[Plutus Aurelius]

kman - you're grasping at straws, and illustrate quite well why the Libertarian mindset is morally bankrupt - it simply replaces common sense with right wing demagoguery.

[Daktoria]

Kman isn't a conservative. Why are you bothering with him? If anything, libertarianism is classically liberal in defending hard work.

Go on. Pick on someone your own size. Let's see what you actually have to criticize about conservatism.

You should understand that free markets are a means to an end, not an end unto themselves.

[Kman]

kman - you're grasping at straws, and illustrate quite well why the Libertarian mindset is morally bankrupt - it simply replaces common sense with right wing demagoguery.

I notice you are not willing to deal with the scientific question of whether labor can reach a market clearing price or whether it is the profit motive that makes people work. Instead you just accuse me of demagoguery, I suspect you are just repeating propaganda you have been fed in the media and now your repeating it here, let me tell you however, you are out of your league here, I have studied tons of economic theory and most importantly it was correct economic theory so you have little chance to win in a debate against me.

Dont worry about it though, I used to be bad at politics also before I started studying it, it is to be expected that a rookie loses to an expert.

[Daktoria]

Labor, labor, labor....

...bla, bla, bla.

Makes people work. Yes, because we live to work, we don't work to live.

[Buzz62]

OK let's discuss conservatism.
First thing we should do is define it:

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to retain") is a political and social philosophy that promotes retaining traditional institutions and supports, at most, minimal and gradual change in society. A person who follows the philosophies of conservatism is referred to as a traditionalist or conservative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism

OK...guess we need to define the social philosophy of the USA now.
As an outsider looking in, I would define it as the following:

A society based on a set of basic and understood freedoms. The pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Where all men are equal in the eyes of the law and society as a whole.
In order to maintain this idealistic society, there have been constructed certain rules.
One of the main rules is...the society must pay for the general maintenance. I.E. TAXATION.
Another way of helping to maintain this society is through maturity and understanding.
Thus MATURE citizens UNDERSTAND that the society must be nurtured with proper conduct both at work and at play.
That means...PAY YOUR TAXES...DO NOT ABUSE THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM...DO NOT MAKE WAR WITHOUT JUST CAUSE...OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND...etc, etc, etc...
Such an idealistic society would have a general understanding that GREED is still a sin.
It would also know it has to take care of the unfortunate...because one day THEY might just be one of the unfortunate.

Finally...this idealistic society would maintain a military force big enough to defend itself from tyranny, yet not so big as to choke itself financially. The military would be used in the name of PEACE...not PROFIT.

That would be MY definition of what the USA "should" be.

Gee...sounds like Canada...

So what is conservatism but the upholding of this basic premise?

[Wolfman]

I would image that the creation of jobs is linked to both private sector and government activity, and not exclusively one of them. However, you guys are too steeped in your ideological bullshit to understand that everything is connected, and there usually isn't a single reason for many things like unemployment.

Rancid: It's what's good for you.

Let's see what you actually have to criticize about conservatism.

OK. The last legitimately (big "C") Conservative President in the US was Eisenhower, and since then the (small "c") conservative party has few to no ideas of it's own, but has been standing in the middle of street screaming and begging for right wing lunatics, quasi-Libertarians and the religious right retards to tell them what to do, and when all else fails, they stop pretending to be a cohesive organization or ideology and start ranting about how everything that has ever gone wrong is the fault of the Democrats, and start blaming them and saying that they are opposed to everything the Democrats stand for, and when the Democrats actually stand for the same thing as the Republican party, they deny either that the Democrats stand for it, or that they stood for it.

kman - you're grasping at straws, and illustrate quite well why the Libertarian mindset is morally bankrupt - it simply replaces common sense with right wing demagoguery.

He's a self described AnCap actually.

[Daktoria]

I prefer Russell Kirk's 10 principles instead of wikipedia if you guys don't mind:

http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/det ... rinciples/

Ten Conservative Principles (1993)

• First, the conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order.
• Second, the conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity.
• Third, conservatives believe in what may be called the principle of prescription.
• Fourth, conservatives are guided by their principle of prudence.
• Fifth, conservatives pay attention to the principle of variety.
• Sixth, conservatives are chastened by their principle of imperfectability.
• Seventh, conservatives are persuaded that freedom and property are closely linked.
• Eighth, conservatives uphold voluntary community, quite as they oppose involuntary collectivism.
• Ninth, the conservative perceives the need for prudent restraints upon power and upon human passions.
• Tenth, the thinking conservative understands that permanence and change must be recognized and reconciled in a vigorous society.

[Kman]

Conservatism sux and so does progressivism, you should believe in things because they are correct, not because they are old or new.

[Buzz62]

Conservatism sux and so does progressivism, you should believe in things because they are correct, not because they are old or new.

Yet anarchy is chaotic.
Is that what you would have Kman?
Chaos?

[Daktoria]

Conservatism sux and so does progressivism, you should believe in things because they are correct, not because they are old or new.

It's not about being old or new.

It's about being personal.

Progressivism isn't conservatism in the slightest sense either. It professionally institutionalizes people instead of engaging organic society.

[Wolfman]

Conservatism sux and so does progressivism, you should believe in things because they are correct, not because they are old or new.

A Burkean/Traditional Conservative (such as myself and Russell Kirk) do not take the position that what is old is good, that is a Paleoconservative or a Neoconservative. A Burkean/Traditional Conservative is happy to accept change and believe that it is inevitable. What a Burkean/Traditional Conservative wants is to evolve from where we are to where we are going, instead of an instant revolution since our society has evolved to where it is for a reason, and an instant and significant overhaul could devastate society. Eisenhower, a Burkean, said something to the effect of "evolution over revolution" in this regard.

[mikema63]

This thread has not gone well, Plutus perhaps you would like to open a thread about libertariansism specifically, it would be better to discuss away from the noise.

[Daktoria]

A Burkean/Traditional Conservative (such as myself and Russell Kirk) do not take the position that what is old is good, that is a Paleoconservative or a Neoconservative. A Burkean/Traditional Conservative is happy to accept change and believe that it is inevitable. What a Burkean/Traditional Conservative wants is to evolve from where we are to where we are going, instead of an instant revolution since our society has evolved to where it is for a reason, and an instant and significant overhaul could devastate society. Eisenhower, a Burkean, said something to the effect of "evolution over revolution" in this regard.

That's not necessarily the case.

Traditional conservatism has two veins. The chronological vein is closer to religious conservatism in that it believes what's right because "the ancient good book says".

However, you also have an organic vein that recognizes what's right because people participated together. Some religious conservatives fit here also because they recognize the celebration of ceremony to be a community building activity.

Russell Kirk recognize the double role of religion in preserving culture here:

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/a ... 6-01-005-f

To understand these words “civilization” and “culture,” the best book to read is T. S. Eliot’s slim volume Notes Towards the Definition of Culture, published forty-four years ago.

Once upon a time I commended that book to President Nixon, in a private discussion of modern disorders, as the one book which he ought to read for guidance in his high office. Man is the only creature possessing culture, as distinguished from instinct; and if culture is effaced, so is the distinction between man and the brutes that perish. “Art is man’s nature,” in Edmund Burke’s phrase; and if the human arts, or culture, cease to be, then human nature ceases to be.

From what source did humankind’s many cultures arise? Why, from cults. A cult is a joining together for worship—that is, the attempt of people to commune with a transcendent power. It is from association in the cult, the body of worshippers, that human community grows. This basic truth has been expounded in recent decades by such eminent historians as Christopher Dawson, Eric Voegelin, and Arnold Toynbee.

Once people are joined in a cult, cooperation in many other things becomes possible. Common defense, irrigation, systematic agriculture, architecture, the visual arts, music, the more intricate crafts, economic production and distribution, courts and government—all these aspects of a culture arise gradually from the cult, the religious tie.

[Preston Cole]

Let me save both of you a very large headache. Plutus Aurelius seems to be some kind of Left Wing/Liberal. Kman however, is a National Anarchist. So, yes, he is that niave. He is also that insane, and that much of an anti-empiricist.

The fuck are you on about? National Anarchism has nothing to do with Kman's libertarianism.

[Daktoria]

Kman has oddball racialist comments to make here and there, and he has a quirky interpretation of self-defense.

N-A is strange enough, so it wouldn't be much if any a stretch to include him with it.

Anyway, where'd Pluto the dog go? It seems he scurried away.

[quetzalcoatl]

Just curious, but how far do wages have to drop before the alleged labor clearing rate is achieved? I only ask because real wages have declined consistently for decades, and rather sharply in the past half decade.

Median earnings male workers:



Employment rate:



If there were a dime's worth of truth in the labor clearing rate hypothesis, we would be at full employment right now.

If there is any correlation between employment rates and wages, it certainly doesn't show up in the real data. So where is the market clearing mechanism with regard to wage rates? Can anybody show its actual existence in the real world?

[Daktoria]

Wages have to drop until people stop hypercompeting and actually talk with each other about participating in the marketplace.

Like I just cited to Wolfman, civilization is art. If people insist on doing menial labor instead, they deserve to get paid less for being uncivil.

[Wolfman]

The fuck are you on about? National Anarchism has nothing to do with Kman's libertarianism.

Racism + Anarchism ~ National Anarchism. Racism + Anarchism + race war rhetoric = National Anarchism. Kman has never specifically talked about race war, but has hinted indirectly at the idea, and will probably be talking about it in earnest soon enough.

[SecretSquirrel]

Kman are these allegations true or are they just slander?

[quetzalcoatl]

OhOh...here we go again.

The whole world is nuts and ultra-right-wingnutz are the only sane ones left.
Quetzalcoatl, your "hitlist" is nonsense.
Want me to prove it?

Tell us all how you plan to refuse Social Security when you retire.

Have a warm and fuzzy day Sir...

My irony is perhaps too subtle. I'm not a conservative, nor do I advocate "reforming" Social Security, at least in the GOP sense.