Why does Liberalism attracted the youths ?

Why does Liberalism attracted the youths ?

Because it is in their rational self interest, same way that conservatism is in the rational self interest of older people.

>rational self interest


>literally fights for other's self interests

For their own self-promotion in the form of virtue signalling. Youths are left becuase educational institutions align with and donate disproportionally more to socialist and liberal causes than conservative ones.

The left won the culture war and ingrain in kids that Left is good Right is bad from a very young age.

Most kids that age are sheep either to eachother or their gut core beliefs which are usually just childhood conditioning.

Now I'm not saying Left wing politics is in fact bad but it's undeniable at this stage that for decades it's been drilled into kids so hard that a massive counter reaction has started.

All... or most... of these kids would have been equally fervent Hitler Youth. It's not that they don' think for themselves but many of them vote for shit they don't even believe in.

It did not actually, liberals are never honest with their statistic

Most young people do not care at all about politics

This we grew up with Dubya and a recession. Hard to get exposed to decent tenants of the right wing when you've been laughing at Hicks with Jon Stewart since you were a kid.

Problem is that we Collectively have shit taste and went to demagogues in disguise like John Oliver.

Lots of kids are turning away from the left because of PC culture

emotionally charged twats who aren't aware of real world consequences.
"if you're not a liberal when you're young, you have no heart. if you're not a conservative when you're old, you have no brain"

that's not true at all. There is only the illusion of that when in reality both political spectrums cherish equal rights

As more kids seek college education as they see that factory, industrial, and other jobs that did not require a college degree and pay above minimum wage either get taken by foreign workers who will do the work for far less without a labor union to wager competitive wages for them or ultimately get mechanized and replaced by machines, they look towards the leadership that promises that their college tuition will not incur substantial amounts of debt. That has been a key message from liberal leaders as of late.

There is also the fact that many are growing up in a more diverse society and many are more sensitive to issues of race than youth were before them, and liberals are the only candidates whom don't sound tone deaf in their approach on racism.

t. Independent currently in college

Undeveloped brains plus sheltered cushy lives—thanks to the comforts provided my modern utilities—makes them ripe for indoctrination into an ideology as ridiculous as modern liberalism.

they never had to work for shit, youth is a dream.

Why are women attracted to leftist ideologies?

>because they're smarter :)
Way to prove you never spend time with women, friend.

most youths aren't attracted to politics

liberalism won the culture war and people want to be on the winning side, same as with the nazis

Why are you arguing with yourself, you fucking mong?

I was anticipating a standard response, person.

A personal answer since I can't really speak for everyone:

Growing up, before I turned around 17 or so, I was always an idealist, someone who expected people to act kindly to each other and put others before themselves. That sort of idealism led to me promoting things like socialism, more government control of various institutions (After all, officials always have our best interests at heart, right?), and various "equality" programs such as affirmative action. I totally thought that only a few greedy individuals were causing the majority of society's problems by keeping everyone else down either through force or ignorance.

Also, at least in my area, a very conservative place, backing such thought was very rare among non-minorities, so it also played in to the youthful need to rebel. I assumed older people were simply stuck in their ways which is why nothing had been changed for the better.

It wasn't until I started seeing some of my ideas in action and the flaws that occur in practice when equality is forced upon a population and government control isn't limited that I started to retract my views. Turns out, the big, fatal flaw of which those beliefs were founded on (That people were naturally benevolent to each other) was false; the majority of everyone is out for themselves, and when given power, even in an attempt to bring them to the same level as others, they will seek more for themselves instead of remain content. Workers will not be content with a livable wage, they want to receive more. It's not enough for man to have a free apartment for his family, he wants a large, beautiful house in the suburbs. Peasants want to be nobles, nobles want to be kings, kings want to be emperors. That is why the forced equality of liberalism eventually pushed me away, because it generated far more problems than a more conservative ideal ever did.

Generally, I'm still a little sad people are wired like that. We're often the cause of our own misery.

>what is a common good

Could it possibly be because rightists shit on them constantly?

Name one time I've ever shat on a woman.

That burden is on you m8

pfft lol. If anything becoming cynical made me more left

What are you talking about? I love Mexicans. I eat taco bowls all the time. Some of them are just bad hombres.

Forgot to say this but
>That people were naturally benevolent to each other
is probably why we need all those stuff you wanted in the first place

Yes. Is that a strange concept?

Why are reactionary notions so attractive to youths?

Traditional edgyness of 14 - 18 year olds

when you're young you want the world to be better but if you try to sell "better" people just tell you "we're doing what we can" (they're not)

so you choose a specific thing and take part in movements telling people specifically to fix that shit. they meme as hard as they can for any excuse not to but if your cause is just they'll eventually have to give ground.

then the young people show up and tell you the specific way things are that you fought for is not good enough and you meme as hard as you can for any excuse not to change it.

but you're really just talking about american politics so let me tell you land of the free you need another fucking party so people don't have to vote for an insane person just because they disagree with another insane person. there's no left-right in burgerstan, there's just two cliques of loons people are forced to make a choice between.

Why do white people believe a liberal republic with 22% tax rate versus a liberal republic with 23% tax rate is a major difference

Undeveloped critical thinking

In theory, since people aren't benevolent towards their fellow man, it would make sense for someone to force them to be through government action. The problem is if someone has the power to enforce that sort of equality, they have the power to abuse it and allocate powers and resources on how they see fit -- essentially, you'd require a benevolent and wise ruler to actually enforce these things instead of one with an agenda to simply take from those who have and give to those who do not.

We see this currently with different effects of liberal policies and organization. Racial quotas enforced in colleges and the workplace, giving two students, one white, one black, who come from the same income bracket, the same high school, both from good families, yet one is given government aid while the other is not. Unions keeping a death grip on companies, demanding higher wages for less time worked, far beyond what a company can feasibly support, all on the pretense that they'll continue to demand as much as they can possibly get. Equality has simply become the pretense for the transfer of wealth from one faction to another, a word used to swing the pendulum from one end to the other.

This sort of disillusion with leftist ideals, seeing how vulnerable to corruption it is, is why I'm opting for a system that's less susceptible to the whims and desires of men in charge. Instead of relying on the benevolence of others to live and prosper, I find that people should instead take charge of their own abilities and harness their own self-serving interests to better themselves. Yes, that will mean that sometimes, someone will not have the aptitude or capability to improve themselves, and will need to settle for whatever station they can reach in life, and while disappointing, it's as fair as we can make things.

If people were benevolent as shit, there would not even need to have a government. But too bad racism still exist, companies give their workers as low of a wage as possible to make more and more profits for the stock owners. Equality would be voluntarily enforced and there would be no poor, social ills or oppression.

But too bad so we need leftist ideals to fix these problems, however cumbersome the solutions. And no matter how much you emphasize personal ability, no man is an island. Unless you can create a soceity by yourself and for yourself, society must work for everyone's interests, even if it is at your own expense sometimes

I think it must be a science to fit this concentration of memes in a post.
>In theory, since people aren't benevolent towards their fellow man, it would make sense for someone to force them to be through government action.
no it fucking wouldn't

In theory, if you want a better society, you must nudge people to get them to behave like that. In practice, all it does is create more problems and further alienate people from each other. It's simply a problem in that we have no current methods to change human behavior.

Racism is a far smaller problem than the left makes it out to be. No longer are we a segregated population, nor are employers unilaterally refusing to give jobs to minorities. And while, yes, there is a lingering tribal notion among all peoples (Not just whites) that causes us to prefer the familiar over the different, it's no longer a society destroying issue.

Greedy corporations squeezing as much money out of the common man is nothing new or noteworthy. At the same time though, in their fervor to strike back, the left simply seeks to take from those they work for and give to themselves, which is precisely while liberalism fails on that account. At best, this creates an endless cycle of have nots taking from those who have and at worst simply swaps the two.

There was another user a while back who mentioned something on another board about how both sides are attempting to arrive at the same place, but have vastly different reasoning on how to get there. I think this is where our disconnect comes from, observation of the failures and successes of both sides which sways our decisions on which to support.

sense of humor