Actually, if you want to unify liberals and conservatives, the best medium to do so is sports. Sports is non political and offers a community experience. This is partly why I enjoy sports.
Even sports don't unify people. Look at the battle over the names of the "racist" sports teams. Look at the Sterling thing. It all turned political and both sides bickered with each other over it.
As I'm not pushing any political agenda, this is not a political thread, but,never if it was, I have let other players run political threads. So, I don't understand your gripe.
I see lots of political threads. Those that are locked are locked because they suck, because they're attacking a certain person/group or because they suck.
Which classical republic ? Do you mean inspired by platos republic ? Or the roman republic with it's families and tribes of plebs and patricians ?
Here's another great quote: "I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." John Stuart Mill, in a Parliamentary debate with the Conservative MP, John Pakington, May 31, 1866.
Here's the great thing about quotes, are you ready for it? THEY'RE OPINIONS. Be more like moose and go find a study, at least psychological studies have some merit.
Roman Republic, worked well enough to outlast any other form of continuous state government and be replicated throughout history. If it was suitable for Venice... It would be exciting at the very least.
Black worth pointing out in that quote It's referring to the Conservative party in the uk. Not a conservative by American standards. Mill himself was a great believer in individual liberty against an over powering government something that generally is described as a conservative opinion in the USA not a liberal one. Perhaps the discussion shouldn't be about liberal vs conservative but more the labels used to Poorly define ideas and ideals in a quick sound bite. Personally from my standpoint it seems neither side is always right and both have some serious issues. Maybe it would be better if there was less overt political agendas within the " free " press. Less preaching of the networks agenda and more actual factual reporting of the news, with out trying to scare the population about whatever the issue of the day is.
Lycan it would be very exciting but with some proper safeguards over campaign finance to stop people basically buying elections it could be interesting to see.
Rage sells, and the media is a business, so, weather its fix news or any score of left wing media sources, they will all pedal outrage.
People With Low IQ Tend to be Socially Conservative: New Study Lower Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low Intergroup Contact http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/20 ... 6.abstract There ya go.
But isn't that a part of the problem moose. If both sides are fed not lies but spun information in ways that have little to do with actual reality how can either side ever hope to compromise and actually work for a better place for all ?
Because what ever happens neither side is going away and how ever much this may annoy people neither side is always right. So maybe less focus on the issues that will never be agreed and more focus on things that can and should be achieved.
The interesting thing in this article, is thst if we understand others more, we may find middle ground by stating things a but differently. Example: If you want gays to be able to marry, but the right opposes it, then press for gays to have the same rights as straights, but call it something different, like a "civil union". Take out the emotionally charged words. Its just one example of many I could cite