 |
|
cinch
|
|
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Jul 2002
time: 22:30
|
|
Well, personally, I'd hesitate to descrive conservatism by saying anything like "right-wing" this or that... That's just circular logic, in my opinion, because both conservatism and 'right-wing' are subjective terms. They can mean a whole bunch of things, depending on who says them.
I like to stick with the classic "conservatism = maintaining the status quo, valuing tradition over progression, etc."... Now, you run into snags with that definition, too, because, for example, in Canada, the 'status quo' is "liberal" and the "conservatives" seek to change 'the way it is'... Although, it does make sense in a way, because a majority of them wish to change things back to the 'way it was'.
I rambled. Sorry.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Conservatives like to conserve things that have been proven to work well. I do not believe in changing for the sake of change when a tried and proved system works fine. I also believe in conserving the environment for future generations and not trashing it in the name of capitalism. Liberty and individual choice are conservative principals because individual liberty is what made the United States to prosper. That liberty also took under consideration the community and the needs of the people as a whole. That system of individual liberty and responsability and sense of community is in a nut shell the American form of conservatinism. Of course the modern version just uses the word to justify greed.
I do not think that conservatism works when people do not care for their neighbor. It becomes simply selfishness and that will destroy any culture.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Conservatism in Grecia
Politico - Societal:The will to preserve the present status quo (that way even socialists can be conservatives, yep)
Politico-Economic: minimum state intervantion in the economy (less social state, less regulations, fewer taxes etc hence socialists are out and right wingers are in)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
PLATO
|
 |
Of the occupied South
Dec 2002
time: 23:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by elijah
Plato (the poster, not the great philosopher (sorry living Plato)) has an interesting idea of it being simultaneously a kind of socialist capitalism!  . One has the "rugged individualism" one associates with capitalism, and moral communism. Presumably they also determine the manner in which a functional state is run?
Personally, I think it should be the other way around to a degree, but thats irrelevant here.
|
I like that..."Socialist Capitalism". The wave of the new century.
elijah, I have to disagree with you. Societies have seemed to advance when they operate from a common value system. Albiet, they do need an influx of new ideas and should be adaptable. The individual, while drawing from society, is accountable to themselves for ambition, drive, and desire. Society should not be held responsible for a lack of these.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Templar
|
 |
People's Republic of the East Village
Oct 2001
time: 00:30
|
|
Unfortunately - or fortunately - conservatives are not a monolithic block. I used to be a libertarian myself, and never had anything but contempt for religious conservatives.
A quick and dirty division goes something like this:
(1) Fiscal conservatives: free market, anti-regulation types. Believe the market is the best way to maximize the values of the people. In the extreme form, this leads to a sort of social Darwinism.
(2) Social conservatives: like the social status quo. In the '50s, that meant Blacks "knew their place" today it means gays "know their place" and all act like the fab five. But seriously, social conservatives tend to think that social relations are the time tested products of tradition and should remain as they are. This may or may not entail a belief that the government should enforce tradition. (Bob Barr, for instance, is a social conservative but does not believe government should be empowered to enforce social mores).
Again, this is quick and dirty. Religious right types tend to be strong social conservatives who do believe in government enforcement of traditional morality. Think Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell or Bill Bennett (when not playing the slots that is). Religious right people tend not to be so hot on the free market though.
Neocons tend to see religion as a useful operating system for "the masses" but many don't seem to take religion that seriously themselves.
Libertarians, at least the ones I know and like I used to be, tend to have strong faith in an unfettered market. But also tend to be socially liberal - favoring things like drug legalization and gay marriage (or in the alternate, government extracting itself from the marriag ebusiness altogether).
Conservatism is a broad field, and different types of conservatives tend not to get along. Kind of like liberals.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:30
|
|
quote:
elijah, I have to disagree with you. Societies have seemed to advance when they operate from a common value system. Albiet, they do need an influx of new ideas and should be adaptable.
|
IMO it is the influx of ideas that advances a society, though they may be generated within that society itself. Of course, that is all dependent on how you see "progress". I would imagine many see it as technological, I see it as intellectual, and working with the grain of human societies throughout history, libertarian. I do see what you mean about a common value system, but I believe that such a notion is inconsistent in application and can often lead to harm. Also, what happens when something needs to occur that contradicts that value system? Its a flawed example, but look at the urgent concerns of environmentalists in todays America being ignored for the sake of the economy. Nonetheless, my argument against is largely irrelevant here.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Giant_Squid
|
 |
Fun Guy from Yuggoth
Jan 1970
time: 00:30
|
|
Conservativism can't be defined as just "trying to keep the status quo" in a political sense because there are seemingly at least as many issues in America at least in which conservatives are the ones pushing for change. Abortion, tax reform, school vouchers, affirmative action, welfare, et cetera - in fact, whenever the current policy was set by liberals, conservatives are usually looking to reform it  And a lot of this thing about "progress" versus "reactionism" is just rhetoric...when a liberal wants something done he says it's necessary in order to progress to the glorious future and when a conservative wants something done he says it's necessary to bring back the simpler and more virtuous days of the past, whereas it doesn't matter what the thing actually is.
Conservative and liberal are at least partly names of groups that have appeared out of necessity with no decent reason for existing or coherent philosophy. The fact that Pat Buchanan and Milton Friedman, despite having a lot of opposite views on stuff, are both called "conservative" should be a tipoff, not to mention the craziness in having, say, a Latino immigrant and a Hollywood superstar as liberals.
Much easier than what you're trying to do would be to define "social conservatives" and "economic conservatives" and not bother trying to link the two into some overarching conservativism existing mostly out of political chance.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The diplomat
|
 |
Terre Haute, IN USA
Sep 1999
time: 23:30
|
|
Conservatism believes that individuals are better capable of managing their lives than government. In order for individuals to be able to manage their own lives, they need as much of their earned income as possible, therefore taxes should be as low as possible. Furthermore, in order for individuals to manage their own lives, government regulations should be reduced as much as possible. Goverment should be as non-intrusive in economic matters as possible. Also, conservatives feel that social programs should be as limited as possible, only covering those in desperate need. The reasoning is that most individuals are capable of self-reliance if helped properly, and individuals should be encouraged to be as self-reliant as possible, or the compassion of others, because self-reliance and economic independance are ultimately better.
Lastly, conservatives believe the primary goal of government is national defense. Therefore, the budget should always emphasize national defense. And, the military should be used only when it involves a matter of national security.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-08-2003 06:25
sorry), I thought I'd ask you!
, but thats not up for discussion. This is purely within the confines of conservatism itself. If you want to flame it, there are plenty of other threads and I will happily join the barbeque!
|