True Conservatives, (And That Doesn't Include Limbaugh or Beck.)

[Roadtoad]

I'm sick of it. I tired of hearing about "conservatives" like Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and their ilk. In all honesty, I don't think they understand the meaning of the word, and what it once meant. When I think of Conservative, I look more to my Grandfather, Thomas Dunn Watson, Jr., than I do anyone else. He understood what genuine Conservatism is really about than most of these folks, and he lived it for the most part.

There aren't many points to understand in what makes someone a Conservative, so the whole concept is pretty easy to grasp.

1.) A Conservative lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions. You don't need to be told not to discriminate, simply because you already know it's wrong. You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

In other words, you consider the consequences of your actions before you act, the behave accordingly.

2.) A Conservative values merit above all else.

In other words, you have your position in life because you've earned it, not because you're given it. You make it by the sweat of your own brow, and you don't do it by taking from others, either through the courts or dishonest business practices.

Further, you don't discriminate on any basis; if someone isn't being promoted, it's because they're either lazy, incompetent, or both. It has nothing to do with race, creed, sexuality, religion, national origin. Work hard, do good work, and you move forward. That simple.

3.) A Conservative is truthful not only with others, but himself.

In short, a genuine Conservative is more interested in facts, and is working towards eliminating bias. It means being honest about your own actions, and not trying to mitigate the impact of them simply because it's convenient, or because it supports your so-called allies. It means you're going to base your actions on rationality, rather than emotion.

4.) A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

A Conservative is more interested in pluralism, and in the community, rather than his/her own pockets, in short because it also benefits him/herself. A golden parachute is nice, but if it comes to the detriment of the company -- and its employees -- what's the point?

By this definition, Al Dunlap, Rush Limbaugh's buddy, is not a conservative. Likewise, neither is Limbaugh. Sean Hannity? Not a chance. Ditto Beck, and his ties with a rather suspect gold trader. Something to consider.

Your thoughts?

[Howie Felterbush]

Well said.

My dad is a conservative and it always makes me bristle when people just assume he's exactly like Beck when in reality he would probably curb stomp Beck if given half a chance. He's a man that could have been the model for your post. He doesn't care who marries who or where you put your wee-wee.

[Upchurch]

Not that I particularly disagree. In fact, what you describe is much more what I consider conservatives when I thought of conservatives as something to admire.

But when defining one half of a dichotomy, the definition is incomplete without defining what it is not. What distinguishes, in this kind of conservative from a liberal?

[Brown]

I sympathize with this. I used to consider myself somewhat conservative (although others might have deemed me liberal in some respects), but now I do not feel that I can use the word "conservative" to describe myself. The so-called "conservative" talking heads and "leaders" have poisoned the label.

The word used to mean that one tended to favor not making a change unless there was a good reason to make it. Generally speaking, the more extreme the change, the more compelling the reason had to be. A conservative tended to be less risk-averse, because a conservative did not want to jeopardize losing what is good. A conservative did not oppose all change, because doing so would be the height of folly. Things will change whether people want them to or not. A conservative would strive for prudent and reasoned responses to changes.

That is not what the term means today.

Today's "conservatives" play to people's stupidity (as well as their racism and bad urges), engage in shameless hypocrisy, promote ghastly fear-mongering and unrealistic scenarios as factual, encourage cliquishness and cronyism, and behave as though "the end justifies the means." None of these is a conservative principle.

[Roadtoad]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Not that I particularly disagree. In fact, what you describe is much more what I consider conservatives when I thought of conservatives as something to admire.

But when defining one half of a dichotomy, the definition is incomplete without defining what it is not. What distinguishes, in this kind of conservative from a liberal?

Hard to say. What I've noticed is that most Liberals tend to be far more focused on what role the community plays in the lives of individuals, (hence, the reason most Liberals tend to support such things as governmental social programs, where most Conservatives would rather see that handled by private organizations.) That would be my first point of departure.

[GodMark2]

There aren't many points to understand in what makes someone a Liberal, so the whole concept is pretty easy to grasp.

1.) A Liberal lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions. You don't need to be told not to discriminate, simply because you already know it's wrong. You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

In other words, you consider the consequences of your actions before you act, the behave accordingly.

2.) A Liberal values merit above all else.

In other words, you have your position in life because you've earned it, not because you're given it. You make it by the sweat of your own brow, and you don't do it by taking from others, either through the courts or dishonest business practices.

Further, you don't discriminate on any basis; if someone isn't being promoted, it's because they're either lazy, incompetent, or both. It has nothing to do with race, creed, sexuality, religion, national origin. Work hard, do good work, and you move forward. That simple.

3.) A Liberal is truthful not only with others, but himself.

In short, a genuine Liberal is more interested in facts, and is working towards eliminating bias. It means being honest about your own actions, and not trying to mitigate the impact of them simply because it's convenient, or because it supports your so-called allies. It means you're going to base your actions on rationality, rather than emotion.

4.) A Liberal works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

A Liberal is more interested in pluralism, and in the community, rather than his/her own pockets, in short because it also benefits him/herself. A golden parachute is nice, but if it comes to the detriment of the company -- and its employees -- what's the point?

I suspect most self-identifying Conservatives would agree with your version, and most self-identifying Liberals would agree with mine. Simply put, none of these things are inherently Conservative or Liberal, they're just ideals people like to see in themselves (regardless of whether or not they actually embody these ideals).

[Roadtoad]

Originally Posted by GodMark2

There aren't many points to understand in what makes someone a Liberal, so the whole concept is pretty easy to grasp.

1.) A Liberal lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions. You don't need to be told not to discriminate, simply because you already know it's wrong. You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

In other words, you consider the consequences of your actions before you act, the behave accordingly.

2.) A Liberal values merit above all else.

In other words, you have your position in life because you've earned it, not because you're given it. You make it by the sweat of your own brow, and you don't do it by taking from others, either through the courts or dishonest business practices.

Further, you don't discriminate on any basis; if someone isn't being promoted, it's because they're either lazy, incompetent, or both. It has nothing to do with race, creed, sexuality, religion, national origin. Work hard, do good work, and you move forward. That simple.

3.) A Liberal is truthful not only with others, but himself.

In short, a genuine Liberal is more interested in facts, and is working towards eliminating bias. It means being honest about your own actions, and not trying to mitigate the impact of them simply because it's convenient, or because it supports your so-called allies. It means you're going to base your actions on rationality, rather than emotion.

4.) A Liberal works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

A Liberal is more interested in pluralism, and in the community, rather than his/her own pockets, in short because it also benefits him/herself. A golden parachute is nice, but if it comes to the detriment of the company -- and its employees -- what's the point?

I suspect most self-identifying Conservatives would agree with your version, and most self-identifying Liberals would agree with mine. Simply put, none of these things are inherently Conservative or Liberal, they're just ideals people like to see in themselves (regardless of whether or not they actually embody these ideals).

By George, I think you've got it.

[Brown]

Although the comparison, is not perfect, today's "conservatives" remind me of the old Soviet Union. Remember these guys?

They had a news source, which many people in the West realized included excessive doses of crap and propaganda. They insisted upon blind adherence to political principles, even if those principles were foolish. They purged leaders who did not do as they wished. They made bombastic statements filled with empty rhetoric. They rattled their sabres regularly and talked tough, even sending in the troops to teach others a lesson. They did not like dissent, not one little bit. They came down hard on criminals, and locked up radicals upon the flimisest of cases, or no case at all. They made sure that those few who held the power kept it at all costs, regardless of what the people as a whole wanted.

And incredibly, "conservatives" actually made fun of the Soviets for doing this. Yet today, "conservatives" seem to be following in their footsteps....

[Roadtoad]

Originally Posted by Brown

Although the comparison, is not perfect, today's "conservatives" remind me of the old Soviet Union. Remember these guys?

They had a news source, which many people in the West realized included excessive doses of crap and propaganda. They insisted upon blind adherence to political principles, even if those principles were foolish. They purged leaders who did not do as they wished. They made bombastic statements filled with empty rhetoric. They rattled their sabres regularly and talked tough, even sending in the troops to teach others a lesson. They did not like dissent, not one little bit. They came down hard on criminals, and locked up radicals upon the flimisest of cases, or no case at all. They made sure that those few who held the power kept it at all costs, regardless of what the people as a whole wanted.

And incredibly, "conservatives" actually made fun of the Soviets for doing this. Yet today, "conservatives" seem to be following in their footsteps....

And, sadly, that sounds like a lot of "liberals."

I don't see much difference between the two when we're dealing with the real deal. I see a hell of a lot of difference once you start pressing out the fringes. (And, frankly, I'm sick of Fat Boy and his pontification, especially when it comes to such things as drugs and alcohol.)

[Ladewig]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

Do you think the percentage of true liberals who don't dump waste into the nation's waterways because they know it is wrong is different from the percentage of true conservatives who don't dump waste because they know it is wrong?

[Roadtoad]

Originally Posted by Ladewig

Do you think the percentage of true liberals who don't dump waste into the nation's waterways because they know it is wrong is different from the percentage of true conservatives who don't dump waste because they know it is wrong?

Nope.

And, I think that's the point. Not too much difference between the real deal on either side.

It's when you start dropping power into the mix, and the potential profits that the extremism kicks in, and winds up destroying consensus. There's little difference between Brown and myself on a number of issues, but where we'd begin our approach is very different indeed.

And to another point on that: Brown and I, or anyone else on this board of this same mindset, (noticed this a lot with Upchurch, which is why I respect him), when we're wrong, we admit it. Most of the whack-jobs can't.

[Piscivore]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

And, sadly, that sounds like a lot of "liberals."

It sounds like a lot of partisans. As far as I'm concerned, politically, if one has a set of principles and values that guides their thinking it shouldn't matter what "side" anyone else is on if they share the same values, but as soon as someone identifies more with a "side" instead of a set of principles, they've checked their brain at the door. *cough*cough* Cicero *hack* BeAChooser *cough*cough*

Quote:

I don't see much difference between the two when we're dealing with the real deal.

There isn't. It's just two small groups of people grubbing for the power to make others do things their way (in other words, get more of the money for them and theirs) and a whole bunch of others trying to feed off the scraps. All the "issues" they pretend to care about is just smoke and mirrors.

Quote:

I see a hell of a lot of difference once you start pressing out the fringes.

In what way?

[Howie Felterbush]

Originally Posted by Piscivore

It sounds like a lot of partisans. As far as I'm concerned, politically, if one has a set of principles and values that guides their thinking it shouldn't matter what "side" anyone else is on if they share the same values, but as soon as someone identifies more with a "side" instead of a set of principles, they've checked their brain at the door. *cough*cough* Cicero *hack* BeAChooser *cough*cough*

In all fairness *cough*cough*leftysergeant*hack* It ain't just the right that acts like that.

There's nutjobs on both sides that make their entire side look like lunatics.

[Piscivore]

Originally Posted by Howie Felterbush

In all fairness *cough*cough*leftysergeant*hack* It ain't just the right that acts like that.

There's nutjobs on both sides that make their entire side look like lunatics.

Unquestionably. Read my post again- "sides" are inherently stupid. It's choosing an easy, prepared answer over thinking.

[Thunder]

how is a true conservative different than a true libertarian?

[Roadtoad]

Originally Posted by Thunder

how is a true conservative different than a true libertarian?

Short answer: Brooks Brothers.

[Howie Felterbush]

Originally Posted by Thunder

how is a true conservative different than a true libertarian?

True conservatives don't care if you don't like them, true libertarians want to make sure you don't like them.

[Thunder]

um...Conservatives want to "conserve" traditions and culture, while Libertarians couldn't give rat's ass and just want to be left alone?

seems to me that TRUE Conservatism and Libertarianism are at odds over more than a few things.

[BenBurch]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

I'm sick of it. I tired of hearing about "conservatives" like Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and their ilk. In all honesty, I don't think they understand the meaning of the word, and what it once meant. When I think of Conservative, I look more to my Grandfather, Thomas Dunn Watson, Jr., than I do anyone else. He understood what genuine Conservatism is really about than most of these folks, and he lived it for the most part.

There aren't many points to understand in what makes someone a Conservative, so the whole concept is pretty easy to grasp.

1.) A Conservative lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions. You don't need to be told not to discriminate, simply because you already know it's wrong. You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

In other words, you consider the consequences of your actions before you act, the behave accordingly.

2.) A Conservative values merit above all else.

In other words, you have your position in life because you've earned it, not because you're given it. You make it by the sweat of your own brow, and you don't do it by taking from others, either through the courts or dishonest business practices.

Further, you don't discriminate on any basis; if someone isn't being promoted, it's because they're either lazy, incompetent, or both. It has nothing to do with race, creed, sexuality, religion, national origin. Work hard, do good work, and you move forward. That simple.

3.) A Conservative is truthful not only with others, but himself.

In short, a genuine Conservative is more interested in facts, and is working towards eliminating bias. It means being honest about your own actions, and not trying to mitigate the impact of them simply because it's convenient, or because it supports your so-called allies. It means you're going to base your actions on rationality, rather than emotion.

4.) A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

A Conservative is more interested in pluralism, and in the community, rather than his/her own pockets, in short because it also benefits him/herself. A golden parachute is nice, but if it comes to the detriment of the company -- and its employees -- what's the point?

By this definition, Al Dunlap, Rush Limbaugh's buddy, is not a conservative. Likewise, neither is Limbaugh. Sean Hannity? Not a chance. Ditto Beck, and his ties with a rather suspect gold trader. Something to consider.

Your thoughts?

I'd call myself one if they could conform to this.

[Tricky]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

I'm sick of it. I tired of hearing about "conservatives" like Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and their ilk. In all honesty, I don't think they understand the meaning of the word, and what it once meant. When I think of Conservative, I look more to my Grandfather, Thomas Dunn Watson, Jr., than I do anyone else. He understood what genuine Conservatism is really about than most of these folks, and he lived it for the most part.

There aren't many points to understand in what makes someone a Conservative, so the whole concept is pretty easy to grasp.

1.) A Conservative lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions. You don't need to be told not to discriminate, simply because you already know it's wrong. You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

In other words, you consider the consequences of your actions before you act, the behave accordingly.

2.) A Conservative values merit above all else.

In other words, you have your position in life because you've earned it, not because you're given it. You make it by the sweat of your own brow, and you don't do it by taking from others, either through the courts or dishonest business practices.

Further, you don't discriminate on any basis; if someone isn't being promoted, it's because they're either lazy, incompetent, or both. It has nothing to do with race, creed, sexuality, religion, national origin. Work hard, do good work, and you move forward. That simple.

3.) A Conservative is truthful not only with others, but himself.

In short, a genuine Conservative is more interested in facts, and is working towards eliminating bias. It means being honest about your own actions, and not trying to mitigate the impact of them simply because it's convenient, or because it supports your so-called allies. It means you're going to base your actions on rationality, rather than emotion.

4.) A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

A Conservative is more interested in pluralism, and in the community, rather than his/her own pockets, in short because it also benefits him/herself. A golden parachute is nice, but if it comes to the detriment of the company -- and its employees -- what's the point?

By this definition, Al Dunlap, Rush Limbaugh's buddy, is not a conservative. Likewise, neither is Limbaugh. Sean Hannity? Not a chance. Ditto Beck, and his ties with a rather suspect gold trader. Something to consider.

Your thoughts?

A lot of what you say is what both sides say about themselves. But things like "Maximum benefit for the greatest number" sounds curiously like socialism, and while I agree that caring people of any party or philosophy think that is what they are doing, that is not a thing to be said out loud in many conservative circles.

Still, I wish there were more conservatives like you.

[BobTheDonkey]

All these definitions fit members on both sides. So what, then, is the difference between a "True Conservative" and a "True Liberal"?

As I recall from years ago, I was told a "True Conservative" would place the responsibility for a person's well-being on the individual where the "True Liberal" would place the responsibility on Society.

[Ladewig]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

Nope.

And, I think that's the point. Not too much difference between the real deal on either side.

Thank you for the clarification.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

I'm sick of it. I tired of hearing about "conservatives" like Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and their ilk. In all honesty, I don't think they understand the meaning of the word, and what it once meant. When I think of Conservative, I look more to my Grandfather, Thomas Dunn Watson, Jr., than I do anyone else. He understood what genuine Conservatism is really about than most of these folks, and he lived it for the most part.

Your thoughts?

Bingo.

I have been trying to tell people this for years - Limbaugh, Beck, O'Reilly aren't conservatives, they're extremist whacktards. And they have their equivalents on the left.

Liberal and conservative used to be opposite, but respected positions. Not anymore.

I happen to be a conservative. Not a whacktard, but a real conservative.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by Brown

I sympathize with this. I used to consider myself somewhat conservative (although others might have deemed me liberal in some respects), but now I do not feel that I can use the word "conservative" to describe myself. The so-called "conservative" talking heads and "leaders" have poisoned the label.

The word used to mean that one tended to favor not making a change unless there was a good reason to make it. Generally speaking, the more extreme the change, the more compelling the reason had to be. A conservative tended to be less risk-averse, because a conservative did not want to jeopardize losing what is good. A conservative did not oppose all change, because doing so would be the height of folly. Things will change whether people want them to or not. A conservative would strive for prudent and reasoned responses to changes.

That is not what the term means today.

Today's "conservatives" play to people's stupidity (as well as their racism and bad urges), engage in shameless hypocrisy, promote ghastly fear-mongering and unrealistic scenarios as factual, encourage cliquishness and cronyism, and behave as though "the end justifies the means." None of these is a conservative principle.

Well said.

A local columist, Bill McClellan, has always identified himself as a liberal, but also says he used to respect conservatives, because they were the crabby old men who watched his money.

[Zep]

What's with all the labelling and pigeon-holing? Everyone is different across a broad spectrum of responses to issues. Putting people in arbitrary groups based on a few select criteria simply closes off thinking about them as whole people.

Example: We had a president of the Returned Soldiers League here (Veterans association, for US folks). He was a highly vocal critic of how aboriginals were financially supported by government - did the whole Beck thing much like you hear about illegals from Mexico and got a lot of people's backs up. But he was also a WW2 vet and strong veterans rights advocate, including for Vietnam vets when it was not so popular to be so. And married to a charming Japanese lady from when he was a young occupation soldier. So was he a reactionary right-wing nutball? Or a latent leftist hippy? He was all of these, at the same time...

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by Thunder

how is a true conservative different than a true libertarian?

Higher IQ and a lot more money.

[The Charnel Expanse]

Originally Posted by Tricky

A lot of what you say is what both sides say about themselves. But things like "Maximum benefit for the greatest number" sounds curiously like socialism, and while I agree that caring people of any party or philosophy think that is what they are doing, that is not a thing to be said out loud in many conservative circles.

Still, I wish there were more conservatives like you.

Not if it's done voluntarily, out of a sense of responsibility for one's surroundings.

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by Piscivore

All the "issues" they pretend to care about is just smoke and mirrors.

In what way?

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

1.) A Conservative lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

2.) A Conservative values merit above all else.

3.) A Conservative is truthful not only with others, but himself.

4.) A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

Your thoughts?

I would also add that A Conservative will understand the science behind imbalances in nature and how such phenomenon will affect the earth's environment.

In other words, there are whack-job liberals who believe in "rights" for certain species in the animal kingdom yet the establishment of rights is a human creation. You cannot have rights without either A) living up to certain responsibilities or B) being part of a group with a leader who's purpose is to protect your rights.

Certain species of animals need their population controlled, it's plain and simple. If such a sport like hunting or trapping is banned, then be prepared for a serious population explosion of biblical proportions.

To add my background to this discussion, I had mentioned in a previous post that at one time I did buy into the Limbaugh sensationalism only to realize that this guy is just a right wing hack who does NOT speak for most conservatives let alone most Americans. I feel that the truer modern day conservatives are people like David Frum, Joe Scarborough, David Brooks, and Colin Powell.

[Piscivore]

Originally Posted by dc1971

In what way?

Getting people all worked up about the Irish Italians Chinese Germans Japanese Mexicans coming into the country, or gays getting married, so we forget about the rich white guys that loot the country. Or setting up government agency after government agency that ends up doing more to line the pockets of an ever-growing bureaucracy than alleviating any social ill.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

I'm sick of it. I tired of hearing about "conservatives" like Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and their ilk. In all honesty, I don't think they understand the meaning of the word, and what it once meant. When I think of Conservative, I look more to my Grandfather, Thomas Dunn Watson, Jr., than I do anyone else. He understood what genuine Conservatism is really about than most of these folks, and he lived it for the most part.

There aren't many points to understand in what makes someone a Conservative, so the whole concept is pretty easy to grasp.

1.) A Conservative lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions. You don't need to be told not to discriminate, simply because you already know it's wrong. You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

In other words, you consider the consequences of your actions before you act, the behave accordingly.

Help me out here.

If you do overdrive, what then?

Sounds like all the illegal immigrants are OK. I thought conservatives were against that.

Sounds like environmentalism. I thought the conservatives were against that.

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

2.) A Conservative values merit above all else.

In other words, you have your position in life because you've earned it, not because you're given it. You make it by the sweat of your own brow, and you don't do it by taking from others, either through the courts or dishonest business practices.

Further, you don't discriminate on any basis; if someone isn't being promoted, it's because they're either lazy, incompetent, or both. It has nothing to do with race, creed, sexuality, religion, national origin. Work hard, do good work, and you move forward. That simple.

What about the children of the rich who are given their parent's wealth. Is that included in the merits you refer to?

And is it fair that hard earned income is taxed differently than sit on your butt investment income in the mind of a conservative?

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

3.) A Conservative is truthful not only with others, but himself.

In short, a genuine Conservative is more interested in facts, and is working towards eliminating bias. It means being honest about your own actions, and not trying to mitigate the impact of them simply because it's convenient, or because it supports your so-called allies. It means you're going to base your actions on rationality, rather than emotion.

That totally rules out Fox News and a very big chunk of people who call themselves conservative. I assume you know that.

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

4.) A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

A Conservative is more interested in pluralism, and in the community, rather than his/her own pockets, in short because it also benefits him/herself. A golden parachute is nice, but if it comes to the detriment of the company -- and its employees -- what's the point?

By this definition, Al Dunlap, Rush Limbaugh's buddy, is not a conservative. Likewise, neither is Limbaugh. Sean Hannity? Not a chance. Ditto Beck, and his ties with a rather suspect gold trader. Something to consider.

Your thoughts?

That last one is a joke, right?

[Brown]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

And, sadly, that sounds like a lot of "liberals."

You hear this a lot. Leaving aside the notion that it seems to be changing the subject, there is another problem with this point.

It is not well-supported by evidence.

It is certainly true that there are loony liberals. (I can name half a dozen without catching a breath.) But as far as I can tell, none of them is considered to be a principal voice of liberalism (whatever that means), although many would like to think of themselves that way. The actual principal voices of progressivism do not suffer from the "Soviet disease" the way that that the big guns of the self-described "conservatives" do.

The Soviets, for example, insisted that certain scientific principles had to be valid, not because they were supported by evidence, but because they were consistent with ideology. Many so-called "conservatives" do this, with evolution and climate change being two notable examples in which ideology is deemed to trump evidence. Do "liberals" do this?

Do so-called liberals purge those with whom they disagree? Do so-called liberals make inflammatory hawkish talk? Do liberals seek to punish (not just rebut, but punish) dissenters? There is evidence that so-called conservatives do all of these things, just as the Soviets did.

[Ysidro]

I do wonder, do True Conservatives use salt or sugar?

[BenBurch]

Originally Posted by Ysidro

I do wonder, do True Conservatives use salt or sugar?

Vinegar.

[drkitten]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

1.) A Conservative lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with this one entirely. The role of "laws" (and specifically their number and scope) is one of the major areas where "true" conservatives differ from "true" liberals.

Quote:

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions.

Does this mean that True Conservatives are omniscient? If so, I might believe that, because that means that they're also nonexistent. The problem with "you don't overdrive for the conditions" is that you, personally, are a lousy judge of the conditions and of what constitutes "overdrive"-- and the worse you are at judging, the more confident you are in your judgement. (Dunning-Kroger effect again.) The whole point of a bright-line standard is that it gives everyone else a clear-cut standard by which to rein you in when your judgement falters.

It's elementary psychology. In general, people don't propose laws against stuff they themselves want to do; you'll never hear a mother asking for a stop sign on her corner because she can't be bothered to stop and she's worried that she's going to hit her children. You hear her complain about how other drivers won't stop.

Every time you see a law, you see a problem that someone took seriously enough to petition for a solution.

We can see the same thing in global warming. Since there are no laws regarding it yet, who are the people "living as though they don't need the laws"? The people who are the most opposed to the law are also the people denying that it's a real issue. If "true conservatives" don't need laws to restrict pollution, why was is necessary to pass those laws? If "true conservatives" don't need laws to restrict greenhouse gases, why is AGW still happening?

Quote:

4.) A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

Again, I disagree. A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for him or herself. A conservative assumes that the global maximum will come from individual greedy optimization. When this assumption is true, of course, then it's generally a good thing. When this assumption is false....

As an example of that, Jim Crow laws directly reduce the maximum benefit for the maximum number, because not only do they reduce the pool of available competitors to provide a service, but that also means that the services is done more poorly and more expensively.

By contrast, liberals tend to work directly towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number, without the assumption that it will arise from greedy optimization.

Quote:

Your thoughts?

Yeah. This misrepresents "conservatism" in two major ways and completely blurs the distinction between the "conservative" and "liberal" point of view. What you present (as was pointed out) is actually a fairly good description of classical liberalism; what you present is also a lousy description of classical conservatism.

[Chaos]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

I'm sick of it. I tired of hearing about "conservatives" like Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and their ilk. In all honesty, I don't think they understand the meaning of the word, and what it once meant. When I think of Conservative, I look more to my Grandfather, Thomas Dunn Watson, Jr., than I do anyone else. He understood what genuine Conservatism is really about than most of these folks, and he lived it for the most part.

There aren't many points to understand in what makes someone a Conservative, so the whole concept is pretty easy to grasp.

1.) A Conservative lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions. You don't need to be told not to discriminate, simply because you already know it's wrong. You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

In other words, you consider the consequences of your actions before you act, the behave accordingly.

2.) A Conservative values merit above all else.

In other words, you have your position in life because you've earned it, not because you're given it. You make it by the sweat of your own brow, and you don't do it by taking from others, either through the courts or dishonest business practices.

Further, you don't discriminate on any basis; if someone isn't being promoted, it's because they're either lazy, incompetent, or both. It has nothing to do with race, creed, sexuality, religion, national origin. Work hard, do good work, and you move forward. That simple.

3.) A Conservative is truthful not only with others, but himself.

In short, a genuine Conservative is more interested in facts, and is working towards eliminating bias. It means being honest about your own actions, and not trying to mitigate the impact of them simply because it's convenient, or because it supports your so-called allies. It means you're going to base your actions on rationality, rather than emotion.

4.) A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

A Conservative is more interested in pluralism, and in the community, rather than his/her own pockets, in short because it also benefits him/herself. A golden parachute is nice, but if it comes to the detriment of the company -- and its employees -- what's the point?

By this definition, Al Dunlap, Rush Limbaugh's buddy, is not a conservative. Likewise, neither is Limbaugh. Sean Hannity? Not a chance. Ditto Beck, and his ties with a rather suspect gold trader. Something to consider.

Your thoughts?

Those are good principles.

Trouble is, most "conservatives" would simply assume they are following most of these principles. Like, they´re not discriminating against Muslims, it´s simply (to them) a fact that Muslims are evil and out to get non-Muslims.
Or, they´re not discriminating against [n-word]s, it´s simply (to them) a fact that [n-word]s are lazy and incompetent, so they feel justified in treating them differently.
Or, they do look at the environmental consequences of their actions, but their action (to them) don´t have environmental consequences because (to them) "global warming" and such is a liberal conspiracy.
Or, they do look after the greatest benefit for the greatest possible number, only (to them) it is a perfectly obvious fact that the only possible way to achieve this is to throw money at the rich. (I really like Nyarlathotep´s old line about that, "trickle-down economics mean the rich piss on the middle class, leaving cold urine to trickle down on the poor")

So, to make a long story short, it isn´t about principles. As has been hinted at in this thread already, the bulk of all liberals (and "liberals") would wholly or mostly agree with your principles, as would the bulk of all "conservatives". The difference is, some people actually try to adhere to these principles in reality, while others prefer the delusion that they are already adhering to them. Not so much serious people versus hypocrites, as sane versus delusional people.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

And is it fair that hard earned income is taxed differently than sit on your butt investment income in the mind of a conservative?

Just out of curiosity, where did the money come from to make the original investment? Was it taxed? Hint: The answers are, 1) someone worked hard for it and 2) Yes.

Just because your life has been a failure, doesn't mean others haven't worked hard for their money.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

I'm sick of it. I tired of hearing about "conservatives" like Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and their ilk. In all honesty, I don't think they understand the meaning of the word, and what it once meant. When I think of Conservative, I look more to my Grandfather, Thomas Dunn Watson, Jr., than I do anyone else. He understood what genuine Conservatism is really about than most of these folks, and he lived it for the most part.

There aren't many points to understand in what makes someone a Conservative, so the whole concept is pretty easy to grasp.

1.) A Conservative lives as though he doesn't need the laws.

This means pretty much what it says. You don't need speed limit laws, simply because you don't overdrive for the conditions. You don't need to be told not to discriminate, simply because you already know it's wrong. You don't dump filth into the nation's waterways, because you already know someone is going to wind up drinking the filth you dump into the water.

In other words, you consider the consequences of your actions before you act, the behave accordingly.

2.) A Conservative values merit above all else.

In other words, you have your position in life because you've earned it, not because you're given it. You make it by the sweat of your own brow, and you don't do it by taking from others, either through the courts or dishonest business practices.

Further, you don't discriminate on any basis; if someone isn't being promoted, it's because they're either lazy, incompetent, or both. It has nothing to do with race, creed, sexuality, religion, national origin. Work hard, do good work, and you move forward. That simple.

3.) A Conservative is truthful not only with others, but himself.

In short, a genuine Conservative is more interested in facts, and is working towards eliminating bias. It means being honest about your own actions, and not trying to mitigate the impact of them simply because it's convenient, or because it supports your so-called allies. It means you're going to base your actions on rationality, rather than emotion.

4.) A Conservative works towards the maximum benefit for the greatest number.

A Conservative is more interested in pluralism, and in the community, rather than his/her own pockets, in short because it also benefits him/herself. A golden parachute is nice, but if it comes to the detriment of the company -- and its employees -- what's the point?

By this definition, Al Dunlap, Rush Limbaugh's buddy, is not a conservative. Likewise, neither is Limbaugh. Sean Hannity? Not a chance. Ditto Beck, and his ties with a rather suspect gold trader. Something to consider.

Your thoughts?

You are more innumerating what you consider to be positive traits not anything that would distinguish a conservative from a liberal. It would seem that you are using those traits to contrast conservative from others, and I don't see why those traits tie into conservative thought better than others.

I would say that a conservative favors slow thoughtful changes if any to the status quo instead of large sweeping change. Basically an individual who is more concerned with making new problems while a progressive would be more concerned with fixing existing problems.

Of course these have little to nothing to do with contemporary american politics and how they use the terms.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

Hard to say. What I've noticed is that most Liberals tend to be far more focused on what role the community plays in the lives of individuals, (hence, the reason most Liberals tend to support such things as governmental social programs, where most Conservatives would rather see that handled by private organizations.) That would be my first point of departure.

The thing is that these points do not do anything about the values you cited, both believe in the idea of the greatest good for the greatest number, this is a very socialist ideology. So you are distinguishing how they achieve their social agenda as the main point of difference?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Zep

What's with all the labelling and pigeon-holing? Everyone is different across a broad spectrum of responses to issues. Putting people in arbitrary groups based on a few select criteria simply closes off thinking about them as whole people.

Example: We had a president of the Returned Soldiers League here (Veterans association, for US folks). He was a highly vocal critic of how aboriginals were financially supported by government - did the whole Beck thing much like you hear about illegals from Mexico and got a lot of people's backs up. But he was also a WW2 vet and strong veterans rights advocate, including for Vietnam vets when it was not so popular to be so. And married to a charming Japanese lady from when he was a young occupation soldier. So was he a reactionary right-wing nutball? Or a latent leftist hippy? He was all of these, at the same time...

Applying one countries political distinctions to a different country is just silly and sloppy thinking. He clearly does not fit into modern american political ideology.