• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is conservatism selfishness?

SonOfDaedalus said:
Is conservative ideology selfish? It seems to be based on self-reliance and the freedom of the individual. Collective cooperation is seen as something to be feared and avoided.

A lot of conservatives like Paul Ryan and Rand Paul (named after her) love Ayn Rand. But her philosophy is that "selfishness is a virtue." So, at its heart is conservatism a selfish ideology?





US Republican leaders love Ayn Rand’s controversial philosophy—and are increasingly misinterpreting it

more Ayn Rand...

Click to expand...


Selfishness may or may not be a virtue and may or may not always be in keeping with self interest.

Ayn Rand made some very good observations regarding the corruption that often grips larger organizations and the petty intrigues that plague them.

In my very limited experience, the best way to get anything done is to start doing it. Government is many things, but it is usually characterized by bureaucracy and bureaucrats that corrupt it.

It "feels" like the real purpose of larger organizations is to both avoid action and then justify that avoidance.

This is usually accomplished while increasing the amount of money used to not accomplish what was not accomplished previously for less.

This is not a condition promoted by one group and opposed by another. In government, the only common thread is waste or theft on a grand scale by anyone with a finger in the pie.

They are all crooks and the illusion of opposing forces is no more real than any other staged, for profit, wrestling match.


 
Renae said:
It's never been selfish, it's been about personal responsibility. YOU are the master of your future, your well being, don't demand others give so you can have through government action.
Click to expand...

How do you define 'personal responsibility'? Are you personally responsible if illness forces you out of work and you end up destitute on the street? If you, personally, fell on hard times would you refuse government (taxpayer), aid out of principle? I have asked this question many times but for whatever reason those espousing 'personal responsibility' seem reluctant to respond. The answer, of course, is that you would, and your 'principles' would rapidly become a distant memory.
 
snakestretcher said:
How do you define 'personal responsibility'? Are you personally responsible if illness forces you out of work and you end up destitute on the street? If you, personally, fell on hard times would you refuse government (taxpayer), aid out of principle? I have asked this question many times but for whatever reason those espousing 'personal responsibility' seem reluctant to respond. The answer, of course, is that you would, and your 'principles' would rapidly become a distant memory.
Click to expand...

Yes. I find it puzzling that they would point to someone who comes from a background of a wealthy elite private college prep boarding school, with strong family connections in the business world, and feel that their success is just due to just to their hard work. Or conversely, they would look to someone from a background where they could not afford lunch at their drug and crime infested inner city school, and lay the blame entirely on them.
 
joko104 said:
The hive mentality. There are no individuals. All serve the hive. Curiously - and a total contradiction - despise the concept of a "society," which is another word for "nationalism,' which they declare is evil. There is no rationality in their ideals because they are not their ideals. They are the ideals of those who want all the power and wealth for themselves, promising to share it - which they will never do.
Click to expand...

Abject nonsense, and typical of the conservative mindset.
 
joko104 said:
The goal is to obtain as much of what you want in life, whatever that is, best you can now and in the future for you and your own - family, nuclear circle and then community and country. Democrats reject competition - certainly for our nation as a society. They want to erase the USA as a competitive country and society, a foolishness no other country shares - other than some other white liberal countries who decided to hate themselves.
Click to expand...

More rubbish. Nobody is trying to 'erase' anything except in your febrile imagination. Tell me, which of these "white liberal" countries hates itself? That's one of the stupidest things I have read from you.
 
joko104 said:
The hive mentality. There are no individuals. All serve the hive. Curiously - and a total contradiction - despise the concept of a "society," which is another word for "nationalism,' which they declare is evil. There is no rationality in their ideals because they are not their ideals. They are the ideals of those who want all the power and wealth for themselves, promising to share it - which they will never do.
Click to expand...

Oh spare us your self righteous and pompous chest beating. Hive mentality. You swallowed the same bull**** peddled in "Calculus of Consent" and other sordid tales from "political economists" like Buchanan and Calhoun and yourself are part of a hive mind ideology.

Look at your arguments. The same rabid, anti-democracy noise we hear spouted off in every malicious propagandized "appeal" to the "patriotic individual american". So please. Spare us the ****ing canard.

At the end of the day, what you lot want is this - groups diminished to individuals, so the propertied class can dictate what it wills onto the individuals that compose the union.

Look at your last sentence. It doesn't even make sense that you would type this comment given the affluence worship you lot are privvy to. Your handouts to corporations and the greedy ****s that own them.

The rich have CREATED your narrative, the hive mind center, which you, like a good little boy, spew out and peddle with such hostility you'd make an enemy of a brother american. The RICH have formulated and refined the arguments you yourself now use. The very few of this country have fed you what to say and lied to you about the intent.

And here you are, pavlov's dog, regurgitating the astroturf filled bull**** you were fed.

Sad.
 
SonOfDaedalus said:
Is conservative ideology selfish? It seems to be based on self-reliance and the freedom of the individual. Collective cooperation is seen as something to be feared and avoided.

A lot of conservatives like Paul Ryan and Rand Paul (named after her) love Ayn Rand. But her philosophy is that "selfishness is a virtue." So, at its heart is conservatism a selfish ideology?





US Republican leaders love Ayn Rand’s controversial philosophy—and are increasingly misinterpreting it

more Ayn Rand...

Click to expand...




After spending Trillions upon Trillions with the "collective" strategy, it seems that hasn't worked either?



In his January 1964 State of the Union address, President Lyndon Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.” In the 50 years since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs. Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all U.S. military wars since the American Revolution. Yet progress against poverty, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, has been minimal, and in terms of President Johnson’s main goal of reducing the “causes” rather than the mere “consequences” of poverty, the War on Poverty has failed completely. In fact, a significant portion of the population is now less capable of self-sufficiency than it was when the War on Poverty began.
Click to expand...




The War on Poverty After 50 Years | The Heritage Foundation
 
snakestretcher said:
How do you define 'personal responsibility'? Are you personally responsible if illness forces you out of work and you end up destitute on the street? If you, personally, fell on hard times would you refuse government (taxpayer), aid out of principle? I have asked this question many times but for whatever reason those espousing 'personal responsibility' seem reluctant to respond. The answer, of course, is that you would, and your 'principles' would rapidly become a distant memory.
Click to expand...

Goly, I didn't think about the most extreme heart sting stories, MY LIFE IS ALIE!!! GO BERNIE!!!

The ****.

Anyway.

Personal Responsibility, as adults know who are using a single brain cell or more..... applies to those who are of able body and mind and they are responsible for THEIR lives and taking care of THEIR families. ERGO, ROAD and HIGHWAYS are not something an individual could do, as an earlier post tried to going into the absurd on. Rather, if you're able to work, then you are responsible for you. That means you should exhaust all avenues of available to you before you sought government assistance, and that assistance should be limited.

Does that mean that you might have to work 3 **** jobs for a while? Yeah. Does that mean you might have to go with out things for a time in your life? Yeah. You might even have to make the hard call to move away from friends and family to get your life in a better place.

But if you are of able mind and body... not some sob story bs what the **** ever, you are responsible for you.

LIFE AIN'T FAIR, and not everyone has the same outcome. You cannot subsidize life to fairness, you cannot legislate equality of outcomes. You can however, greatly stack the odds in your favor by taking control of your life and doing what you need to do, instead of looking for handouts. This concept isn't hard.
 
Renae said:
Goly, I didn't think about the most extreme heart sting stories, MY LIFE IS ALIE!!! GO BERNIE!!!

The ****.

Anyway.

Personal Responsibility, as adults know who are using a single brain cell or more..... applies to those who are of able body and mind and they are responsible for THEIR lives and taking care of THEIR families. ERGO, ROAD and HIGHWAYS are not something an individual could do, as an earlier post tried to going into the absurd on. Rather, if you're able to work, then you are responsible for you. That means you should exhaust all avenues of available to you before you sought government assistance, and that assistance should be limited.

Does that mean that you might have to work 3 **** jobs for a while? Yeah. Does that mean you might have to go with out things for a time in your life? Yeah. You might even have to make the hard call to move away from friends and family to get your life in a better place.

But if you are of able mind and body... not some sob story bs what the **** ever, you are responsible for you.

LIFE AIN'T FAIR, and not everyone has the same outcome. You cannot subsidize life to fairness, you cannot legislate equality of outcomes. You can however, greatly stack the odds in your favor by taking control of your life and doing what you need to do, instead of looking for handouts. This concept isn't hard.
Click to expand...

Right, so you were unable or unwilling to answer my question. That's ok, I'm quite used to it when uncomfortable questions are asked.
 
snakestretcher said:
I clearly asked you if you would refuse state aid. Well, would you (being principled and all)?
Click to expand...

You know, when I got out the Navy, and my wife and I were homeless after a hurricane destroyed the business I was going to work for... everyone told me to sign up for "Unemployment" through Texas, as we pay into that through taxes it was due me. I was on it, I think 3 months. And I felt dirty as hell. It still bothers me. My wife didn't' as she had never worked in Texas she felt it would be wrong. We had NOTHING. I got a **** job, working in retail. At the time we qualified for food stamps and other programs, but we refused. I worked a few side jobs and despite having nearly been on the streets twice since that point some 13 years ago, I couldn't and wouldn't take another penny. We lived off ramen noodles and el cheapo products presents for near on a year. We had one car. Hell it took us 4 years to buy an LCD TV, we were still using a 32 inch CRT I got in 1994. We saved up for that and paid cash.

She got a job working part time that turned into a job that now could, should things work out and the COMPANY ACTUALLY SELLS... net us 750k. I bounced around a few jobs and now work from home for good money, great benefits. Hell I didn't have a cell phone for 6 years? Just recently got one...

But we went without rather than sign up for other programs, we went without when times got hard rather than take.

We were in a bad bad place, and I made the wrong choice to listen to others, a lesson well taught.
 
snakestretcher said:
I clearly asked you if you would refuse state aid. Well, would you (being principled and all)?
Click to expand...

And how has this "state aid " worked all these years?

I mean, the 22 Trillion worth
 
Renae said:
You know, when I got out the Navy, and my wife and I were homeless after a hurricane destroyed the business I was going to work for... everyone told me to sign up for "Unemployment" through Texas, as we pay into that through taxes it was due me. I was on it, I think 3 months. And I felt dirty as hell. It still bothers me. My wife didn't' as she had never worked in Texas she felt it would be wrong. We had NOTHING. I got a **** job, working in retail. At the time we qualified for food stamps and other programs, but we refused. I worked a few side jobs and despite having nearly been on the streets twice since that point some 13 years ago, I couldn't and wouldn't take another penny. We lived off ramen noodles and el cheapo products presents for near on a year. We had one car. Hell it took us 4 years to buy an LCD TV, we were still using a 32 inch CRT I got in 1994. We saved up for that and paid cash.

She got a job working part time that turned into a job that now could, should things work out and the COMPANY ACTUALLY SELLS... net us 750k. I bounced around a few jobs and now work from home for good money, great benefits. Hell I didn't have a cell phone for 6 years? Just recently got one...

But we went without rather than sign up for other programs, we went without when times got hard rather than take.

We were in a bad bad place, and I made the wrong choice to listen to others, a lesson well taught.
Click to expand...

Nobody gives a damn for your "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" anecdote. It's the same sordid song and dance every "conservative" spins around here.

Newsflash: it's an anecdote, and anecdotes are not useful in debate, because everyone has an anecdote to counter the one postulated.

So please. If you want to be seen as credible, stop spewing such rabid soundbyte nonsense. No one cares. Full stop.
 
Obscurity said:
Nobody gives a damn for your "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" anecdote. It's the same sordid song and dance every "conservative" spins around here.

Newsflash: it's an anecdote, and anecdotes are not useful in debate, because everyone has an anecdote to counter the one postulated.

So please. If you want to be seen as credible, stop spewing such rabid soundbyte nonsense. No one cares. Full stop.
Click to expand...



Pardon the interruption... but I'm seeing a lot of "emotion" here
 
Luther said:
And how has this "state aid " worked all these years?

I mean, the 22 Trillion worth
Click to expand...

Its worked wonderfully. Look at countries with very low state aid. They are hell holes
 
Luther said:
Pardon the interruption... but I'm seeing a lot of "emotion" here
Click to expand...

The only emotion is derision and annoyance at having to continue to point out that anecdotes are not arguments, they're useless noise.
 
Obscurity said:
Nobody gives a damn for your "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" anecdote. It's the same sordid song and dance every "conservative" spins around here.

Newsflash: it's an anecdote, and anecdotes are not useful in debate, because everyone has an anecdote to counter the one postulated.

So please. If you want to be seen as credible, stop spewing such rabid soundbyte nonsense. No one cares. Full stop.
Click to expand...

Thanks for admitting you gave up trying to make a rational argument, pull yourself up by the bootstraps is the key to a successful life, reliance on government is the key to forever being poor. Have a nice day.
 
Obscurity said:
The only emotion is derision and annoyance at having to continue to point out that anecdotes are not arguments, they're useless noise.
Click to expand...

You asked if I would ever take state assistance, and I admitted once, I did, to my deep shame and regret.
 
vegas giants said:
Its worked wonderfully. Look at countries with very low state aid. They are hell holes
Click to expand...

No... No.... and No.... I don't care about "other countries"

So you think spending 22 trillion(United states) with very little results is a good thing?
 
vegas giants said:
You would never live in a country without welfare
Click to expand...

Again, you keep bringing up "other countries"

I don't give a Rats behind about other countries
 
Luther said:
No... No.... and No.... I don't care about "other countries"

So you think spending 22 trillion(United states) with very little results is a good thing?
Click to expand...

The results have been fantastic. We dont look like countries that have no welfare
 
Luther said:
Again, you keep bringing up "other countries"

I don't give a Rats behind about other countries
Click to expand...

I dont care if you hate facts.


They are still facts
 
Renae said:
Thanks for admitting you gave up trying to make a rational argument, pull yourself up by the bootstraps is the key to a successful life, reliance on government is the key to forever being poor. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

If you want to have a rational argument, then let's have one. Using anecdotes is the exact opposite of having a rational argument. It's spewing uninformed and useless noise that detracts from and diminishes the discussion to a mudslinging contest of who can form the best emotional appeal to the listener.

A rational argument would not rely on such contrivances to construct and reinforce its point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom