hypothetical scenario: two countries, one liberal, one conservative.

[BlahBlahYouToo]

both start off on equal footing, in terms of population, economy, finance, technology, etc.
politically, one leans left, the other right and remains this way and will never change.
immigration, business, trade does not occur between the two. basically, they are completely isolated from each other, without any knowledge of the other country.

over time, which would be the more desirable nation to live in?
which country would be more advanced?

 

[ch33zw1z]

/me grabs lawnchair a popcorn. This should be a good one..

 

[yllus]

If they're both "far ____", neither of them are going to progress anywhere.

 

[Schadenfroh]

When one goes far left or far right, there is little difference between the two in terms of oppression and the police state. As far as early-modern examples go, far right seems to have a higher standard of living than far left. For example, I am sure the standard of living was much higher in prewar Nazi Germany, Fascist Argentina and Italy than Russia under Stalin or China under Mao.

It would be bad to live under either.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

When one goes far left or far right, there is little difference between the two in terms of oppression and the police state. As far as early-modern examples go, far right seems to have a higher standard of living than far left. For example, I am sure the standard of living was much higher in prewar Nazi Germany, Fascist Argentina and Italy than Russia under Stalin or China under Mao.

It would be bad to live under either.

ok, let me remove far and see how it plays out.

 

[MJinZ]

It depends.

Conservative, as in all of them are pretty much Religious dumbasses?

If both are stuck in the middle ages, you know which one is going to come out first (the Liberal one, obviously).

If both are already in our time period, then it depends on how "conservative" people are that would significantly hold back any sort of scientific or social progress.

If both are already Utopias with flying space ships and hovering aircrafts, no diseases etc, then it probably doesn't matter since "conservative" would be like preferring solid colors over stripes.


As for which country is more desireable to live in, that obviously depends on who you are. Church leader? Probably in one and not the one. Flaming gay guys? probably in one and not the other.

 

[QuantumPion]

both start off on equal footing, in terms of population, economy, finance, technology, etc.
politically, one leans left, the other right and remains this way and will never change.
immigration, business, trade does not occur between the two. basically, they are completely isolated from each other, without any knowledge of the other country.

over time, which would be the more desirable nation to live in?
which country would be more advanced?

How about comparing states? Would you rather live in Michigan or Texas? California or Florida?

 

[Acanthus]

How about comparing states? Would you rather live in Michigan or Texas? California or Florida?

You can take this argument to any number of extremes.

Massachusetts or Mississippi?

Somalia has a tax rate of 0.

China has no freedom of speech, and all workers are forced into unions, and most of the the nation is still to some extent a command and control economy.

 

[irishScott]

If Germany and Soviet Russia were any indication, without any intervening factors the Conservatives would Conquer the Liberals.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Look at how Chile, Spain, Taiwan, South Korea, and Italy turned out. All started as rightwing dictatorships then transitioned into a liberal democracy.

Then look at places that were ran by leftwing dictatorships. Compare.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

It's impossible to answer the OP's question because "conservative" and "liberal" are broad, ill-defined words. In what way are the two nations liberal and conservative? What kind of philosophy--non-political philosophy--do the people in each nation have? There are a great many other factors involved with a nation's success besides just its economic and social policies. There is also what I like to call the "rationality factor".

What if the people in the liberal country are hard working, law abiding atheists with a high rationality factor whereas the people in the conservative country are religious loons who have far more children than they can afford to care for and end up overpopulating their land while denying or being completely oblivious to environmental issues? What if the people in the liberal country are laid-back potheads and new-age religious freaks and the people in the conservative country are devout Objectivists?

A great many other factors come into play besides being merely "liberal" or "conservative" whatever those two terms mean.

 

[Mursilis]

Conservative, as in all of them are pretty much Religious dumbasses?

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

It depends.

Conservative, as in all of them are pretty much Religious dumbasses?

If both are stuck in the middle ages, you know which one is going to come out first (the Liberal one, obviously).

If both are already in our time period, then it depends on how "conservative" people are that would significantly hold back any sort of scientific or social progress.

If both are already Utopias with flying space ships and hovering aircrafts, no diseases etc, then it probably doesn't matter since "conservative" would be like preferring solid colors over stripes.


As for which country is more desireable to live in, that obviously depends on who you are. Church leader? Probably in one and not the one. Flaming gay guys? probably in one and not the other.

lets not turn this into a religion bashing thread.

 

[Red Dawn]

Well Norway is very Liberal and Pakistan is very Conservative, which one would you prefer to live in?

 

[her209]

The social progressives have been able to advance their "agenda" since the end of the Civil War.

 

[Atheus]

This is such an unfathomably dumb thread. If we knew the answer to this question it would solve pretty much every problem on Earth.

 

[woolfe9999]

It's impossible to answer the OP's question because "conservative" and "liberal" are broad, ill-defined words. In what way are the two nations liberal and conservative? What kind of philosophy--non-political philosophy--do the people in each nation have? There are a great many other factors involved with a nation's success besides just its economic and social policies. There is also what I like to call the "rationality factor".

What if the people in the liberal country are hard working, law abiding atheists with a high rationality factor whereas the people in the conservative country are religious loons who have far more children than they can afford to care for and end up overpopulating their land while denying or being completely oblivious to environmental issues? What if the people in the liberal country are laid-back potheads and new-age religious freaks and the people in the conservative country are devout Objectivists?

A great many other factors come into play besides being merely "liberal" or "conservative" whatever those two terms mean.

Yup, you have to define what each term means in the context of the hypothetical, or else anyone answering will just assume whatever the terms mean to them. For example, some people seem to think that "conservative" means something like libertarian, and does not include any of the rightwing social agenda or anything to do with religion. Then there are these insinuations about "classical" conservatism and liberalism (both of which are apparently identical strains of libertarianism, so say many of this board).

And even if we know what the terms mean, just HOW liberal or conservative are we talking here? Is this cross ideology steroptype, where liberal = communist and conservative = either fascist or theocratic? Or are we talking about real world, mainstream liberalism and conservatism? If so, even those terms need further defining because people have trouble jettisoning the stereotypes.

Hypothetical is intriguing but fails due to insufficient information.

- wolf

 

[Carmen813]

Yup, you have to define what each term means in the context of the hypothetical, or else anyone answering will just assume whatever the terms mean to them. For example, some people seem to think that "conservative" means something like libertarian, and does not include any of the rightwing social agenda or anything to do with religion. Then there are these insinuations about "classical" conservatism and liberalism (both of which are apparently identical strains of libertarianism, so say many of this board).

And even if we know what the terms mean, just HOW liberal or conservative are we talking here? Is this cross ideology steroptype, where liberal = communist and conservative = either fascist or theocratic? Or are we talking about real world, mainstream liberalism and conservatism? If so, even those terms need further defining because people have trouble jettisoning the stereotypes.

Hypothetical is intriguing but fails due to insufficient information.

- wolf

I wouldn't say identical strains, as there are some pretty large distinctions between left and right libertarianism. Some of the fundamental beliefs are the same, but there are substantial disagreements about the role of government.

 

[cubby1223]

When one goes far left or far right, there is little difference between the two in terms of oppression and the police state. As far as early-modern examples go, far right seems to have a higher standard of living than far left. For example, I am sure the standard of living was much higher in prewar Nazi Germany, Fascist Argentina and Italy than Russia under Stalin or China under Mao.

It would be bad to live under either.

Don't forget that our traditional conservative and liberal extremes here in the U.S., are different from the "left/right" extremes over in Europe.

They say Nazi Germany was far right, and Soviet Russia was far left. Well, here in the U.S., extreme conservatism is not even close to what the Nazis were, nor is extreme liberalism close to what the Soviets were.

 

[woolfe9999]

I wouldn't say identical strains, as there are some pretty large distinctions between left and right libertarianism. Some of the fundamental beliefs are the same, but there are substantial disagreements about the role of government.

I call them "left leaning libertarians" and "right leaning libertarians," as distinguished from pure libertarians. The Pauls, for example, are right leaning libertarians in that, for example, they want to criminalize abortion. In other words, they depart from pure libertarian principles to move in a conservative direction on one or more issues. But that isn't the exact issue I was raising. My point was that many seem to think that both liberals AND conservatives were, at some earlier point in time, basically something more akin to libertarians than what they are now. I find this odd, because it suggests that these two opposing ideologies were at one point very close together, and it suggests that something vaguely similiar to libertarianism was, at one point in time, the one and only dominant and prevalant current in American political thought.

I find the discussion of so-called "classical liberals" and "paleo-conservatives" on this board interesting and, at times, a bit irritating, since this board has a ton of people who seem to think of themselves as some sort of libertarian and hence they want to believe that everything now is a pervision of some sort of originating libertarian idea.

- wolf

 

[Steeplerot]

Well Norway is very Liberal and Pakistan is very Conservative, which one would you prefer to live in?

this

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Well Norway is very Liberal and Pakistan is very Conservative, which one would you prefer to live in?

Actually the leading party in Pakistan is the PPP (Pakistan Peoples Party).

They are centre-left political party affiliated with Socialist International. There are a surprising number of socialist parties in the Middle East.

 

[Fox5]

Don't forget that our traditional conservative and liberal extremes here in the U.S., are different from the "left/right" extremes over in Europe.

They say Nazi Germany was far right, and Soviet Russia was far left. Well, here in the U.S., extreme conservatism is not even close to what the Nazis were, nor is extreme liberalism close to what the Soviets were.

The National Socialist party was far right?

I think the terms right and left are pretty poorly defined...

 

[Rainsford]

I would say that, as a whole, the answer is that both countries would do about the same, assuming their only difference was the black and white political difference of "left vs right". This kind of political ideology may create a great deal of controversy and discussion, but in most areas where you might measure national progress, it couldn't possibly matter less.

Political ideas are of course at the foundation of how a society prospers (or not), but the idea that the left vs right divide is the important one totally misses the point. National political views go beyond the two simplistic choices, and I'd argue that common positive factors around the world hold true whether the people in question are lefties or righties.

Look at the number of successful countries around the world that lean one way or the other...

 

[Tristicus]

It depends.

Conservative, as in all of them are pretty much Religious dumbasses?

Yeah, it depends. If we're all dumbasses like you, we get nowhere.