Conservatism is a Mental Illness

[nbachris2788]

<p>

nbachris,</p>

<p>Secretly crave?</p>

<p>I don’t think so.

</p>

<p>So the last eight years of the erosion of civil liberties was NOT done under a conservative administration?</p>

<p>Or maybe to conservatives, the only freedoms that matter are the free markets, free right to worship Christ, and free right to wage war.</p>

[pugfug90]

<p>Who cares if the government is snooping on you if you’re being protected? Bwah, they know what library books you’re checking out!</p>

[Mr_Payne]

<p>

It’s a liberal position. Liberalism, in its truest sense, is freedom - freedom of choice, freedom of lifestyle, freedom of market. It wasn’t until corporate greed and abuse of power started overtly oppressing the freedoms of individuals that liberalism began to focus more on ensuring the freedoms of powerless individuals rather than big business (unions, environmental protections, the New Deal when markets failed due to greed). Think of it as a parent having to watch over an unruly child.

Ummm, so basically, Libertarianism? I doubt most “liberals” would say they are Libertarians.</p>

[Dr.Horse]

<p>Applejack that may be the definition of classical liberalism, which is pretty much the same thing as conservatism or libertarianism, but it aint the social liberalism we see today and have seen for a very long time.</p>

[littlegreenmom]

<p>Here is a quote from Bernard Goldberg, journalist:</p>

<p>“Lincoln, whom many consider the greatest of our presidents, suspended all sorts of civil liberties during the Civil War, in order to save the country. He interfered with free-speech rights, with press rights, and he even suspended the right of habeas corpus, which meant that American citizens could be arrested and held without formal charges being brought against them.” </p>

<p>But in a post 9/11 world where terrorists strike at our country, we care more about rights than safety, and being politically correct than anything else.</p>

[StellaNova]

<p>And here’s a quote from Ben Franklin:</p>

<p>“The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either.”</p>

[doctorb]

<p>Conservatism isnt a mental disease. They are just fairly naive, bewildered by the real world, and desperate to be told a simple, albeit misleading, answer to complicated questions. Its why we elect conservatives when times are good, and liberals come in to clean up the mess afterwards. See Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, TR, Wilson, FDR, Kennedy, Carter, and Clinton. </p>

<p>Its a common theme in US History. This is also why there are no national monuments to conservative leaders. They havnt truly accomplished anything of note and have created more problems then have been solved. Bush years, Watergate, McCarthyism, Great Depression, Indian ethnic cleansing, gilded age abuses ,slavery</p>

[nbachris2788]

<p>

This is also why there are no national monuments to conservative leaders.

</p>

<p>Ronald Reagan is the best they can come up with. </p>

<p>Seriously though, you raise an interesting question. Of the great presidents, how many were conservative? And don’t confuse party affiliation with ideology. Presidents like Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt were Republican, but they were progressive for their time, and thus would qualify as liberals.</p>

[icantfindaname]

<p>What world do you live in, Lincoln was not a democrat. I know liberals like revisionist history and object to US History being taught but come on you must be kidding.</p>

[Mr_Payne]

<p>

Seriously though, you raise an interesting question. Of the great presidents, how many were conservative? And don’t confuse party affiliation with ideology. Presidents like Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt were Republican, but they were progressive for their time, and thus would qualify as liberals.

I consider myself an individualist. I prize the individual more than anything. They should be free to fail or to succeed. Am I conservative or liberal? Or neither?</p>

[Dr.Horse]

<p>somebody needs a history lesson on presidential political affiliations.</p>

[nbachris2788]

<p>

What world do you live in, Lincoln was not a democrat. I know liberals like revisionist history and object to US History being taught but come on you must be kidding.

</p>

<p>What did I just say? I don’t care about meaningless political party labels. Lincoln was a Republican, but what do you think the conservative position was at the time? Keeping or not keeping slavery?</p>

[Mr_Payne]

<p>So, what position do you think “freer markets” falls under? Is that conservative or liberal?</p>

[GeekNerd]

<p>

So, what position do you think “freer markets” falls under? Is that conservative or liberal?

</p>

<p>Freer Markets - </p>

<p>Contemporarily, this is a mainstream policy in the GOP,</p>

<p>Classical Liberalism (as in letting the markets be liberal), </p>

<p>and allied with contemporary conservatism (you might think of it as “being conservative about the proliferation of regulations”, but it’s about 30 years into what is more accurately a pact. I say this because Economic Conservatism doesn’t have an intuitive literal definition, so when someone says “Economic Conservatism” usually people just assume the subject is the economic policy of politicians who are intuitively conservative in other ways. Other words used in economic spectra include Capitalist and Socialist, which are perhaps among the least ambiguous.)</p>

<p>Since the party called “Liberal” has turned classical economic liberalism on its head, it is sometimes informative to look at the voting records of particular politicians. Libertarians include certain members of both major US parties. The United States Libertarian Party’s website can be found at [Libertarian</a> Party | Smaller Government | Lower Taxes | More Freedom](<a href=“http://www.lp.org%5DLibertarian”>http://www.lp.org).</p>

<p>That said, Mr Payne, how can there be economic individuality while family is so prominent in our lives? There is great human need for support and nurture, so economic individuality is something of a pipe dream to me. However, I would pursue it in restructuring society - with a government whose only purpose is Law, Education, Infrastructure and Parenting. Yes, parenting. On a very large scale. Family is a rather inefficient thing to me. What do you think about that? Nepolegality/biolegality starkly contradicts individuality, much more so than a generic parenthood of the state.</p>

[Dr.Horse]

<p>I find this thread utterly amusing, because I will say 98% of you posting have no idea what conservatism is. You consider conservatism to be what the corporate corrupt liberal media tells you it is. So I will try and sum up conservatism here.</p>

<p>Conservatives are against </p>

<ul>
<li>Big Government. </li>
<li>Spreading democracy.</li>
<li>Policing the world.</li>
<li>Taxes(anything but excise)</li>
<li>Interventionism.</li>
<li>The Welfare State.</li>
<li>The War on Drugs.</li>
<li>The Regulation of the Financial sector and Markets</li>
<li>Corporatism</li>
<li>Cronyism</li>
<li>War on Terrorism</li>
<li>Having a huge foreign policy.</li>
<li>Central Banks</li>
<li>AA</li>
</ul>

<p>What conservatives approve of</p>

<ul>
<li>Freedom of Drugs use</li>
<li>Sectors with no regulation</li>
<li>Free and open markets. Liberal markets, classical not social.</li>
<li>Free and open ports with no protectionism</li>
<li>Individually we may or may not agree with abortion, but we know that we have no right to take the ability/freedom/liberty from somebody else. So we allow it.</li>
<li>We are for Gay marriage as we believe all humans are equal</li>
<li>A commodity based currency that is non fiat.</li>
<li>The Law and constitution</li>
</ul>

<p>There are many more on both lists, but I cant go forever. </p>

<p>Conservatism used to pretty much be precived as the same thing as Libertarianism and they were both considered to be from classical liberalism. Eventually when theocratic and neo conservatism roared its ugly head, the Libertarian Party was actually created in result of the republican party loosing its way.</p>

<p>I am a high conservative person. But you may ask why. I find government to be pretty much the cause of most problems and they usually if they are not, they try and fix it and it only gets worse. I cant think of a time when goct stepped in and things actually got better than if they just let the citizens do it themselves. An example would be, The Great Depression and FDR. If FDR just let the markets work without regulation, peoples lives would have returned to normal(pre depression) 15 years earlier. Read this article if ya don’t believe me
[University</a> of California - UC Newsroom | FDR prolonged – not ended – great depression](<a href=“http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/6550]University”>http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/6550)</p>

<p>I believe that America was created as the greatest country in the world, one with the most liberties and freedoms. We were given documents to sustain our liberties and freedoms and we should keep them not change or destroy them.</p>

<p>I believe every citizen is equal and they all deserve every liberty and freedom as the next. I believe Government is to big and should be trimmed into a minimalist system. Markets and Trade should be 100% free with no government regulation at all. I don’t believe in protectionism. I don’t believe in universal health care or welfare. Theirs no need for it. Simply Government is not the answer to problems, it never has been. </p>

<p>This is a pretty good definition of what true conservatism really is. If you consider maximal freedom & Liberties under govt to be a mental illness, there something wrong. But its ok.</p>

<p>Above I bolded the there pillars that real conservatives are against, They are the 3 main pillars neoconservatives stand on. Thats the difference, in the truest sense.</p>

[StellaNova]

<p>

There is great human need for support and nurture, so economic individuality is something of a pipe dream to me. However, I would pursue it in restructuring society - with a government whose only purpose is Law, Education, Infrastructure and Parenting. Yes, parenting. On a very large scale. Family is a rather inefficient thing to me. What do you think about that? Nepolegality/biolegality starkly contradicts individuality, much more so than a generic parenthood of the state.

</p>

<p>Like in Brave New World?</p>

<p>

Conservatism used to pretty much be precived as the same thing as Libertarianism and they were both considered to be from classical liberalism.

</p>

<p>That’s funny, my history textbook says that conservativism was the exact opposite of classical liberalism. Where do you get your definition?</p>

[nbachris2788]

<p>Dr. Horse,</p>

<p>You are right in most of your tenets of actual conservatism. But that in no way represents contemporary American conservatism. Because conservatism is a reactionary and not forward-thinking philosophy, it has a tendency to simply adopt the opposing values of liberal thought like a petulant younger sibling.</p>

<p>I think the foremost example of this is on global warming. Many conservatives (except for unethical captains of industry) don’t seem to have much of a vested interest in denying global warming, other than for the fact that it’s now a pillar cause for the Democrats and liberals and thus, an issue that American conservatives feel the need to oppose.</p>

[GeekNerd]

<p>Confused? See Wikipedia.
StellaNova, I think that the Republican Party’s economic policy is more conformal to Classical Liberalism than is that of the Democratic Party.
Below is a laundry list of wikimedia links and the first paragraph or first sentence in each site.
The first two sites contain panels that include a survey of many of Wikipedia’s articles on the topic.</p>

<p>The conservatism and liberalism depicted are ** not ** accurately reflective of the United States Democratic and Republican Parties. This is because the following are rather frozen ideas, whereas those parties (and consequently the populations called “lib”, “neocon” etc in the US) are dynamic and heterogeneous in both ideology and policy. Of course, often one population’s stance (not clear cut) is a reaction to that of the other.</p>

<p>[Liberalism</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism]Liberalism”>Liberalism - Wikipedia)

Liberalism is a broad array of related ideas and theories of government that consider individual liberty to be the most important political goal.
<a href=“GeekNerd’s%20remark:%20This%20is%20a%20very%20general%20framework”>B</a> **

[Conservatism</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism]Conservatism”>Conservatism - Wikipedia)

Conservatism is a term used to describe political philosophies that favour tradition, where tradition refers to various religious, cultural, or nationally defined beliefs and customs.
<a href=“GeekNerd’s%20remark:%20This%20is%20a%20very%20general%20framework”>B</a> **

[Classical</a> liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism]Classical”>Classical liberalism - Wikipedia)

Classical liberalism (also known as traditional liberalism[1] and laissez-faire liberalism,[2], market liberalism[3] or, in much of the world, simply called liberalism) is a doctrine stressing individual freedom and limited government. This includes the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, constitutional limitations of government, ** free markets **, and individual freedom from restraint as exemplified in the writings of John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, David Ricardo, Voltaire, Montesquieu and others.

[Market</a> liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_liberalism]Market”>Market liberalism - Wikipedia)

Market liberalism, also called free-market liberalism in order to emphasize the support to ** free markets **, is a term used of a variant of liberalism, combining free market economy with personal liberty and human rights in contrast to Social liberalism, which, while still supporting personal liberty and human rights, supports a more mixed economy with state produced public services.

[Fiscal</a> conservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_conservatism]Fiscal”>Fiscal conservatism - Wikipedia)

Fiscal conservatism (also known as economic conservatism) is a political phrase term used in North America to describe advocacy of lower governmental spending practices and a lower federal debt; It is used to define someone who advocates smaller government, less federal spending, fewer earmarks and entitlement programs, and lower taxes. <a href=“GeekNerd’s%20Remark:%20See%20here%20that%20Fiscal%20Conservatism%20is%20restraint%20of%20the%20Government’s%20own%20spending,%20and%20not%20necessarily%20on%20Market%20Rules!”>B</a> **

[Liberal</a> conservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_conservatism]Liberal”>Liberal conservatism - Wikipedia)

Liberal conservatism is a variant of conservatism, combining conservative values and policies with liberal stances. As these latter two terms have had different meanings over time and across countries, liberal conservatism also has a wide variety of meanings.
Historically, it often referred to the combination of economic liberalism, which champions ** laissez-faire markets **, with the classical conservative concern for established tradition, respect for authority and religious values. In this way it contrasted itself with classical liberalism, which supported freedom for the individual in both the economic and social spheres.

</p>

[applejack]

<p>

I find this thread utterly amusing, because I will say 98% of you posting have no idea what conservatism is. You consider conservatism to be what the corporate corrupt liberal media tells you it is. So I will try and sum up conservatism here.</p>

<p>Conservatives are against </p>

<ul>
<li>Big Government. </li>
<li>Spreading democracy.</li>
<li>Policing the world.</li>
<li>Taxes(anything but excise)</li>
<li>Interventionism.</li>
<li>The Welfare State.</li>
<li>The War on Drugs.</li>
<li>The Regulation of the Financial sector and Markets</li>
<li>Corporatism</li>
<li>Cronyism</li>
<li>War on Terrorism</li>
<li>Having a huge foreign policy.</li>
<li>Central Banks</li>
<li>AA</li>
</ul>

<p>What conservatives approve of</p>

<ul>
<li>Freedom of Drugs use</li>
<li>Sectors with no regulation</li>
<li>Free and open markets. Liberal markets, classical not social.</li>
<li>Free and open ports with no protectionism</li>
<li>Individually we may or may not agree with abortion, but we know that we have no right to take the ability/freedom/liberty from somebody else. So we allow it.</li>
<li>We are for Gay marriage as we believe all humans are equal</li>
<li>A commodity based currency that is non fiat.</li>
<li>The Law and constitution</li>
</ul>

<p>There are many more on both lists, but I cant go forever. </p>

<p>Conservatism used to pretty much be precived as the same thing as Libertarianism and they were both considered to be from classical liberalism. Eventually when theocratic and neo conservatism roared its ugly head, the Libertarian Party was actually created in result of the republican party loosing its way.</p>

<p>I am a high conservative person. But you may ask why. I find government to be pretty much the cause of most problems and they usually if they are not, they try and fix it and it only gets worse. I cant think of a time when goct stepped in and things actually got better than if they just let the citizens do it themselves. An example would be, The Great Depression and FDR. If FDR just let the markets work without regulation, peoples lives would have returned to normal(pre depression) 15 years earlier. Read this article if ya don’t believe me
University of California - UC Newsroom | FDR prolonged – not ended – great depression

</p>

<p>You are utterly amused by our being duped by the (surprise, surprise) “corrupt corporate liberal media”. (always gotta get the liberal in there, true or not). Yet, one need only look at the actions and beliefs of a majority of self-proclaimed conservatives to know that it is not the media manipulating us. It’s what they stand for and have aggressively pushed into society. </p>

<p>Look at your list of what conservatives are against and you will see the Republican platform from Reagan through the collapse his era in 2006.</p>

<p>You’re a libertarian, not a conservative. Vote for Ron Paul.</p>

[Dr.Horse]

<p>

Dr. Horse,</p>

<p>You are right in most of your tenets of actual conservatism. But that in no way represents contemporary American conservatism. Because conservatism is a reactionary and not forward-thinking philosophy, it has a tendency to simply adopt the opposing values of liberal thought like a petulant younger sibling.</p>

<p>I think the foremost example of this is on global warming. Many conservatives (except for unethical captains of industry) don’t seem to have much of a vested interest in denying global warming, other than for the fact that it’s now a pillar cause for the Democrats and liberals and thus, an issue that American conservatives feel the need to oppose.

</p>

<p>Theirs no modern view of conservatism. What we see today is neoconservatism, but again its not real conservatism. The definition of real conservatism still stands. Neoconservatism has its own definition as well. Same way that Liberalism today is not the same as classical liberalism. The media just sums up conservatism and liberalism for idiots who watch tv news. If you are talking to a educated person, the original is always taken to be the true meaning unless you indentify otherwise. Especially when the different types like the ones we are talking about are night and day.</p>