General [M]ayhem

General [M]ayhem (http://www.genmay.com/index.php)
-   The Pit (http://www.genmay.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   US Conservativism - official stance of biggoted idiots and bible thumpers (http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=840371)

[H]ard|On 04-13-2012 09:23 PM

US Conservativism - official stance of biggoted idiots and bible thumpers
 
Let's take a look at what it is by definition. Read it and tell me if there's anything in there you actually consider relevant, important and necessary for today's economy, society and way of living.


[QUOTE=Conservatism Wiki]
Conservatism in the United States has played an important role in American politics since the 1950s.[1] Historian Gregory Schneider identifies several constants in American conservatism: respect for tradition, support of republicanism, "the rule of law and the Christian religion", and a defense of "Western civilization from the challenges of modernist culture and totalitarian governments."[2] The history of American conservatism has been marked by tensions and competing ideologies. Economic conservatives and libertarians favor small government, low taxes, limited regulation, and free enterprise. Social conservatives see traditional social values as threatened by secularism, so they support school prayer and oppose abortion and the legalization of same-sex marriage.[3] Neoconservatives want to expand American ideals throughout the world and show a strong support for Israel.[4] Paleoconservatives, in opposition to multiculturalism, press for restrictions on immigration.[5] Most conservatives prefer Republicans over Democrats, and most factions favor a strong foreign policy, a strong military, and strong support for Israel. The conservative movement of the 1950s attempted to bring together these divergent strands, stressing the need for unity to prevent the spread of "Godless Communism".[6][/QUOTE]


[B]-The rule of law and christian religion:[/B] Law is law, why does one party get to claim enforcing the law? Christians can go fuck themselves, as it's just one of many religions: keep it out of government.

[B]-Defense against challenges of modern culture:[/B] Like women driving cars or wearing short skirts? What the fuck does that mean? I really don't buy the argument that when societal norms change it's always for the worse. Because it isn't.

[B]-Supporting school prayer and opposing abortion[/B] is pure nonsense based on nothing.

[B]-Spreading our ways all over the world[/B] - sure like Hitler, Napoleon or Ghengis Khan.

[B]-Supporting Israel [/B]:rolleyes: - how, or why the fuck is that even in there?

[B]-Opposition to multiculturalism[/B] - directly against the roots of this country, basically a euphemism for racism.

[B]-Small government, low taxes and no regulation: [/B]We had that. It was called the wild west. You could shoot anyone you want, sell anything you want, claim it would do anything you want and not pay any income tax. Interesting how far this country came since then. I suppose the ultimate small government would be having a single King.

Now even if that stuff sounds good to you on paper keep in mind it's all babble. Creating more agencies to soak up tax dollars like department of Homeland Security which now employs more than two million people is basically doing exactly the opposite. Between the CIA, FBI, various military branches and everything else I really don't feel any safer. Deregulating the banks under Reagan lead to a multitude of bad loans and eventually a huge real estate bubble, foreclosures, and bankruptcies.




[B]Cliffs:[/B]

Conservatives stand for silly, irrelevant often bigoted/xenophobic issues. They hypocritically denounce government yet create more of it. They try to engineer society to fit a template based on a religious book written in 300 AD. The ultimate Conservative lifestyle seems to be in a cabin, deep within the woods where there are no taxes, no government and you can pray all day if you want. Or maybe somewhere in the mountains of Afghanistan.



Ps.

[URL="http://www.uploderx.net/x/140633/"][IMG]http://www.uploderx.net/dphrag/reaganomics-trickle-down593.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

Jamesgott 04-13-2012 09:25 PM

screw 3 year olds being NRA members...

My sperm are all NRA members. ALL OF THEM

[H]ard|On 04-13-2012 09:29 PM

[QUOTE=Jamesgott;25008192]screw 3 year olds being NRA members...

My sperm are all NRA members. ALL OF THEM[/QUOTE]

:cool:


Did they each get the little round sticker? My dad has one on his truck... yet he's not a republican ;)

Colicious 04-13-2012 09:34 PM

:doublepicardandtheotherguyfacepalm:

[H]ard|On 04-13-2012 09:39 PM

[QUOTE=Colicious;25008199]:doublepicardandtheotherguyfacepalm:[/QUOTE]

:doublenothingtosaybecauseitstrue: huh? :p

I expect quite a few empty posts with some occasional bad language - at least you kept clear of that.

Gibonius 04-13-2012 09:40 PM

[QUOTE='[H]ard|On;25008190']
[B]-Small government, low taxes and no regulation: [/B]We had that. It was called the wild west. You could shoot anyone you want, sell anything you want, claim it would do anything you want and not pay any income tax. Interesting how far this country came since then. I suppose the ultimate small government would be having a single King.[/quote]
Well
It said "limited" regulation, which is not such a terrible goal. We have a lot of really stupid regulations which are basically payoffs to big businesses. Modern Republicans, though, are seemingly against regulation on principle without really considering the benefit of said regulations. Smart regulation ought to be our goal, but limited regulation is probably better than corrupt or poorly applied regulation (see: many climate change proposals).

Having a King wouldn't be "small government" at all unless said King had extremely limited powers.

[quote]
Now even if that stuff sounds good to you on paper keep in mind it's all babble. Creating more agencies to soak up tax dollars like department of Homeland Security which now employs more than two million people is basically doing exactly the opposite. Between the CIA, FBI, various military branches and everything else I really don't feel any safer. Deregulating the banks under Reagan lead to a multitude of bad loans and eventually a huge real estate bubble, foreclosures, and bankruptcies.
[/QUOTE]
A lot of deregulation happened under Clinton too, signed off on Republican Congress bills.

Modern Republicans haven't been so conservative. But they can get away with it because of our goofy two party system.

Colicious 04-13-2012 09:46 PM

[QUOTE='[H]ard|On;25008204']:doublenothingtosaybecauseitstrue: huh? :p

I expect quite a few empty posts with some occasional bad language - at least you kept clear of that.[/QUOTE]

im currently enjoying a beer right now

basically, as a republican, i'm in a minority. im in a minority in the fact that im pretty much an athiest, and i dont give any more shit about isreal more than any other of our allies. im basically a libertarian, but theyre usually labeled as cooks

the only thing i can fight you on is about small govt

[H]ard|On 04-13-2012 09:48 PM

[QUOTE=Gibonius;25008205]Well
It said "limited" regulation, which is not such a terrible goal. We have a lot of really stupid regulations which are basically payoffs to big businesses. Modern Republicans, though, are seemingly against regulation on principle without really considering the benefit of said regulations. Smart regulation ought to be our goal, but limited regulation is probably better than corrupt or poorly applied regulation (see: many climate change proposals).[/quote]

Agreed. Humans set rules in everything from sports to business and criminal law. For a reason! It's better to regulate the regulation (something conservatives find humorous) than to blindly denounce it all. That shit sounds good from a podium but doesn't work IRL.

I like having running water i can drink without getting the runs, like you might in Mexico. Voila beneficial regulation.

[quote]
Having a King wouldn't be "small government" at all unless said King had extremely limited powers. [/quote]

Purely size wise it creates a small government without a congress or any special committees. I was trying to show that small physically isn't small politically.

For example if you deduce that "small" means limited in political power, what were the "Patriot Acts" all about? :wtf: Like I said it's all babble and catch phrases.

[quote]
A lot of deregulation happened under Clinton too, signed off on Republican Congress bills.

Modern Republicans haven't been so conservative. But they can get away with it because of our goofy two party system.[/QUOTE]

Point taken, each side ends up compromising to capture more votes.

[H]ard|On 04-13-2012 09:52 PM

[QUOTE=Colicious;25008209]im currently enjoying a beer right now

basically, as a republican, i'm in a minority. im in a minority in the fact that im pretty much an athiest, and i dont give any more shit about isreal more than any other of our allies. im basically a libertarian, but theyre usually labeled as cooks

the only thing i can fight you on is about small govt[/QUOTE]

That's fair, see my other post above.

My main gripe about their cry for small government is that they advertise it as the ultimate measure of efficiency.... and then enact more powers for themselves, and physically expand the government by creating new agencies.

Apparently "small government" means shutting down Planned Parenthood :rolleyes:

Colicious 04-13-2012 09:57 PM

[QUOTE='[H]ard|On;25008222']That's fair, see my other post above.

My main gripe about their cry for small government is that they advertise it as the ultimate measure of efficiency.... and then enact more powers for themselves, and physically expand the government by creating new agencies.

Apparently "small government" means shutting down Planned Parenthood :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

i agree. i dont like it either

small govt should mean small govt, whether its democratic or republican

edplayer 04-14-2012 01:13 PM

So what do you think liberal or liberalism stands for?


I consider myself liberal but I think most people either don't know or don't agree upon its definition.

5ive 04-14-2012 01:16 PM

^An American conservative is a classical liberal, at least on economic issues

edplayer 04-14-2012 01:24 PM

[QUOTE=5ive;25008543]^An American conservative is a classical liberal, at least on economic issues[/QUOTE]


but what if one of their parents was an immigrant that studied Renaissance arts (assuming standard atmospheric pressure and temps)?

pyramid 04-14-2012 01:30 PM

What the guy credited with inventing "Reaganomics/Trickle Down" says now: [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/opinion/01stockman.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&sq=david%20stockman&st=cse&scp=1[/url]

Redrum 04-14-2012 01:57 PM

yeah, english, dutch, and french banding together to kill native americans and enslaving negros

real multiculturism there

this country was literally built on racism you moron


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2002-2015 CrowdGather, Inc.