Do aspies generally dislike conservatives?

Post Reply New Topic

So do liberals.
Rich democrats hate poor people too. I’ve met plenty.
My neighbor supports homeless camps but is anti welfare. So he’d rather we be in homeless camps then get government aid and food. He provides them security not food to my knowledge. My uncle is a rich democrat supported obama, anti welfare.

So don’t pretend any side likes us both would rather we be dead, the left just wants our votes. They won’t be giving us universal income and they love wars as much or more then the right.

Honestly, I really don't like how people are using labels to dehumanize others, such as comments along the lines of calling them evil, stupid, wanting to starve us -- it's wrong for anyone to dehumanize others like this. We should look at each person as an individual, and not be so prejudiced or judgmental because they think differently or hold different beliefs. In my opinion, the lack of having any ounce of respect for others, as fellow humans, is disgusting.

I don't dislike Conservatives. Just jerkish or dumb Conservatives. I actually dislike Liberals who display those traits too, but as this discussion is about Conservatives let's get started.

When it comes to issues of race and gender, many Conservatives are just jerks. When anyone has the audacity to advocate for equality they respond by calling such people SJWs or snowflakes without offering any argument for why they don't believe in equality.

I was actually curious one day and wondered why such an aberrant and unsympathetic point of view has been gaining traction lately, and the results surprised me. Conservatives are not actually advocating for inequality at all. They're actually advocating against inequality that arises from policies such as having a mandatory ratio of women and minorities occupying certain positions that make it far easier for those demographics to get certain jobs. That's not actually equality, and anyone who thinks it's a good thing is a fake Liberal IMHO given that Liberalism is founded on the notion of equality for all regardless of gender, race and creed.

Anyways, I made a post on another forum asking why Conservatives never explain their position and are instead content with people thinking they're jerks. Apparently they tend to just get sick and tired of explaining their position, so they just act like the jerks they're accused of being. Ok...

I've also come to dislike how 99.99% of Conservatives weigh in on environmental issues. The vast majority tend to just ignore science and pretend they know better than 97% of environmental scientists, who I might add have dedicated their lives to studying the topic of the environment. When called out for that, they refuse to offer any kind of counter-argument and just result to name calling. It is actually still a mystery to me why so many Conservatives refuse to acknowledge scientifically valid findings and any logical argument that supports them.

I have actually seen arguments from Conservatives with working brains who do acknowledge climate change and that it's at least being affected by human activity. They allege that carbon taxes aren't the solution (which I do agree with). Taxing motorists doesn't get people out of their cars as long as people need cars to get around. I also have serious doubts that 100% of that tax money is going to green initiatives and funding transit projects.

Said Conservatives also argue that industrial activity in certain regions actually doesn't leave as much an environmental impact as, say, millions upon millions of people driving to work everyday, that outsourcing industry to other regions of the world is actually having greater adverse effects on their environment in many cases, and that certain green initiatives only minimally reduce our impact on the environment while greatly impacting the economy. Also, some environmentalists greatly miscalculate their assessment of certain projects like pipelines and the long term effects cancelling said projects can have on the environment they want to protect.

All of the above are very reasonable arguments. Why the vast majority of Conservatives don't use them and instead prefer to look like they have the intelligence of a grapefruit is beyond me. I also dislike when Conservatives pretend that the economy is literally the only thing that matters ever and everything else is either not important or is merely an obstacle to be dealt with. Ugh. I actually do swing right on a lot of issues, and heck, might even identify as a Conservative to some capacity if Conservatives did not rub me the wrong way.

I lost my patience with them when it became plain to anybody paying attention, that they hold the lower class to be beneath contempt and wouldn't piss on us if we were on fire, when it became obvious that they think we're just "useless eaters" and that we fully deserve to suffer and perish if we couldn't afford their criminally overpriced health care.

Conservatives in my area tend to be closer to the original conservatives. Fiscally conservative yet socially liberal as far as personal rights go. They believe in small government low taxes, don't have a problem with LGBT people, and do not espouse prejudice. Those conservatives, I don't have a problem with.

In fact, it's nice to have fiscal conservatives in charge occasionally, because while I like many liberal ideologies, they still have to work out financially and often times liberals neglect the financial feasibility of things. In the past, I relied on liberals to implement progressive policies, and conservatives to balance the budget.

Unfortunately, I believe the conservative party has undergone yet another paradigm shift, and has attracted a rather unsavory crowd, and the reliable, level headed, respectable conservatives are being overshadowed by them.

Old-school conservatives didn't want to give up their hard-earned money to taxes, but we're still empathetic people.

The biggest thing these new conservatives have an issue with giving isn't tax money, but empathy. In fact, they seem to have a disdain for anything that may be interpreted as a disability or a weakness, tending to believe there is no disability; only lazy people who want hand outs.

I have multiple disabilities that are more limiting than I would like them to be, but am not looking for a hand out. All I really ask for is people understand that I have some limitations. This, however, seems to be too much for these newer conservatives, and I often feel hostilities and negative judgements from them. There seems to be this paranoia among these newer conservatives that everybody with a disability is trying to scam them.

I do not feel these vibes from liberals. I do not see liberals calling the mentally ill individuals on the street dirty subhuman bums, I do not see liberals calling those on the spectrum snowflakes who just don't want to work or children on the spectrum spoiled brats who just need a good spanking, or being hostile towards people with disabilities as a point of political ideology, but I do see many conservatives doing these things.

In the US the original conservatives were social conservatives. The economic liberalism part seemed to come later with Reagan. The angry xenophobia seems to be a new thing though, separate from both social conservatism and economic liberalism. Seems like it actually started in Europe and then spread to the US, culminating in the election of Trump.


It seems like usually the reason things don't work out is due to competing interests constantly fighting. The liberals manage to pass new legislation, then conservatives cut the funding or cut the taxes that would pay for it. The end result is a hole in the budget.

Now it seems the idea that conservatives want to balance the budget was a myth. They just increased military spending and gave the wealthy tax cuts. Now they're going to use the deficit hole created by that policy as a good excuse to go crazy cutting all the things the most vulnerable people depend on.


Personally, I'd rather watch Trump throw the disable onto the street while publicly mocking them than watch someone like Paul Ryan do the same with a smile on his face. Who cares that they want to appear civil and respectable. It's how they actually affect people's lives that matters to me.


I think the newer conservatives are just more comfortable sharing how they really feel these days. In the past they hid it. Now they're in the open.

I'm from a lower class conservative family. In addition, I'd say that most non-urban workers are conservative in the United States. I will say that the wealthy elite, of which are mostly leftist in America, hold a view of keeping the poor in poverty and dependent on them in order to garner power.

Lastly, in our time of greatest need, it was charity that saved us, not the government. I'll always be grateful that people voluntarily helped us.

Of course, if you're from an urban area, or from western Europe, then I can see why you would think that. There is a great lack of community in the city, having lived in both urban and suburban America, and having been in both the northern part and southern part of the U.S. The sense of community, in the urban south, is non-existent. The sense of community in suburban and urban north is non-existent. People aren't as friendly, as charitable, and a lot more selfish. As a result, people become miserable and have very negative outlook on other humans and think other humans have an inherent negative outlook back on them. That's from my experience and what I think of it all anyways. In short, city-dwellers are a miserable bunch that bring misery into their ideology and outlook on life -- the city is not the kind of environment that mankind can really flourish on the individual level.

Sorry for going on a bit of a tangent there. I'd also like to clarify that I don't mean miserable in a way that would come off as me disliking the people themselves -- I blame the environment as opposed to the individual for the stress that city life puts on people; otherwise they're just normal people that, with a good community and some sweet tea, could be a lot happier and have more positivity in life.

We tend to use the word conservative to refer to republicans and liberal to refer to democrats, however this can cause confusion because both parties have undergone numerous ideological shifts over the course of their existance.


The original republican party was a party of economic reformists and those opposed to slavery. A shift in the political climate occurred both during the great depression, with the "New Deal" and in the 60s when the democratic party took up the issue of civil rights, and Strom Thurmond, who was a segregationist, defected to the republican party in protests. This caused most southern democrats, who are called Dixiecrats, to also deflect to the republican party. That is how the republican party became the party of racists and those opposed to the rights of others.
When you look at a photo of a KKK rally in the 1940s in the 1950s, you are looking at a bunch of registered democrats.



Sometimes but it was a bunch of liberals who voted for a 9 billion dollar bullet train during a state budget crisis. Because they didn't fully think it through, the project has been stalled for years, and as it turns out is not going to cost 9 billion dollars, but 77 billion dollars. It should have been apparent that it was actually going to cost significantly more than 9 billion dollars, because it costs 11 billion dollars to add just a few miles of a new lane to a freeway in the state.

They fixate on the idea. They like the idea of a bullet train between Los Angeles and San Francisco, but they haven't sat down with an Excel spreadsheet and thought out the math. They punch the hole on the ballot and think their leaders will make it all work.

Here is a good example of the democrat thought process at the ballot.

"I make no bones about it. I like trains and I like high-speed trains even better." - Spokesman for Gov. Jerry Brown.

Today, here is what democratic leaders have to say about it.

"At first glance, the High Speed Rail project is still over budget and the funding to complete the program hasn't been identified," said Jim Frazier (D-Discovery Bay), chairman of the Assembly Transportation Committee"

Here is what republican leaders have to say about it.

"Initially a rathole, now a sinkhole, soon it will be an abyss in which more and more tax dollars are forever lost. I speak of the never-ending scam called High Speed Rail," said Sen. Andy Vidak (R-Hanford)."

What they should really do is task fiscal republicans with bringing these projects to fruitation.



Cutting taxes whether it be on the rich or the middle class for the poor, is a fiscally conservative move from the republican perspective. Increasing military funding isn't, but we are not dealing with traditional fiscal conservatives.



Possibly. While most conservatives/republicans aren't evil, if one were evil, they would likely be more inclined to align with the republican party at the moment, in my opinion.

These days I think the left tends to be more affluent than the right, because the left is more likely to be college educated and get those fairly well paying white collar jobs. However there is a perception that wealthy tech moguls are liberal, and this isn't really the case. Wealthy tech moguls are progressive because there is profit in it for them. If they can get people to do things new ways, there's more of a market for them to sell products that allow people to do things new ways. I would say most of these people don't fall neatly along the right left political spectrum.

Liberals tend to think a lot about inequality, but they don't do a lot as far as fixing it. More conservatives donate to charities than liberals. This likely reflects the fundamentally different ways that conservatives and liberals have in addressing problems. Conservatives seem to believe that help should be rendered through individuals while liberals seem to believe that help should be rendered through the government. Conservatives champion self-responsibility, while liberals champion social responsibility of societies. Towards the middle they are both right and they're both wrong and on the extremes of the expectorant they are both wrong.

We need both self responsibility and social responsibility. If we rely entirely on charity through the individual to get things done, things are too decentralized and big changes and big benefits can't happen. If we rely entirely on the government, needs get overlooked and money gets mismanaged and disappears into bureaucracy.

Do you honestly think the middle class and elites on the left wouldn’t do the same?
Do you think Bloomberg gives a crap about you? He doesn’t. Neither do any of the celebrities or other millionaires and billionaires on the left. Don’t see any of them opening their mansions to homeless people.
This is t a left or right issu it’s a well off vs poor isssue. Only difference between a rich conservative and a rich liberal is wether they support abortion or gun control. They pretty much align on hating poor people.

the GOP has [with the unlikely exception of Nixon, and was shot down by his own crooked party] lifted a finger to make health care more affordable to the working class. when #44 pushed through PPACA, it was against united GOP opposition. that tells me that the GOP is my enemy here, not the democrats.

Leftists would really love you, though.

IMO the worst part about leftists is maintaining a permanent underclass as a power base. They’d rather you stay on welfare. They’d rather keep wages as-is because it creates such a huge gap between what people get in benefits vs what they could be doing in the workforce. Some welfare recipients DO get more in benefits than the lowest wage-earners. Why work for something you don’t need to? It only makes sense. But it also forces you into a cycle of poverty that is almost impossible to overcome.

I owe some $50k (actually slightly less) in student loans. My household income is well under $30k. We almost NEVER have money to spare. So we take advantage of a IBR plan that takes our payments down to $0. If we just hang in there for a total of 20 years, the loan will be forgiven.

Which sounds GREAT. But once I start earning more money, I have to pay back the loan, which could mean even more poverty as opposed to where I am now. If I can just hang in there and stay broke for another 15 years, give or take, everything will be fine...

This is a leftist wet dream. Completely free education at the expense of wealth and freedom. No thanks. I’ll take my chances with a higher income and the possibility I’ll pay them off well ahead of time and enjoy the rest of my life completely free and out from under their control.

Leftists, so-called “liberals,” couldn’t care any less about freedom. It’s antithetical to their ideals. Give the voting base a little of what they want, but keep them poor and don’t let them leave the plantation.

Now what is this saying?

For being an aspie. For not having the ability to help yourself.

I’m not saying this is your reality. I don’t know your situation. But their attitude is “oh, but you’re on the spectrum. You don’t need to worry about that. We have ‘programs’ to take care of you.” The subtext is that you better remember where your check is coming from next time you vote.

I’m a conservative. That doesn’t mean I’m against welfare. If you are mentally and physically incapable of earning money, then take your check, stay on your couch and play video games every day for the rest of your life for all I care. No sarcasm, here, I’m being serious. I’ll say that I’m sorry for your situation and that I’m glad you can still manage to do slightly better than survive and that I’m jealous of how you get to spend your day.

What I dislike is while I do think welfare should be easy for those who genuinely need it, whose survival depends on it, and for whom there really are no options, it’s a little too easy for those whose situations are not that dire really. And that’s not even touching the abuse of the system. People who max out their EBT on junk food and soft drinks and resell it at their portable building “snack shop.” They convert government money into cash so they can get high or drunk on the weekend.

Leftists encourage that kind of thing. They don’t mind the corruption because that’s half the reward. Of course you can make money off EBT. It should be your money to spend on whatever you want. Those restrictions aren’t OUT policies...

It boils down to whatever it takes to get a vote. There is an unfair gap between welfare income and the work it takes to out-earn benefits. Liberals WANT you to believe your situation is hopeless so you’ll keep playing the victim and keep voting for them. But with each passing election cycle there are only more broken promises and more excuses. And that tells me they don’t want to help you. They want you to think it’s all someone else’s fault. They know that if your problem gets solved, there’s no one to blame, which means they have to actually find a REAL issue to champion. Having a permanent underclass to represent is the easiest way to achieve their goals.

They love aspies and anyone else on the spectrum because often we are lifelong dependents. As I said, there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s just the notion that they will do anything to keep us on the plantation that bothers me.

Last edited by AngelRho on 12 Apr 2018, 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That the wealthy elite are "leftist" is a total lie. What do you consider the "elite". Hollywood actors? What about the wealthy CEOs? Most of them are conservative. Pretending your political opposition wants to keep people poor so they can have power is outright slanderous conspiracy nonsense. If you can't even trust that people actually believe what they say they believe then it's not worth having a civil debate anymore.


You were extremely fortunate. Not everyone has access to charity.


I agree that there's a lack of community in the city. It has to do with the environment, not people's political beliefs. Conservative city dwellers are just as self-centered and non-community oriented as liberal city dwellers. It probably has a lot to do with the fact that people in the city are exhausted from working long hours and spending most of the time they're not working commuting to and from work, cooking, shopping, etc... There's little time for community, because conservatives like yourself are hell bent on working people to death so that a small wealthy elite can make more money. There is no life outside of work. Plus with the death of unions it's so easy to fire people that most people are constantly changing jobs. How do people make friends when they don't even work with the same people for any length of time?


I agree. I'm not a city person myself. The thing is you don't have a solution. Do you just expect everyone to live in the country? People move to the city because that's the only place they can find jobs. They don't move there because the love having no community.

Last edited by NoClearMind53 on 12 Apr 2018, 11:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

They also might not support corporate welfare or cutting things like your SSI to fund a useless wall. However that is also why I like socialism....it would also keep uber wealthy lefties in check as well as the uber wealthy righties. I mean just getting a democrat in office next won't fix all the issues...there are wealthy lobbyists on both sides with too much political influence.

Last edited by Sweetleaf on 12 Apr 2018, 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.