.

Why Does Hate and Hate Speech Dominate Social Conservatives

Exercizing the 1st Amendment
Exercizing the 1st Amendment

Over the last five years it has become apparent to me that those who have chosen the social conservative path seem to be extraordinarily angry whenever they speak or write. I am not so naive as to believe that the liberal/progressives don't have their own version of the 'angry man' who can't reference anything about conservatives without invoking the pejorative. But when the two are compared, the conservative position of anger and outrage appears to be so much more pervasive in approach and content. I've visited any number of right wing sites and they all share this same angry outrage characteristic. As far as I'm concerned this is not politics 'as usual', but something else altogether.


From my observation it doesn't include all conservatism, but only social conservatism. The positions of the fiscal conservatives are far less emotive and remain mostly rational and approachable. Therefore, all conservatives cannot be stereotyped with the angry outrage label.


With so much anger and outrage, it makes it exceedingly difficult to rationally discuss issues when one position or the others anger and belligerency blocks all meaningful communication. Each conversation attempted, under such circumstances, simply leads to a widening divide. It has driven a wedge between family members and friends creating, in some cases, rifts that will take a long time to heal if at all.


First and foremost the key characteristic to the social conservative's position, is that of being victimized by non conservatives. It is clear to the social conservatives, however mistaken, that non conservatives have deliberately contrived to eliminate individual rights and freedom in favor of collectivism and the movement toward the “New World Order”. The social conservative views anything that the non conservatives devise to be as a result of some form of socialist cabal or simply brainwashed liberals. I find this view of the world as looking through a very narrow lens clouded by peculiar notions of freedom, liberty and individuality. These assumptions and ideologies of the social conservatives make them particularly susceptible to well crafted hate speech and pernicious rabble rousing.


It is important to the unity of the social conservatives that they view themselves to be a subjugated minority. Only through shared feelings of victimization are they capable of maintaining unification of purpose and a position opposing social change; based on a perception of a deterioration of moral and natural order within their society. Social conservatives are very susceptible to strong beliefs in xenophobia and ethnocentrism. Many social conservatives are also strong advocates of Social Darwinism and that some cultures, societies or groups are just more socially evolved than others.


One of the basic historical stated values of the social conservative is the value of fairness. Rationally they may support social justice, but not when social justice means that they will be required to involuntarily change their behavior, beliefs, give up one of their perceived privileges or a perceived reduction of status, whether earned or unearned. This is precisely what the mongers of hate and derision focus on to rouse the fear of the susceptible social conservative. Raising fear in the targeted group has led to unwarranted anger and outrage, continuously feeding upon itself for sustenance. This is clearly a manipulation of people who are known for their propensity of rigidity and generalized resistance to change, reinforcing their perceptions of being a subjugated minority.


There has emerged a hate industry that is dependent on promoting hate and discontent. Obvious is the media that is making money into the billions from promoting the subjugated minority beliefs. However, less obvious is the amount of money flowing into tax free entities supporting every social conservative position under the sun, from anti-abortion to school choice and beyond. If one was to include the money brought in by the right wing Christian organizations, it would make pale, in comparison, to the vast majority of the globe's largest corporations. The hate consumption industry has provided huge benefits to the wealthy by diverting attention away from their questionable activities and keep the focus on the opposition that would openly challenge their activities. The hate industry has translated into political power that assures the retention of power of the right wing ruling plutocracy.


I know I'll be taken to task for that assertion and there will be any number who will raise the issue of the left leaning plutocracy as a counter to the statement. However, given the scope, breadth and pervasiveness of the hate industry, it would be difficult to envision leftest plutocrats being able to exercise the same control of the right. I won't quibble about whose worse, the right or the left, since I oppose all plutocrats and oligarchs.


If we look to history and the impact of escalating hate beliefs, it always results ill for society in general. Nations and societies that are based on hate have led to some of the greatest atrocities in our specie's history. A Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, Stalinist Russia, and the American Civil War; just to name a few, could not have occurred without the hate and discontent that led to their fruition.


It is time to see the damage that is being done by all the hate speech and reintroduce civility into the conversation, treating those who we disagree with respect and human understanding.







This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Lyle Ruble January 20, 2014 at 08:29 PM
@J. D. Hogg......OK, you're not Craig, I apologize for the assumption.
Cody Walker January 20, 2014 at 08:39 PM
Unlike you Lyle, I have provided factual quotes proving liberals practice hate, and the progressive movement is rooted in this hate speech and ideology. You provided paragraph upon paragraph of more babble. But what's new?
Lyle Ruble January 20, 2014 at 10:40 PM
@J.D. Hogg......I make no claims as to my intelligence or whether I'm smarter than anyone else. As far as you being the judge of truth or not is a difficult assertion for you to make. But, that is immaterial to my original article. My focus was on social conservatives and the hate speech that permeates from them. Hate speech is unacceptable no matter the source.
Bob McBride January 20, 2014 at 11:04 PM
Well then to take it back to your original title in the form of a question, the answer would be "for the same reason hate and hate speech dominates social liberals". The issues are emotional in nature, not logical. Hate is an emotion. Describing something as hate or hateful is an emotional response. Do you support a woman's right to choose Lyle? Why do you hate the unborn? Anyone who supports Act 10 hates teachers. Anyone who doesn't support increased expenditures for social services hates the poor. If I refer to liberals as a "cancer to society", I'm being hateful. If you refer to Republicans as fascists and compare them to the Nazis, you're being hateful. If I support voter ID, it's because I hate black people. If I don't support Obama, it's because I'm a hateful racist. Pretty much anything can be described as hate, particularly if one prefers not to attempt to justify their own stance on a topic on principle. Mr. Grumpy, another example of lefty tolerance we've neglected to bring up, loved nothing better than to jump into a conversation here and play the race card while tossing out personal insults. And yet you want to focus on hate speech from the right. I could copy and paste some of Wilson's gems here for you if you like if you want to see some real hate speech. Your response, so far, to examples posted by myself and others is "I don't care about hate speech coming from those on the left, I want to focus about how it "dominates" social conservatives" Why is that, Lyle? Why focus on just that coming from those on the right?
Lyle Ruble January 20, 2014 at 11:26 PM
@bob McBride......Look at the comments that have been posted. Who has been the point of attacks? I will be honest, when I started researching for this particular article, I was both amazed and disgusted with what I was seeing and reading. The characteristics that were clear to me was unjustified fear spawning outrage. I am disturbed to see anyone sink to a level of painting others as less than full human beings worthy of respect.......As far a focusing on the social right, I did that because the Patch is dominated by conservatives who make it a standard practice of dehumanizing rhetoric. Yes, there are the Jasons and the John Whites, but they are few and far between when compared to the conservatives who are constantly over the top in their comments.......From the comments that have been made, I can't see that my contention that social conservatives see themselves as a subjugated minority and are being victimized by the left.
Bob McBride January 20, 2014 at 11:40 PM
Lyle, currently lefties are few and far between here in general. You've based you theory here on sites that are predominantly populated by those on the right. As I said earlier, if I were to visit sites predominantly populated by lefties, I could come to a conclusion exactly the opposite of the one you've come to. You want to focus strictly on those on the right that you view as hateful and when you catch flack for ignoring their counterparts on the left, you point to that as evidence that you're correct. That really makes no sense whatsoever.
Cody Walker January 21, 2014 at 12:34 AM
Just like the hateful witch hunt against conservatives called a Jon Doe, you have no proof Lyle. You were asked to prove your blog with facts, and you have failed to post anything. This has to be your largest boondoggle to date. :thumbs up:
Bob McBride January 21, 2014 at 07:08 AM
Even if Lyle were to offer up proof, it would be proof he's offering up based on visits to sites populated by right-wingers, predominantly. All it would prove is that his methodology for coming to the conclusion he's coming to is faulty. The whole premise of this particular blog entry is jaded by his own admission that he's singularly focused on one side to the exclusion of the other. If I were to throw up a blog here suggesting all lefties are heartless, self-serving baby-killers based on visits I made, exclusively, to pro-choice websites, I'm confident that it wouldn't stand without some pretty hearty criticism of my methodology. And it, and I, would be deserving of it.
Bob McBride January 21, 2014 at 09:07 AM
I wouldn't have bothered, but that's just me. And frankly if Lyle was just some average schmuck around here I'd would have just written it off as par for the course. But he's not. He's smart and generally a reasonable person. I'm not sure why he wants to subject himself to viewing what he classifies as hate on websites run by people who don't agree with him. We can tend to create our own little customized worlds here by the choices we make in terms of where we go on a regular basis. If I find myself overwhelmed by a particular viewpoint or set of viewpoints, I adjust my website itinerary accordingly and don't let it get to me.
Lyle Ruble January 21, 2014 at 12:36 PM
@Bob McBride......I failed to adequately communicate my reasoning for visiting only the social right sites. I have noticed over time that there appeared to be some consistency in the anger and outrage displayed by social conservatives. My inquisitive nature led me to exclusively visiting those sites to try to determine the causality of the extreme anger. From the social science, theoretically the development of world views has much to do with the process and content of human socialization. Once the world view is formed, then through the process of continuous validation it becomes engrained. All humans are limited by a phenomenon of selective perception, whereas we only count that which validates our already held beliefs and world views. It is very difficult to get beyond our own cultural conditioning to gain a different view and other aspects of truth.......One of my observations was that the industry of hate and outrage had become big business and clearly manipulates the inherent nature of the validation of already held world views........What resulted from my analysis was a consistent belief that the liberal left was consistently victimizing the social right. Viewing themselves as victims provides the rationalization for striking back with anger and outrage. From what I have been able to observe, the right is not being victimized by the left and the message of victimization is used to manipulate and feed the industry of hate.......Unfortunately I didn't make the point clear enough and much of the comments have resulted in people justifying their positions against the liberal left (me). There is also a counterpart to the social right in the liberal left that is attempting to replicate the success of the right. Now we have a situation where the hate industry is set up to prosper through manipulating people's emotions.........I didn't mention that I looked at associated industries that are dependent on fear and hate such as the 'Prepper Industry' and the sale and accumulation of precious metals......Finally, my analysis doesn't allow for using the 'scientific method' as an empirical tool. To attempt to use the scientific method on such a subject is much like using a straight edge ruler to determine the flow of water, not the right tool for the question. I thank you for your patience.
Bob McBride January 21, 2014 at 12:44 PM
And once again, Lyle, I can point to the same thing on the left. Not so very long ago we had an entire state in upheaval here because forces on the left were able to engage large portions of the public sector in playing the victim card. I know you're going to say that's different, but it's not. In fact, if either side is guilty of having a long-standing tradition of selling people on their victim status and exploiting it for political gain, it's the left. Maybe, in truth, what you don't like is seeing what those of us on the right have been seeing for years. You've just been unable to see it because it hits a little too close to home for you. You don't have to look much further than your discussion with Jay, above, to see it at work.
J. B. Schmidt January 21, 2014 at 12:52 PM
The following two problems still exist: 1) As I have stated, you fail accept your own distance from the political center, thus making the basis of your argument flawed. Many conservatives (politicians aside) understand and accept their distance from political center. 2) Conservative views were the state of things prior to the increased invasion of progressive thought. Obama was opposed to Gay marriage before he was for it. The social conservative position is being removed by using the accusation of hate and victimization you claim is being used by conservatives. ----- You made the following point, "t is very difficult to get beyond our own cultural conditioning to gain a different view and other aspects of truth". You are currently suffering from this exact conditioning.
CowDung January 21, 2014 at 01:51 PM
Well, it is his blog...
CowDung January 21, 2014 at 02:07 PM
I'm pretty sure the Lyle could run this site far better than Patch seems to be. His blogs are pretty much the only thing worth coming here for...
Lyle Ruble January 21, 2014 at 04:36 PM
@J.B. Schmidt....I'm not immune to my own bias and I am fully aware of it. Understanding that, I attempt to view world from a number of perspectives and get past my own filters. The exchange of perspectives increases awareness and promotes further discussion and investigation. It is important to have our own bull get gored once in a while.
J. B. Schmidt January 22, 2014 at 09:21 AM
When contrasting the actions of Gov. Walker and Gov. Cuomo, it appears that demands made for social change based on anger and intolerance are advanced with greater zeal among leaders of liberal movement.
® Cody Walker January 22, 2014 at 11:52 AM
The party that claims to be tolerant is the least tolerant of all. But everything a liberal says needs to be flipped upside down and backwards. They literally will tell you their plan by claiming their enemy is doing it.
Bob McBride January 22, 2014 at 01:16 PM
I think if this blog asked the question why social issues, in general, tend to generate hate speech, it might not have been met with the reaction it did. I think the topic itself is interesting. Social issues do tend to be those in which people tend to be emotionally invested. They also tend to be the ones utilized by both sides to not only "fire up" the base, but to distract from issues that are often times more important in the grand scheme of things.
J. B. Schmidt January 22, 2014 at 01:19 PM
Bob, you should write a blog.
CowDung January 22, 2014 at 01:45 PM
Marriage isn't just about private lives though, Pale Rider. The government defined the construct of marriage and grants certain rights and privileges to those who are married.
Bob McBride January 22, 2014 at 01:50 PM
I wouldn't disagree with you on that, Rider, but I do think it does tend to get utilized as a distraction at times. I'm sure those on the left who view it as an affront to women's healthcare consider it important as well. But most certainly the emotional aspect of it is utilized to fire up the base and distract from other issues. It's also piggy-backed onto other issues, such as Obamacare, to engender support or opposition, when in fact there are other aspects of the issue itself that are far more important than is its relationship to how one feels about abortion. I, frankly, don't doubt the earnestness of those on either side of the abortion issue. However I do think the emotional aspects of the issue allows folks on both sides to be played, at times. :::::::::::::::::::::: Think about Act 10. What it actually proposed to do and what it actually did hardly warranted the kind of reaction it got from the left. It wasn't until numerous emotionally charged issues were attached to it that it became the catalyst for the unprecedented and unnecessary opposition both it and Scott Walker faced from 2010 through most of 2012. Many on the right are probably going to disagree with me, but I do feel that often times the specter of increased gun control regulation is used in much the same way on the right as is the specter of a tightening of abortion legislation on the left.
Lyle Ruble January 22, 2014 at 01:55 PM
@Pale Rider.....If you truly are a libertarian, then why are you positioning yourself one way or another over abortion? Your definition of innocent life could be applied to any number of living things. However, both from a philosophical perspective and a legal perspective, the unborn do not have agency. In fact we don't grant full agency until the age of 21. Therefore, is everyone under the age of 18 or 21 to be considered innocents?
Lyle Ruble January 22, 2014 at 01:58 PM
@CowDung.....You are exactly on the money with the issue of marriage. If there wasn't any benefit to being married, then Pale Rider's point would be relevant. However, married couples enjoy all kinds of benefits that are denied to single people.
J. B. Schmidt January 22, 2014 at 02:04 PM
I think anger stems from how each side believes society should be controlled. Either you control society by establishing a specific level of morality or you control society by imposing regulations based on the ideals of the day. For the most part Social Conservatives have been consistently advocating for strong traditional families and pro-life. While their counterparts on the left have had a more fluid approach tackling issues viewed as important based on election cycle. Each side believes their position is important to the nation. The biggest difference is that the Right seems old fashion as their positions have remained largely unchanged over time; yet, at the same time the Left has enjoyed, what they call, an evolving position that panders to the issue du jour. As result, the anger on the Right comes from an emotional reaction as society drifts further from what they perceive is moral; and, the Left gets its emotional hackles flared when their ideals are challenged rather than blindly accepted. ---- There is no good solution. As we drift further from a republic style of governance to that of a democratic society, the political center will become more sparse as policy and cultural standards are decided more and more by straight polling percentage as opposed to governmental leadership for the good of the country.
J. B. Schmidt January 22, 2014 at 02:30 PM
Regarding marriage. The government grants marriage rights equally to all citizens. Gay and straight have always had the same rights/restrictions on entering into marriage. It is the homosexual person that is trying to do something that no one is allowed to do. In fact the legalization of gay marriage allows some to have more rights than others. The equals sign, that everyone had on their face book page was untrue. It should have been a (+1) as homosexual now are being granted a right that no one else is offered; the ability to alter marriage. ---- Yes, by that statement traditional marriage is being used to control behavior; however, point out a law that doesn't?
Bob McBride January 22, 2014 at 03:32 PM
I'd just like to see those who support abortion be honest about what they're doing. They're killing a pre-born human baby. This absolute necessity to refer to it as something other than what it's commonly known as and as it's referred to by medical professionals in cases where its survival is desired is an indication that they're not at all comfortable with what they're doing when they do it. If you're a proud supporter of the pro-choice movement, you should be equally as proud to declare that you have no problem with people deciding to kill their pre-born human baby for whatever reason.
Lyle Ruble January 22, 2014 at 06:20 PM
@Pale Rider.....See his response on the other blog, he holds his own just fine.
Sweet Pickles January 23, 2014 at 08:05 AM
The above respondents to Lyle's blog prove his point. They're postings are that of "angry social conservatives." If they're not, they wouldn't be responding. He, he...
Bob McBride January 23, 2014 at 08:13 AM
Ho, ho...
® Cody Walker January 23, 2014 at 06:17 PM
A liberal posting hate during the state of the state --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ►"OMG...this speech is so full of sh**. Wish I could get up and walk out." --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ►"Bottom line..the rich get richer and the poor and middle class continue to get kicked in the butt." --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/241570551.html Read more from Journal Sentinel: http://www.jsonline.com/newswatch/241570551.html#ixzz2rGa81IOV Follow us: @JournalSentinel on Twitter

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something