It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Conservative Ideology Finally Dead?

page: 6
23
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrThortan

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: vjr1113


youre right free health care is an oxymoron, i should rephrase it, id pay taxes for cheaper healthcare. and it is cheaper, Obamacare saved me hundreds so its not a myth.


Socialist health care is cheaper by force of government threat.

Free market healthcare is cheaper from competition and voluntary charity.

Which system is going to give the better care?



The one that just charged my friend 15k for a one night stay to the emergency room that saved his life.?


That price is from gov regulation and Medicare not paying for what they use.

Thermodynamics -- the more complex the system, the more waste.




posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

im sorry your insurance company screwed you dont take it out on everyone else. id say the ar15 is a fine legal weapon among others to cause harm.

you keep saying a fetus as a person so i know you dont understand the abortion issue. it doesnt matter the reason behind the abortion all that matters is when the abortion is being taken place. as soon as a fetus is conscious and viable, usually around the third trimester, an abortion is out of the question. this is about individual liberty and yes, financial reasons are very much a major factor in a woman's life. mind your own business, stay out of it, abortion is between a woman and their doctor.
edit on 9-2-2016 by vjr1113 because: (no reason given)


you seem to care more for a fetus than a child being born into poverty.
edit on 9-2-2016 by vjr1113 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

"The pigs at the top are lying cheating greedy murdering monsters -- I want them to promise me a fair deal" -- Progressive party platform


Source please?

Thank you kindly.


The allegorical truth of that statement is self evident.

'"The pigs at the top are lying cheating greedy murdering monsters -- I want them to promise me a fair deal" -- Progressive party platform

AKA the Zombie Party MMMMM.. Free Stuff
edit on 9-2-2016 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: vjr1113

Abortion is an issue where with technology and science it doesnt have to be... remove technology and science and I'm the devil... because coat hangers in back alleys and homes for "fallen" women was a long dark time ok?.. and the people that put holds on birth control etc for moral reasons are more devil with modern medicine... lets seriously complicate things for those that had sexual intercourse for pleasure not procreation that got pregnant...

Theres the planned parenthood policy in some states where Valium is your pain killer because they want you to suffer pain for this "immoral" procedure... but not freak out on them... and also block the morning after pill and contraception access etc. just in case we can force all these pregnancies to term because god dont make no mistakes like you done did... the odd part? The people fighting for this very nonsense... feel no tax obligation what so ever to take care of these children if forced to term... then say the very same people need to quit having babies once here... ATS please excuse me of any liability for head explosions over that...



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

On the contrary. Conservatism is just beginning. Someone needs to stand up to the fascists and the authoritarians alike. It will be the conservatives.


Well, I think its completely natural, this course we are taking.

I often ask myself how anyone could still cling to the concepts of conservatism.
I think it is ultimately evil to foster a sink or swim world.


That's easy. It's the better philosophy.

If you want corrupt, compare the political parties of the state and federal politicians who have been convicted of corruption charges. See which political party is overwhelmingly, and literally, corrupt.

American politicians convicted of corruption.
edit on 9-2-2016 by TheTory because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 11:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

On the contrary. Conservatism is just beginning. Someone needs to stand up to the fascists and the authoritarians alike. It will be the conservatives.


Well, I think its completely natural, this course we are taking.

I often ask myself how anyone could still cling to the concepts of conservatism.
I think it is ultimately evil to foster a sink or swim world.


That's easy. It's the better philosophy.

If you want corrupt, compare the political parties of the state and federal politicians who have been convicted of corruption charges. See which political party is overwhelmingly, and literally, corrupt.

American politicians convicted of corruption.


You wouldnt happen to be: Last edited 10 months ago by Fayenatic london (from the linked wiki anyone can make and edit would you?) teasing but hey wouldnt be an ATS first if you were.

p.s. there are threads on this and more3 reliable sources than wikis... you're likely in for a fight stirring such... um good luck.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

No. That's not me. The page includes a list of links to the politicians' Wikipedia page, in which states their corruption charges, their political party and position in government, their jail sentence, and any other biographical information. Take it for what you will. Dismiss it outright if you wish.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TheTory

Its contribution to the topic but conservatism and liberal cross party lines in the US political system... we have two labels that encompass every political ideology and extremism represented in both of them. So theres a divide and conquer effect of those very broad terms in American politics... very clear when reading through the thread. Since you have Tory as a user name, I thought it pertinent because even though some party agendas cross global lines? Those two terms do not when it comes to public... and nearly impossible to label to a party without ignorance... whereas conservatism in England is very well known and defined having more than two political parties with representation to represent... all or nothing here one side or the other, where liberal and conservative are used as intolerant pejoratives instead of anything rational in most cases.

And well staunch supporters identifying it as a side to be on when they arent parties... is just guaranteed to bring it since you fired a shot... thought a watch your butt was in order.

Hey, sometimes mods need a break and I can imagine the ones fielding the political forums have had a tough go of it for months now.



Since the topic is conservatism; and it is so well defined in the UK maybe you like to share it's platform specifics? This is an honest question as my UK friends and US friends often conflict when talking about conservatism, as they equate Tory to the Republicans and I just mind my pint. Both words have been hijacked and distorted through this current of divide propaganda that's been going on since the first announcements for those running. It would be great if people enjoying the conservative or liberal label here would do the same... as its all just dogma and rhetoric at this point on the brink of meaningless in our political system.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: EternalSolace
Any ideology, when taken to the extreme, is a bad thing. Liberals and conservatives need one another. Democrats and Republicans need one another. It's the only way to balance out the stupid in each side of the political spectrum.


I thank you for making conciliatory efforts here but, as you can see, understanding and open-mindedness are outside of the realm of possibility.

With some degree of difficulty, I have come to the conclusion that such gestures are merely perceived as weakness to be exploited. It does not have the disarming effect that we might desire. We are dealing with malicious bullies here, not misinformed idealists.

As a result, I advise against any further compromise. That's not to say that there are neither enlightening conversations to have nor that much cannot be learned from interacting but, politically and economically speaking, concessions must no longer be forthcoming.

We now stand on the precipice of totalitarianism due to our well intentioned irenic genuflections. Too much ground has been lost repeating that mistake.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

I can't say I disagree. One thing I noticed about the last republican debate was how poorly conservatism was defined.

In my own analysis, conservatism can be expressed as "the means justify the end", as opposed to "the end justifies the means". We retain and pass on to our children what our ancestors have passed on to us. These institutions, laws, religions, principles, represent a society's collective wisdom, have arisen naturally through the interactions of people over countless generations, and they should adapt from the bottom up instead of from the top down. Those who attempt to level never equalize; they only pervert the natural order.

I'm not a good teacher. There is plenty of literature on conservatism.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Ah, so, no source then? You can't own your own position, so you have to make up someone else's?

Your beliefs are the only truth. Check.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:53 AM
link   

edit on 10-2-2016 by NihilistSanta because: Deleted due to redundancy.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 04:29 AM
link   


It'll be dead when you kill us.

You can have liberty or equality. You cannot have both. So long as there are those who are conservative, there will be those who fight for liberty, and you will not have perfect equality. You will only have that over our dead bodies.


this kind of nonsensical gibberish highlights the confusion and hypocracy of the conservative mindset.

Liberty: The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.

These days it sure seems like the conservative agenda is to use their authority to impose oppressive restrictions on people who don't share their political beliefs, like they do with lgbt folk for one example, or voter restrictions aimed at minorities for another, or restrictions on womens health issues for yet another. Say what you will, but this kind of behavior is the very opposite of "fight(ing) for liberty".
There can be no true liberty without equality. Our pledge of aligence ends with "liberty and justice for all", that means everybody. Conservative politicians dictating how everyone needs to live their lives according to their often religiously motivated "values" IS NOT liberty, it's tyranny. Conservatives are free to live their own lives however they please, but the instant they begin using their personal/religious beliefs as a weapon to cut away at anyone elses personal liberty they become an enemy of freedom.
edit on 10-2-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2016 by LordSnow21 because: added

edit on 10-2-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2016 by LordSnow21 because: added more

edit on 10-2-2016 by LordSnow21 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 05:40 AM
link   
Dead on OP imo. With current trends there will literally never be another conservative president.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 06:31 AM
link   
Conservative ideals are on the decline because personal responsibility scares people. It scares people to fail, people are scared of being poor, people are scared of inadequacy.

Democrats promise free things: college, healthcare,a living wage. All of these of course come with a loss of liberty and the expansion of govt.

Basically you have a complete 180 from
What the founders wanted. Security in place of Liberty.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 06:45 AM
link   
a reply to: vjr1113

I wouldn't take that tack with him.

His mother was an unwed 16-yer-old who missed Roe v. Wade by one year. As a result, he was adopted, but if he had happened a year later, he might never have been born at all. Don't you think he isn't at all conscious of that fact?

He also has two adopted nephews, and we'd have an adopted child if we had the money to cut through the legal red tape.


edit on 10-2-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: ketsuko
It'll be dead when you kill us.

You can have liberty or equality. You cannot have both. So long as there are those who are conservative, there will be those who fight for liberty, and you will not have perfect equality. You will only have that over our dead bodies.


Typically conservative misunderstanding of the relationship between equality and liberty. If you are truly a lover of liberty then you should want to expand liberty to the greatest extent to the most people possible. The "conservative" position throughout history has always been one of preserving inequality by limiting the liberty of others — that's not a fight for liberty.

Right now, there are "conservative" candidates who are campaigning for president on promises such as fighting tooth and nail to deny gay people the liberty to marry who they want. Is that a fight for liberty or a fight against liberty? Other candidates are suggesting surveillance of citizens of this country based on their religious affiliation. Is that a fight for or against liberty?

Don't get me wrong, the American "left" is no beacon of liberalism either (consider the obsession with gun control) but on the whole, it's still far more liberal than the American "right."


This is exactly my point.
How can any "good" person continue to support this ideology?



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: ExNihiloRed

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: ExNihiloRed

You are clearly a Libertarian/Classical Liberal.


To call yourself conservative is to conserve the zeitgeist...
To preserve tradition.

Decriminalisation isn't a conservative value it is a Libertarian position.

Equal rights to marriage for LGBT, and pro choice are not conservative values they're Classical Liberal.


You may hold a few conservative values, but to label yourself like that is to do yourself a disservice.


And to be fair, and to eat crow myself on generalizing, I think in this debate we have bifurcated the multiple factions of both parties into conservative vs. liberal. In that, I side with the former, notwithstanding the fact that my particular sect may be more libertarian, etc. (or a "moderate" republican).


Agreed, I'm learning a lot in this thread.
Very enlightening.

What I'm coming away with though is the feeling that so called conservatives are not so quick to embrace the classical sense of conservative ideas. It seems a lot of conservatives like to sprinkle a bit of progressive ideas into their plan.

Thus my OP that the conservative ideology is probably dead and what we have is now in the world is this:
Extreme Left, Left, Center and then finally: Outdated and Destructive Selfish Insanity (classic conservatism) which doesnt really work anymore in todays world.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Did not read the whole thread, I will get back to it later. There will always be change and the resistance to it. You cant ha freedom without the earned responsibility that goes with it. Liberty and Conservatism keep eachother in check. It's all about ballance.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   
s Conservative Ideology Finally Dead?

Isn't that what the 'liberals' want ?

No one to stand in their way and tell them NO, and let them run roughshot over anyone they want to.

Liberals truly do want a one party rule, and truly can't stand a 'democracy'.
edit on 10-2-2016 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join