A break off from this thread: http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=233964&postcount=158

Quote from: Warthur;233964You are basically arguing for the right of local communities to ostracise people on any damn basis they feel like, and that's wrong on a million different levels. Especially since you don't get to choose who the mob decides to kick. How'd you like it if your local town banned RPGs?

The 14th admendment without the activism that extended it would still apply. Thus right to assemble, right to bear arms, etc. No mainstream Conservative (again going back to NR to define such currently) I know of is asking for the repeal of that Admendment.

So between your overwought nightmare example and the Conservative idea is how it things would shake out. And no, I don't have a problem with some states being different than others. Again, it's called Federalism, check it out. I know it's a new idea to you.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make with this post.

What are the "concepts of conservatives" in your mind?  

What sort of differences are we talking about?

Quote from: Jackalope;233984I have no idea what point you are trying to make with this post.

What are the "concepts of conservatives" in your mind?  

What sort of differences are we talking about?

The thread from what I pulled the above revealed that many here confused Conservative Main Stream (Mainstream for Conservatives that is) ideas with the Republican Party and various groups that happen to support it in elections.

The idea is to point out that they are not same, and where they differ and why they often ally in elections.

Towards that end I'll quote the following from the 1st issue of National Review from 1955, most of it has aged perfectly well:

QuoteAmong our convictions:

A) It is the job of centralized government (in peacetime) to protect its citizens' lives, liberty and property. All other activities of government tend to diminish freedom and hamper progress. The growth of government(the dominant social feature of this century) must be fought relentlessly. In this great social conflict of the era, we are, without reservations, on the libertarian side.


B) The profound crisis of our era is, in essence, the conflict between the Social Engineers, who seek to adjust mankind to conform with scientific utopias, and the disciples of Truth, who defend the organic moral order. We believe that truth is neither arrived at nor illuminated by monitoring election results, binding though these are for other purposes, but by other means, including a study of human experience. On this point we are, without reservations, on the conservative side.


C) The century's most blatant force of satanic utopianism is communism. We consider "coexistence" with communism neither desirable nor possible, nor honorable; we find ourselves irrevocably at war with communism and shall oppose any substitute for victory.


D) The largest cultural menace in America is the conformity of the intellectual cliques which, in education as well as the arts, are out to impose upon the nation their modish fads and fallacies, and have nearly succeeded in doing so. In this cultural issue, we are, without reservations, on the side of excellence (rather than "newness") and of honest intellectual combat (rather than conformity).


E) The most alarming single danger to the American political system lies in the fact that an identifiable team of Fabian operators is bent on controlling both our major political parties(under the sanction of such fatuous and unreasoned slogans as "national unity," "middle-of-the-road," "progressivism," and "bipartisanship.") Clever intriguers are reshaping both parties in the image of Babbitt, gone Social-Democrat. When and where this political issue arises, we are, without reservations, on the side of the traditional two-party system that fights its feuds in public and honestly; and we shall advocate the restoration of the two-party system at all costs.


F) The competitive price system is indispensable to liberty and material progress. It is threatened not only by the growth of Big Brother government, but by the pressure of monopolies(including union monopolies. What is more, some labor unions have clearly identified themselves with doctrinaire socialist objectives. The characteristic problems of harassed business have gone unreported for years, with the result that the public has been taught to assume(almost instinctively) that conflicts between labor and management are generally traceable to greed and intransigence on the part of management. Sometimes they are; often they are not. NATIONAL REVIEW will explore and oppose the inroads upon the market economy caused by monopolies in general, and politically oriented unionism in particular; and it will tell the violated businessman's side of the story.


G) No superstition has more effectively bewitched America's Liberal elite than the fashionable concepts of world government, the United Nations, internationalism, international atomic pools, etc. Perhaps the most important and readily demonstrable lesson of history is that freedom goes hand in hand with a state of political decentralization, that remote government is irresponsible government. It would make greater sense to grant independence to each of our 50 states than to surrender U.S. sovereignty to a world organization.

Full article here: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDJhYTJjNWI0MWFiODBhMDc2MzQwY2JlM2RhZjk5ZjM=

QuoteA) It is the job of centralized government (in peacetime) to protect its citizens' lives, liberty and property. All other activities of government tend to diminish freedom and hamper progress. The growth of government(the dominant social feature of this century) must be fought relentlessly. In this great social conflict of the era, we are, without reservations, on the libertarian side.

The growth of government is a direct result of the very attempt to protect the lives, liberty and property of all citizens against the depredations of a small economic elite that has traditionally been able to control and dictate the terms of small government.

Libertarian economic policy will ultimately only result in a return to the vast disparity in opportunity that plagued the 19th century and lead to the formation of the international socialist movement.

Which is to say that conservatives, by siding against the desire for widespread economic prosperity of the many, are only creating the groundwork for a second international socialist movement.

QuoteB) The profound crisis of our era is, in essence, the conflict between the Social Engineers, who seek to adjust mankind to conform with scientific utopias, and the disciples of Truth, who defend the organic moral order. We believe that truth is neither arrived at nor illuminated by monitoring election results, binding though these are for other purposes, but by other means, including a study of human experience. On this point we are, without reservations, on the conservative side.

This is specious nonsense.  Conservatives are every bit as guilty of social engineering as liberals.  There is no such thing as an "organic moral order."  This is just another term for "natural law," a specious and foolish theory that has been soundly dismissed as nothing but superstition.

QuoteC) The century's most blatant force of satanic utopianism is communism. We consider "coexistence" with communism neither desirable nor possible, nor honorable; we find ourselves irrevocably at war with communism and shall oppose any substitute for victory.

I am reminded of a quote from Robert Anton Wilson:  "Convictions cause convicts."

While I agree that (Soviet) communism is a threat to freedom, history has shown that communism can be defeated without warfare or bloodshed.  There is no need to declare perpetual war on communism.

Also, communism has been essentially defeated.  This positions seems, at best, outdated and moribund.

QuoteD) The largest cultural menace in America is the conformity of the intellectual cliques which, in education as well as the arts, are out to impose upon the nation their modish fads and fallacies, and have nearly succeeded in doing so. In this cultural issue, we are, without reservations, on the side of excellence (rather than "newness") and of honest intellectual combat (rather than conformity).

This is so evocative of Nazi positions on art and culture that it is really quite disturbing.   It's also a highly hypocritical position, as conservatives make far more effort to impose conformity of belief on the populace than liberals do.

Furthermore, at the end of the day, the "excellence" that conservatives support is ultimately just racist, sexist and homophobic beliefs that are counter to the very notions of freedom and liberty this country was founded on.

QuoteE) The most alarming single danger to the American political system lies in the fact that an identifiable team of Fabian operators is bent on controlling both our major political parties(under the sanction of such fatuous and unreasoned slogans as "national unity," "middle-of-the-road," "progressivism," and "bipartisanship.") Clever intriguers are reshaping both parties in the image of Babbitt, gone Social-Democrat. When and where this political issue arises, we are, without reservations, on the side of the traditional two-party system that fights its feuds in public and honestly; and we shall advocate the restoration of the two-party system at all costs.

Bipartisanship is not a liberal conspiracy.  This platform here essentially states that conservatives are the enemies of all who disagree with them, will not accept any compromise, and seek only to increase fractionalization on conflict within government.

America is founded on the premise that from compromise comes the greatest liberty for all.  To declare oneself an enemy of compromise is to be both decidedly unamerican and dangerously ideological.

QuoteF) The competitive price system is indispensable to liberty and material progress. It is threatened not only by the growth of Big Brother government, but by the pressure of monopolies(including union monopolies. What is more, some labor unions have clearly identified themselves with doctrinaire socialist objectives. The characteristic problems of harassed business have gone unreported for years, with the result that the public has been taught to assume(almost instinctively) that conflicts between labor and management are generally traceable to greed and intransigence on the part of management. Sometimes they are; often they are not. NATIONAL REVIEW will explore and oppose the inroads upon the market economy caused by monopolies in general, and politically oriented unionism in particular; and it will tell the violated businessman's side of the story.

Pity the poor businessman, he is no longer allowed to shoot his workers for demanding reasonable wages and hours.

QuoteG) No superstition has more effectively bewitched America's Liberal elite than the fashionable concepts of world government, the United Nations, internationalism, international atomic pools, etc. Perhaps the most important and readily demonstrable lesson of history is that freedom goes hand in hand with a state of political decentralization, that remote government is irresponsible government. It would make greater sense to grant independence to each of our 50 states than to surrender U.S. sovereignty to a world organization.

Interconnection, communication and collusion on economic policy between world governments is a necessary component of shaping a global market where international trade can flourish.  By working through organizations like the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization and other multinational groups, we can unite disparate groups across this planet, and move the world towards full and complete enfranchisement as well as the global peace that a thoroughly integrated world economy will bring.

Buckminster Fuller was the first major political activist to note that the linkage of economies was the first major step to bringing about global peace.  This is why he proposed creating an energy infrastructure that would have place the USSR, China, Canada and the USA on the same power grid.  One if much less likely to bomb one's neighbor if doing so will end the flow of cheap power.

Fractionalization and balkanization will not produce good results, it will only produce more war.  More war is bad for the very economic prosperity that conservatives claim to defend.

War is, however, very profitable for the elites who profit from government borrowing, and are sufficiently insulated from the effects of war that their own families do not suffer.  These are, of course, the very elites that the conservative movement supports, and who fund the conservative movement.

Quote from: Jackalope;233997

Most of this is the typical marxist talking points combined with a common problem of not reading (passing over the comments on monopolies for example to so to fire off the stock big business marxist whine).

If I was interested in in defending these items in this thread, I'd respond in detail. But that wasn't the purpose of the thread- only to define it and highlight the differences for those who don't understand how they differ from the sum total Repubilican vote.

Quote from: gleichman;234001Most of this is the typical marxist talking points combined with a common problem of not reading (passing over the comments on monopolies for example to so to fire off the stock big business marxist whine).

There is no such thing as a union monopoly.

Also, I'm not a Marxist.  I'm an Anarchist.

QuoteIf I was interested in in defending these items in this thread, I'd respond in detail. But that wasn't the purpose of the thread- only to define it and highlight the differences for those who don't understand how they differ from the sum total Repubilican vote.

I still don't understand.  Your points were mostly specious nonsense.

You don't really believe this crap, do you?  Because man, you're stupid if you do.

Quote from: Jackalope;234003There is no such thing as a union monopoly.

Also, I'm not a Marxist.  I'm an Anarchist.

In terms of harm, not much difference in my eyes.

And to be honest Jack, you're on my ignore list. I've specifically clicked to see these couple of points to make sure you didn't derail the thread.

Quote from: gleichmanThe century's most blatant force of satanic utopianism is communism.

OMGLOL! satanic... this is just extremely silly calling it satanic... wouldn't: "force of utopianism is communism" without that mentionig satan, who is fictional diety...

...or do conservatives belive in "satan"...?

Quote from: Fritzs;234007...or do conservatives belive in "satan"...?

Many are Christian, but in recent years the number have declined.

In the quote, it think it's just an adjective indicating human evil but to be honest that's only my opinion as I never asked him.

So, Jackalope, you are essentially accepting Gleichman's definition of "Conservatism" as being the universally acceptable definition?
Because by jumping in and arguing with him about them point-by-point, that's basically what you're doing.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Jackalope;234003Also, I'm not a Marxist.  I'm an Anarchist.

Not much of a difference these days , really.
 They both seem to shop or not shop at the same places.
  Both are equally misguided.


- Ed C.

G is what keeps you up at night isn't it?

I'm keeping an eye on the 7 steps, by the way.

Quote from: RPGPundit;234009So, Jackalope, you are essentially accepting Gleichman's definition of "Conservatism" as being the universally acceptable definition?
Because by jumping in and arguing with him about them point-by-point, that's basically what you're doing.

RPGPundit

Most days, I would rather kick Jackalope in the nutsack than look at him, but in this case, I think he is just addressing what was posted.  Whether or not Gleichman or anyone else believes the definition provided is accurate or desireable, the fact remains that it is a set of really crack-pot beliefs, and the kind of thing that Goldwater probably would have endorsed, at least the 'anti-union' parts.

More to the point, if that is what Conservatives are to emulate, it's total moon-logic.  It's a bill of sale to keep the rich in power for people who will never have a tenth of what the people that proposed that list had at the time.

Pointing out the utter lack of sense made by that screed is the duty of all good citizens, Liberal or Conservative, Democrat or Republican.  That list is complete conspiracy nutter raving.

Quote from: gleichman;233968The 14th admendment without the activism that extended it would still apply. Thus right to assemble, right to bear arms, etc. No mainstream Conservative (again going back to NR to define such currently) I know of is asking for the repeal of that Admendment.

Under the selfsame 14th amendment, before the "activism that extended it", black people were considered "separate but equal" (and were in practice kept separate and decidedly unequal) up until the civil rights movement.

So you'll forgive me if I am sceptical about the ability of the 14th Amendment to restrict the activities of people who especially want to discriminate against gays, or black people, or non-Christians (or, for that matter, straights, whites, or Christians) to get their way in communities where they are the majority in the sort of America you envision, especially if the interpretation of the 14th Amendment is kept to the limited extent you envision.

What you must always remember is that the US Constitution is, at the end of the day, just a piece of paper, and it means nothing unless it is implemented by people who are acting in good faith.

Quote from: Warthur;234030Under the selfsame 14th amendment, before the "activism that extended it", black people were considered "separate but equal" (and were in practice kept separate and decidedly unequal) up until the civil rights movement.

If I wiped away everything that except the Constitution and the various Admendments, I suppose there is the option for local governments to do things that you and I approve of, and would still pass Constitutional muster. I seriously think turning back the Civil Rights Act of 64 wouldn't be one of these, and worrying about it is little short of being paranoid.

I'm ok with what would be at risk, as a Strong center government is certain to wipe away things that I approve of, and certain to enact those things I don't approve of. And I have no option that is not criminal to avoid those things.

With a weak center government, I can move from city to city or state to state to find something much closer to my needs. If none do, then I"m seriously out of cultural step- and likely need to change nations or become criminal.

Quote from: Warthur;234030What you must always remember is that the US Constitution is, at the end of the day, just a piece of paper, and it means nothing unless it is implemented by people who are acting in good faith.

This is true of all Government- even none at all. And it should be assume that it will at times not act in good faith.

Which is why is needs to act as little as possible.