To Liberals: Define Conservatives, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 21-10-2009 @ 12:55 PM by Finalized
Since the other thread was started for Conservatives to define Liberals, it's only fair that it goes the other way.

From Wikipedia, the entry for Conservatism. Here's an excerpt:

Conservatism (from Latin: conservare = "save" or "preserve") is the diverse political and social philosophy that supports tradition and the status quo, or that calls for a return to the values and society of an earlier age, the status quo ante. However, the term has been used by politicians and political commentators with a variety of meanings. The modern political term conservative was used by French politician Chateaubriand in 1819.


I think the left/right liberal/conservative paradigm is a control tool personally, but people still fall for it.

[edit on 10/21/2009 by Finalized]


reply posted on 21-10-2009 @ 01:23 PM by Avenginggecko
reply to post by Finalized


Well I believe Democrat/Republican is a tool, but I think Liberal/Conservative is more about human mindset and personality.

We can all post wiki and web site definitions about what we think each other are, but a personal definition of a Conservative is, to me:

Conservative: One who distrusts government and taxes, social welfare, and believes the individual should have total control over their environment and thus total responsibility for their actions. Outside events can influence a person's life, but regardless of whether or not those events are positive or negative, an individual carries the responsibility and should not seek help unsolicited from others or another entity.

Treating everyone equally means that no law should support a group of people instead of legislating that a group of people be propped up to proportionately represent themselves in our society's aspects.

That's the unbiased, completely fair definition of a Conservative from a Liberal. Unfortunately, nobody falls neatly into either category and we're all hypocritical in some way or another.


reply posted on 21-10-2009 @ 02:05 PM by silver tongue devil
Originally posted by Finalized


Conservatism (from Latin: conservare = "save" or "preserve") is the diverse political and social philosophy that supports tradition and the status quo, or that calls for a return to the values and society of an earlier age, the status quo ante.


See this is the issue with the people calling themselves Conservatives.

Half of them are trying to maintain and support the current tradition and status quo. Hence resistant to the change and progressive talk of the liberals, radicals, and the other wackies. They are conservative in the sense that they are tying to conserve the way things are now.

Whereas the other half of Conservatives are for restoring to an earlier time. What does this restoration entail exactly?? Change and progressive action! So do these Conservatives, wanting to restore to earlier conservative ideals, become progressive Liberals during this process? It would seem so since Conservatives label people Liberals merely at the mention of 'progress' and 'change'.

So if only the first definition really represents Conservatives, then which generation of Conservatives were conserving the most ideal ideals? Surely it isn't the current trend, that's generally accepted. Whether it's worded as such, most Conservatives today are talking about change. Hey, not referring to Obama here..

A shift towards a restoration of the old is no less progressive then a strive for something new.

My personal opinion is that Conservatives love to bash other ideologies with buzzwords like 'Change' and 'Progressive' and 'Radical', meanwhile not acknowledging it would take those very things to realize what they themselves view as ideal.

Obviously I don't consider myself a Conservative. And by that I mean I don't like the current trend. I want to restore... wait... hmm

[edit on 21-10-2009 by silver tongue devil]


reply posted on 21-10-2009 @ 02:09 PM by Rhetoric
reply to post by Hambone23


I can't understand the difference between Conservative and Fascist.

There are parallels between all of the "isms". Oone could draw comparisons and differences in each.

Liberal doesn't fit the current theme of Liberal America any more that Conservative fits the theme of Conservative America.

I don't know if either definition ever fit the Party system we now have, but neither one fit what we know as Liberalism or Conservativeism .

I would submit that they're just words that are familiar, thus used, but neither really apply.

and it's just as easy to say that Conservatives are like Fascists, as it is to say that Liberals are like Socialists.



reply posted on 21-10-2009 @ 07:38 PM by argentus
reply to post by Abbby


Y'know............ the older you get, the less "perv" resonates as a bad thing.....

I mean, I look at the ED commercials and snicker to myself..... imagining a four-hour errection. Would I go to the hospital? NO!!! Call the press!! I want pictures

Please don't take offence... that's just my wingnut way of saying that it sounds to me as if your concept of "conservative" might really be that of a Republican. It doesn't seem to me as if there are many true conservatives left.

An observation, nothing more.

Cheers


reply posted on 21-10-2009 @ 08:01 PM by Abbby
reply to post by argentus


Ha!
I think you know what I mean, though. Yes, maybe it's the republican politicians that I'm annoyed with. No, make that all politicians. I dunno.....it's seems like everybody has a few bones in their closet nowadays. I guess I did come across kind of bitchy. My apologies.



reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 05:05 PM by argentus
reply to post by Abbby


Ha!
I think you know what I mean, though. Yes, maybe it's the republican politicians that I'm annoyed with. No, make that all politicians. I dunno.....it's seems like everybody has a few bones in their closet nowadays. I guess I did come across kind of bitchy. My apologies.


No apologies ever necessary for speaking one's mind, Abby, but I accept anyway........ no worries

Yep. I know what you mean. There is a whole cross-section of wide-butted red-faced pundit of whatever, that seem to do nothing more than pooh-pooh progressive thinking and arch a padded cheek for the status quo. They often even pretend to support a conservative agenda. Did I sum that up accurately?


reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 05:14 PM by argentus
reply to post by Finalized


I'm ashamed. Yes, of course, how could we forget the quiet, disenfranchised anarchist. It's been my experience that they tend toward impressionist art and lofty poems, however that's not to say that there aren't real and genuine patriotic dreams of justice and freedom roiling under the malnourished surface. I was once one of their ranks, so I feel ya. Later on, I discovered to my dismay, that I had to produce something to be able to garner a wage in order to support my desire to be fed and watered.

Still later, I discovered that if I played the competitive game and socked away shiny little implements of monetary exchange that I could actually purchase land and do what I wanted on it.

If I am able to hold the land against agressors, I will continue to grow foods to support my own and others' desires to eat. I have a woefully inadequate supply of weaponry toward that end. Still, I'm not without resources, and the lifetime learning has certainly made me somewhat costly to take.

Everybody be safe. I guess I'm feeling a little on edge this weekend -- prior to the nexus of DOOM as forecast by our neo-modern prophets.


reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 05:23 PM by argentus
reply to post by Abbby


p.s. Abby, you didn't come across bitchy at ALL, at least to me. You are sick of the babbling heads on TV, I'd imagine, and I am as well. There doesn't seem to be anybody of any political or mediariffic importance that speaks for ME. They're all full of crap, and I think the best thing that could happen to CONgress and the SINate would be to impose term limits and a sudden circumcision of their benefits and income.

When we choose to pay real people a mere $47,000 per year with health benefits, retirement, per diem with a provision for ONLY commercial air travel, we will begin to get people who really care about the job, and not about forging a monetary dynasty for themselves.
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^