Are Infernet Users Conservative or Liberal?
posted by shuac 3 months ago • 431 views
Howdy kids. Shib-ity Shib-ity Shuac here with my very first Sift Talk topic.

Many members are complaining about how VS is becoming "Demosift" or "Atheist-Sift" and the like and it got me thinking. Yep, I'm a thinker.

This is how I see it: by and large, the political climate of the world has a symbiotic relationship with individuals in it. If the world leans conservatively, liberal-leaning individuals become the squeaky wheel which eventually turns the world liberal-leaning. Then conservative-leaning folks do their thing and so on.

It's a yin-yang shin-dig, by golly. Doe-see-doe yer partner and all that.

So my question for the group is this: is the reason VS features so many so-called "liberal-leaning" vids is that there are a limited number of conservative vids in existence?

Or is it that those conservative vids do not get as many votes?

Or both?

Or neither? Perhaps my premise is faulty.

Discuss.

















bookmarks (0)
Comments subscribe to this feed
It's because most conservatives aren't actually conservative at all and don't possess enough intelligence to poke a computer with a stick, let alone turn it on. Yet they still get counted as conservatives.

If you want conservatives, go to a wall mart.


written by Ryjkyj  | 3 months ago | CH
 -1  | flag spam (0)
unfortunately i have to ignore everything you say because you used the words "liberal" and "conservative"... polarising is not good.

but i secretly read it anyway, and yes, you are kinda right, in a ridiculously simplistic way.


written by MINK  | 3 months ago | CH
 3  | flag spam (0)
While some people use the internet to censer their experience of the world by only having to deal with viewpoints that they already agree with ( see conservapedia) it seems that at least folks on the sift are not in that camp.

Many netizens attempt, in at least a juvenile way to interact with people who disagree with them (see flame wars), and so tend, in my experience, to have a more nuanced view of the world than most provincial real-world-only humans.

Take the Ron Paul thing, big on the net, small in the general population, but not really fitting current conceptions of lib/con. Similarly you will find much higher concentrations of people who define themselves outside of these boundaries, you are almost as likely to meet an anarchist or libertarian on the net as a democrat or republican.

I think the answer to your either-or question is no.


written by dgandhi  | 3 months ago | CH
 2  | flag spam (0)
If my "many members", you mean BillO, you may be right.

As far back as I can recall, the sift has always been left-leaning, with very few members complaining about it.


written by MarineGunrock  | 3 months ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
Internet users do skew toward more liberal values than the general population. That will slowly change as the median age of net users increases.

Supposedly you can go from a liberal to an arch-conservative in 20 years without changing a single one of your values.

That's why I support pet marriage now - to keep me liberal into the future.


written by dag  | 3 months ago | CH
 10  | flag spam (0)
Today's conservatives (not the religious right) are very similar to classical liberals. Opposition to gay marriage will look as bizarre in the future as supporting child labor does now.


written by Fjnbk  | 3 months ago | CH
 1  | flag spam (0)
^Exactly. 20 years from now people will say "I can't believe the government prevented people from marrying who they wanted to".


written by dag  | 3 months ago | CH
 1  | flag spam (0)
if the guy who founded the site talks like that, it's not surprising this "liberal" influence persists... and it's not a bad thing. i just wish people wouldn't use these stupid polarising words.

Anyone subservient enough to just subscribe their brain to a single political "genre" is obviously not thinking enough and should be ignored (see conservapedia or malkin or 911truth or moveon or peta for details... across the spectrum extremism is retarded)


written by MINK  | 3 months ago | CH
 1  | flag spam (0)
I'm a staunch Hillary supporter, just thought I'd throw that out there to make myself fit in better here


written by BillOreilly  | 3 months ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
Tomorrows conservative is today's liberal.


written by Farhad2000  | 3 months ago | CH
 1  | flag spam (0)
Too many labels. What is meant by "liberal" and what is meant by "conservative"? The definitions go back and forth. Personally I have things I like from both ends of the spectrum - Ron Paul & Dennis Kucinich '08! - even if they may seem incompatible.


written by gwiz665  | 3 months ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
There's a saying that I heard that's stuck with me cuz of how uncomfortable it makes me. Young and conservative: no heart; old and liberal: no brain. I don't agree with it, at least not directly. But, intuitively, what Dag and FJBNK say seems to hold some water. Maybe there is some truth to that old saying.


written by RhesusMonk  | 3 months ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
OK, never mind the awkward phrasing of my question and let me ask those sifters who routinely get their comments voted down this question instead (how's that for avoiding labels, bitches? )

Do you feel your point of view is insufficiently represented? Not just on Videosift but the interwebs in general? If so, why do you think this is? If not, why aren't you sifting more of that content?


written by shuac  | 3 months ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
The whole dichotomy of separating liberal from conservative is one of the main factors at the root of all of our problems. When one says the conservatives this or the liberals that, what they do is they take a person, who may have judgment on subjects based on personal knowledge and experience and push them into one group that ALL believe the same thing. We each, then, become typecast into a template by the other "side".

This does two things:
1. It creates separation and closes down communication between the different groups.
2. It forces people to commit to stances on topics they wouldn't have taken if they had used their own rationale.

If we were able to look at a situation without that political name calling, I believe we'd find many to be in between. I wouldn't mind traits from both presidential candidates but others I could do without.


written by rottenseed  | 3 months ago | CH
 3  | flag spam (0)
^ Well, I felt we'd properly established the whole label assigning as generally bad, which is why a) I was careful to add the suffix "-leaning" to both liberal and conservative when I wrote the original sift (promptly ignored in favor of mounting horses high) and b) I'd made an honest attempt to rephrase my question, also ignored for more mountain-making by way of molehill.

So what's it to be, ladies and gentlemen? Pray we pretend this vile episode never happened? Failing that, may we, each of us, be able to cleanse ourselves of the fetid, reprehensible labeling, resolute in our conviction that we shall never again indulge in such thoughtless behavior? I do wonder.


written by shuac  | 3 months ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
I agree, label assigning is bad, if for no other reason than the whole political discourse focuses its attention on trying to stereotype the opposing side (at least, in American politics).

As for why it's LiberalSift? I'm not sure. I personally see that a lot of the other vocal members of the politics areas here are libertarian or "true conservatives", not "liberals". It seems there is more of an audience for pro-Democratic, anti-Republican vids, but I never see anyone even submit anti-Democrat, pro-Republican vids.

I do think that right now a majority of Internet community participants are at a minimum leaning liberal, but that has a lot to do with the demographics of who participates in these things (mostly middle-class, young, white males), and where that demographic leans politically at this point in time.


written by NetRunner  | 3 months ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
As we all learned from Colbert, Reality has a very well-known liberal bias. And, of course, all videos on the Internet represent reality.


written by direpickle  | 3 months ago | CH
 2  | flag spam (0)
Early-adopters of anything are by definition "liberal". Web 2.0 has existed for what, only 4 years?

What do you have against PETA?

Also, on the whole, what's so bad about MoveOn?


written by jwray  | 3 months ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
20 years from now in some idyllic fantasy dag can conjure, Australia will be frog-free, and alien oysters will swim upstream to service artificial sausages.....

conservative/liberal...is a goddamn illusion, fed by symbol-junkies and regurgitated to their screaming, helpless offspring...get a clue-you are you, and fuck the dubshitz!!


written by choggie  | 2 months 4 weeks ago | CH
 0  | flag spam (0)
Submit Comment
log in or register to submit new comment