Why I Am Not a Conservative

[christman]

Anyone in here need an E-highfive?

 

[level.eleven]

I think its interesting that Glenn Beck has been pimping The Road to Serfdom for weeks and vaulted it to #6 on Amazon (26 weeks in top 100)

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/ref=pd_ts_zgc_b_books_mot1?pf_rd_p=475709271&pf_rd_s=right-3&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=283155&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0V88RSVS169MV0V6TWJX"]Amazon.com Books Bestsellers: The most popular items on Amazon.com. Updated hourly.[/ame]

It's interesting in seeing how the same author is being cast in this thread. Just a random observation, really. I wonder how many people are reading that book and are not digesting the message.

 

[shibumiseeker]

Yes, and the various polls we've had have confirmed this. What makes it seem heavily conservative is that we have a number of conservatives who fit the Furious Typer mold, and the volume and vehemence of their posts tends to outweigh that of the libertarian side.

Agreed. It's a variation of "proof by vigorous assertion." It's also the assumption that like attracts like.

So folks on the extreme end will often be the ones posting the most about those extremist topics because they assume most people agree with them, when in reality many of the folks who agree with them are the same ones again and again and the bulk majority of people who disagree with them really don't care to be drawn into exchanging walls of text when there are better things to do in life. This happens on both right and left leaning sites. Around here it gives the illusion that only conservatives support gun ownership while liberals are all vehemently anti gun. The reality is that among conservatives the majority who support gun rights isn't that far above 50% and among liberals the folks who support gun rights aren't that far below 50%. The overlap is far greater than the difference, but you won't tend to see that here because the vast majority of people on this site are here to talk about guns and stay out of the political discussions for the most part since it's like wrestling with a pig: you get dirty and the pig enjoys it. In the political discussions it tends to be the same 10-20 people who comprise the bulk of the discussions.

<edited to clarify>
I'm not really talking about folks who enjoy discussing things, though I am having a hard time clearly writing what I mean with the distinction. The folks who are here just to beat their political drum are the types of people I consider trolls.

 

[Fletch]

Some folks come here and rarely post anything beyond the politics section, or politically related threads and only vaguely tie them into gun politics. These are the trolls.

Dangit, now I'm a troll... In my defense, I hang out here the most because it's what I enjoy talking about.

 

[rambone]

I wrote this analysis several months ago. Maybe some of you would like to check it out.

The differences between a "conservative" and a "libertarian"


(Link fixed)

 

[shibumiseeker]

Dangit, now I'm a troll... In my defense, I hang out here the most because it's what I enjoy talking about.

I'm not really talking about folks who enjoy discussing things, though I am having a hard time clearly writing what I mean with the distinction. The folks who are here just to beat their political drum are the types of people I consider trolls.

 

[Fletch]

I wrote this analysis several months ago. Maybe some of you would like to check it out.

The differences between a "conservative" and a "libertarian"

Link seems broken.

 

[lashicoN]

For example, a liberal may say stay out of people's bedrooms, until it is their 12 year old daughter having sex with a 20 year old man. Then they want government intervention, and implementation of the death penalty. Conversely, a libertarian farmer will have distain for government intervention unless and until he needs it to save his farm. We all want outcomes that favor us.

I don't want to sound all high and mighty here, but I honestly don't want government intervention. I simply want to be left alone, for better or worse. Perhaps you're correct, if I were in a "can't help my self" situation, who knows, but I've seen what government does to help people, and I know I would just do better to simply help myself, alone.

It's funny that you say that, because I've read a tremendous amount of scholarship that suggests that even 50 years ago, the same debate was going on about the meaning of the word.

Furthermore, if a word you're using takes on a meaning totally contrary to its definition, wouldn't you agree that's an incorrect use of the word? The word "liberal" has the same root word as "liberty." Is stealing my money at gunpoint, "liberty"? Obviously not and we should rightly condemn anyone who calls that such.

The "leftist" comment illustrates another point in this essay, that there is no left and right.

Furthermore, I have never, not even once, seen a progressive democrat call himself a liberal. I have seen Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc., call these people liberals, but never the people themselves.

But if you can't stand the difference in wording, copy the document, use the replace function to replace "liberal" with "libertarian" and continue reading. While I do think it is important to have an understanding of what the words mean, it's not the real crux of the work.

If a dictionary cannot define terms or words, or we cannot use word history to decide what they mean, what defines the bounds of a word's use?

Many progressive tenets are completely opposite to the dictionary definition of liberalism. In Economics, we call free trade and other free market policies "liberalization." Are you telling me that protectionist policies and interventionist monetary/fiscal policies are now the liberal positions?

Additionally, most of the world, including our ally Great Britain, has a "liberal" party that is much like our libertarians. They call their progressive party what it is--labour! Germany is the same way.



And, since someone mentioned "true" conservatism, I'd ask you to define that as well. If this essay is correct, conservatism has no unifying philosophy and thus "true conservatism" is whatever is going on at the time. If conservatism really isn't a philosophy other than to put the brakes on the philosophy of progressives, there certainly aren't too many people left to defend freedom, especially when progressives and conservatives are at odds with liberals.

And I assure you, that if you read the article, you'll have some actual substantive criticism, because you're most of the way there, but you just have to read the material before you can engage in a debate about it, I'm sorry to say.

I considered myself a liberal for a few years...probably 16-21, thinking pretty much as you do. The root word is liberty. You guys are both right, liberal simply means one thing to one person and something else to another person. I'm sure when people hear the word American it means something great to one group of people, and something not so great to others.

But then I saw what kind of people were in the liberal camp. Even if they didn't call themselves liberals, that was their label and they never refuted the label. I've come to terms to just accept (generally) that 2010 liberals are anti-self defense, pro ever expanding government, anti-male, anti-white, anti-Christian, anti-American, and pro big spending without thought.

Libertarians in 2010 are pro-self defense, anti big government, pro-American, and anti big spending.

Of course, these are just my opinions of the two groups and it is rare for any one person to agree with ALL of these tenets. Which is why when I stopped considering myself a liberal, I never really adopted a new "group name". Because I'm just pro-freedom. I'm pro gun, pro-rights (for homosexuals and every other human being), and pro-drugs. I simply want people to mind their own business and leave me alone as long as I'm not hurting anyone else.

I think arguments like these happen so often because the term liberal or libertarian doesn't completely describe you or me, so we revert to arguing "that's not what it means!" when we really mean "that doesn't describe me!". Belonging to a group like liberals or libertarians has it ups and downs. When you state what you are (liberal) people get a very quick run-down of what your beliefs are, but they also assume that you are what they believe liberals, by their definition, are. So many of their assumptions can be incorrect. I don't know where I'm going with this, so that's it.

 

[Fletch]

I'm not really talking about folks who enjoy discussing things, though I am having a hard time clearly writing what I mean with the distinction. The folks who are here just to beat their political drum are the types of people I consider trolls.

It's all good... I didn't think you really meant that the way it came out, so no worries.

 

[Colt556]

Yes, and the various polls we've had have confirmed this. What makes it seem heavily conservative is that we have a number of conservatives who fit the Furious Typer mold, and the volume and vehemence of their posts tends to outweigh that of the libertarian side.

Hello Pot, Kettle calling....

It amazes me how you guys say that the Conservatives are "Furious Typers" when as I see it it is just the opposite. The Lefties on here drag on and on and on trying to make their point. If that verbage marathon is not enough you resort to cut and paste tactics. C'mon, do you guys really believe all you type and how you try to pound your views on others while totally negating theirs? Same old story from your side, do and think as I say and not as I do. "The problem is the definition of the word is", Sound familiar?

PS; My puter skills are not the best. I can see a BIG BLACK KETTLE but when posted it disappears. Another reason I don't engage in long battles of words.

 

[shibumiseeker]

It's all good... I didn't think you really meant that the way it came out, so no worries.

Yah, but I try to write clearly and I hate it when I can't do the imaginotransfer of ideas to words very well!

 

[TiminMishawaka]

"(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1960)"

I'll read a University of Chicago publication from the 60s when I'm not busy with important things like picking out the junk between my toes.

 

[rambone]

Dangit, now I'm a troll... In my defense, I hang out here the most because it's what I enjoy talking about.

Same here. I love guns but I barely have much to say about them unless I have a question. Defending our rights is an everyday endeavor.

 

[Fletch]

Hello Pot, Kettle calling....
It amazes me how you guys say that the Conservatives are "Furious Typers" when as I see it it is just the opposite. The Lefties on here drag on and on and on trying to make their point.

What Lefties? I haven't seen any of those on in a long while. That's kind of the whole point of this discussion.

And Furious Typer speaks to a particular mode of response, not just the fact that someone has responded.

C'mon, do you guys really believe all you type...

If I don't believe it, I tend not to type it, unless I'm doing so ironically. I can only speak for myself, of course.

...and how you try to pound your views on others while totally negating theirs?

I don't think I've ever tried to pound my views on others. I offer counterpoints. I try to represent my point of view to the best of my ability. This is not what a Furious Typer does, as the page at the link states. If anything, I'm more of a Tireless Rebutter mixed with a Capitalista, though I one day hope to be a Philosopher.

Same old story from your side, do and think as I say and not as I do.

I absolutely do not want anyone to do as I say, and I'm more interested in having people think, rather than think as I say. I don't want any power over anyone, as anyone who's read my posts would know.

 

[level.eleven]

Hello Pot, Kettle calling....

It amazes me how you guys say that the Conservatives are "Furious Typers" when as I see it it is just the opposite. The Lefties on here drag on and on and on trying to make their point. If that verbage marathon is not enough you resort to cut and paste tactics. C'mon, do you guys really believe all you type and how you try to pound your views on others while totally negating theirs? Same old story from your side, do and think as I say and not as I do. "The problem is the definition of the word is", Sound familiar?

I haven't encountered a single "lefty" on this board since I registered. Maybe I missed a few threads, but no on who has been posting in this thread would fit the accepted term "lefty". That's my opinion of course.

 

[downzero]

I think arguments like these happen so often because the term liberal or libertarian doesn't completely describe you or me, so we revert to arguing "that's not what it means!" when we really mean "that doesn't describe me!". Belonging to a group like liberals or libertarians has it ups and downs. When you state what you are (liberal) people get a very quick run-down of what your beliefs are, but they also assume that you are what they believe liberals, by their definition, are. So many of their assumptions can be incorrect. I don't know where I'm going with this, so that's it.

I actually agree with you, somewhat.

I describe myself as a libertarian. And so long as it is precisely clear what I'm talking about, I will interchangeably describe myself as a libertarian. To me, a liberal and a libertarian are the same thing.

 

[shibumiseeker]

Same here. I love guns but I barely have much to say about them unless I have a question. Defending our rights is an everyday endeavor.

One expects to have people defending gun rights on a gun board. That's expected. Its when virtually all of a person's posts are unrelated to gun topics and continue to beat the political drum that I question why they are even here other than they have an audience who won't get out the tar and feathers even if they don't agree.

 

[downzero]

"(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1960)"

I'll read a University of Chicago publication from the 60s when I'm not busy with important things like picking out the junk between my toes.

Can you explain this comment, please?

Do you realize that Justice Scalia, before serving on the Supreme Court, was a Professor of Law there?

Sometimes I really wonder about the people on this board and where they get their ideas.

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

I think in fairness we need to define our terms.

The last thing I have ever considered myself is "liberal." However I have largely found that I agree with the libertarian platform, which does have some parallels with true "liberalism."

Modern day liberalism has perverted a term which was once something very positive, into something synonymous with Socialism, collectivism, welfare, etc.

At its inception liberalism was about strong individual rights. Today in America it is about collective rights.

Similarly, people associate "Conservatism" with international meddling, constant warring with other nations, and a developing police state. I don't think this is what true conservatism represents either.

However, we are left with the associations that these modern terms have been pinned with. That's why I consider myself libertarian more than anything.

In regards to the Founders, I think that in their own day they would have been described as liberals, in modern times they would be libertarians. They were not the gun-grabbing socialists that you may be associating the term with. They were liberators.

I enjoyed this post, and thank you. The corruption of the word, occured, with the influx and spread of the communist agenda.

One doesnt need to be a scholar to know that communism even in it's conception was nothing more than satanic.

I've often promoted the idea of loaded terms, much to those around either fully supporting or entirely negating.

Sometimes I fall victim to it myself. I think it's important to remember that name means very little compared to actions.

When I look around, internationally and I see violent, genocidal groups with FreedomDemocracy or some variants, who are committing inhumane attacks, I find myself thinking "What's in the name" if violent people like this can simply say we "Are" and then "Be".

There is more to it, and I look at the actions, not the words definition to decide good or bad.

In short, great post!

 

[OAK]

New title "I do not write my own material nor have a cognition of my own (period)"