FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB General Discussion Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-06-2003, 06:22 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southern US
Posts: 817
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by m00ner
We're conserving ourselves and our hard-earned income.
Why not conserve...

our Treasury!

Bush is making it see massive red! Hope you aren't counting on any Social Security which many of us have also earned and worked hard for!
Sojourner553 is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 06:24 PM   #22
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 180
Default

Don't blame this on our idiot president. In fact, don't ever, ever listen to anything he says. He's being told what to say, and he usually screws it up.
m00ner is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 06:27 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Fatal Shore
Posts: 900
Default

The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

John Kenneth Galbraith
Jane Bovary is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 06:29 PM   #24
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 180
Default

Well, here's the way I see it...

In the words of the great Broadway musical "Cabaret": "Money makes the world go around."
m00ner is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 08:04 PM   #25
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: New York,NY, USA
Posts: 214
Default

Conservatives are in favor of conserving the status quo. While many here may criticize this as a form of greed, selfishness, and oppression, the status quo is familiar and built upon the foundation of human experience. So they are trying to conserve a way of life they know works for them. They probably ask, "Why change?" and view change with fear because it is unknown and potentially negative to their well-being.

They would argue that thousands of years of human experience has produced this current society, and it should require careful examination of a reform to accept change as necessary. As meritocrat has stated, this means slow change but one that avoids uprooting an established system based upon wishful thinking.

I've given you a general, conservative defense of their position, and not one I necessarily subscribe to. However, I think there is better logic behind their thinking than some of you are willing to give them. Change is a scary thing, and it is natural for people to want to take it slowly or resist change at all.
Brad Messenger is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 10:04 PM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,956
Default

Conservatives = opposing UN and EU or international cooperation
Answerer is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 10:11 PM   #27
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sri Dunka .... Donut: Cruller w/Jimmies
Posts: 2,710
Default

Conservatives = someone has to put a pretty face on greed.
Colander of Truth is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 10:30 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 929
Default

George Lakoff is a liberal who wondered why conservatives have done so well in recent elections, and tried to analyze and compare liberal and conservative outlooks. As one who once considered myself a conservative, but now label myself as a liberal, yet one who has not forgotten that there is some real value to conservative values (some of them, anyway), I think he has an interesting thesis and does a pretty good job of it. He webbed up a summary of his thoughts on Metaphor, Morality, and Politics, or, Why Conservatives Have Left Liberals In the Dust, if anyone is interested.
Hobbs is offline  
Old 05-07-2003, 04:33 AM   #29
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 180
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Brad Messenger
Conservatives are in favor of conserving the status quo. While many here may criticize this as a form of greed, selfishness, and oppression, the status quo is familiar and built upon the foundation of human experience. So they are trying to conserve a way of life they know works for them. They probably ask, "Why change?" and view change with fear because it is unknown and potentially negative to their well-being.

They would argue that thousands of years of human experience has produced this current society, and it should require careful examination of a reform to accept change as necessary. As meritocrat has stated, this means slow change but one that avoids uprooting an established system based upon wishful thinking.

I've given you a general, conservative defense of their position, and not one I necessarily subscribe to. However, I think there is better logic behind their thinking than some of you are willing to give them. Change is a scary thing, and it is natural for people to want to take it slowly or resist change at all.
That's what the majority of Conservatives do, but not what all believe. I'm more Conservative, and I don't even let religious and political thoughts become entangled, for they are two very, very different subjects.
m00ner is offline  
Old 05-07-2003, 09:56 AM   #30
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: SoCal USA
Posts: 7,737
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Jane Bovary
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

John Kenneth Galbraith
I like these types of mischaracterizations.

Conservatism generally holds individual rights to be of the utmost importance. With that in mind, you're damned right that people want to keep what belongs to them and not be forced by a group of people to give it away for some so called "higher purpose".

To me, there is nothing of greater importance than MINE.

My family.
My job.
My home.
My health.
My financial security.
My comfort.

Everything else comes in a distant 2nd, 3rd, and 156th.
I don't steal from anyone else to pay my bills, feed my family, or engage in leisure activities. I am not responsible for anyone else's lot in life but my own and those I am obligated to. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't help out a friend in need-I have done so before. But I wouldn't hurt my wife and kids lifestyle to do it.

Someone on this board once asked me, "didn't your mom teach you to share as a child?" My answer is this; yes she did but she also didn't give my toys to the kid I was playing with when he had to go home at the end of the day either.

Selfish? If you wish to call it that if it makes you feel better about whatever it is you need to feel better about then have at it. But the way I see the word used here is better interpreted as "you have more than other people and you don't want to part with it. That makes you immoral." Or "you have no right to what you consider 'yours'. If you weren't so rotten you'd realize that". Whatever the case may be, the philisophy is one of intimidation and theft.

I'm not a Republican and more and more I think they lose sight of the sanctity of the individual due to religious influence. And using Dubbya as some sort of example of thoughtful conservatism is like using----nevermind, I'm crappy with metaphors. But it's inaccurate.

HaysooChreesto! is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:29 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.