What is a 'real' conservative?

[Swagger]

Someone who isn't and doesn't support cuckservatives.

 

[amrchaos]

Someone that defends the family, the culture and the heritage of this nation.

In other words, a 'real' conservative is just a conservative. Some one who preserve traditions in what is considered the bedrock of American society.

So the word 'real' is an unnecessary term to you?

 

[Boss]

Taken from

What is a real conservative these days Yahoo Answers

"I have heard a number of people claim that such-and-such a candidate is the "real" or "true" conservative. But there are so many flavors of conservatism these days that I am not sure what "real" means anymore. There are neoconservatives, social conservatives, the religious right, Libertarian conservatives, etc.--all stake the claim to being the real deal.

As someone who leans left, can someone define for me "conservatism" and explain why their brand of conservatism is the legitimate form of it? Thanks." by bluevent47


I think that is a great question!! What exactly is a real conservative? Are there fake conservatives? What do they believe in? How do you identify them? What is their political focus?

For a long time, I thought a conservative was someone who took a conservative stance on some issues. But it seems like that is not the case.

Are you a 'REAL' conservative? If so, tell us what it means to be 'Real' and why the others are not.

Okay, I will tackle this in the name of enlightening the pinhead masses. The reason some people have a problem figuring out who/what is a 'conservative' is because conservatism is not an ideology.

Liberalism, libertarianism and "social conservative" are ideologies. (Yes, "social conservative" contains the word 'conservative' but often in name only.) Conservatism is a PHILOSOPHY. In essence, it is the counter-philosophy to extremism.

Conservatives believe in slow gradual well-reasoned changes as opposed to radical extreme 'knee-jerk' ones. Activism is ideologically-driven so most conservatives are not activists.

This does not mean that most conservatives lack an ideology. This is where it gets murky. Libertarians and social conservatives are both ideologues who wave the Conservative banner proudly but they are as different as night and day in what they support. Republicans (elites) are also ideologically-driven and often (whether true or not) lay a claim to Conservatism. So you will often see conservative activists promoting their ideologies under the philosophy of Conservatism.

Now, earlier I stated that "social conservatives" are often conservative in name only... I wanted to talk about this a bit to clarify. George W. Bush was a social conservative. His spending record was not that of a fiscal conservative. This is often the case with social conservatives... Mike Huckabee's spending in Arkansas is another good example. Social cons tend to be very benevolent and compassionate with tax money when put in power. It's their ideology overriding their conservative philosophy.

Is there a such thing as a Liberal Conservative? The answer, surprisingly... YES! There is! The best two examples I could give would be Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman.... you can add Olympia Snow, Susan Collins and Lincoln Chafee. One could also consider Bill Clinton a Liberal Conservative. They are all ideologically-driven by a Liberal agenda, but their philosophy is Conservative and not Extremist.

Finally, most of the Conservatives who understand the nuance between ideology and philosophy, are as open-minded on change as anyone else, they just don't want radical extreme change or change for change sake. They mostly reject the perversions of the Constitution enacted over years by various 'activist' ideologues. You will often hear them call themselves "Constitutional Conservatives" and they are only driven by the ideology of the founders and original intentions of our Constitution.

 

[amrchaos]

So far, if I use Matthew, Boss and MacClaur(sorry for msp) 1st half of his post, I am regaining the basic meaning of Conservatism

If I use Boss post to give definition to the the term 'real', the term 'real' is to differentiate those that use conservative philosophy and approach to new ideas/change versus those who call themselves conservatives but advocates rapid and probably not well thought change

Hence, the term 'real' is to identify conservatives of the philosophical bent from those that are really ideologues or activist that call themselves conservatives.


So the use of the term 'real' is an attempt to divide conservatives from other strains of thought that are corrupting its name.

Is that it?

If so, this thread is closed!

 

[SuperDemocrat]

What is a political operative who poses questions designed to divide the oppositions party?

 

[amrchaos]

What is a political operative who poses questions designed to divide the oppositions party?

I think I said the thread is closed

If there was something constructive you wished to add, you can.
But your attempts to turn this into an unproductive argument has already failed.
I believe my question was answered most sufficiently by the posters I mentioned earlier.

 

[ClosedCaption]

lol...they cant tell you what a real conservative is because its just an excuse used to dismiss opposing opinions as being "fake"

 

[Boss]

So the use of the term 'real' is an attempt to divide conservatives from other strains of thought that are corrupting its name.

Kinda, but not really... does that make sense?

The term "real conservative" can used by anyone. It can be used by a philosophical conservative to distinguish between themselves and various 'ideologies' hijacking their philosophy... but it is also used by one ideological conservative to distinguish between their ideology and another. It can also be used by liberals and lefties to pit contradicting conservative-based ideologies against each other. We see Tea Party Conservatives calling people of the Establishment GOP "not real conservatives" but again, a variety of reasons are found in the individual view of what a "real" conservative stands for. So the "use of the term" cannot be isolated to one universal meaning.

 

[Mac1958]

I've been assuming people who call moderate conservatives "RINOs" consider themselves "real" conservatives.

No?

.

 

[Boss]

I've been assuming people who call moderate conservatives "RINOs" consider themselves "real" conservatives.

No?

.

I've actually always had a problem with what is commonly called a RINO. ---And I am guilty of using the acronym myself! A LOT of people really mean to say they are CINOs... Conservative in name only. I reserve the acronym for those who are clearly not following the Conservative philosophy which represents the overwhelming base of their party, regardless of ideology.

What some will call RINOs are actually the opposite. They are party-partisan and dedicated to the agenda of party over principles of conservative philosophy. They believe to save the party they have to become more like their opponents, willing to work together... "reach across the aisle" as McCain famously says.

"Moderate conservative" is an oxymoron. It's like "extremist conservative" or "moderate extremist" ...it contradicts because it includes dual philosophies which can't both be true values. There are moderate Republicans. A Conservative is someone who has a conservative philosophy as opposed to a radical or extreme philosophy. It IS already the more 'moderate' viewpoint, by default.

 

[amrchaos]

I've always considered McCain a Moderate and not a conservative. Now I am starting to question exactly what was my definition of moderate is.

Now you pointed out the term 'real' as in 'real' conservative is used like a cattle prod to herd one group into accepting another groups stance. That makes understanding what is a conservative position on an issue a bit tricky.

Bottomline--I need to understand the philosophy of conservatism before I try to identify who is who.

 

[Boss]

I've always considered McCain a Moderate and not a conservative. Now I am starting to question exactly what was my definition of moderate is.

Now you pointed out the term 'real' as in 'real' conservative is used like a cattle prod to herd one group into accepting another groups stance. That makes understanding what is a conservative position on an issue a bit tricky.

Bottomline--I need to understand the philosophy of conservatism before I try to identify who is who.

Well, McCain is a moderate Republican. I have questions as to how "conservative" he is, he doesn't seem to want to act conservative unless he needs conservative support. McCain-Feingold radically changed campaign finance and the structure of politics in America, and I am not sure it was an improvement at all. Conservative philosophy rebukes such radical and dramatic changes... it completely contradicts conservatism.

That's not to say that Conservatism can't demand radical changes at all... Currently, people like Mark Levin are suggesting Article V conventions of the states to "reel in" the powers of federal government through Constitutional amendments at the state level. Some rather radical and bold changes are being proposed. However, these ideas are all centered around undoing the assorted misconstructions of the constitution over the years and returning us to more of what the Founding Fathers had envisioned. Like getting rid of the 17th Amendment, letting Senators be elected again by the state legislatures so that the interests of the states are represented.

To summarize, the 'default' position of Conservative philosophy rests in democracy, the will of the people. They are not opposed to change, even radical change, as long as it is through the ballot box and the expressed will of the people.

 

[Boss]

Bottomline--I need to understand the philosophy of conservatism before I try to identify who is who.

Exactly!

 

[Toro]

One who supports Trump.

lol

 

[eagle1462010]

How about a bit of common sense, especially with the pocket book. Even a small child can learn about balancing a check book and understand that you cannot continue to keep going into debt without having consequences down the road. The destruction of the value of the dollar, a debt that ensures that we will not be able to pay it in the near future, and a lower standard of living.

Resistance to Change..............Gov't is the poster child of stupid business practices..........Spending far more money for projects than they should be. Perfect example is HIGH SPEED RAILS............Texas versus California..............In Texas the rail was between Houston and Dallas...........Permits to construction breaking ground 5 months...............Built on schedule and in budget 10 BILLION..............California.....years to start...........Behind schedule and a cost of 64 BILLION. The Gov't and their cronies wasted at least 50 BILLION DOLLARS for the rail.............most went into pockets jingling all the way............

So for my first point of Conservatism......................Live within your means and DON'T WASTE MONEY.

Hand up and not a hand out.....................I don't mind the hand up for people who need assistance...............I do mind a permanent HAND OUT that we have now...................If these people are capable of working then they should work, and not take advantage of the system..............But under our current system...................corruption is rampant, and able bodied people sit on their butts rather than work...........Which goes to point one of living within our means.........as more give on the dole.........more money is spent and more debt is incurred............................

No jobs.................then look to the Ten Thousand Commandments and CFR'S of the federal Gov't..............and the large amounts of money required to be legal in this country.............Costing more to build and operate, and making more companies leave..........Not that we should have regulations..........BUT not to the point that they are JOB KILLERS......................We need the jobs...........so people can get off the dole.....................

Less Gov't..................too many regs.........and TOO MANY GOV'T AGENCIES passing new laws without the consent of Congress...........using OLD LAWS to Justify anything they think they can get away with..................Congress shot down Cap and Trade...........The Liberals and Obama have went through the back door to force a lot of it anyway................via the EPA with old laws, and JUDICIAL ACTIVISM.....................

The Constitution.....................live by it..............follow it.............go outside the box and you should be put down.............Back to the EPA...........this is not the intent of the Constitution to produce laws by FIAT...............it is the purpose of CONGRESS through the process that it should be done..................and not via a bunch of lawyers finding holes in laws to abuse................

Earmarks....................ARE BRIBES............and are used on almost all the new laws passed to BUY VOTES.............They should be outlawed and should be voted on BY THEMSELVES if they are WORTH THEIR SALT.....................

Just a few views from my own version...............Now the left can abuse them and say how RADICAL IT IS for a country TO LIVE WITHIN IT'S MEANS.................Someone pointed out Bush is a Social Conservative..............well yeah he was..............and Obama is a SOCIALIST ON STEROIDS who has increased the debt more than all the other Presidents combined...................and he says he's CUT THE BUDGET............AND DEBT..................BY DOUBLING DOWN ON IT............AND THE LIBERALS CHEER...........Well RAH FUCKING RAH TO THAT.