Originally posted by: Nines
You just bolster my point here, imo. True about change..most of 'us' (conservatives) don't like it..I certainly don't on average even though some degree of it is inevitable. Simultaneously, you and many Dems / lefties assume all / most change is good; plenty of evidence that it isn't. Change for the sake of change alone always makes me skeptical. In my profession we have the option to use a laser and / or a true bubble level to do a lot of tasks; I still prefer the bubble level ( just out of life long habit) and use it to confirm what a laser line is tellin me; the new tech ( not just level / plumb line devices) at first glance is often appealing, seems 'easier', and is touted as having equitable accuracy..not always the case in real life.
I never said --and Democrats have never said--thst change for its own sake is desirable. That's never been part of the liberal philosophy. Your reductio ad absurdum argument doesn't fly.
Your example is poor--the laser will indeed be more accurate than the bubble level and your eyes, so a "change" from level to laser wouldn't be merely so: it would also be an improvement. I can imagine the Assocation of Bubble Level Manufacturers bribing your Congressperson to introduce a bill banning laser levelers because they're made in China or whatever.
So to more accurately state my and liberals' point of view, we regard change as both good and necessary, and our default setting should be to embrace it IF it is truly beneficial. Your perjorative characterization, that we embrace change for its own sake, is dead wrong--how would you feel if I said that conservatives reject change reflexively and automatically, without considering if it would be beneficial?
Even though that's pretty fuckin' close to the truth sometimes!!
