Posted: 1/25/2011 11:05:27 PM EDT
|
delete
Read the metadata mod/staff if you care. |
|
Quoted:
Please name any "brand" of conservatism or of the right side of the political spectrum. There seem to be many, and like ARFcom there is much agreement on what the problems are, but a whole lot less on the solutions. I remember when Baskin Robbins discontinued the "Blood, Sweat and Tears" flavor of ice cream. That sucked. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Please name any "brand" of conservatism or of the right side of the political spectrum. There seem to be many, and like ARFcom there is much agreement on what the problems are, but a whole lot less on the solutions. Get lost, troll. Seems like a good solution to me. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pike.. yep your on the list Serious question gets multiple trolls and you find it shocking I find pointless to continue? Sorry. OUT. You delete before I even posted that.. You knew exactly what you were doing.. And what makes you think I wasn't talking about a good list? |
|
If you're talking about the post-war American Conservative Movement then the three main types are the libertarians, traditionalists, and the fusionists although there are certainly other variations. Outside of the English-speaking world they would be called liberals although many would also bear the adjective conservative. There is a historical reason why most liberals became known as conservatives and illiberal types became known as liberals here in the U.S. (and to a lesser extent in the rest of the Anglosphere).
You also have conservatives that are not really conservatives in the above sense, i.e. subscribers to a certain set of liberal political philosophies, but rather people who either by temperament just want to conserve whatever the status quo happens to be or who do so because they despair of making things better from the perspective of the aforementioned philosophies and thus try to conserve the status quo (which is in opposition to those philosophies) to prevent them from from becoming worse (which I suppose could be called moderate conservatives in the latter cases; the former are more dictionary conservatives than anything else and represent no true political ideology or philosophy). The former and sometimes the latter end up opposing what the Conservative Movement or subsets of it do because the status quo represents the Left while the Conservative Movement is on the Right. There are also those in the Right which have never been part of the Conservative Movement in any way including Objectivists (who are very much an anomaly having fundamentals that are more in common with the Left), the more extreme libertarians (the minarchist types, some of which are probably better labeled anarchists), the libertarians which are classical liberals (for the most part), and anarcho-capitalists, among others. There are also European conservatives which are similar to those in the 2nd paragraph but tend to support the status ante, and most often are monarchists. Other European conservatives, monarchists or republicans, would likely fall into the category in the first paragraph, i.e. the more conservative sorts of liberals. The rest of the European Right could probably fall into the category of the 3rd paragraph in their own way. I'm sure there are others on the Right I am missing. Finally you have those who bear the conservative title in America but really are on the Left and not the Right. These are the neoconservatives. They are fundamentally the same as the common false liberal in the Democratic Party but they have parted ways on a number of foreign policy issues (adopting a foreign policy that also bears the neoconservative name), are anti-communist wheareas the rest of their kind are either anti-anti-communist or have some sympathies in that direction (a more modern variation on this theme deals with Islamism rather than Communism), and have a number of social views more aligned with those of traditional conservatives. They often are a bit more moderate or reformist on their other views but for the most part they are synonymous at their core with those of the Democratic Party, although since most are in the GOP now they tend to modify views as the political winds seem to demand although this strays from the basic ideology. They are not in any way real conservatives and were not originally knwon as such. You also have the dumb categories of fiscal and social conservative which make no political sense and which seem to derive from the even more senseless political compass concept, along with variations on these terms (like economic conservative). There are also the religious fundamentalists who make their fundamentalism the centrepiece of an ideology which can easily be tossed into the junk ideology category (you can probably also throw the former types from the 2nd paragraph into the junk pile as well). |
