Conservative Revolution?

[Cilogy]

Was what we commonly refer to as "The American Revolution" conservative in nature?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Other

Was it really a revolution at all?

MODS PLEASE ADD A POLL, I AM AN IDIOT!

 

[Gibberish]

Was what we commonly refer to as "The American Revolution" conservative in nature?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Other

Was it really a revolution at all?

The act wasn't conservative at all. Not only did it break away from the tradition of British control it also very un-conservative idea of a new type of government structure. It was actually all quite liberal in nature, in the true sense of the word.

 

[Dav]

"Other". You're assuming that modern definitions for conservative and liberal existed back then.

 

[First Thought]

"other". You're assuming that modern definitions for conservative and liberal existed back then.

qft...............

 

[WI Crippler]

Moderator's Warning:

Poll added per request

 

[Cilogy]

"Other". You're assuming that modern definitions for conservative and liberal existed back then.

Who said I was using THOSE definitions?

 

[Dav]

Who said I was using THOSE definitions?

You have to be clear; "Conservative" can mean a lot of different things. Which definition, exactly, are you talking about?

 

[Zyphlin]

Was what we commonly refer to as "The American Revolution" conservative in nature?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Other

Was it really a revolution at all?

MODS PLEASE ADD A POLL, I AM AN IDIOT!

Please define conservative in this instance?

In a classical sense, I'd probably say no.

In a modern sense, closer to yet. They were fighting against unfair taxation, desire for less of a centralized government control, strong rights on individuals to protect themselves, more self determination and less government decree, etc.

 

[Ikari]

No, the revolution was based on ideals of classic liberalism (of which the closest modern day philosophy alive which best matches it is libertarianism).

 

[UtahBill]

sounds like an oxy-moron...

 

[ARealConservative]

yes the original revolution was a fight for self determination and limited local goverment.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

"Other". You're assuming that modern definitions for conservative and liberal existed back then.

Well, let's apply those modern definitions and see what we get.

The modern definition of "conservative" runs something like this:

Supporting personal self-reliance, distrustful of government power, values the freedom of the individual, respects the private ownership of property.

The modern definition of "liberal" runs something like this:

The disasters of life are always caused by someone else, in particular, someonne else who has more money, and people who have money are obligated to pay it to the government to support those who won't work or who suffered some of those personal disaster things. Also, modern liberals are all for freedom of speech, so long as the speech doesn't oppose their ideas, and they just love the attraction of huge monolithic government. That last is probably some Freudian thing they have, but that they have it can't be refuted.

What was the American Revolution about? Rejecting overweening government power and establishing a country of free, independent people.

Clearly the American Revolution was more "conservative" than anything else. Either that, or today's conservatives learned the lessons the Revolution taught and try to live by them, unlike the modern American liberal.

 

[Ikari]

The modern definition of "conservative" runs something like this:

Supporting personal self-reliance, distrustful of government power, values the freedom of the individual, respects the private ownership of property.

I thought modern day conservatism was a big government, big spending, big deficit, big war, big brother philosophy. Kinda like modern day liberalism. Which are both facets of fascism.

 

[disneydude]

They were fighting against unfair taxation, desire for less of a centralized government control, strong rights on individuals to protect themselves, more self determination and less government decree, etc.

In other words, nothing like "conservatives" of today.

 

[Hatuey]

Well, let's apply those modern definitions and see what we get.

The modern definition of "conservative" runs something like this:

Supporting personal self-reliance, distrustful of government power, values the freedom of the individual, respects the private ownership of property.

The modern definition of "liberal" runs something like this:

The disasters of life are always caused by someone else, in particular, someonne else who has more money, and people who have money are obligated to pay it to the government to support those who won't work or who suffered some of those personal disaster things. Also, modern liberals are all for freedom of speech, so long as the speech doesn't oppose their ideas, and they just love the attraction of huge monolithic government. That last is probably some Freudian thing they have, but that they have it can't be refuted.

What was the American Revolution about? Rejecting overweening government power and establishing a country of free, independent people.

Clearly the American Revolution was more "conservative" than anything else. Either that, or today's conservatives learned the lessons the Revolution taught and try to live by them, unlike the modern American liberal.

You should really switch your label from independent to conservative.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

I thought modern day conservatism was a big government, big spending, big deficit, big war, big brother philosophy. Kinda like modern day liberalism. Which are both facets of fascism.

Not really. You're thinking about the Republican Party, which hasn't been conservative since Reagan left office.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

You should really switch your label from independent to conservative.

Why? I don't need you to define what my political world view is. I don't even need you to pick which buttons to push.

 

[Hatuey]

Not really. You're thinking about the Republican Party, which hasn't been conservative since Reagan left office.

And you're thinking of 9 liberals in some room in Berkley. Who aren't representative of the millions of liberals who live elsewhere.

 

[Zyphlin]

I thought modern day conservatism was a big government, big spending, big deficit, big war, big brother philosophy. Kinda like modern day liberalism. Which are both facets of fascism.

you realize on the modern american scale of liberal and conservative ideologies, libertarianism falls within conservatism. I think you're talking about modern day Republicanism in regards to those that currently have power.

 

[Ikari]

you realize on the modern american scale of liberal and conservative ideologies, libertarianism falls within conservatism. I think you're talking about modern day Republicanism in regards to those that currently have power.

Libertarianism is not a subset of conservatism. It's classical liberalism. Even if we kinda go to the Reagan style conservatism; there are many things which are similar between that and libertarianism. But libertarianism expands upon that as well, especially into social construct and what is proper use of government. Before the GOP imploded and became a bastion for neo-conservative fascism I remember people talking about how they were fiscally conservative and socially liberal. That's more in line with libertarianism. Libertarianism doesn't fall within conservatism, conservatism adopted some of the tenets of classical liberalism. But that style of conservatism doesn't exist in the main parties or government anymore. "Conservatives" the likes of Hannity and such are as I have described them. The Republocrats in general have embraced forms of fascism, and the Republicans specifically have been able to adopt well fascist propaganda.

 

[Zyphlin]

Libertarianism is not a subset of conservatism.

In terms of the modern definitions, IE of the past 30+ years, yes, out of the two main political philosophies out there Lilbertarianism is primarily a conservative ideology.

It is fiscally conservative, conservative in a government size perspective, conservative in a militaristic perspective. It is a strange hybrid of conservative and liberal view points on the social side of things.

Your issue, as I already stated, is you seem to be at odds with current Republicans and their brand of conservatism that, while present for the past 7 years, is hardly enough to have changed the terminology on a large scale way for the past few decades. The current Republican brand is a strange hybrid of liberal and conservative views in regards to the military, fiscal policy, and the size of government, and social issues. While Sean Hannity may keep calling himself a conservative, and perhaps not incorrectly as a large umbrella term, his particular brand of conservatism is very much more in line with Republicans than pure conservatism.

You can run from it all you want because it disgusts you to be somehow tied to those icky republicans and conservatives and because you're one of the most stereotypical libertarians in regards to your thinking and attitude toward other groups of politics on this board, but the fact is its not incorrect in current terms to label Libertarianism as being under the umbrella of Conservatism when speaking of the two main political leans currently experienced within our country.

 

[ARealConservative]

In other words, nothing like "conservatives" of today.

I'm a conservative of today and it fits me

 

[Ikari]

In terms of the modern definitions, IE of the past 30+ years, yes, out of the two main political philosophies out there Lilbertarianism is primarily a conservative ideology.

It is fiscally conservative, conservative in a government size perspective, conservative in a militaristic perspective. It is a strange hybrid of conservative and liberal view points on the social side of things.

Your issue, as I already stated, is you seem to be at odds with current Republicans and their brand of conservatism that, while present for the past 7 years, is hardly enough to have changed the terminology on a large scale way for the past few decades. The current Republican brand is a strange hybrid of liberal and conservative views in regards to the military, fiscal policy, and the size of government, and social issues. While Sean Hannity may keep calling himself a conservative, and perhaps not incorrectly as a large umbrella term, his particular brand of conservatism is very much more in line with Republicans than pure conservatism.

You can run from it all you want because it disgusts you to be somehow tied to those icky republicans and conservatives and because you're one of the most stereotypical libertarians in regards to your thinking and attitude toward other groups of politics on this board, but the fact is its not incorrect in current terms to label Libertarianism as being under the umbrella of Conservatism when speaking of the two main political leans currently experienced within our country.

Snarky today aren't we.

Still I pointed out why you are wrong previously. Libertarianism was not born out of conservatism. There are many similarities between libertarianism and the philosophy formerly known as conservatism on fiscal matters, but social matters things were very different. Socially it lined up well better with liberalism. The fact is that libertarian philosophy is deeply rooted in classical liberalism and comes neither from modern liberalism or conservatism. Though it shares many ideas with both.

 

[Zyphlin]

Snarky today aren't we.

Still I pointed out why you are wrong previously. Libertarianism was not born out of conservatism. There are many similarities between libertarianism and the philosophy formerly known as conservatism on fiscal matters, but social matters things were very different. Socially it lined up well better with liberalism. The fact is that libertarian philosophy is deeply rooted in classical liberalism and comes neither from modern liberalism or conservatism. Though it shares many ideas with both.

I didn't disagree with you inregards to it being possibly closer to classical liberalism, or being born more out of that. You're creating a strawman and you can beat on it all you want.

I'm talking about currently and the current dominant political philosophies and the basic principles and views of said philosophies. Out of the two major leans currently, Liberal and Conservative, Libertarians fit more under the conservative banner. Republicans fit under that as well. That does not make them one in the same.

Just because two things fall under the same umbrella doesn't mean they're exactly the same or amazingly closely related. Take sports. You could say there's two primary current spectrums of Sport...those with balls and those without. Football and Baseball would both fall under the umbrella of "Sports with Balls", that does not necessarily mean that they are exactly the same or even closely the same. But in regards to the core definition used there, the use of a ball or no, baseball is closer to football than it is to say swimming.

I'm not arguing of whence Libertarian came. I'm arguing as to where it sits in the spectrum of American Politics based on the two over arching political leans found within this country.

 

[Ikari]

Ok, when the umbrella is Sports with Balls, yeah football and baseball are under that. But if the umbrella was football, baseball wouldn't fall under it. It's not that you claim the umbrella is small government philosophies or something like that, you claim the umbrella is conservatism in and of itself. If libertarianism fell under that umbrella, that would make it a subset of conservatism. But libertarianism is not a subset of conservatism, while there are some things which the two philosophies agree on they disagree on many fundamental things. In the end, libertarianism is equally apart from modern liberalism and conservatism.