When I saw the title I'd hoped for a thoughtful piece touching on the different ways that caring and uncaring can be acted out. Maybe some recognition that apart from at the worst extremes people who subscribe to differing political viewpoints still tend to be both capable of great care and great indifference to the lives of others depending on what issues they are concerned about.

Instead I found a sadly one sided rant.

In answer to the question, conservatives (using the broad term to differentiate from the left) are as caring as I perceive the left to be. Some care deeply about issues of social justice and the needs of real people, they may define those issues differently to the way someone on the left of politics defines it though.

Others like some on the left of politics are utterly self serving and seemingly incapable of real care about anything beyond themselves, I hope they are in the minority on both sides but it's hard to get a good feel for what really drives people.

As for the "claims of being "consumed by fear", I think there is some evidence that conservatives are more cautious than so called progressives but that's different to being consumed by fear. Some are too reluctant to embrace change as a counterpoint to the lack of caution shown by some on the left.

Many on the left are more than willing to trade on fear when it suits them, the issue in judging both sides is if we believe their concerns are legitimate or poorly founded. I'm guessing trying to promote fear of an Abbott lead government will be a big factor in the Lefts campaigning this year.

I'd suggest that the majority of so called conservatives are no less caring than the majority of so called progressives. Both will have their blind spots and their spots of real compassion and care.

R0bert

I'm with you there, RObert. The title - and the opening paragraph - suggested a desire for a genuine discussion and a debunking of generalisations. Apparently not. That said, it is an opinion forum and the author has put forth an opinion. The title, of course, invites us to disagree. And disagree I do.

Aligning the Liberal Party with the Republicans is, perhaps, an effective argumentative tool: there is much to dislike (in my opinion) about the Republicans, so if the likeness is accepted at face value there must be much to dislike about the Liberals as well. Frankly, there is - but they are very different things. I don't see a Tea Party being formed among our Liberals - if anything, it seems most likely that such a movement would form among the ALP. The ALP feeds on the fears of the 'working man' (which apparently excludes anyone in possession of a university degree), the 'battlers' (which, according to their processes of financial support, seems to exclude anybody in possession of a trade or a university degree) and the rusted-on supporters who fall into the 'excluded' categories but abhor the idea of supporting the Libs. They mobilise these people by identifying enemies: the wealthy, the 'lazy' professionals, the big businesses that employ them, etc.

Perhaps the Labor of old was a more caring party, but I don't know that they are any more caring than their opponents now. Which doesn't mean that either is particularly caring at all ... So perhaps conservative parties are uncaring, but the conservatives in society are not. That's my reading of it, anyway.

If the Political Compass (http://politicalcompass.org/index) is to be believed, there is no such things as a 'liberal' among the ALP, the LNP, the Democrats, the Republicans, European governments or the major British parties. They are all 'conservative'. How true this is, I'm not sure. I'm often accused of being a raging fascist by my colleagues, but the test suggests that I'm far more liberal - and less authoritarian - than the lot of them.

This is an excellent topic for reading recommendations.

Two books come immediately to mind. Anyone who accepts that right wing politicians ever have the Common Good in mind should read Alex Carey whose works have been collected and published as "Taking the Risk Out of Democracy" and subtitled "Corporate Propaganda versus Freedom and Liberty".

The first article in the On Line Opinion email today is written by a researcher at the Centre for Independent Study, a right wing think tank funded largely by the tax deductible contributions of businesses whose leaders fear having to contend with a clear thinking well educated population. Carey's book gives CIS a couple of good serves and claims it was initially set up and assisted by American business interests.

The second book would particularly suit runner. It is "Society without God". The book was written by Phil Zuckerman after living and researching life and living conditions in two Scandinavian countries, Denmark and Sweden.

The author concluded;
"....most people don't believe much in God, don't accept the supernatural claims of religion as literally true, seldom go to church at all, and live their lives in a largely secular culture wherein death is calmly if not stoically accepted as simply a natural phenomenon and the ultimate meaning of life is nothing more or less than what you make of it. The existence of this relatively irreligious society suggests that religious faith - while admittedly widespread - is not natural or innate to the human condition. Nor is religion a necessary ingredient for a healthy, peaceful, prosperous, and deeply good society.

Gee Runner,

Who's governments were they that turned the Middle East into a basket case in the first place and then tried to bomb democracy back into them?

Which government (when it wasn't putting dogs on wharfs) fostered racism and intolerance for quick electoral gain on the back of a single leaky boat?

Which government historically encourages and uses social division as a strategic political tool?

Which government has sold out to the evangelical right in return for financial support?

If it's only a body count you are interested in, which government sacrificed the lives of our troops on the altar of political expediency in the hope of getting a Fair Trade Agreement?

A bit late for crocodile tears from the Reich Wing.

Runner: will Tony save the thousands of boat people

Well if he is as successful as John Howard he will, if he is as successful as Rudd/Gillard more diaster is on the way.

rache

which Governments is the champion of murdering the unborn?

Don't vote, it only encourages them.
Neither party has a legitimate claim to represent the nation, they're uniformly awful and Katter is simply a synthesis of the worst bits of both sides, maybe it's time we assembled a new party but banned lawyers, farmers and trade union officials from joining?