the pregnancy, and a lucrative industry of death disguised as convenience and mercy.

And now, lets move "up" to the philosophical and psychological . . .

Radical Leftist philosophy includes many disturbing branches devised primarily for the purpose of removing empathy, God, sense of individualism, forgiveness and personal freedom of thought from our lives, in support of conversion of the sacredly held facts and beliefs of our forefathers into pure intellectual obedience.

For example, the concept of Antipositivism, which is the antithesis of Positivism Antipositivism is a philosophical and psychological approach to studying both the natural world and human social interaction by means of non-scientific methods such as rationalization and inference; in other words, it is a means of investigating, understanding and interacting with the world by means of simply thinking about it. On a more metaphysical level, and a completely hypocritical one in the face of atheism's desire to remove God from our minds--Antipositivism is about examination of, for and by, the higher, abstract, purely of the mind force of intellect; thought conducted on a plane of the psyche . . . and one could even argue--the religious or supernatural.

A long running psychological obsession of the radical Left is measurement, and thereby prediction, of authoritarian behaviors in the average individual. Without getting into excessive detail, more information can be found around the Web by Googling: The Authoritarian Personality and the California F-scale--which is a actual test to measure predisposition to Fascism. I'll only add that controversy over the F-scale arose over Left leaning subjects tending to score higher than Right leaning ones.

In closing, the radical Left's ideology is to me clearly one of enforced deceit, submission, loss of individuality, loss of Constitutional rights and blatant lies about governments ran by the People which are actually run by authoritarian party councils or dictators. Further, radical Leftist ideologies are about mass addiction to government enforced benefits, political correctness over free speech, the murder of the unborn, destruction of religion, enforced Party line conformity, and use of cultural violence--to name but a few of its naked realities.

So what say you?

Conservatism vs. modern Liberalism = Good vs. Evil?

Commentary from all sides welcome--along with all the vitriol this thread can eat (joking, surely).

Your post reminds me of what Ben Franklin said about the Constitution.

Mr. President

I confess that there are several parts of this constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them: For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others. Most men indeed as well as most sects in Religion, think themselves in possession of all truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far error. Steele a Protestant in a Dedication tells the Pope, that the only difference between our Churches in their opinions of the certainty of their doctrines is, the Church of Rome is infallible and the Church of England is never in the wrong. But though many private persons think almost as highly of their own infallibility as of that of their sect, few express it so naturally as a certain french lady, who in a dispute with her sister, said "I don't know how it happens, Sister but I meet with no body but myself, that's always in the right — Il n'y a que moi qui a toujours raison."

In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.


The genius of the Founding Fathers is, they realized that man speaking for God does not work. Theocracies all over Europe oppressed men with Inquisitions and Crusades, and the persecution of Jews etc. That is because the evil political plans of man for power cannot work the righteousness of God.

On the other hand, only righteousness through God can obtain a moral society, and only a moral society is capable of freedom. Without a moral society, men need to be locked up with a fence built around them and a warden to monitor them.

Either man can regulate his own moral behavior, or the state must do it for them to try and keep a civil society. The catch 22 is, men must be free to choose to do this. The state cannot force them.

Franklin knew that although the society of his time was virtuous enough to embrace freedom, the odds of maintaining such virtue indefinitely was nonexistent.

This is why I think the Left is at war with morality. They realize that if they create a bunch of foul mouthed violent animals that are willing to suck the brains out of their offspring to abort them, must necessitate a police state and a strong centralized government to oversee it all.

 

[night_son]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

 

[night_son]

. . . is a clash between good and evil?

Philosophically speaking, of course. . . .



In my opinion, philosophically, the sum total ideology of radical Leftism--excluding political or religious qualities--can be summed up best as a paradigm of evil euphemisms, each one being equally deceitful and engineered to encapsulate as means of lurid, attractive disguise, the true madness within their cores.

For example: the transgender movement. Radicalized Leftist party public relations mouthpieces would have the American people believe the transgender movement is about equality and social acceptance for all Americans. When in truth it is a two sided coin of amoral, anti-American violence against the most innocent and deletion of individual Constitutional rights.

Imagine the horror of the child who is convinced by teacher and guidance counselor or movement activist educator, that he can become a she with hormone treatment and surgery, who after said procedures now must live with a mutilated body as he ages into the realization of the terrible things done to him.

On the coin's other side, think of the woman who after working out in public at the Gym retires to its women's locker room to shower and change, only to have a biological man, pretending to be a woman in all its muscular superiority, barge in and get naked before her eyes. The euphemism for equality, civil rights and acceptance is, in fact, a euphemism for legal butchery of biological sexual identity, and removal of right and expectance of privacy and fear of being assaulted or raped.

Then, there's the molten-hot-iron Leftist-radical-feminist ideology of abortion on demand. Again we see the Leftist publicity spun euphemism for women's rights to unhindered control over their bodies, access to women's healthcare, for mercy of a child of parents with no financial means, because: death penalty and all the other common euphemistic justifications. What all of them really mean after shedding of their disguise, is: population control, child sacrifice, ultimate selfishness, utter lack of personal responsibility, blaming the unborn for the pregnancy, and a lucrative industry of death disguised as convenience and mercy.

And now, lets move "up" to the philosophical and psychological . . .

Radical Leftist philosophy includes many disturbing branches devised primarily for the purpose of removing empathy, God, sense of individualism, forgiveness and personal freedom of thought from our lives, in support of conversion of the sacredly held facts and beliefs of our forefathers into pure intellectual obedience.

For example, the concept of Antipositivism, which is the antithesis of Positivism Antipositivism is a philosophical and psychological approach to studying both the natural world and human social interaction by means of non-scientific methods such as rationalization and inference; in other words, it is a means of investigating, understanding and interacting with the world by means of simply thinking about it. On a more metaphysical level, and a completely hypocritical one in the face of atheism's desire to remove God from our minds--Antipositivism is about examination of, for and by, the higher, abstract, purely of the mind force of intellect; thought conducted on a plane of the psyche . . . and one could even argue--the religious or supernatural.

A long running psychological obsession of the radical Left is measurement, and thereby prediction, of authoritarian behaviors in the average individual. Without getting into excessive detail, more information can be found around the Web by Googling: The Authoritarian Personality and the California F-scale--which is a actual test to measure predisposition to Fascism. I'll only add that controversy over the F-scale arose over Left leaning subjects tending to score higher than Right leaning ones.

In closing, the radical Left's ideology is to me clearly one of enforced deceit, submission, loss of individuality, loss of Constitutional rights and blatant lies about governments ran by the People which are actually run by authoritarian party councils or dictators. Further, radical Leftist ideologies are about mass addiction to government enforced benefits, political correctness over free speech, the murder of the unborn, destruction of religion, enforced Party line conformity, and use of cultural violence--to name but a few of its naked realities.

So what say you?

Conservatism vs. modern Liberalism = Good vs. Evil?

Commentary from all sides welcome--along with all the vitriol this thread can eat (joking, surely).

Your post reminds me of what Ben Franklin said about the Constitution.

Mr. President

I confess that there are several parts of this constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them: For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others. Most men indeed as well as most sects in Religion, think themselves in possession of all truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far error. Steele a Protestant in a Dedication tells the Pope, that the only difference between our Churches in their opinions of the certainty of their doctrines is, the Church of Rome is infallible and the Church of England is never in the wrong. But though many private persons think almost as highly of their own infallibility as of that of their sect, few express it so naturally as a certain french lady, who in a dispute with her sister, said "I don't know how it happens, Sister but I meet with no body but myself, that's always in the right — Il n'y a que moi qui a toujours raison."

In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.


The genius of the Founding Fathers is, they realized that man speaking for God does not work. Theocracies all over Europe oppressed men with Inquisitions and Crusades, and the persecution of Jews etc. That is because the evil political plans of man for power cannot work the righteousness of God.

On the other hand, only righteousness through God can obtain a moral society, and only a moral society is capable of freedom. Without a moral society, men need to be locked up with a fence built around them and a warden to monitor them.

Either man can regulate his own moral behavior, or the state must do it for them to try and keep a civil society. The catch 22 is, men must be free to choose to do this. The state cannot force them.

Franklin knew that although the society of his time was virtuous enough to embrace freedom, the odds of maintaining such virtue indefinitely was nonexistent.

This is why I think the Left is at war with morality. They realize that if they create a bunch of foul mouthed violent animals that are willing to suck the brains out of their offspring to abort them, must necessitate a police state and a strong centralized government to oversee it all.

Thank you.

I agree. The inherent and obvious risk of providing for freewill is in and of itself guarantee that truly freewill can never be provided without opening the door to a barely controlled form of chaos. The ultimate struggle against the ancient methods of societal tyrannical control, self-justifying in its jackbooted violence by preventing inherent human violence in absolute or less restricted freedom.

 

[ozro]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

Does politics affect your life to that degree? Honestly?
It does not affect mine that way. I do what I chose and expect the same of others. I am fond of the saying"keep on your side of my gate" which simply means do as you wish elsewhere and I do what I wish here.
But honestly, does politics affect your life as you say?

 

[night_son]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

Does politics affect your life to that degree? Honestly?
It does not affect mine that way. I do what I chose and expect the same of others. I am fond of the saying"keep on your side of my gate" which simply means do as you wish elsewhere and I do what I wish here.
But honestly, does politics affect your life as you say?

Yes. It does--or rather, more poignantly--the lives of younger family members and their parents' recent ordeals with the public school system. I will leave it at that.

Mind your own backyard while I mind mine and we will both get along. I agree with this philosophy up to a point, but what do we do then when government policy enables our neighbor to intrude on our backyard in protection of his rights? A move which reduces our own.

 

[ozro]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

Does politics affect your life to that degree? Honestly?
It does not affect mine that way. I do what I chose and expect the same of others. I am fond of the saying"keep on your side of my gate" which simply means do as you wish elsewhere and I do what I wish here.
But honestly, does politics affect your life as you say?

Yes. It does--or rather, more poignantly--the lives of younger family members and their parents' recent ordeals with the public school system. I will leave it at that.

Mind your own backyard while I mind mine and we will both get along. I agree with this philosophy up to a point, but what do we do then when government policy enables our neighbor to intrude on our backyard in protection of his rights? A move which reduces our own.

I can understand frustration with the school system. Though I can say it was frustrating in the late 90's when my kids finished as well.

Local politics also has more effect on my life but it rarely involves conservative or liberal or good or evil. Usually it is money or some issue with a pot of money in the middle.

I moved when the city I lived in started requiring me to get a permit to trim my trees.
I moved again when the town I lived in, where I served a term on town council, refused a business license for a pawn shop I wanted to open. Presently I live alone on ten acres, off grid, 16 miles to pavement , 45 miles to a town.. My closest neighbor is two miles and I own the road from there. I don't get bothered much.

 

[Votto]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

Does politics affect your life to that degree? Honestly?
It does not affect mine that way. I do what I chose and expect the same of others. I am fond of the saying"keep on your side of my gate" which simply means do as you wish elsewhere and I do what I wish here.
But honestly, does politics affect your life as you say?

Growing up, politics was not as invasive as it is today. Today, people are bombarded 24/7 with political propaganda, fake news stories, families being broken apart because of stupid nonsensical postings on things like Facebook with political related ranting.

Today the government has never been as entrenched in our lives as it is today. Every year the government passes some 40,000 new regulations and laws as our children in schools are dragged out into the streets to protest for their politically minded teachers.

 

[night_son]

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

Does politics affect your life to that degree? Honestly?
It does not affect mine that way. I do what I chose and expect the same of others. I am fond of the saying"keep on your side of my gate" which simply means do as you wish elsewhere and I do what I wish here.
But honestly, does politics affect your life as you say?

Yes. It does--or rather, more poignantly--the lives of younger family members and their parents' recent ordeals with the public school system. I will leave it at that.

Mind your own backyard while I mind mine and we will both get along. I agree with this philosophy up to a point, but what do we do then when government policy enables our neighbor to intrude on our backyard in protection of his rights? A move which reduces our own.

I can understand frustration with the school system. Though I can say it was frustrating in the late 90's when my kids finished as well.

Local politics also has more effect on my life but it rarely involves conservative or liberal or good or evil. Usually it is money or some issue with a pot of money in the middle.

I moved when the city I lived in started requiring me to get a permit to trim my trees.
I moved again when the town I lived in, where I served a term on town council, refused a business license for a pawn shop I wanted to open. Presently I live alone on ten acres, off grid, 16 miles to pavement , 45 miles to a town.. My closest neighbor is two miles and I own the road from there. I don't get bothered much.

We're not too many miles north of Baltimore City, and experiencing more "bleed over" outside the City limits each year. Although it is mainly confined to highway and state road corridors, north and east, there's been an increase in homeless heroine addicts occupying the many fairly deep wooded areas nearby. So in that light, I also see liberal City policies affecting our daily lives where we live and work.

 

[ozro]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

Does politics affect your life to that degree? Honestly?
It does not affect mine that way. I do what I chose and expect the same of others. I am fond of the saying"keep on your side of my gate" which simply means do as you wish elsewhere and I do what I wish here.
But honestly, does politics affect your life as you say?

Growing up, politics was not as invasive as it is today. Today, people are bombarded 24/7 with political propaganda, fake news stories, families being broken apart because of stupid nonsensical postings on things like Facebook with political related ranting.

Today the government has never been as entrenched in our lives as it is today. Every year the government passes some 40,000 new regulations and laws as our children in schools are dragged out into the streets to protest for their politically minded teachers.

Understood, and I agree. However the thread was about equating political parties/movements with moral values of good vs evil.
You seem to be pointing some of that evil out.

 

[ozro]

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

Does politics affect your life to that degree? Honestly?
It does not affect mine that way. I do what I chose and expect the same of others. I am fond of the saying"keep on your side of my gate" which simply means do as you wish elsewhere and I do what I wish here.
But honestly, does politics affect your life as you say?

Yes. It does--or rather, more poignantly--the lives of younger family members and their parents' recent ordeals with the public school system. I will leave it at that.

Mind your own backyard while I mind mine and we will both get along. I agree with this philosophy up to a point, but what do we do then when government policy enables our neighbor to intrude on our backyard in protection of his rights? A move which reduces our own.

I can understand frustration with the school system. Though I can say it was frustrating in the late 90's when my kids finished as well.

Local politics also has more effect on my life but it rarely involves conservative or liberal or good or evil. Usually it is money or some issue with a pot of money in the middle.

I moved when the city I lived in started requiring me to get a permit to trim my trees.
I moved again when the town I lived in, where I served a term on town council, refused a business license for a pawn shop I wanted to open. Presently I live alone on ten acres, off grid, 16 miles to pavement , 45 miles to a town.. My closest neighbor is two miles and I own the road from there. I don't get bothered much.

We're not too many miles north of Baltimore City, and experiencing more "bleed over" outside the City limits each year. Although it is mainly confined to highway and state road corridors, north and east, there's been an increase in homeless heroine addicts occupying the many fairly deep wooded areas nearby. So in that light, I also see liberal City policies affecting our daily lives where we live and work.

Having grown up in the east, and after living in Arizona most of the last 35 years, I can only say I feel sorry for you brother.

 

[night_son]

It is not a fight between good and evil, rather a struggle between two evils.

Then all of man's precedent rationalization and interpretation, all sects of philosophy, are inherently, inescapably, evil?

The two major us political parties do not represent all that, they are political parties nothing more.

Evil divides us, as do both parties. Show me different.

But how does one distinguish between the political dogma and its direct effects on our lives vis a vis good vs. evil, and, how do we remove or extract the morality or lack thereof of political philosophy and psychology from the living of our own lives and minds of our families?

Does politics affect your life to that degree? Honestly?
It does not affect mine that way. I do what I chose and expect the same of others. I am fond of the saying"keep on your side of my gate" which simply means do as you wish elsewhere and I do what I wish here.
But honestly, does politics affect your life as you say?

Growing up, politics was not as invasive as it is today. Today, people are bombarded 24/7 with political propaganda, fake news stories, families being broken apart because of stupid nonsensical postings on things like Facebook with political related ranting.

Today the government has never been as entrenched in our lives as it is today. Every year the government passes some 40,000 new regulations and laws as our children in schools are dragged out into the streets to protest for their politically minded teachers.

I agree, escaping politics these days--psychologically or physically is very difficult, and the constant media bombardment provides us with endless reason to be enraged. Even word of mouth gossip on the job, in passing or via brief social media log in is a chain of never ending transferal of someone else's ideas--many of which we neither want nor need to hear about.