• 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?

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.

I don’t think you made the wrong choice. Everyone needs a helping hand every now and then. Everyone understands that. What people resent is when welfare becomes a generational thing.
 
The radical fringe libertarians that have subverted republicanism and replaced it with a pall of evangelical horse**** concealing a truly radical property supremacists movement has completely commandeered right wing think now.

These folks believe a fringe interpretation of the constitution, a restriction of collective power, and an evisceration of the rights of the majority as a voting bloc.

Go read Democracy in Chains.

As readers may recall, Democracy in Chains by Duke History Professor Nancy MacLean is a very badly-flawed account of the life, career, and influence of the late Nobel Prize winning economist, James Buchanan. Despite the fact that the book has been shown to be replete with errors, exaggerations, and misinterpretations, it was a finalist for a National Book Award and more recently received honors from the Los Angeles Times. Most disturbingly, despite serious allegations of academic malfeaseance, MacLean is the plenary speaker at the AAUP's annual conference this Fall.

MacLean has refused to respond to any of the substantive critiques of the book, beyond to claim that her critics are almost all somehow associated with the Charles Koch Foundation, and thus somehow tainted. (In the book, she grossly exaggerates the influence of Buchanan on Koch, but the critics do not focus on that point, as there are so many other errors to deal with.)

A review by Alain Marciano of Université de Montpellier and Jean-Baptiste Fleury of the University of Cergy-Pontoise, forthcoming in the Journal of Economic Literature should, but almost certainly won't, be the final nail in the book's coffin:
Another Devastating Review of “Democracy in Chains” – Reason.com

I'll pass on reading garbage.
 
The radical fringe libertarians that have subverted republicanism and replaced it with a pall of evangelical horse**** concealing a truly radical property supremacists movement has completely commandeered right wing think now.

These folks believe a fringe interpretation of the constitution, a restriction of collective power, and an evisceration of the rights of the majority as a voting bloc.

Go read Democracy in Chains.

MacLean seems not to notice Brown is itself an example of the phenomenon MacLean is denouncing: a Constitution being used to overrule a democratic outcome in the name of protecting a minority.

It's an awkward start for a baroque conspiracy story, and it signals what a mess the book will be. The historian has little to no evidence for her history. She invents some when necessary, and will at times just make assertions to suit her narrative, mustering neither real nor phony evidence to back them up. Many of her factual and interpretive errors have already been covered elsewhere, in venues ranging from Vox to The Washington Post. Rather than get lost in the weeds of covering every false statement or misleadingly gerrymandered quotation in this book, I want to focus here on the core claims that it gets wrong:

MacLean fundamentally misunderstands Buchanan's intellectual project, treating his theories about politics as an apologia for the wealthy and powerful. This gives short shrift to a serious body of thought, and it fails to see that his arguments can indict the wealthy as much as anyone else.
What Nancy MacLean Gets Wrong About James Buchanan – Reason.com
 
Come back when you have some facts



I aim to please(LOL)


Here ya go buddy!


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.
 
And this "European enlightenment" is the same socialist Europe of today?(LOL)

Yes of course. It's also what the government of the United States was built on.

Some humility, openness to ideas, willingness to be a student and learn stuff, is not a bad thing. Arrogant people don't usually do well in the long run.
 
Last edited:
I aim to please(LOL)


Here ya go buddy!

Please run from this question


Can you name a current successful.country without welfare or social.programs?


Watch this folks. Lol
 
Kind of. It's also what the government of the United States was built on.

Some humility, openness to ideas, willingness to be a student and learn stuff, is not a bad thing. Arrogant people don't usually do well in the long run.

You sure had to pause and really, really had to think about my response didn't you?(LOL)



Kind of?

Not even close
 
You sure had to pause and really, really had to think about my response didn't you?(LOL)




Kind of?

Not even close

Can you name a current successful.country without welfare or social.programs?
 
I don’t think you made the wrong choice. Everyone needs a helping hand every now and then. Everyone understands that. What people resent is when welfare becomes a generational thing.

True, but the job I took barely made more after taxes than what the Unemployment check landed me, and as I had friends saying "Hey look stay on unemployment, sign up for this and that and you wont' have to work and still... " it was not a good place for me as my spirit was broken at the time. And after the ex went to court my pay check dropped to at one point $50 every two weeks after taxes and 750 a month child support for two kids. It got better when she gave up on our son and sent him to me but still... it was UGLY.
 
Please run from this question


Can you name a current successful.country without welfare or social.programs?


Watch this folks. Lol


You see, there are so many holes to your point

I'm not going to waste my time discussing Other countries which I don't even care about

I care about these United American states(Hello)

Summery: You ignore the facts that you asked for(wink)

I gave you facts of the U.S.A. and it's welfare programs

Later dude!
 
You see, there are so many holes to your point

I'm not going to waste my time discussing Other countries which I don't even care about

I care about these United American states(Hello)

Summery: You ignore the facts that you asked for(wink)

I gave you facts of the U.S.A.

Later dude!

Can you name a current successful.country without welfare or social.programs?
 
It's never been selfish, it's been about personal responsibility.

Well that's demonstrably false.

Trump never takes personal responsibility, and Conservatives love him.

Conservatives who are not successful usually seem to blame immigrants, they rarely look to themselves to improve their education and help themselves. In fact many eschew getting an education, preferring to spout nonsense such as they will get "indoctrinated", so they can sit on their lazy asses and blame everyone else.

Or they could get a second, and if needed third job to improve their lot. Of course, that's what they used to tell blacks, but now that it's them who are on the bottom rung, why it's just not fair, and wages need to go up.

Nope, the last thing most American Conservatives do is take personal responsibility. Trump is a perfect reflection of his base, that's why they love him, and the last thing he does is take personal responsibility.
 
Last edited:
Yeah yeah. One review, a few dozen reviews claiming she misrepresented quotes - spare me. Her documentation of the radicalizing of the right has already come to fruition. Look at how you lot argue. IT's all there in black and white.

You ought to read it. It explains quite a bit, despite partisan efforts to disenfranchize it.

Actually, I could post a list of academic eviscerations of that trash manual you're slobbering over.
 
Yeah yeah. One review, a few dozen reviews claiming she misrepresented quotes - spare me. Her documentation of the radicalizing of the right has already come to fruition. Look at how you lot argue. IT's all there in black and white.

You ought to read it. It explains quite a bit, despite partisan efforts to disenfranchize it.

Thanks for the link. Interesting.
 
Is conservative ideology selfish? NO!

Sure it it. It's survival of the fittest. Anti any essential social services funded via tax dollars. Their belief that the hungry can to a church to eat, patronize a soup kitchen (privatized only) or beg in the street. They're against school lunches. Children can eat what their parents pack, never mind the fact that we don't live in Mayberry where all adults are responsible enough to prepare their children's lunch. The world to conservatives is black and white, this or that one way or the other. Grey areas and unforeseen circumstances don't exist. Get off your ass and pull yourself up by your heels and just do it. The ironic thing is that this mentality exists in the disenfranchised in poor red states among people who utilize the same essential services that they continually vote against.
 
Actually, I could post a list of academic eviscerations of that trash manual you're slobbering over.

And I could post a list of academic support for the assertions made in Maclean's book.

You guys just don't like being exposed.
 
I've never heard of Ayn Rand's philosophies being called "conservative". I think you mean "libertarian".

Have you read her books? In "Atlas Shrugged" every character who isn't one of her "strong and powerful men" or a woman who loves them, everyone who in actual life would be in favor of social programs of any sort, are depicted as extreme buffoons, almost like comic book characters.

Yeah, she was conservative.
 
And I could post a list of academic support for the assertions made in Maclean's book.

You guys just don't like being exposed.

Tin foil hat troof believers always think they are smarter than everyone, because they keep the Government mind rays blocked...
 
Tin foil hat troof believers always think they are smarter than everyone, because they keep the Government mind rays blocked...

I'm still waiting for that rational argument. I can sit here and sling **** at you all day too, but I'm not interested in wearing the stink.
 
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.

So, if you become catastrophically ill or injured and can't work, too damn bad? Or if you are developmentally challenged? Or a wounded veteran?

I'm not disagreeing that we should all chart our own course, but sometimes life just happens while you're making plans to succeed. Have you never benefitted from any government program?
 
Back
Top Bottom