I'm not sure how things work over there, but I'm looking forward to the comments of typical redstate visitors.
Progressive vs. Conservative – A Direct Challenge
Greetings redstate readers! This is my first diary here, and given the fact that I consider myself a Progressive and a Liberal, I will try to be as polite as possible, understanding that I’m on your turf.
Why am I doing this? Well, it’s because I believe that there is an unhealthy segmentation of different political factions who do not communicate with each other, and who instead choose to “congregate” with like-minded people who share the same world view. This results in an increased level of polarization, and in the end, the country is worst off as these factions demonize each other.
Some readers may be surprised at this statement, since many on the so-called Right believe that Progressives don’t see the world in a black-and-white, or good-vs.-evil, kind of way, but I do tend to see the world this way…
For example, when it comes to understanding the world around me, I rely on empirical evidence, science, reason, analysis, observation. So even though I understand that as we move forward there are new scientific discoveries as technology advances, I base my understanding of the world on reason and the latest advances in science and technology.
Based on that, I understand that species have evolved (thus, the science and evidence of evolution). I evaluate the science behind the issue of global climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels, and I come to the conclusion that it is real (even if not exact).
I have no problem with religion insofar as it is something that can be practiced by groups of people who have the need to believe in something (including superstition), as long as the State remains Secular, which is the only way to maintain a reason-based, civil society.
So my main point is that there is such of thing as “absolute” truth. That people are entitled to their opinions, but not to their own facts… For example, a fact its so regardless of whether you are a Liberal or a Conservative.
Given this introduction, the purpose of this diary is to respectfully challenge any conservative to an objective debate about any of the hot-button issues we are dealing with today, including the economy, taxes, national debt, etc.
My contention is that much of the so-called Right is unduly influenced by the work of corporate-paid think-tanks who exploit certain traits shared by the “right-wings” in any society in order to manipulate people into acting against their own interests… I’m sure the average conservative reader has heard these assertions before, but I believe I can prove them with certainty.
Now, the only “rule” I would have in order to engage in debate is that the debate be conducted with civility and respect, avoiding adhominen personal attacks, vulgar insults, and threats. I argue that if these basic rules of civility are adhered to, and we follow a pure “Socratic” method of argumentation, I could destroy any typical conservative or right-wing argument fairly quickly.
Now, I’m open to the possibility that I may be surprised and someone will present a coherent and powerful argument based on reason, empirical evidence, and analysis, but I argue that in those cases we will find more common ground.
If the argument is based on typical right-wing talking points, mainly present in the Tea Party movement, then my contention is that I’ll be able to defeat it fairly easily.
Any takers?
P.S. I do make a commitment to read the diaries and arguments presented here at RedState with an open mind. I actually subscribed to Erick Erickson’s daily newsletter and will make sure to read it carefully as time allows.