What does "conservative" mean nowadays?

Status
Not open for further replies.
1. Are the designations “liberal” and “conservative” still useful? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

No. It is not really descriptive regarding the pro-con positions on a
wide range of issues, eg, what is a "conservative Democrat" or a "liberal
republican"?

2. Does a binary Left/Right political spectrum describe the full range of ideological options? Is it still applicable?
Click to expand...

No. However, it is still applicable as long as the Pater Patriae believes that
his "children" are only capable of picking one of two choices, both of which
conform to what the pater wants anyway, and the children allow themselves
to be restrained by it.
 
Technically, Politically,

Conservative means to take a strict constructionist view of the Constitution and adhere to it, and Liberal means to bend, twist, add to, subtract from and "interpret" the Constitution as needed to fit an agenda.

Woody

"Peace, Prosperity, and Freedom: Magic elixirs of life brought to you courtesy of the Constitution for the United States of America." B.E.Wood
 
Would an example of this theory be when "conservatives" tell us that the Constitution gives the president the inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches? to detain citizens incommunicado without charges for years on end?
 
The fear that someone else out there might be enjoying life and there's nothing you can do about it.
Click to expand...

You actually just described communism, socialism, and democracy. A Constitutional Republic, which true conservatives believe in, and which this nation was always intended to be (remember: "...and to the Republic for which it stands..."), respects the liberties of its citizens, and encourages them to enjoy life.

Woody, as always, hit the nail right on the head.
 
1. Are the designations “liberal” and “conservative” still useful? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

No, they are not useful, since the classic definitions do not represent what too many people claiming those labels really espouse. Now one can never be sure of the intent. Injecting religion into politics or resisting religious initiatives has made it all very murky, causing people to search for or fabricate compound labels, e.g. "secular conservative", to approximate a mix of political positions or segregate themselves from some contemporary aberration.
 
Last edited:
woodcdi said:
Technically, Politically,
Conservative means to take a strict constructionist view of the Constitution and adhere to it,
Click to expand...
I thought that is what is known as a "Constitutionalist," or as you already mentioned a "Constructionist." There are conservative parties in other countries that don't have anything even resembling a constitution, so that would lead me to believe that conservative ideologies have nothing to do with a constitution or adherence to anything other than the status quo.
 
woodcdi said:
Conservative means to take a strict constructionist view of the Constitution and adhere to it, and Liberal means to bend, twist, add to, subtract from and "interpret" the Constitution as needed to fit an agenda.
Click to expand...

At best that's a clever myth dreamed up to snare the votes of the gullible. Conservatives have never paid more than lip service to the Constitution.



Phetro said:
You actually just described communism, socialism, and democracy. A Constitutional Republic, which true conservatives believe in, and which this nation was always intended to be (remember: "...and to the Republic for which it stands..."), respects the liberties of its citizens, and encourages them to enjoy life.
Click to expand...

Kind of ironic that you quote a crazy socialist while talking about what true conservatives believe in.
 
The definition of conservative has certainly changed.

Today, you can support wild spending, increase government welfare, increase government bureaucracy, an be moderate on the gun issue and still be labelled a conservative.

The conservatives of today are actually more liberal than JFK was.
 
At best that's a clever myth dreamed up to snare the votes of the gullible. Conservatives have never paid more than lip service to the Constitution.
Click to expand...

That is just a sound bite that goes to the core of the discussion. What doctrine do you refer to when using the label "conservative"?
 
RealGun said:
That is just a sound bite that goes to the core of the discussion. What doctrine do you refer to when using the label "conservative"?
Click to expand...

I don't generally use the label "conservative" as I prefer commie, but if I had to pin something down, I'd define a conservative as someone who is more interested in conserving the power of the state than in liberty.
 
I consider myself conservative, although I do not identify with the majority of so-called "conservative" politicians. The politicians have lost focus of what conservative ideology is supposed to be about.

Today, "conservative" politicians are a joke. Like has previously been mentioned, many of them support increases of government spending, tax increases, enlarging the size and role of the government bureaucracies, meddling in the economy, and most are way too "moderate" (aka liberal) on immigration policy. In short, conservative politicians have become alot like liberals... they want to stick their nose into things that are none of their business.

Also, it bothers me that most "conservative" politicians support the restriction or denial of civil rights and protections, particularly in criminal investigations and judicial process, in the name of the "war on crime".

Conservative ideology is supposed to focus on small government, low spending, low/reduced taxes, laisse-faire economic policy, and supporting the rights of individuals.
 
Grant48 said:
Conservative ideology is supposed to focus on small government, low spending, low/reduced taxes, laisse-faire economic policy, and supporting the rights of individuals.
Click to expand...

I've always believed in the above. Unfortunately these planks haven't been the focus of the R's or the D's since, well, ever?

Has there been a US administration (R or D) that has reduced the size and spending of the gov't? Anyone? Bueller? The current imperialist Trots in power look nothing like the definition you detailed.
 
Conservative means to take a strict constructionist view of the Constitution and adhere to it, and Liberal means to bend, twist, add to, subtract from and "interpret" the Constitution as needed to fit an agenda.
Click to expand...
I don't remember the Constitution saying anything about banning certain types of marriage between consenting adults. I don't remember the Constitution saying that the sixth amendment was only a suggestion or that it only applied to citizens. I don't remember the Constitution saying anything about wars on illegal drugs, prescription drug plans, rights (more like forced) to public education or any of the myriad of other things the freedom grabbing conservatives espouse to win their share of the electorate. There is little practical difference between conservative and liberal anymore. It's just a matter of which of my particular freedoms their after.
 
Conservative means to take a strict constructionist view of the Constitution and adhere to it, and Liberal means to bend, twist, add to, subtract from and "interpret" the Constitution as needed to fit an agenda.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see. Conservative means "In favor of truth, justice and the American way." Liberal means "Distorts, bends, and otherwise destroys what is Holy."

To paraphrase my Black friends and neighbors: "Person of African descent, with your permission!"

Now that is one of the most self-serving, weaselling, snotty and downright false distortions I have heard in my twoscore and three. It completely ignores most definitions of "conservative" and at least as many of "liberal". Where are the theocratic witch-burners (AFA, 700 Club, Rushdooney fans, etc.) who believe that only Christians should be citizens? How about the current crop of government officials who are loved by conservatives but who do not believe in the separation of powers or checks and balances? On the other side, if you discount the foaming-at-the-mouth crowd like Coulter, O'Reilly, and Cheney, if you actually look at political and legal history you'll find that "strict constructionist" has been more and less fashionable among all political sorts over the years. Most of the time it's been used as a way of patting oneself on the back and berating anyone who disagrees with one as an evil commie mutant traitor.

What you might call liberals have been at least as fervent in their defense of the fundamental Law of the land as have the people with whom you personally identify. The idea that politics is divided up into G-d (people just like me) and the Devil (anyone who isn't just like me) betokens political sophistication approaching that of a first grade playground. It is unworthy of adult citizens but fits nicely into H.L. Mencken's "boobocratic" view of America.
 
I've always believed in the above. Unfortunately these planks haven't been the focus of the R's or the D's since, well, ever?
Click to expand...

Nope. Reagan was the closest, but even that was a half-hearted effort.

"Conservative" politicians campaign on these planks, but once they're actually in office, they change their tune. They realize that if they did what they're supposed to do, they'd be reducing their own power and influence... which would be great for everyone except themselves. So then they proceed to do the exact opposite, in order to expand their power and influence. And unfortunately, thats why we're where we are today.
 
Very correct, Lone_Gunman. If JFK, or Hubert Humphrey, or even LBJ were alive and holding office today, they'd have a difficult time choosing a party affiliation.

The lines between traditional definitions of "liberal" and "conservative" have pretty much vanished. Instead, the terms are applied selectively and individually, depending upon who's writing the story or who's running the campaign. John McCain is no more a conservative than Hillary Clinton.

JFK was much more conservative in the traditional sense (taxes, big government) than Rudy Guiliani.

I'm no history wiz, but I suspect that the blurring of the lines began with Reagan's presidency. After that, everyone who aspired to office in the Republican party laid claim to his conservativism. Problem was (and still is) that few are true conservatives.

The 1994 "Republican Revolution" ushered into office some folks who could legitimately be called conservatives: Newt Gingrich and JC Watts come to mind.

Once in office, though, most of them seem to have become preoccupied with staying in office. And they've resorted to the age-old strategy of promising everyone everything at any price.

The distinctions have been further blurred by social issues that I suspect the leadership of both parties would like to see just go away: gun control, abortion, religion, gay issues, etc.

The result is that a Zell Miller is both a liberal and a conservative, and so is McCain.

There are still some traditional conservatives out there. Columnist Robert Novak is one example. As a tax-cutting, isolationist conservative, he's been critical of GW's invasion of Iraq from the outset, as well as the increased spending on social programs.

Pat Robertson might be considered another example, although the Republicans successfully cut him off at the knees after he wrote in his book about isolationism at the outset of WWII. (Another topic for another time).

Within the Republican party now are two wings, and they don't always play well together: the country club Republicans, primarily concerned with taxes and spending; and the social issues Republicans.

For so-called "conservative" voters like me--who want no gun control, want government out of our bedrooms and cars and motorcycles and toilets and wherever else government seems to wander, want spending reduced, want taxes lowered, and want our borders secure--there's slim pickings for candidates.
 
I don't generally use the label "conservative" as I prefer commie, but if I had to pin something down, I'd define a conservative as someone who is more interested in conserving the power of the state than in liberty.
Click to expand...

Since all those labels, as you use them, seem in the pejorative, what does that make you?
 
The last President who actually reduced the power of the Executive was Jimmy Carter. He was the one who exposed the cockroaches in the CIA and the FBI to the light of public scrutiny, for which they never forgave him.
 
For so-called "conservative" voters like me--who want no gun control, want government out of our bedrooms and cars and motorcycles and toilets and wherever else government seems to wander, want spending reduced, want taxes lowered, and want our borders secure--there's slim pickings for candidates.
Click to expand...

I'd say pickings for candidates that subscribe to those views, the views of guys like us, well... those candidates dont exist.

Its hard to find a candidate nowadays that believes the federal government's role should be restricted to ONLY the enumerated powers within the Constitution. The government is out of control, due to their abuse of the largely imaginary "implied powers".
 
Well, if you believe that our world looks suprisingly like Orwell's--then:

War is Peace

Freedom is Slavery

Ignorance is Strength

I would also add: conservative=the dissolution of our sovereignty/borders, essential liberties, devaluing of the amero(I mean the dollar), illegals have more rights than US citizens, government that is of the elites--by the power hungry--for the corporations.

Conservative means: submitting as slaves to a government that would shower fear over its subjects all the while having them take a nat'l id card and a biometric implantable microchip--oh, wait--that is just around the corner.

Conservative also means: taxing the Amerikan people and having them pay for all that the Security and Prosperity Agreement/North American Union entails.

;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top