Why Conservative Is Simply Better....

[JQPublic1]

View attachment 50666

How silly.

The following, for your edification:

1) Conservatives believe that there are moral truths, right and wrong, and that these truths are permanent. The result of infracting these truths will be atrocities and social disaster. Liberals believe in a privatization of morality so complete that no code of conduct is generally accepted, practically to the point of ‘do what you can get away with’. These beliefs are aimed at the gratification of appetites and exhibit anarchistic impulses.


2) Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace. Law is custom and precedent. Liberals are destroyers of custom and convention. To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old. We build on the ideas and experience of our ancestors. The species is wiser than the individual (Burke).


3) Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the ‘evils’ that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman. There should be a balance between permanence and change, while liberals see ‘progress’ as some mythical direction for society.


4) Conservatives believe in the principle of variety, while liberal perspectives result in a narrowing uniformity. Conservatives believe in choice of healthcare, education, religion, and various other areas. Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Equality will be of opportunity, not necessarily of result. The only uniformity will be before the law. Society will not be perfect. Consider the results of the rule of ideologues of the last century.


5) Freedom and property are linked. Private property results in a more stable and productive society. Private property and retaining the fruits of one’s labor has been proven successful from the Puritan’s Bradford, to the Stakhanovite Revolution!


6) Conservatives believe in voluntary community and charity, based on duties to each other, with the assumption that each person must do whatever he could to avoid requiring assistance, as opposed to involuntary collectivism, as in “let the government do it..” Burke's understanding that the "little platoon" - family, neighborhood, professional organizations etc - is the "first principle" of society has been consistently identified as providing the necessary inspiration for conservativism. And explains why conservatives give more to charity than liberals.


7) Conservatives view people as both good and bad, and for this reason believe on restraints on power, as in checks and balances, while liberals see power as a force for good, as long as the power is in their hands.


8) Liberals and Conservatives differ in the way to proceed. For Conservatives, data informs policy. (“More Guns, Less Crime” and “Mass murderers apparently can’t read, since they are constantly shooting up ‘gun-free zones.’”- Coulter) We use Conservative principles to the best of our ability, but when confronting new and original venues, we believe in testing, and analysis of the results of the tests. For liberals, feeling passes for knowing; it is based on emotion often to the exclusion of thinking.


9) Conservatives view results differently from Liberals. Liberals respond to success and material wealth with envy and hostility, encourage class warfare and an attempt to obviate any chance that it might happen again. The exception is when it is a Liberal with the wealth. Conservatives see success as the validation and culmination of the application of Conservative principles, most prominently Liberty.


10)Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts, nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas’ “High Tech Lynching.”

YOUR MANIFESTO IS FULL OF HOLES. TRY AGAIN>>>

 

[JQPublic1]

View attachment 50666

Dipshit….you obviously don't realize that modern Conservatives in America are actual "Classical Liberals." We are the ones who support individual liberty and equality…you morons want a huge government controlling everything you do…and if you have a huge government, they will team up with big business…..moron.

If modern Conservatives are classical liberals why don't they say so? Could it be that uneducated White male "conservatives" are so caught up in pejoratively branding democrats as "liberal" that they could never conceive the concept, even when it is put before them in black and white?


You may THINK that modern Conservatives in America are Classic Liberals but I don't think you can prove that. Wishful thinking on your part doesn't cut it , bub. Actions speak louder than words...

 

[JQPublic1]

View attachment 50666

How silly.

The following, for your edification:

1) Conservatives believe that there are moral truths, right and wrong, and that these truths are permanent. The result of infracting these truths will be atrocities and social disaster. Liberals believe in a privatization of morality so complete that no code of conduct is generally accepted, practically to the point of ‘do what you can get away with’. These beliefs are aimed at the gratification of appetites and exhibit anarchistic impulses.


2) Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace. Law is custom and precedent. Liberals are destroyers of custom and convention. To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old. We build on the ideas and experience of our ancestors. The species is wiser than the individual (Burke).


3) Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the ‘evils’ that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman. There should be a balance between permanence and change, while liberals see ‘progress’ as some mythical direction for society.


4) Conservatives believe in the principle of variety, while liberal perspectives result in a narrowing uniformity. Conservatives believe in choice of healthcare, education, religion, and various other areas. Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Equality will be of opportunity, not necessarily of result. The only uniformity will be before the law. Society will not be perfect. Consider the results of the rule of ideologues of the last century.


5) Freedom and property are linked. Private property results in a more stable and productive society. Private property and retaining the fruits of one’s labor has been proven successful from the Puritan’s Bradford, to the Stakhanovite Revolution!


6) Conservatives believe in voluntary community and charity, based on duties to each other, with the assumption that each person must do whatever he could to avoid requiring assistance, as opposed to involuntary collectivism, as in “let the government do it..” Burke's understanding that the "little platoon" - family, neighborhood, professional organizations etc - is the "first principle" of society has been consistently identified as providing the necessary inspiration for conservativism. And explains why conservatives give more to charity than liberals.


7) Conservatives view people as both good and bad, and for this reason believe on restraints on power, as in checks and balances, while liberals see power as a force for good, as long as the power is in their hands.


8) Liberals and Conservatives differ in the way to proceed. For Conservatives, data informs policy. (“More Guns, Less Crime” and “Mass murderers apparently can’t read, since they are constantly shooting up ‘gun-free zones.’”- Coulter) We use Conservative principles to the best of our ability, but when confronting new and original venues, we believe in testing, and analysis of the results of the tests. For liberals, feeling passes for knowing; it is based on emotion often to the exclusion of thinking.


9) Conservatives view results differently from Liberals. Liberals respond to success and material wealth with envy and hostility, encourage class warfare and an attempt to obviate any chance that it might happen again. The exception is when it is a Liberal with the wealth. Conservatives see success as the validation and culmination of the application of Conservative principles, most prominently Liberty.


10)Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts, nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas’ “High Tech Lynching.”

YOUR MANIFESTO IS FULL OF HOLES. TRY AGAIN>>>

View attachment 50673

NOTE:
Those holes in post # 61 are NOT meant to mean any thing more than to signify that PC's premise is full of holes.... Those were the only holes I could find... I would have preferred holes that look like those in swiss cheese but couldn't find any!

I will remove the post if any "liberals" are offended.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Conservatism can't be better because historically progress replaces it with something better.

Looks to me like conservatism is winning all over the globe.

The Soviet Union collapsed. China and India are moving away from centrally planned economies toward freer and freer market economies.

Those are huge victories for conservatism.

So when states rights in the US lost out to 'central planning' and slavery was abolished, that was a tragic defeat?

You are sick.

States rights are not lost. The 10th Amendment is not repealed.

Slavery was abolished and civil rights were enforced in spite of the Democrats, not because of them.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Liberal nation = America

Conservative nation = Saudi Arabia

Nuff said.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

[


Interesting,....bordering on amusing...that you would reference Nazism...

...Nazism, and Liberalism are scions of the very same evil predecessor....


.”

Or, instead of listening to some confused haus frau on the internet, we could go right to a real Nazi,

Joseph Goebbels:

"Both in theory and practice, National Socialism opposes liberalism."

Indeed it did, by the classical definition. Your current Progressivism is not liberalism by that definition.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That doesn't sound like conservatism to me, that sounds like progress and change. Conservatism would have kept things the same...

He's pretending that the totalitarian regime of the Soviet Union was somehow an example of liberalism. In short, he's stupid.

No, I am saying a free market economy is what conservatism is all about.

Nice try.

American Liberals were quite obsequious to the USSR, though. And not a few left wingers were outright commies and comsymps in the 60s and 70s.

"I'll take two Che Guevara shirts, please."

We have a market economy in this country. We also have rightwing extremists. Get to your point, preferably in English.

I did get to my point. Quite succinctly. Right at the start of this little chain of uncomprehending idiocy which followed.

Allow me to refresh your amazingly short memory:

Conservatism can't be better because historically progress replaces it with something better.

Looks to me like conservatism is winning all over the globe.

The Soviet Union collapsed. China and India are moving away from centrally planned economies toward freer and freer market economies.

Those are huge victories for conservatism.

And so we see progress replaced failed left wing systems with successful right wing systems, contrary to your claim.

I wasn't aware that Liberals supported totalitarian dictatorship. Name the prominent Liberals in America who do.

How many prominent "liberals" are there?

There's your answer.

 

[BlindBoo]

Which is closer to the classical liberal view?

Neither. Both are tax and spend elitist.

 

[NYcarbineer]

He's pretending that the totalitarian regime of the Soviet Union was somehow an example of liberalism. In short, he's stupid.

No, I am saying a free market economy is what conservatism is all about.

Nice try.

American Liberals were quite obsequious to the USSR, though. And not a few left wingers were outright commies and comsymps in the 60s and 70s.

"I'll take two Che Guevara shirts, please."

We have a market economy in this country. We also have rightwing extremists. Get to your point, preferably in English.

I did get to my point. Quite succinctly. Right at the start of this little chain of uncomprehending idiocy which followed.

Allow me to refresh your amazingly short memory:

Conservatism can't be better because historically progress replaces it with something better.

Looks to me like conservatism is winning all over the globe.

The Soviet Union collapsed. China and India are moving away from centrally planned economies toward freer and freer market economies.

Those are huge victories for conservatism.

And so we see progress replaced failed left wing systems with successful right wing systems, contrary to your claim.

I wasn't aware that Liberals supported totalitarian dictatorship. Name the prominent Liberals in America who do.

How many prominent "liberals" are there?

There's your answer.

Start with the president.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You're wasting my time trying to change the subject to Liberalism.

I'm not changing any subject, but merely mirroring your expressed opinion.

The Op has made the assertion that Conservatism is better for the individual and for society, the problem of course is that the Republican Party does not meet the standards of Conservatism.

Perhaps. But it is certain that the current Democratic Party does not meet the standards of classical liberalism.

Next?

I don't think the captains of the present democratic Party ever claimed to be the standard bearers of classic liberalism. That "liberal" moniker was hung around their necks by right wing talking heads. The Democratic Party is made up of both conservative AND liberal factions. One or the other surfaces depending on the issue at hand.

What nonsense.

If you ask nicely, I'm certain an adult will help you to obtain a library card.

A bit of study, and you won't embarrass yourself like this again.

The Stormfront library is not on my list of places to visit... BTW, does your library card have swastikas on it?

You d

When one as dumb as you are is skewered....as I have done by highlighting your ignorance, what is left for you but to scream 'you Nazi, you!!!!'

It is nothing less than proof of what I said.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[


Interesting,....bordering on amusing...that you would reference Nazism...

...Nazism, and Liberalism are scions of the very same evil predecessor....


.”

Or, instead of listening to some confused haus frau on the internet, we could go right to a real Nazi,

Joseph Goebbels:

"Both in theory and practice, National Socialism opposes liberalism."

So.....Goebbels is your paragon of truth?

How consistent of you.

The Nazis were militaristic, xenophobic, extreme nationalists, anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-liberal, for starters.

Now where in America today do you find the political entity closest to that set of beliefs?

The Nazis were one more iteration of a big government totalitarian dictatorship based on the following:

1. The Germans have a history of embracing authoritarian rule. As the German philosopher Hegel said, “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest” (Ralf Dahrendorf, Society and Democracy in Germany).

The very same is the central theme of communism, socialism, fascism, Liberalism, and Progressivism.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I'm better...and heres why....

Pretty much.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Which is closer to the classical liberal view?

Neither. Both are tax and spend elitist.

You seem to lack a necessary facility with the English language.
Although it is not my first language, luckily for you, I am here to save the day.


Adv. 1. closer - (comparative of `near' or `close') within a shorter distance; "come closer, mydear!"; "they drew nearer"; "getting nearer to the true explanation"
nearer, nigher
comparative, comparative degree - the comparative form of an adjective or adverb;"`faster' is the comparative of the adjective `fast'"; "`less famous' is the comparativedegree of the adjective `famous'"; "`more surely' is the comparative of the adverb`surely'"
closer


Possibly you now realize what a dunce you appear.


So....try again?

Democrats or Republicans: which is closer to a view based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

 

[BlindBoo]

Conservatism can't be better because historically progress replaces it with something better.

Looks to me like conservatism is winning all over the globe.

The Soviet Union collapsed. China and India are moving away from centrally planned economies toward freer and freer market economies.

Those are huge victories for conservatism.

So when states rights in the US lost out to 'central planning' and slavery was abolished, that was a tragic defeat?

You are sick.

States rights are not lost. The 10th Amendment is not repealed.

Slavery was abolished and civil rights were enforced in spite of the Democrats, not because of them.

Without the Northern Democrats the Civil Rights bill would never have passed.

 

[PoliticalChic]

View attachment 50666

Dipshit….you obviously don't realize that modern Conservatives in America are actual "Classical Liberals." We are the ones who support individual liberty and equality…you morons want a huge government controlling everything you do…and if you have a huge government, they will team up with big business…..moron.

Actually, he didn't realize that fact.

Clearly a product of government schooling, and a perfect 'reliable Democrat voter.'

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


Interesting,....bordering on amusing...that you would reference Nazism...

...Nazism, and Liberalism are scions of the very same evil predecessor....


.”

Or, instead of listening to some confused haus frau on the internet, we could go right to a real Nazi,

Joseph Goebbels:

"Both in theory and practice, National Socialism opposes liberalism."

Indeed it did, by the classical definition. Your current Progressivism is not liberalism by that definition.

The Nazis were not talking about 'classical liberals' in the 1930's. Modern democratic socialist liberalism was already on the rise.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatism can't be better because historically progress replaces it with something better.

Looks to me like conservatism is winning all over the globe.

The Soviet Union collapsed. China and India are moving away from centrally planned economies toward freer and freer market economies.

Those are huge victories for conservatism.

So when states rights in the US lost out to 'central planning' and slavery was abolished, that was a tragic defeat?

You are sick.

States rights are not lost. The 10th Amendment is not repealed.

Slavery was abolished and civil rights were enforced in spite of the Democrats, not because of them.

Without the Northern Democrats the Civil Rights bill would never have passed.

Every Southern Republican voted against the Civil Rights Bill.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatism can't be better because historically progress replaces it with something better.

Looks to me like conservatism is winning all over the globe.

The Soviet Union collapsed. China and India are moving away from centrally planned economies toward freer and freer market economies.

Those are huge victories for conservatism.

So when states rights in the US lost out to 'central planning' and slavery was abolished, that was a tragic defeat?

You are sick.

States rights are not lost. The 10th Amendment is not repealed.

Slavery was abolished and civil rights were enforced in spite of the Democrats, not because of them.

Without the Northern Democrats the Civil Rights bill would never have passed.

Democrats stood in the way of every civil rights bill, including every anti-lynching bill in the Senate.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberal nation = America

Conservative nation = Saudi Arabia

Nuff said.

Look who's back!

The liar who repeatedly tries to claim that those known as Liberals today are the same folks who memorialized this nation in the founding documents!

 

[nuhuh]

Yet there isn't a single Republican Civil Rights Leader beloved by Blacks. Odd isn't it?