• 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!

Does this video explain conservatism accurately?

Does this video portray conservatism accurately?


  • Total voters
    16
This is a bit over the top. Progressivism equals communism and mass murdering? Getting something for nothing from the government? No. He's got the main points of conservatism right I would say, but everything else is a bit silly.
 
I like it. Simple and accessible communication of core values.
 
Well, it certainly does show the standard Tea Party Line if that's what you're asking. I'm sure Tea Partiers not only believe but approve of the infomercial style of exaggeration and misinformation.
 
This is a bit over the top. Progressivism equals communism and mass murdering? Getting something for nothing from the government? No. He's got the main points of conservatism right I would say, but everything else is a bit silly.

Did you watch the whole video?

What does progressivism progress to?
 
Did you watch the whole video?

What does progressivism progress to?

Social justice in most cases, such as ending segregation.
 
Social justice in most cases, such as ending segregation.

Then we are talking about different versions. Progressivism tends to favor greater government intervention in daily life, which leads to socialism, which, according to Marx, is only a step towards communism.
 
I think this video nails the philosophical underpinnings of conservatism.

 


One school of conservatism, yes. Big government, anti- or skeptical viewpoints toward free-enterprise is also a conservative philosophy.

Arguing on behalf of the notion that people are perhaps bad would also explain why big government conservatism exists.
 
Last edited:
One school of conservatism, yes. Big government, anti- or skeptical viewpoints toward free-enterprise is also a conservative philosophy.

Arguing on behalf of the notion that people are perhaps bad would also explain why big government conservatism exists.

I don't think that any American conservatism calls for big gov't. If you would kindly elaborate...
 
Then we are talking about different versions. Progressivism tends to favor greater government intervention in daily life, which leads to socialism, which, according to Marx, is only a step towards communism.

It also leads to social progress, such as equality for women and minorities - or at least the removal of legislative and social barriers to progress in those areas. And Socialism does not lead to Communism - otherwise you'd have half the countries in the world, including all of Scandanavia, Marxist.
 
I don't think that any American conservatism calls for big gov't. If you would kindly elaborate...

Well, aside from much of American conservative history (Federalists, Whigs, Early and post-Civil War GOP, and so on and so forth)......

Hawkish foreign policy conservatives, domestic policy neoconservatives, Bush "compassionate conservatism," Theoconservatives, Culture warriors.....

For the sake of argument, a decent chunk of the Tea Party.
 
His video on American exceptionalism is also equating American exceptionalism with exclusively greatness. While that is an important part of it, there is a great deal more about it.
 
I don't think that any American conservatism calls for big gov't. If you would kindly elaborate...

This is where it gets tricky..."small government" conservatives under Bush like Paul Ryan were voting for his big government agenda.

Small government conservatives have passed things like a Doctor isn't allowed to ask a patient if they own a gun, pregnant women are forced to get ultrasounds before an abortion, they've supported laws to create a state religion, they always pushed for more spending on the military....honestly if you believe in small government and are afraid of a government take over how do you support a military anywhere the size of ours.

Small government how? States rights? It was the Federal Government that ended segregation and ended slavery.

Small government as in less government intervention across the board? Do you agree or disagree with the Sherman Anti-Trust Act? The creation of national parks? So that Yellowstone is open to the public and kept clean rather than surrounded by touristy high rises?

What does exceptionalism mean? I've seen it used as a stick to beat to criticism of the government. Why do conservatives tend to label things like "anti-american" or "doesn't believe in exceptionalism" at persons that disagree with the actions of a government. Doesn't exceptionalism take work? Like sometimes you have to criticize the government in order to meen any idea of exceptionalism?

Edit: I also think this guy spends a lot of time attacking views of a very small % of the population...or at least creating broad generalizations for the "other side".
 
Last edited:
Then we are talking about different versions. Progressivism tends to favor greater government intervention in daily life, which leads to socialism, which, according to Marx, is only a step towards communism.

Yeah, but your most important progressive impulse in the United States was nearly antithetical to Marxism. It didn't subscribe to his stage theory.
 
I think this video nails the philosophical underpinnings of conservatism.



The video you posted is vary close, if not exactly, what the founding father wanted the U.S.A. to be. We have strayed far from that path. Now it is our duty to get back to it.
 
What does exceptionalism mean? I've seen it used as a stick to beat to criticism of the government. Why do conservatives tend to label things like "anti-american" or "doesn't believe in exceptionalism" at persons that disagree with the actions of a government. Doesn't exceptionalism take work? Like sometimes you have to criticize the government in order to meen any idea of exceptionalism?

It means a lot of things. For one, it can mean greatness or power, or at least, an aspiration toward it. Second, it can mean some sort of metahistorical narrative regarding destiny, whether for better or for worse. For instance, references to a beacon of liberty, city upon a hill, and so forth. Related to this is immense pressure put on the United States or the colony to fulfill its role, lest it be punished or ridiculed by God or by mankind in a manner never-before-seen. It can also simply refer to a significant distinction between the United States and many other nations, be they explicitly European or much of the world. This last notion takes on many different forms. It can be anything from "the U.S. was founded upon an ideology" to "the U.S. has a higher rate of gun violence than X number of countries throughout the world."
 
The video you posted is vary close, if not exactly, what the founding father wanted the U.S.A. to be. We have strayed far from that path. Now it is our duty to get back to it.

They were never a monolith. This is probably the worst idea you could promote. There are still ideas that many Founders thought acceptable that would be deemed wholly too big government, too imperialistic, too anti-democratic, too...whatever.
 
It also leads to social progress, such as equality for women and minorities - or at least the removal of legislative and social barriers to progress in those areas. And Socialism does not lead to Communism - otherwise you'd have half the countries in the world, including all of Scandanavia, Marxist.

American conservatism leads to social progress as well in that it dictates that all humans are worthy of equal treatment before the law. Something that Lincoln (a conservative Republican) fought for. But under the same banner as social progress are the socialists who fight for greater involvement of government. Now those who once fought for social progress fight against it because (much like the democratic party) it has been co-opted by the socialists. Meanwhile republicans have been portrayed as the representative of conservatism in America when they have long since lost the right to bear that title. Conservatives need a new party to fight for them, so the more hardcore libertarians created the tea party which has been ruthlessly attacked by the media which means that no one take them seriously.

*Inhales, ending rant*

What you say about socialism is largely true in that it doesn't lead to communism. Marx was wrong.
 
American conservatism leads to social progress as well in that it dictates that all humans are worthy of equal treatment before the law. Something that Lincoln (a conservative Republican) fought for. But under the same banner as social progress are the socialists who fight for greater involvement of government. Now those who once fought for social progress fight against it because (much like the democratic party) it has been co-opted by the socialists. Meanwhile republicans have been portrayed as the representative of conservatism in America when they have long since lost the right to bear that title. Conservatives need a new party to fight for them, so the more hardcore libertarians created the tea party which has been ruthlessly attacked by the media which means that no one take them seriously.

*Inhales, ending rant*

What you say about socialism is largely true in that it doesn't lead to communism. Marx was wrong.

Debatable to say the least. First off, you have to contend with the extensive history of American conservatism where there was a significant amount of elitism and anti-democratic attitudes. This showed itself in numerous forms. I consider elitism and anti-democratic attitudes as sometimes very necessary and good. This isn't a dramatic criticism of the concept. However, conservatism has many different flavors and concepts that can often contradict themselves.
 
They were never a monolith. This is probably the worst idea you could promote. There are still ideas that many Founders thought acceptable that would be deemed wholly too big government, too imperialistic, too anti-democratic, too...whatever.

May by I am giving them to much credit. But they were very intelligent. They wrote the constitution, but recently it have starred to be ignored by law makers.
 
Back
Top Bottom