Republicans should be more openminded
auburnman227 said 02/22, 02:12 AM
Inorder for us to have any kind of progression in this country we have to grab ideas and values from both parties
swdowning said 02/22, 05:18 AM
I've accepted this challenge despite your lack of focus and definition. I don't, for example, know how you define "progression," but given the rest of your statement, I'm going to suppose that you mean the Republican party should move to the left and should replace some of its long-held values with those the Democrat party embraces.
I think "open-mindedness," if it requires compromising the Republican party's core values, is not good and does not strengthen the party.
It helps neither the Republican party nor the country for Republicans to try to look more like Democrats. There are fundamental, value-based differences between the two. If the Republican party takes its policy and value cues from the Democrat party just to appear more accessible or "open-minded," then it really stands for nothing more than obtaining power for its own sake. It thereby abrogates any claim to the moral authority that has animated the policies of which it is so rightly proud.
I might, given your lack of specifics, presume too much about your argument, and if so, I apologize.
It is possible, as a wise man once said, to be so open-minded that one's brains fall out.
auburnman227 said 02/22, 02:42 PM
I apologize for my miscommunication because of my amateur debating skills but this is what I mean. I meant that in order for our country to advance past other countries is that we should have more bipartisanship efforts between the two parties. I often listen to republicans to get different views on different issues to mold my strategy to fit both liberals and conservatives....As a liberal moderate I have views from both spectrums of the fields. What I mean about being more open minded was this, as soon as republicans start opening up to democrats and democrats stop hating republicans we will have the United States that our forefathers wanted. They did not want red states or blue states but the United States.
swdowning said 02/23, 12:47 AM
There's no need to apologize - we all start with the passion and patriotism that shine in your argument. Be patient; nurture your patriotism; the words will come later. Now to the topic at hand.
You imply that a happy medium between the two relevant parties is desirable; that this nation would be well served by a grand compromise that splits the difference on the issues that have for so long divided us into left and right, into red and blue. Further, you suggest that the onus for this compromise is on the Republicans, because they should become more open-minded. This is a subtle way to blame Republicans for the rift you want to mend, and has the added benefit of not requiring that Dems similarly "open up" to Reps (Dems simply need to stop hating Reps, which they would certainly do if Reps place compromise above principle and shift sufficiently to the left).
But this does not well serve our nation, which was forged in the fire of reasoned and impassioned debate, and hammered out on the unyielding anvils of political and natural reality.
We should not desire to reduce our differences - we should celebrate them. We are a superpower because of, not despite, our disagreements.
auburnman227 said 02/23, 01:50 AM
It is true...our differences are what make this country great. But we are named the United States for a reason. Compromise is the key word of my arguement. I too often see bills get passed by due to them having to many liberal elements or too many conservative elements. All men came together for us to become a country,why have we become divided now?
swdowning said 02/23, 08:56 PM
America is no stranger to division, and "united" does not and should not require agreement on political issues. You say Reps should be more open-minded and should compromise with Dems. This means a Rep shift to the left. Not required. The left has moved the nation toward its position without compromise. The 1928 U.S. Socialist Party had a platform, almost all of which has since been made law.
I think the term "open-minded" is code for "liberal." You think Reps should be more liberal. The result would be no significant ideological difference between Dems and Reps. But why shouldn't I say that Dems should be more "open-minded"? I'd like to see them move to the right. Our nation is ill-served by either shift.
How would our new open-mindedness let us compromise on troop withdrawal? Pull out half the troops? If Reps want to lower taxes and Dems want to raise them, what would be an open-minded compromise? I think you really mean that Reps should just go along with Dems. But informed opposition is the reason we are so strong. We are united in the process that has enobled this nation and advanced the cause of freedom globally.
There is no need for either party to be more "open-minded."
Comments
Add Your Comment
Although Auburnman really didn't define what he's talking about, and swdowning won, I'm voting for Auburnman because I agree. There is so much diversity within the democratic party, and such a huge lack of that in the republican party. Republicans vote for candidates based on their values and not the problems at hand; which is pretty twisted to me. The world is constantly changing and our politics have to change to meet the changing world. Not to mention Republican values are mostly based on the Christian Right's values, which are not the values of the American people.
papabear | 02/22/08
Report Offensive Comment
I have always found "values" to be very akin to religious faith in the sense that people hold on to certain values because they believe that they are correct regardless of outside influence. Often with little to no evidence in support, many people believe in "the family," life at conception, male-female marriage only, and the supremacy of "America." They believe these things because their hearts and minds told them that despite evidence to the contrary or lack of evidence at all, these values were right and just. Thus, like a leap of faith, they cling to these values no matter what and as such they have chosen to do so in a manner that defies persuasion by logical/illogical argument or contrast of opposing values. Thus, a suggestion that a party be more "openminded" must be clarified into a certain context. Maybe Republicans should be more openminded that they share this world and this nation with others who do not share their same core principles. Maybe they should be more openminded that when in office, they are responsible for all Americans and not just the ones who are affiliated with their party or share their virtues and vices. Maybe they should be more openminded that divisive political fighting is more detrimental than helpful. Maybe they should be more openminded that a consensus is more powerful and effective than just a simple majority. However, these same encouragements could and should be leveled at Democrats as well. In the end, we are all reminded that we share more often than not and because of this, the progress of the United States is dependent on our ability to be "openminded" to all who value our democratic system.
Nikolai | 02/22/08
Report Offensive Comment
Anyone feeling that conservatism cannot go too far, should look at the state government of West Virginia. That state has remained relatively the same since the early 50's. (with the exception of computers). The state has consistently lost population, leading to very few representative seats, and remains in the bottom 2 of the 50 states in terms of prosperity. The state is never-changing. Its very sad to drive through the mountains and see the state at which people exist in our own country.
Eaglevision | 02/23/08
Report Offensive Comment
They're open-minded enough (that's why McCain has the nomination), but this decade has made it necessary for any candidate to practive partisan politics. The political climate is much different than it was 40 years ago. It was okay to be a moderate (Dwight Eisenhower proved to be an excellent president, and held the ideas of moderation to the presidency), but now one must be partisan. That causes people to be stricter in their voting record and thus more close-minded, especially Republicans, who all want to align themselves with the Conservative agenda. The Conservative agenda is to "conserve" things the way the are- thus they're open to little change.
Ikefan | 02/23/08
Report Offensive Comment
Sorry auburn, I tend to agree, but I have to give it to downing based on the arguments presented. Maybe you should team up with Nikolai next time...
IamFry | 02/23/08
Report Offensive Comment
Im for my country being united. So Im rooting for auburn, but based upon the argument so far, swdowning has my vote. 2 more left.....
Eaglevision | 02/23/08
Report Offensive Comment
I agree with swdowning that one of the key characteristics of this nation is the ability to debate in an open forum and often these debates were/are characterized for passionate and distinctly opposite positions. However, what also characterizes the strength of a robust democracy is the ability to compromise on the path to the greater good. And this is where I feel the notion of "openmindedness" comes into play. Thomas Jefferson was an avid proponent of free speech rights because he believed that within an open forum of free speech, where all points of view can be heard, the "ultimate truth" would surface. I think that reason, coupled with this notion of "ultimate truth", brings forth an urge to compromise in the modern context. However, what we have in our current political environment is this incessant urge to demonize our political opponents simply because they do not see the "truth" of our own point of view. For a more contemporary example, a former professor of mine once told me that the most effective Supreme Court decisions were the ones passed with total or at least closest unanimity because they reflected reasoned judgment based on compromise. Moreover, they were stronger because it took more than a switch of a few seats on the bench or changes of mind to overturn them. So while I agree that Republicans should not be the only ones to "open up," the more important aspect is to focus the political debate in this country away from the demonization of opposing views consistent with modern partisan politics into a more open forum based on reason.
Nikolai | 02/23/08
Report Offensive CommentPost A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
Only Axl Rose remains in the group, but since 1987 GnR has been rocking with fury
More than 50 years of cover stories about the 35th President
I'm a self-admitted left-leaning guy, but I'm voting for downing here. I will always respect a conservative who can hold true to his or her values without sinking into traditional "mud-slinging" and partisan politics like many current Republican leaders have embraced. It's not about open-mindedness; if that were the case then liberals could be called "close-minded" for not embracing Republican ideals.
Austhus | 02/22/08
Report Offensive Comment