Posted on 05/15/2003 8:29:22 PM PDT by no_gods_no_masters
redrock
Wrong, *bzzzzzzzt*. Politics on the right today is revolutionary, and has been since President Reagan took office.
These (tax cuts) represent a turnaround of almost a half-century of a course this country's been on and mark an end to the excessive growth in government bureaucracy, government spending, government taxing. --President Reagan on the largest tax cuts in history.That "conservative" politics is revolutionary is lost on the left, which thinks it owns the war against poverty, racisim, and all other injustices. Each time society had to change, progressive thinking was required. I'm here to say that the right in this country now holds that baton of "forward thinking." The left dropped it years ago when they asked us to lose the Vietnam war.
Sure the right is asking Americans to "look back" at their heritage, but more than that, the right is urging Americans to look forward again, to build and develop, not to settle into the depths of self-loathing pessimism.
Now you got that one right, the lefties hijacked the word "liberal" years ago, but they are about as liberal as Hitler and Stalin.
Nope. Conservatism is to adhere to the constitution- that is most certainly NOT done by adhering to the status quo, as our Republic has strayed from its Constitution owing to years of corrosive, self-centered "three wolves and a sheep democracy" socialist politics.
Anything outside of the "normal" is to be destroyed, looked down upon, or forgotten.
Conservatives are conservationists. We don't destroy. We reform. I get the impression that you are FEELING lonely and alienated, like some sort of outcast, and you have probably tried to get the attention you craved by behaving outlandishly. Unfortunately for you, you discovered that while you did get attention, you didn't get respect, and this has left you even more alienated, if not bitter. So rather than consider your own behavior a potential suspect in your misery, you blame America and conservatives for your alienation and come to FreeRepublic, of all places, still seeking attention, even if it were only a zot.
Not all cultures are equal, as you seem to believe. Not all are even compatible. A culture which believes in human sacrifice is not a culture we want to spread or add to our own, for example, even if we find their weaving skills to be artistically admirable. A culture which believes in molesting children is not one worth considering. A culture which still believes in slavery is likewise not worthy, even if their metalsmithing is excellent. A culture where work is not valued is likely to stagnate and eventually will be overcome by others- do we want to emulate that? Some cultures are simply not as innovative as others, fail to exploit their opportunities in commerce or fail to provide for an effective defense and these will not endure. Some otherwise superior cultures have fallen to inferior ones for lack of good defense or lack of resources. Even a lack of ports and navigable rivers can determine if a culture will ever advance and survive. One thing is for certain- cultures are not equal, morally or practically.
The only culture that is acceptable to Americans is the one which makes us American; the one with the inalienable individual liberties as described in the Constitution at its core. Those cultures which subvert individual liberties such as property rights and speech in the interests of coercive and oppressive group rights ideology are dangerous to the individual and to any free society, and are rightly rejected.
All others are unimportant and wrong.
Obviously ideologies such as international communism are by definition a threat to a free nation. You're free to express your opinion. You are free to seek out the best culture in the world and move in if they will take you. We just object when people try to impose wealth redistribution or restrict our property rights and other freedoms such as religious liberty and free speeech, or try to undermine the foundations of our freedoms.
Look at the obviously pro-capitalist stance taken by most, if not all, conservatives. It is the viewpoint that only what is good for me and my own is good and f**k the rest.
No, it's human nature which has the viewpoint that only what is good for me and my own is good and "**** the rest." And human nature is socialism/communism, ideologies where the inate greedy desires of individuals to use the power of government to steal the property of others for themselves. Of all economic systems, capitalism is the one which recognizes that human nature exists, that men are by nature capable of evil, and balances this tendency with opportunity and freedom. Capitalism enables individuals to harness human nature and in the process, create opportunity for others. But it is an economic system, not a political system. It function best with separation of powers and rule of law to prevent mob rule.
Well, if your society continues to crumble because the power is concentrated for your own good, then it is not in the end good for your own ends.
Society is not crumbling, though socialists are quite corrosive and we have them aplenty.
Rather, the collective raising of the foundation of society is what is needed,
Capitalists in constitutional republics raise more and better foundations in their societies than could ever be done by collectivists, who spend most of their time preventing, regulating and punishing people for building anything of value. Collectivist societies cannot tolerate individuals or groups of individuals thinking independently, much less taking action independently. The lack of independent thought in collectivist societies inevitably results in increased dependence on a central figure at the top known as a dictator, whose absolute power will corrupt him or her and lead those around the dictator to feed him only that which he wants to hear. Centralized planning is thus inefficient, unresponsive, heavy handed, and except in quashing dissent, inept. It eventually collapses in ruin after sucking society dry and leaving the land devestated and pillaged.
not for the rich to get richer
What's wrong with the rich getting richer? In this society, not only do the rich get richer, but so do the middle class and the poor. This is a GOOD thing. Indeed, America has the richest poor people on earth- they would pass for rich in any collectivist society, unbelievably rich in Castro's Cuba, a nation where everyone would be far better off under capitalism.
or for people to seperate even more,
The only "separating" going on is from those who play the race game, preach class warfare, raise diversity as a golden calf, or demand unequal rights before the law based on color or ethnicity.
and thus the apparent alienation
There's that "alienation" word again. You seem to have personal issues to address, not national ones. Alienation is a liberal trait. They FEEL alienated about virtually everything, they think wealth is finite, they think that there's only one pie to split among everyone and no others can be made.
and complacent ignorance I've found in many conservative types.
Your ignorance is showing in your apparent love for failed economic systems and your cluelessness about what defines conservatism. Your condescending attitude will not make you appear more brilliant, although leftists seem to believe the tactic makes them more intimidating than they actually are.
Conservatives can obviously not make the connection between elitist class systems
Conservatives haven't been reduced to the whining, groveling, teat-sucking state of personal helplessness that characterizes the average American lefty.
You really should get a job, and pry yourelf from whatever silly make-work psuedo-academic pursuit you're wasting your student loan on. Judging from your words, you've probably never had a job, much less considered running your own business.
and the violence
You don't know what the meaning of violence is ... for an understanding of what violence is, read up on Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, Castro, FALN, Hamas, Hezbollah, PFLP, Abu Sayyaf, Abu Nidal, China, the PLO, the Red Army Faction, the Baader-Meinhof Gang, North Korea, etc...
and "moral" outrage that is about.
?
Awfully polite for a member of the left. But this is a perfect example of why the left is failing. They view all questions as academic questions without consequence to actual people.
To this poster, socialism and capitalism are essentially on equal footing and should both be considered as viable economic systems. It ignores the fact that one has never failed to improve the lives of people why the other has never succeeded. But results are of no consequence when asking academic questions.
Straw dog argument, beginning with an unsupported assertion that environment is the largest contributor to the development of the individual. Individuals are themselves the largest contributor. We're each endowed with the most incredible brains even before we are born and these brains can be used to modify our environment or to control how we learn from what we experience and how we respond physically or mentally. Each individual has the means and opportunity to conquer ALL other environmental factors of their own free will. Good parenting helps, and a strong foundation in God provides extra armor against the temptation to let human nature govern, but each of us no matter our origins and no matter our environment has the ability to choose good over evil. Whether individuals choose to strive continually to be good, or choose to return to the right path if they stray, is entirely up to them. One thing is for cerrtain though : society cannot fabricate, breed, or raise better or good people, nor can it reform the bad. Only the individual can choose what course he will take through life.
Get your communist-utopian idea of a "perfectable human being" out of your system. Communism believes that by changing the environment- through force if need be- that a government can create better citizens. That's garbage, and it has historically resulted in millions and millions of dead people, and the torture and systematic attempt to dehumanize millions and millions more.
Then you say they should make tougher laws
No, we say we should ENFORCE the laws we have. We already have too many laws. .
and they should be thrown in a cage
You know there are penalties for every action you do. And rightly so. Take care not to harm your fellow human beings and respect the laws at least until you can change them and you will not run afoul of the law. But if you do, accept the responsibility for what you do, serve your time, and then don't do it again and you shall do fine. You always had the choice to abide by the law or not. Why shouldn't you be held responsible for your acts according to the law and constitution? You are free to leave this country if the laws don't suit you, and as a part of society you have the right to express your opinions and through the system we have established, make changes along with the consent of your fellow citizens, but you do not have the right to violate the law on a whim, much less expect ot get patted on the back or coddled in spite of your criminal behavior.
so we can continue to ignore them
There's your "personal issues" bubbling to the surface again....
Citizens do NOT have a right to be the center of anyone's attention. You are capable of, and expected to be, a good and law-abiding human being even when you are ignored. Human beings are the highest form of life on earth- all human beings are fully capable of good behavior throughout their lives. Some just don't care to excercise this capability full time, some don't care to excercise it any time, and others try to make excuses for bad choices for fear of having to admit that man really has free will, something certain folks with wanna-be-elite socialist-communist syndrome can't admit without terminating their utopian illusions.
I don't have sudden urges to kill people or break the law when I am ignored. Do you?
and pretend they are sub-human
Don't be silly. We know they are human- very human indeed. And we knnow that humans are higher than all other forms of life on earth, even though people sometimes choose not to act the part. As a society steeped in the Judeo-Christian faith, those among us who are religious know that through faith all men can be redeemed. It's a personal choice to ask for redemption. That doesn't mean we can avoid punishment on earth for our actions, (if anything it involves us admitting to what wrongs we have done even if it means punishment under our nation's laws and putting our faith in God for what comes after) but it clearly illustrates that all human beings are of great value to their creator, and so, should also be of great value to us. Our founding fathers' concept of inalienable rights granted to us by a Creator has placed our humanity above government's ability to define or diminish.
It's ideologies like Communism and humanism believe that men are no higher animals. Thus they are able to believe in the perfectability of man by the hand of mere men, by government, which is another way of saying that some men are inferior to others which have been "certified human" by government "reeducation."
I wonder what gives you the impression that conservatives do not wish to change the things they view as wrong with the government? I'm not sure how long you've lurked here, however I can assure you that those days when conservatives (especially those found in this forum) are pleased with the status quo are rare indeed. Why this very forum was founded in an effort to roll back decades of largess, waste and incompetency perpitrated by our elected government representatives.
Close. I think it means “From each according to his ability to each according to his ability.” Which is sort of the same thing given the author of the work you reference.
or at the very least those we need to climb over and ignore to get in our wonderful positions.
You don't need to "climb over" when you build your own ladders. And when you are on your ladder and someone ties to climb over you, you have the means to shake your ladder until they get their butt back on their own. It's when we take away people's ladders and force them onto one of government manufacture that you have problems, and not just from people clambering over each other, but also because no one will maintain a ladder they do not own. It decays and becomes unstable, and collapses.
Build your own ladder. If you wish, you can share it with others, and if others wish, they will share theirs with you. But you have no right to use government to coerce others to build ladders for you, or pay for your ladder, or share their ladders with you, or help you climb, or pay attention to you when you sit on the bottom rung waiting for others to do your work.
Rightist politics is also very privy to negative discrimination against races, religions,
Hitler was a national socialist, and Stalin was an international socialist. Some call socialism "rightwing," and communism "leftwing" but they're not, as the number-line view of politics is total BS and terribly misleading. Neither were conservative constitutionalist "rightwingers" like the folks here- rather, they were as far from that at they could get. Neither were capitalists. Both were intolerant of race and religion. The Arab nationalists who are steeped in Marxism and Nazism, like secular Palestinian terrorists, are also racist. Castro is a communist racist dictator- ever seen a blacks in his highest level of government? Saddam Hussein, same problem. Very tribal, group rights kind of guy- meaning that not all groups were OK and the same went for individuals. The cult of personality is another telltale sign of intolerance common to extreme socialism whether you want to call it right or left. But it is seldom if ever seen in capitalist economies where the bulk of society is middle class and so, not easily impressed with displays of power. Intolerance can appear in capitalist societies but it seldom lasts long as capitalist societies admire capabile people, and admire most those who achieve against great odds.
Intolerance of both race and religion is the norm for those who don't adhere to the ideas of individual liberty but instead believe that they can isolate their people, reeducate them, purify them through purges, and breed themselves to victory.
That's why I call y'all lefties, stupid lefties, brain-dead lefties, or rabid lefties instead.
But what difference does it make, in the end? You all believe in subverting the rights of the individual to some imagined right of the collective. The only individual rights you believe in are the rights to "free" stuff, sexual licensce, and the freedom to whine endlessly about conservatives (you already have the last two, but since you cannot legislate approval of same from free people, you imagine you are being oppressed). That doesn't cut it for people who know about real freedom. And we don't appreciate your eforts to take that away from us.
I'm hoping that the godless/alienated one's utopian idealism is a sign of ignorance, which can be fixed, and not some terminal disease picked up from Chomski. :o)
Left-wing conservatives are the scariest of all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.