Conservatisms Last Days (CNN, solution, dollar, financial)

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by KevK

You are right in that neo conservatism is not limited to foreign policy but to a whole host of domestic policies. If you look at old line conservatism, it was generally "small government" non interventional types that were conservatives. People of the type in the Charlie Daniels song "Long Haired Country Boy". They certainly were not into the war on drugs, the war in Iraq, bloated budgets, deficits and the religious nutcases who want to take away their beer and Hustler Magazine! Real old line conservatives hate that kind of government as much as they do liberalism. Old line conservatives also have a very deep love of "private property rights" as they see it. Neo cons do not have any such respect and the split was magnified by the US Supreme Court in the Kelo decision which infuriated old line conservatives but which is generally supported by neo conservatives.

You have absolutely no freaking idea what you are talking about.

Neo-conservatives are members of the Social Democrat Party.

The Social Democrat Party was formerly known as the Young People's Socialist League/Social Democrat Party of America. They are the former Welfare Liberals that stalked the halls of various government agencies.

Neo-conservatives are Neo-Marxists and still very liberal on many issues.

You should know have known that because you should have known that Irving Kristol, the godfather of neo-conservatism said, "Capitalism deserves two cheers, but not three."

You would have known that had you bothered to read Two Cheers for Capitalism by Irving Kristol (Basic Books, New York, 1978)

You would have also known that had you read Daniel Bell's The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (Basic Books, New York, 1976)

It is very obvious from the dates that neo-conservatism pre-dates George Bush, so I hope I didn't embarrass the jerks who continue to propagandize and spread disinformation by insisting that neo-conservatism is a Bush invention.

[laysayfair]

Originally Posted by Mircea

You have absolutely no freaking idea what you are talking about.

Neo-conservatives are members of the Social Democrat Party.

The Social Democrat Party was formerly known as the Young People's Socialist League/Social Democrat Party of America. They are the former Welfare Liberals that stalked the halls of various government agencies.

Neo-conservatives are Neo-Marxists and still very liberal on many issues.

You should know have known that because you should have known that Irving Kristol, the godfather of neo-conservatism said, "Capitalism deserves two cheers, but not three."

You would have known that had you bothered to read Two Cheers for Capitalism by Irving Kristol (Basic Books, New York, 1978)

You would have also known that had you read Daniel Bell's The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (Basic Books, New York, 1976)

It is very obvious from the dates that neo-conservatism pre-dates George Bush, so I hope I didn't embarrass the jerks who continue to propagandize and spread disinformation by insisting that neo-conservatism is a Bush invention.

Thanks Miracea! I don't know that much about neo-conservatives so I was actually starting to buy into some of this "disinformation" because the people spouting it were doing it with such authority. Thanks for the book references and for stopping the propagandizing on this subject.

[Frankie117]

Originally Posted by laysayfair

Thanks Miracea! I don't know that much about neo-conservatives so I was actually starting to buy into some of this "disinformation" because the people spouting it were doing it with such authority. Thanks for the book references and for stopping the propagandizing on this subject.

If only the rest of the country knew the 'true' meaning of neo-conservatives, and not what the media has them believe.

[harborlady]

Originally Posted by Frankie117

If only the rest of the country knew the 'true' meaning of neo-conservatives, and not what the media has them believe.

frankie, please do define it. I think this is an appropriate thread to post that on- I'm listening. Problem I think you'll encounter (even prior to your typing) is that half dozen people will come foward to disagree with your interpretation based on some arguing lack of authority. Wikkipedia is currently being challenged, as example.

Hammering out definitive answers won't be easy. Please make the effort.

[Frankie117]

Originally Posted by harborlady

frankie, please do define it. I think this is an appropriate thread to post that on- I'm listening. Problem I think you'll encounter (even prior to your typing) is that half dozen people will come foward to disagree with your interpretation based on some arguing lack of authority. Wikkipedia is currently being challenged, as example.

Hammering out definitive answers won't be easy. Please make the effort.

It was explained in post #181, I was only reinforcing that post. Yes I know several people always post disagreeing no matter if you're right or wrong, but that's just how the political forum here on City-Data is (and any site for that matter).

Anyways, I've actually given up on trying to reply to every single post, it's hard enough to keep track of because 10 pages pop up between my visits to the site. So let people disagree with me (or anyone else), but I won't be there to give them the response they hope for.

[Shizzles]

Originally Posted by harborlady

Personally, I am a centrist. I believe both sides of the coin have validity, and when taken to any extreme we all suffer. We've all suffered enough from conservativism badly ministered.

Bush and the NeoCons are National Socialists, not capitalists. Read up on the term for more details. They do not represent the free market.

Hopefully, the liberals will do a better job this next full swing of the pendulum.

Doubt it.

I know exactly what you mean about that entitlement attitude creating sickness. The programs were not meant to be a full time lifestyle, but you can't deny there are forces out there that really want to KEEP you in that hole. I saw it growing up when people tried to get off the rolls by getting a job and being punished for taking initiative. Poverty is very profitable, and I don't mean to the poor. Please consider looking for evidence of that in your experiences to be fair about the context.

You're absolutley right, it is very profitable. It's profitable to the politicans who promise hand outs. The non-profits and government agencies. To race-pimps and religous zealouts. And it is profitable to the extent of controlling society.

I think the best designed social programs are ones that teach a man to fish, then send him on his way to continue the upward trend. Denying people those kinds of programs hurts everyone. Social security is not charity. It IS an entitlement because it was paid for, just like my 401k plan. The only people to my knowledge who got freebies were aging cuban refugees who didn't have enough working years in USA.

You're absolutley right. However, the Liberals will never go for that, becuase it's the dependace that keeps the votes coming.

That was a special case.
I think it's also a mistake to ignore other forms of governing when it comes to specific issues. For example, our military is currently operating under a communist arrangement. It works quite well for them.

Becuase communism only works well when there is a unifying goal. In the military's case, it's to defend our nation. America with thousands of different cultures, views, beliefs and ideologies doesn't have that. That's what makes us special. The Nazis had a unifying goal, it was hate. In the US, what everyone's "goal" is is unique to the individual. That's why people come here.

I think they'd agree if not for the dwindling benefits packages and the constant raises in acceptable retirement age.
Schools are modeled after socialism. That works only if the standards are consistent. They aren't. They won't be. As long as schools are funded through property taxes where one community of wealth has surplus and another community of poverty has deficits, it will never be standard. That doesn't mean we should abolish public schools. Easier to fix than to disassemble, and risk everyones standard of living going down. When it all gets down to brass tacks, the whole country benefits when everyones standard of living is raised. Even the wealthy.

Equal oppertunity does not guarentee equal outcome. People need to get over the fact that chances are, someone out there will make more than them. Not all beings are created equal. Now, everyone who works hard deserves to have a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs, that I agree on. But most Americans have that already.

Most of the hate and animosity in this country and in the West in general stemms from people being greedy and envious. I may want Steve Jobs or Donald trumps lifestyle, but I do hate them for having it over me. I appluad them. Liberals hate anyone who has more than them, full stop.

Liberalism as presented by fake media outlets is equated with irresponsibility.

Let's face it, the 60s opened up a whole new way of behaving that is frankly very "childish". Now, I'm not an old coot whose lamenting the loss of "American Values", but even I as a generation Y adult can see than some stuff just goes too far.

When you look at the true meaning of the word, nothing could be further. Some groups of liberals take it one step further and are altruistic. The version of liberals most closely identified with what you detest are called social liberals. There would be no social liberals if oppression were extinct in this nation. I disagree with how they go about many things, but I see the neccessity for their existence in the political spectrum. They aren't always wrong.

Sometimes they prepetuate it to justify their existance. Just like the NeoCons prop up the Suadis terror funds to justify their's...

Look at how everything on this forum all of the sudden became about "race". Let's face it, as long as people on the Left see anti-white resentment as a vote generator, we as a nation will never heal.

I won't define conservative, because you've assigned it a positive meaning in your mind already. But conservatives aren't always right. Sometimes they're clerics oppressing people, keeping them prostrate indefinately.

I never said conservatism was the end all be all. However, there is far more ideological diversity on the right than on the left. Not to mention, they tend to accept me more...

Sometimes they're hoarders. Sometimes, on corporate scales, they fearfully prevent growth and innovation to protect wealth that was earned on growth and innovation. Monopolies are judiciously guarded against in america for a reason.

That's not conservatism. That's fascism. Which is a form of socialism.

Like it or not, you and I are dependant on all of civilization in order to function in it- a vast tapestry of people you'll never meet doing services for you, working all night to move the oil, keep the power on, unload the trucks for the store you will shop at today. We all need one another. Unless you're a self sustaining hermit on a hill and are yanking out the internet today. It's not inherently bad, but like anything else in life it can be used badly. Discernment my longest life lesson.

Civilzation has been growing and evolving since the dawn of time. I would argue the post-war period has been one of regression in some prespects.

My congratulations to you on taking control of your own destiny. The fruits of responsibility are freedom.

Thank you. At the end of the day, we all have the same goals. Just different ways of reaching them.

[rlchurch]

The Republican Party embraced the neo-conservative mantra stating with Reagan's administration. The chickens have come home to roost and it's way to late to start claiming they aren't you. Stick a fork in the Republican Party; it's done.

[laysayfair]

Originally Posted by Shizzles

Bush and the NeoCons are National Socialists, not capitalists. Read up on the term for more details. They do not represent the free market.



Doubt it.




You're absolutley right, it is very profitable. It's profitable to the politicans who promise hand outs. The non-profits and government agencies. To race-pimps and religous zealouts. And it is profitable to the extent of controlling society.




You're absolutley right. However, the Liberals will never go for that, becuase it's the dependace that keeps the votes coming.



Becuase communism only works well when there is a unifying goal. In the military's case, it's to defend our nation. America with thousands of different cultures, views, beliefs and ideologies doesn't have that. That's what makes us special. The Nazis had a unifying goal, it was hate. In the US, what everyone's "goal" is is unique to the individual. That's why people come here.




Equal oppertunity does not guarentee equal outcome. People need to get over the fact that chances are, someone out there will make more than them. Not all beings are created equal. Now, everyone who works hard deserves to have a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs, that I agree on. But most Americans have that already.

Most of the hate and animosity in this country and in the West in general stemms from people being greedy and envious. I may want Steve Jobs or Donald trumps lifestyle, but I do hate them for having it over me. I appluad them. Liberals hate anyone who has more than them, full stop.



Let's face it, the 60s opened up a whole new way of behaving that is frankly very "childish". Now, I'm not an old coot whose lamenting the loss of "American Values", but even I as a generation Y adult can see than some stuff just goes too far.






Sometimes they prepetuate it to justify their existance. Just like the NeoCons prop up the Suadis terror funds to justify their's...

Look at how everything on this forum all of the sudden became about "race". Let's face it, as long as people on the Left see anti-white resentment as a vote generator, we as a nation will never heal.



I never said conservatism was the end all be all. However, there is far more ideological diversity on the right than on the left. Not to mention, they tend to accept me more...



That's not conservatism. That's fascism. Which is a form of socialism.



Civilzation has been growing and evolving since the dawn of time. I would argue the post-war period has been one of regression in some prespects.





Thank you. At the end of the day, we all have the same goals. Just different ways of reaching them.

Shizzles, you are amazing! How well-read you must be to have gone from "where you were" to "where you are". Did you ever think of writing a
book? Your way of expressing yourself and your clarity and insistence on defining terms is so impressive. I don't mean to gush but even you must know how rarely one comes upon someone like you, from your background with your understanding and your ability to express it. Please write a book. (They won't let me rep you again...)

[evilnewbie]

Shizzles is correct. The biggest problem now IS our socialist attitudes that has been prevalent for some time... Socialism isn't in any one particular party... it can be found in neo-conservatives like Bush and McCain as well as liberals in Hilliary and Obama... apparently everyone is looking for a handout that can help them live on borrowed money. The people that earn their money are trying to protect it from other people's hands. I keep hearing that everyone deserves a piece of your income because we live in a "society"... Is that the society that you want? A society that steals from others? Or would you prefer a society that helps one another without stealing from them. Big business would rather you steal, more money for them when more people buy... its no wonder big business loves entitlements, it leaves more money to circulate into their coffers... and liberals love to give it to them and saying they are doing it for the "people"... in the end, does anyone getting entitlements KEEP that money? No? Money well spent then? No? Social security is NOT like a 401k plan, it is an INSURANCE plan... the government could say you get $1 from all your mandatory "donations"... its not even a good insurance plan... you probably end up with MORE money if there was a mandatory 401k plan instead of social security... but then government would have less money to use and maintain their power over you... why would anyone want to endanger that?

[harborlady]

Shizz, I'm not going to quote all that convo because as it is I'm already a long poster and I don't mean to hog the microphone.
Fascism is in direct opposition to socialism, as per mussolini.

Bush has never declared himself a national socialist. That definition is associated with nazi's when googled. If you think he's a nazi, ok, I'll say nolo contendere as an adjective. Fact: Bush declared himself a republican. Beyond that, there is no other formal affiliation, and the flavor of the year definition of republican is whatever republicans say, but that doesn't help the rest of us out.

The link below is an interesting read. Over 200 yrs the 2 parties have occillated in mission statement 180 degrees more than once. Who you affiliate with is not something I'm trying to change, but trying to get people to see definitions clearly. Conservative & Liberal has lost its meaning muddled in with democrat, republican, socialist, communist, facist... down the line.
American Political Parties

Here is the comprehensive list of american poli parties. I had to chuckle at the anti-nebraska party!
List of political parties in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Political parties and ideologies are like some wild assed graphic equalizer with 5,000 buttons and knobs for each issue. I keep trying to tweak it so it's just right, then they relabel the knobs by changing definitions on me. Gotta keep my ear keen.

Personal note- Hate of something can be used as fuel only so long. Someday I hope you'll get to forgive your mom to find a whole other level of freedom. Realizing she did the only thing she knew how can help get you there when you're ready. Good luck!