How conservative are you?

[ErikViking]

I have been thinking about this:

If you define yourself as a conservative, was there ever a time in history you think should be the general goal for society. Now you might like the policy during the eighties but the technology of today.

But if be bundle all soft values toghether, things like policy, family values, fairness of society, health and things like that - can you pick a time when you think things were "best yet"?

 

[JW Frogen]

I am sooooooooooooo conservative I am calling for my own salvation and death penalty.

In that order.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That would be when Government and Congress understood their limits and actually followed the Constitution. In other words not in a HELL of a long time.

Congress does not have the authority to create new functions or responsibilities for itself or the Government. The Government needs new powers and Authority? The Constitution provides for that, it is called the Amendment process. Not stretching and lying about what the enumerated powers of the Federal Government and Congress are.

 

[Fatality]

is there ever such a thing as "best" seems to me the possablity of things always being on a projection towards the "best" is really the essence of your today, your here and now. now with obama, the downward slide, things can only get better after this set of losers is gone, casue if it gets worse the world is in for a lot of hurt.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmXzamLDgFk&feature=related]YouTube - Vic Fontaine/Benjamin Sisko - The Best Is Yet To Come[/ame]

 

[JW Frogen]

I am soooooooooooo conservative I have forced myself to have a baby I do not want and then sent it off to die in a war I do not understand.

 

[skookerasbil]

I am soooooooooooo conservative I have forced myself to have a baby I do not want and then sent it off to die in a war I do not understand.

yikes.........how miserable is this fcukk?? ^^

 

[Diuretic]

I am soooooooooooo conservative I have forced myself to have a baby I do not want and then sent it off to die in a war I do not understand.

Stop it JW, you're confusing the hoi polloi

Now, for those who don't get it.

"Conservative" doesn't mean "right wing authoritarian". You authoritarian wingnuts can stop answering the poll, you don't qualify

 

[Ravi]

That would be when Government and Congress understood their limits and actually followed the Constitution. In other words not in a HELL of a long time.

Congress does not have the authority to create new functions or responsibilities for itself or the Government. The Government needs new powers and Authority? The Constitution provides for that, it is called the Amendment process. Not stretching and lying about what the enumerated powers of the Federal Government and Congress are.

Too bad you didn't complain about it when Bush and Cheney were in charge.

 

[skookerasbil]

I am soooooooooooo conservative I have forced myself to have a baby I do not want and then sent it off to die in a war I do not understand.

Stop it JW, you're confusing the hoi polloi

Now, for those who don't get it.

"Conservative" doesn't mean "right wing authoritarian". You authoritarian wingnuts can stop answering the poll, you don't qualify

s0n.....your sig should say, "Master of the Two Sentence Incoherent Post". This is a message board.......

 

[Diuretic]

I am soooooooooooo conservative I have forced myself to have a baby I do not want and then sent it off to die in a war I do not understand.

Stop it JW, you're confusing the hoi polloi

Now, for those who don't get it.

"Conservative" doesn't mean "right wing authoritarian". You authoritarian wingnuts can stop answering the poll, you don't qualify

s0n.....your sig should say, "Master of the Two Sentence Incoherent Post". This is a message board.......

I know, I know, I need more pictures - all these words and no pictures confuse the right wing authoritarians

Here you go:

 

[JakeStarkey]

That would be when Government and Congress understood their limits and actually followed the Constitution. In other words not in a HELL of a long time.

Congress does not have the authority to create new functions or responsibilities for itself or the Government. The Government needs new powers and Authority? The Constitution provides for that, it is called the Amendment process. Not stretching and lying about what the enumerated powers of the Federal Government and Congress are.

Gunny, all of this has been decided for you a long, long time ago. Quit worrying. You can do nothing about it except pout.

 

[Sarah G]

I'm not Conservative at all but not a Liberal Democrat either. Centrist, pro-business Democrat if there is such an animal.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

A time when the people would not stand to be lied to by political leaders , and when leaders wouldn't try.
That time is in the future.
This is a time of educated, not indoctrinated people .
"If a nation expects to be ignorant -- and free ... it expects what never was and never will be."

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I am soooooooooooo conservative I have forced myself to have a baby I do not want and then sent it off to die in a war I do not understand.

Nice caricature.
wasnt it a black baby I hated cause Im a racist ?

 

[editec]

Things weren't more conservative in the past and are now moving toward more liberal.

It doesn't really work that way.

For example were the Puritans conservatives as we most of us define that word today?

They certainly were profoundly religious so that sort of seems conservative by today's stardards.

They obviously believed in guns, so that's sort of conservative, too.

And they obviously belived in family values, and didn't believe in abortions or homosexuality either.

But were they anything like today's conservatives?

They wer utopian socialists living communially, so I don't think that they were remotely conservatives as we understand that word today.

And floundering father's generation...was that conservative as we think of the word today?

Clearly not .

They were radicals who created a government for the people of the people and by the people, and they believed in religious freedom that they made that one of the grounding principles of their government.

History is NOT linear, folks.

It does migrate and change values and commonly held beliefs, but clearly not from what we call conservative to what we call liberal.

If anything those words change meaning as times change.

There isn't a real conservative on this board.

Seriously...which among us thinks we want nothing to change?

That's what conservative sort of means...folks.

Thinking that the status quo is okay, and the belief that we should stay the course.

 

[Diuretic]

You're right ed - what's needed is a good theory of historical change, it seems to me that the terms we continually use - conservative or progressive - are relative to the times in which they're used. Having said that though I am always drawn to Burke when it comes to trying to define what a "conservative" is at any time or indeed in any place. It's a philosophy and not simply a set of policy views rooted in time and place.

 

[Sarah G]

You're right ed - what's needed is a good theory of historical change, it seems to me that the terms we continually use - conservative or progressive - are relative to the times in which they're used. Having said that though I am always drawn to Burke when it comes to trying to define what a "conservative" is at any time or indeed in any place. It's a philosophy and not simply a set of policy views rooted in time and place.

It seems defining the parties by focusing on policy has been a fairly recent phenomenon. Even Nixon and Carter were more idealist than policy wonks.

 

[Diuretic]

I have to clarify my understanding.

I come from a culture that has a parliamentary system that until a few years ago had at its core the idea that the public service ("civil service" in the UK) was nonpartisan (pause for laughter) and that the public service (government departments and their permanent heads) simply carried out whatever policy positions the government of the day required (after those positions had been approved by the parliament via the legislative process).

I'm used to political parties having distinct philosophical differences (again at least until a few years ago).

In a sense those philosophical differences - historically - could have been described as "conservative" or "progressive", at least in terms of their innate tendencies. Policy could be analysed, discussed, dissected and presented without positions being pre-fabricated. Conservatives would take, unsurprisingly, a conservative position on an issue; progressives would take a progressive position. But the issues didn't define the tendencies, the tendencies defined the issues. So, for example, abortion wouldn't be automatically opposed by conservatives and approved by progressives; there had to be discussion and debate on the issues rather than their being held up as shibboleths to be defended or attacked as the case may be.

I see American politics as defining itself by its positions on issues and not by its tendencies. Anti-abortion is "conservative", pro-abortion is "progressive". This leads to confusion.

I am a conservative therefore I'm against women being able to choose an abortion (within medically approved limits).

I am a progressive therefore I approve a woman being able to choose an abortion (within medically approved limits).

The issues aren't discussed, sandbags are arranged, ammunition is readied, war is declared.

Conservatism is a philosophy that can be applied to any public policy issue quite satisfactorily to devise a rational policy position. Authoritarianism is an attitude which sets up a pre-determined approach to any public policy issue without regard to proper analysis of the issue itself.

Many Americans who call themselves "conservatives" are not conservatives at all. They are authoritarians who pretend to be conservative.

 

[editec]

You're right ed - what's needed is a good theory of historical change, it seems to me that the terms we continually use - conservative or progressive - are relative to the times in which they're used. Having said that though I am always drawn to Burke when it comes to trying to define what a "conservative" is at any time or indeed in any place. It's a philosophy and not simply a set of policy views rooted in time and place.

Conservatism and liberalism are NOT a phiosophies.

They describe propensities toward wanting things to remain the same or to change.

If you live in a communist or capitalist dictatorship and you like it?

You're a conservative.

If you live in a communist or capitalist dictatorship and want it to change?

You're a liberal.

 

[ErikViking]

Things weren't more conservative in the past and are now moving toward more liberal.

It doesn't really work that way.

For example were the Puritans conservatives as we most of us define that word today?

They certainly were profoundly religious so that sort of seems conservative by today's stardards.

They obviously believed in guns, so that's sort of conservative, too.

And they obviously belived in family values, and didn't believe in abortions or homosexuality either.

But were they anything like today's conservatives?

They wer utopian socialists living communially, so I don't think that they were remotely conservatives as we understand that word today.

And floundering father's generation...was that conservative as we think of the word today?

Clearly not .

They were radicals who created a government for the people of the people and by the people, and they believed in religious freedom that they made that one of the grounding principles of their government.

History is NOT linear, folks.

It does migrate and change values and commonly held beliefs, but clearly not from what we call conservative to what we call liberal.

If anything those words change meaning as times change.

There isn't a real conservative on this board.

Seriously...which among us thinks we want nothing to change?

That's what conservative sort of means...folks.

Thinking that the status quo is okay, and the belief that we should stay the course.

Well, my idea (that seems to be working not so good) was this:
IF you are a conservative perhaps you could point to some time in history where society correlated somewhat with your softer values.

If it had worked the poll would show a graph with a peak somewhere and likley distributed softly. This could then be discussed further.

The poll seems to fail, but I must thank you who made an honest try anyway.