It's glib, but the meaning is that rational observation tends to strongly disfavor conservative views. Things like climate denial and supply-side economics that are tentpoles of conservatism consistently fail to hold up to any level of scrutiny. Modern American republicans are currently hanging their hats on completely farcical assertions that the 2020 election was stolen and Democrats are all pedophiles. When an outlet like CNN reports the truth, they are going to appear liberal in comparison.
That's not what it means. It means that rational observation free of bias aligns more closely with liberal politics.
Per the examples given: Scientific observation says climate change is real, man-made and an urgent threat. Liberals agree, conservatives don't. Maybe not to a person and maybe not with 100% fidelity to the science but the trend is unmistakable.
Same for many other conservative fallacies like "tax cuts pay for themselves". We have data and know it isn't true. And current hot topics like election fraud. All the evidence says it's extremely rare. Liberals agree with the evidence, conservatives don't.
That's not the entirety of the political divide and there's plenty of subjective and philosophical arguments irrespective of evidence but when it comes to justifying policy, one side relies on evidence one doesn't.
No, both sides have different realities they don't like-
Reality Progressives don't like:
- Gender correlates with biology
- Giving chronically homeless people housing won't fix their homelessness
- Not charging serious crime won't lead to safer neighborhoods
- You can't fix societal disparities by changing who is at the top and bottom of a pyramid of privilege
- Demonizing the wealthy won't lead to any productive outcomes
- The amount of GDP consumed by government already should be manifestly sufficient to fix the things government is capable of addressing efficiently
- Universal Basic Income is a pipe dream with no mathematic or social basis in reality
- Getting rid of religiosity without replacing it with another moral foundation will lead to progressively worse societal outcomes (and progressive thought is in no way an adequate replacement)
- Shouting down unpopular opinion doesn't make those opinions go away
Reality conservatives don't like:
- Locking prisoners away for long periods leads to greater gangsterism and lifelong criminality
- Racial disparities, whatever their source, need to be addressed systemically for society to prosper
- Making huge changes to our atmospheric mix is 100% likely to lead to undesirable outcomes- the globe, and humans as part of it, will not prosper with large changes leading to unknowable outcomes in our biosphere
- Education is essential to social mobility
- Social safety nets are essential to social mobility
- Free markets are rarely free of defect and tend towards capture, either regulatory or monopolistic, and need frequent intervention to function efficiently
- Even if you've felt deceived by the media, making it a point of pride to doubt anything/everything you hear opens you up to those who will manipulate that doubt for their profit and power
Either way, the smugness both sides have in being sure they are the 'righteous/scientific' side only opens them up to lack of self-reflection on whether their side is correct on a particular issue. If you're sure that your 'sides' agenda is correct top to bottom, you've assuredly sold yourself a bill of goods.
Nothing you listed under progressive misapprehensions are liberal dogma, nor are they categorically disproven. No sane person would argue that biology has no bearing on gender identity. The liberal idea is that people should be able to live their lives as they choose. Obviously someone with XY chromosomes can never get pregnant even if they outwardly change their gender. Giving the chronically homeless housing has had some positive results and nothing else has, so it's something some democrats have been willing to try. It's experimental, but definitely hasn't failed and we would absolutely abandon it if it ever does. Absolutely no one advocates not charging serious crimes, that's propaganda. UBI is also nowhere near liberal dogma, but has some credible theory behind it worth exploring. We already do EITC and it's wildly successful. The democratic candidates for president in 2020 who supported UBI got zero delegates. Government has enough money to solve everything it should solve? That's just unquantifiable gibberish.
Regardless, my point is still that the preponderance of evidence aligns with a preponderance of liberal policy. Climate denial, covid denial and election fraud conspiracies on their own are enough to condemn modern American conservatism to the garbage heap of corrupt populism even if liberals were buying every drug-addled hobo a luxury condo. I'd still rather live in that world.
