Add new comment

I couldn't listen to the whole show, so maybe I missed this. It seems the guest, and the tone of the show, suggests that if we can engage in dialogue then we can accept common principles to lead us forward towards accepting difference and disagreement. But this is, by definition (admitted by the guest), a liberal position. This is then a selfish request for dialogue with those "conservatives" that, rightly or wrongly, desire only control. There should be no confusion: modern conservatism is about authoritarian control (possibly often for malicious ends). To suggest that they would "dialogue" is to betray blindness to this fact. They will have no dialogue that they will not control.