Conservatives used to care about community. What happened?

[Lakhota]

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

To secure his standing as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney has disowned every sliver of moderation in his record. He’s moved to the right on tax cuts and twisted himself into a pretzel over the health-care plan he championed in Massachusetts — because conservatives are no longer allowed to acknowledge that government can improve citizens’ lives.

Romney is simply following the lead of Republicans in Congress who have abandoned American conservatism’s most attractive features: prudence, caution and a sense that change should be gradual. But most important, conservatism used to care passionately about fostering community, and it no longer does. This commitment now lies buried beneath slogans that lift up the heroic and disconnected individual — or the “job creator” — with little concern for the rest.

Today’s conservatism is about low taxes, fewer regulations, less government — and little else. Anyone who dares to define it differently faces political extinction. Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana was considered a solid conservative, until conservatives decided that anyone who seeks bipartisan consensus on anything is a sellout. Even Orrin Hatch of Utah, one of the longest-serving Republican senators, is facing a primary challenge. His flaw? He occasionally collaborated with the late Democratic senator Edward M. Kennedy on providing health insurance coverage for children and encouraging young Americans to join national service programs. In the eyes of Hatch’s onetime allies, these commitments make him an ultra-leftist.

I have long admired the conservative tradition and for years have written about it with great respect. But the new conservatism, for all its claims of representing the values that inspired our founders, breaks with the country’s deepest traditions. The United States rose to power and wealth on the basis of a balance between the public and the private spheres, between government and the marketplace, and between our love of individualism and our quest for community.

Conservatism today places individualism on a pedestal, but it originally arose in revolt against that idea. As the conservative thinker Robert A. Nisbet noted in 1968, conservatism represented a “reaction to the individualistic Enlightenment.” It “stressed the small social groups of society” and regarded such clusters of humanity — not individuals — as society’s “irreducible unit.”

True, conservatives continue to preach the importance of the family as a communal unit. But for Nisbet and many other conservatives of his era, the movement was about something larger. It “insisted upon the primacy of society to the individual — historically, logically and ethically.”

Because of the depth of our commitment to individual liberty, Americans never fully adopted this all-encompassing view of community. But we never fully rejected it, either. And therein lies the genius of the American tradition: We were born with a divided political heart. From the beginning, we have been torn by a deep but healthy tension between individualism and community. We are communitarian individualists or individualistic communitarians, but we have rarely been comfortable with being all one or all the other.

Much More: Conservatives used to care about community. What happened? - The Washington Post

 

[Sallow]

They never cared about community.

Conservativism is the philosophy of "me, mine, and myself".

 

[rdean]

They only care about communities in other countries. In this country, they call that "socialism".

 

[Lakhota]

They never cared about community.

Conservativism is the philosophy of "me, mine, and myself".

Maybe that has been your experience, but not mine. I'm 65, and I don't ever remember Conservatives being so hateful, radical and selfish as they are today. That's why I truly identify with the OP.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I have long admired the conservative tradition and for years have written about it with great respect. But the new conservatism, for all its claims of representing the values that inspired our founders, breaks with the country’s deepest traditions. The United States rose to power and wealth on the basis of a balance between the public and the private spheres, between government and the marketplace, and between our love of individualism and our quest for community.

This of course is the sad consequence of conservatives abandoning these values and replacing them instead with the political expediency of social conservatism, religious fundamentalism, and rightwing extremism.

Conservatives once played an important role in American political society, as a counterbalance to the left’s idealism, lost now to the radicalism of the partisan right.

 

[Lakhota]

Amen!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why care when all liberals will do is have the government regulate what you worked hard for and try to come and take it by means of a tax. And then when they finally control it fuck it up and blame you for it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why care when all liberals will do is have the government regulate what you worked hard for and try to come and take it by means of a tax. And then when they finally control it fuck it up and blame you for it.

Rather than attempting to deflect, respond to the issue in the OP.

 

[Lakhota]

Why care when all liberals will do is have the government regulate what you worked hard for and try to come and take it by means of a tax. And then when they finally control it fuck it up and blame you for it.

Taxes? Taxes are the lowest they've been in about 50 years. Regulations? How are regulations hurting you? Do you trust corporations to self-regulate?

 

[Lakhota]

Why care when all liberals will do is have the government regulate what you worked hard for and try to come and take it by means of a tax. And then when they finally control it fuck it up and blame you for it.

Rather than attempting to deflect, respond to the issue in the OP.

Thank you. I agree.

 

[Two Thumbs]

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

To secure his standing as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney has disowned every sliver of moderation in his record. bit even close to the truth. He’s moved to the right on tax cuts and twisted himself into a pretzel over the health-care plan he championed in Massachusetts — because conservatives are no longer allowed to acknowledge that government can improve citizens’ lives. There's a limit, we passed it in the seventies.

Romney is simply following the lead of Republicans in Congress who have abandoned American conservatism’s most attractive features: prudence, caution and a sense that change should be gradual. That's what a moderate is. damn, the author doesn't know shit. But most important, conservatism used to care passionately about fostering community, we still do, in the form of less government in our lives. and it no longer does. another lie. This commitment now lies buried beneath slogans that lift up the heroic and disconnected individual — or the “job creator” — with little concern for the rest. more lies

Today’s conservatism is about low taxes, YEAH, more money in everyones pocket!! only and idiot would see that as bad, or a liberal. fewer regulations, YEAH, the cost of products and services can go down, and competition can go in, driving costs down, leaving more money in everyones pocket. less government Do I need to repeat myself?— and little else. Pro Constitution, pro rights, pro family, pro etc etc etc.Anyone who dares to define it differently faces political extinction. Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana was considered a solid conservative,a rep moderate to the bone. until conservatives decided that anyone who seeks bipartisan consensus on anything is a sellout. Even Orrin Hatch of Utah, one of the longest-serving Republican senators, is facing a primary challenge. His flaw? He occasionally collaborated with the late Democratic senator Edward M. Kennedy on providing health insurance coverage for children and encouraging young Americans to join national service programs. In the eyes of Hatch’s onetime allies, these commitments make him an ultra-leftist. good lord. We don't want more bloated Fed level failures, this stuff is done WAY better at the state level, and we support these. ahem, more lies from the lefty liar

I have long admired the conservative tradition he's lyingand for years have written about it with great respect. But the new conservatism, for all its claims of representing the values that inspired our founders, breaks with the country’s deepest traditions. The United States rose to power and wealth on the basis of a balance between the public and the private spheres, between government and the marketplace, and between our love of individualism and our quest for community. mostly bullshit. We rose due too our freedoms, not government controls

Conservatism today places individualism on a pedestal, but it originally arose in revolt against that idea. As the conservative thinker Robert A. Nisbet noted in 1968, conservatism represented a “reaction to the individualistic Enlightenment.” It “stressed the small social groups of society” and regarded such clusters of humanity — not individuals — as society’s “irreducible unit.” We, still, fully support local communities. Being against vast government is not being against communities. fukken libtardation at it's finest.

True, conservatives continue to preach the importance of the family as a communal unit. duhBut for Nisbet and many other conservatives of his era, the movement was about something larger. It “insisted upon the primacy of society to the individual — historically, logically and ethically.” duh, but still not big government.

Because of the depth of our commitment to individual liberty, Americans never fully adopted this all-encompassing view of community. But we never fully rejected it, either. And therein lies the genius of the American tradition: We were born with a divided political heart. From the beginning, we have been torn by a deep but healthy tension between individualism and community. We are communitarian individualists or individualistic communitarians, but we have rarely been comfortable with being all one or all the other.

Much More: Conservatives used to care about community. What happened? - The Washington Post

Leave it to some flaming liberal to explain us Two other liberals and get it almost completely wrong.

 

[buckeye45_73]

When have liberals cared about community, I love how republicans are selfish, based on what? Wow you socialist retards dont know jack. Look at liberal communities, like Detroit...awesome!!!!!! EJ Dionne is a joke, he reminds me of Gargemel from the Smurfs. When did he think conservatives were good? He never has.

republicans give more money to charity, they promote more freedom for the individual. I mean do all of you think your life would be this good in a socialist setting? Which socialist country do you think runs it right?

So what is your goal? Every person has the same amount of money?

 

[Sallow]

They only care about communities in other countries. In this country, they call that "socialism".

I'll stand by what I posted.

Conservativism is part and parcel with "self".

And that's it.

 

[Sallow]

I have long admired the conservative tradition and for years have written about it with great respect. But the new conservatism, for all its claims of representing the values that inspired our founders, breaks with the country’s deepest traditions. The United States rose to power and wealth on the basis of a balance between the public and the private spheres, between government and the marketplace, and between our love of individualism and our quest for community.

This of course is the sad consequence of conservatives abandoning these values and replacing them instead with the political expediency of social conservatism, religious fundamentalism, and rightwing extremism.

Conservatives once played an important role in American political society, as a counterbalance to the left’s idealism, lost now to the radicalism of the partisan right.

This I agree with.

 

[buckeye45_73]

They only care about communities in other countries. In this country, they call that "socialism".

I'll stand by what I posted.

Conservativism is part and parcel with "self".

And that's it.

Explain the liberal yuppie ME generation.

 

[Sallow]

Sometimes you need a selfish voice to pull you back.

 

[Sallow]

They only care about communities in other countries. In this country, they call that "socialism".

I'll stand by what I posted.

Conservativism is part and parcel with "self".

And that's it.

Explain the liberal yuppie ME generation.

Reagan was a conservative.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why care when all liberals will do is have the government regulate what you worked hard for and try to come and take it by means of a tax. And then when they finally control it fuck it up and blame you for it.

Rather than attempting to deflect, respond to the issue in the OP.

In case you missed it that was a response addressing the issues with the OP
Why care when all that will happen is liberals will try to take from success and give it to those who did not work for it.

OH and by the way you're not going to dictate to me how and what I post.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Sometimes you need a selfish voice to pull you back.

so that's it? wow liberals do come up with crazy ass answers. So in other words you can be selfish if you're liberal, kinda like being rich, it's ok if you're liberal. So in other words all the political arguements you make are only valid if you're a republican, if you're a liberal then you dont care what they do? Did I get that correctly?

 

[idb]

When have liberals cared about community, I love how republicans are selfish, based on what? Wow you socialist retards dont know jack. Look at liberal communities, like Detroit...awesome!!!!!! EJ Dionne is a joke, he reminds me of Gargemel from the Smurfs. When did he think conservatives were good? He never has.

republicans give more money to charity, they promote more freedom for the individual. I mean do all of you think your life would be this good in a socialist setting? Which socialist country do you think runs it right?

So what is your goal? Every person has the same amount of money?

Exactly...according to you and your cronies liberal equals socialism.
No middle ground, no chance of discussion.
People like you are the real reason for the mess.