Conservatism

Post Reply New Topic

I love how on one hand, conservatism is painted as hate for anything different. And in order to prove such, the liberals go out and spew hate for how different conservativsm is....

I am a dyed-in-the-wool republican, and I'm mixed race. More liberals have been bad to me than conservatives, by an extremely long shot.

The girl I described talking to in my original post: perhaps her demeanour could be seen as just being nice, yes. But in fact her manners and social behaviour were things she put down to being conservative.

Since then, she has seemed to be very different when I've talked to her (or tried to) and has seemed to lose her manners and respect.

I bought a pair of beige slacks recently, LOL.

I think nothingunusual, 2ukenkerl, ToughDiamond have the right idea of what I was meaning when I introduced the topic of social conservatism. Exactly that, a social system, not an economic one.

My view of Conservatism is doing what has been shown to work, versus trying new things, just because.

The raceist, sexist, try to assign blame, their main action, but Conservative is the same to all, what gets the job done. It is neither racist or sexist, it is about working for what you want, and living within your means.

Here in the South Social Conservative means Klan member. Their only skill is in being white.

Looking at the history of people who made something of themselves, they came from all backgrounds, but what they had in common was a drive to self educate, and to work at being themselves.

They looked at a world filled with bad and good, and thought about where they would fit in.

The other view is the whole world should change to fit around a single person, times billions.

In 1800 90% of London was very poor people, mostly unemployed, uneducated, and the consumption of Gin was a quart a day per man, woman, and child.

Dicken's wrote about the virtues of work, learning, being sobor, that opened the way to a better life.

Now hardly 10% of London are poor, most are working, and they drink less.

I would say the Conservative view is make the next generation better than the last.

I am much more liberal than conservative in my political beliefs. But here is what I find attractive in conservatism:

A belief in the distribution of power by valuing and encouraging local institutions as alternative centres of power to national governments. Being against the overweening power of the state.

A belief in the preservation of high standards in education and culture, and opposition to the triviality and superficiality of much of popular culture.

Wanting to keep the individuality of towns and cities by opposition to hugh stores like WalMart replacing small, local shops. Being in favour of conservation and sustainability.

But I am strongly opposed to the following conservative attitudes and beliefs:

The equation of freedom with uncontrolled, irresponsible free market capitalism in which a few multinational corporations have tremendous economic and political power.

The attitude which equates richness with virtue and poverty with vice, with a harsh and uncaring attitude to poor people who are told to 'stand on their two feet'.

A tendency to conformism and prejudice against minority groups. I would guess that most conservatives are in favour of curing autistics. Conservatives are at best sceptical, at worst hate, movements for the rights of disabled people, and have a strong tendency to being homophobic. A rejection of ideas and movements which threaten to disturb the power and privileges of the rich.

A willingness to throw aside political freedoms in the interest of 'national security' and a strong inclination towards imperialism. In the late 19th century and early 20th century British conservatives proclaimed the God given mission of the British empire. Now American conservatives proclaim the God given mission of the American empire.

I very much like this article Conservative Anarchists by Daniel McCarthy: http://www.lewrockwell.com/dmccarthy/dmccarthy15.html .

A few days ago I read in a book about American politics than when Senator Barry Goldwater was asked what pricks the conscience of a conservative, he replied anything which denies the dignity of any person. When asked if that includes poverty, he replied that it does.

I think that the terms "liberal" and "conservative" do still have some use. Here are thoughtful and insightful essays written for the article What is Left? What is Right? Does it Matter? published in the August 28, 2006 issue of The American Conservative: http://www.amconmag.com/article/2006/aug/28/00004 .

I'm sorry did I miss something last night?

I don't remember engaging in a debate.

But if I'm to be "outted" as a staunchly Anti-Bourgoise Mediocritist then so be it. I hate rich people. All of them. I don't care what their political stance is. I'm equal opportunity that way.
I wonder if the common perception is that "conservatives" have money and "liberals" don't. I know that I tend to believe that.

There are many types of conservatives, liberals. To use certain types to equate a group to it's basic ideals leaves plenty out.

A man who pushes a broom for a small company, works his tail off for 30 years, and ends up atop a hugely succesful multi-national corporation can be a conservative, or liberal, depending what perspective he takes. Being conservative, he may feel that everyone can, and should work their butts off before complaining or asking for favors/handouts. Being liberal, he may feel that luck happened to be on his side, and "luck" should be made available to all, not those just in the right place at the right time. This is the very narrow view here, there is much more to conservative/liberal thought.

You're right there. Scrooge WAS bad! There is no mistaking that. SOME claim THAT is conservatism. WRONG. And some of the REALLY poor, etc... didn't, at least in various renditions of it, seem to be very good either. Frankly, my position was one of "Bob Cratchit ". Although not as apparent NOW, it was very much so at the job I had only about a decade ago. I see HIS family as being more the conservative type. And the POOR and RICH would hate him to some degree for similar reasons.

BTW about any KKK being considered social conservative, the men look down on, and may even mistreat the women! They aren't generally for a good education. Many aren't even middle class. They are often FOR unions and subsidies, so they aren't even politically conservative. They, like the other N word's(I won't say), ARE in a position where they are considered nationalistic and even ultra right, but that is PAST anything a conservative would be.

Frankly, I feel a bit cheated. If you went to a gym, and the smallest weight was say 100 pounds, some would SUFFER! SO, they have 5 pound weights AS WELL!(A minor consideration that hurts nobody) Still, they lack certain equipment SOME have.(A major consideration that could hurt their profitability) Should I COMPLAIN? Should I SUE!?!?!? NOPE! I'm decent. I'll get by. The Schools have the SAME problems, but people have sued, etc... and most suffer and have to get by.(The total cost to the nation, possibly even the world, is enormous!)

Do you guys know that, apparently, US teachers have been openly campaigning even in CLASSROOMS for democrats, and are now FIGHTING a suit that the school board has against it? Funny, the republicans AREN'T into such propaganda. Obama even has a CHILDRENS BOOK that is PROPAGANDA!

so the Bush Admin-allied FOX News and many of Cable News outright accepting Bush Admin propaganda regarding Iraq and posting it as truth for years isn't that

Also regarding the thread title "conservatism" is evil, it represents the oppression of the varied fringe groups, forced to accept some BS 'manners'; complicated and convoluted social skills, etc....

As opposed to the liberal (etc) view being . . . ?

Making the next generation worse than the last? The same as the last . . . ?

Face it, it's not like the traditions and zeitgeists across the world have been of equal opportunities for either sex. If your view, rather, is one of courteous male chaperones opening doors, tipping their hats, and leaving their seats to women, then your view of history is partially-sighted. As women are still climbing up the status quo in Western society, harking back to tradition is regression.

Actualy, Bush didn't start it, and even many LIBERALS believed it! Still, government propaganda is run on both sides. I meant election propaganda. When churches even THOUGHT to support a republican(A right recognized under the first amendment, because it is in line with Christianity), they STOP, because they may have their tax exempt status revoked! If DEMOCRAT churches do the SAME thing(often AGAINST the Bible, and thus NOT protected), THEY are OK, because THEIR friends are the ones that decide! HECK, Wright's church is NOT theology, or a religion, but IT is tax exempt! It is INTERESTING, because when a person declared a family a church, and decided to use THAT to get tax exempt status, the IRS wouldn't let him. BTW, not that it matters, but he WAS white!

As for the "BS 'manners'", what are THOSE!?!?!? The manners I was taking about:

1. asking please
2. saying thankyou
3. respecting another person's person, space, property
4. apologizing for wrongs(REAL apologizing means to give an apology, make amends, and STOP continuing the wrong)
5. saying excuse me and allowing the person to act BEFORE trespassing/interrupting.
6. giving a person some respect by default
7. giving certain courtesies

What is wrong with THOSE!?!?!?

Aren't these two views pretty incompatible? Allowing a corporation to let rip on the land and then protesting once it manages to close your locals?

GEE, there HAVE been women above me in title and income! In my last contract, the HEAD person! The one that was over my bosses boss! The one that finally decided to let me go, although she liked me, and apologized, was a WOMAN! A fellow coworker on this job was fired primarily because of HIS boss, a WOMAN! There ARE a lot of MEN making MINIMUM wage! At my last job, almost all of the customers were WOMEN! One company was RUN by two SISTERS and the ONLY man in the office of a company of HUNDREDS was the HUSBAND of one of the owners! ( http://www.tamrac.com/ )

So you really have to wonder how true GROUP statistics are. They lack SO much detail that they are basically worthless. Earlier, more men were doctors, heavy truckdrivers, construction workers, technical, and in risky jobs. HECK, many women were PART TIME! Such things only REALLY started changing like 3 decades ago. That would skew statistics even today and, without such detail in the data, you can't REALLY say that the disparity was based on sex discrimination. BTW I knew a hispanic woman that said she would NOT hire hispanic women! She didn't like their attitudes! She was ok with other women, and ok with men, but NOT hispanic women! All that is what SHE said when I asked her about her comment! So racism and/or sexism is not always white males!

In any even't, I was speaking AGAINST treating women as worthless dreck, and saying that those wanting to treat women as such dreck were NOT conservative, at least as far as the US and most of europe are concerned.

I'm all for culture conservatism. Something more European countries should learn. It's entire identity is being destroyed. I'm not racist, but I also dislike liberalism. Hitler was an arrogent b***h who never got it right enough, and got what he deserved in the end. This does bring up race though, Europe just doesn't make any sense anymore. For instance, someone from Italy has no right to go to Sweden and become a citizen. It brings up an analogy I've heard before, it makes no sense for non-scandinavians to live in Scandinavian countries, just as much as it makes no sense for a negro to wear a viking helmet, or a jew to go to a Slavic country and wear clothing with the flyflot symbol. They are not part of that culture, no one whether you are white or black has the right to lessen the integrity of it. Those countries have all the right in the world to whatever it takes to defend it as well. If you like mixed culture just come to USA.
Social conservatism is an interesting idea and is stimulating to think about, but is it possible? Will a place you described ever exist? It's in my deepest wishes for it to one day.. Since a lot of people want to keep their neurological condition, this would be the ultimate way to ensure comfort and happiness, so it gets my support.

You ARE right about that. I HATE that the british just destroyed the irish culture. It isn't even a race thing at all. As for the US, it was SUPPOSED to be a MELTING POT! The idea being that each culture brongs it's best, and basically leaves the worst at the port. THAT was the idea behind Ellis Island: http://www.ellisisland.org/ And HEY, I found a couple people with my paternal name that came at about the right time, and a couple people with my great grandmothers name at about the same time.

Here the Liberal view is getting what they want, or think they want, now, by Act of Congress.

It is the result without the foundation, and a fine example is the subprime mortgage.

Everyone should own a home, we have lots of land.

The problem is Congress passed laws, and then let the banks and mortgage brokers put people into homes they could not afford, knowing they would take them for the down payment, and the increase in value.

People buying their first home are not wise to the ways of the world, so the sheep were sheared.

It sounded like a good idea, but the result made poor people with good credit, into poorer people with bad credit.

It was carried so far it broke the banks, the housing market, the Investment Bankers, and now the world economy. The sound bite was good, but the result cost several hundred trillion so far, and generations of debt to come, if we can get capital flowing again, which is a maybe right now.

Liberals chase ideas, Conservatives build on the known mess we have.

If 5% of people had stayed renters, they would have more money, and good credit.

If 5% less houses sold, the mass of houses would not be worth less than the mortgage.

The price of houses would not have shot up at a rate that could not continue.

Congress deregulated conventional wisdom, we will have good times and bad, so plan to survive the bad.

The way to get the poor to be home owners is to keep the price of houses down.

We have a lot of cities that need and overhaul, homes that could be renovated, made secure, and potential home owners could do the work. Jobs and cheap homes in good neighborhoods with good schools. A few billion directed at reviving cities would have the working poor in homes that were cheaper than rent.

The Conservative view is making work and oppertunity available to all, and to seeing to the well being of all.

We have retired people who are not doing much, they should not be renters, if a small house they could afford on Social Security was available, they have twenty years or longer. The old should be secure.

We have children in need of education, health care, and their own back yard to play in. The young should be secure.

Those of working years should get a life for their efforts, and have a secure future to work toward a better life for them and their's.

Bankers and Mortgage Brokers gave money to a Liberal Congress, and then looted the old, young, working poor, stock and bond holders in banks, and flooded the Investment Banks with mortgages doomed to fail.

I do not think it was proper management. Some Bankers and Brokers made huge short term profits, and left everyone with the result.

Everyone in Congress is a Liberal when it comes to taking money for their favors.

The lowest House Member brings in a million a year in donations.

There is no connection to the laws they pass that favor Bankers and Oil Companies.

535 make up Congress, and at a million each, the oil companies can make that in a few hours.

The Conservative view is We the People own the oil.