Conservatives, Round 2

Jump to Last Post 1-6 of 6 discussions (86 posts)
  1. gmwilliams profile image83
    gmwilliamsposted 7 weeks ago

    https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/8481070_f1024.jpg
    In the midst of the American sociopolitical discussions, what do Conservatives, Traditionalists, Reactionaries, Retrogressives, & Rightists want for American society?   What are the specifics goals that Conservatives, Traditionalists, Reactionaries, Retrogressives, & Rightists want for American society?

    1. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      And you think that they are really going to tell you?

    2. crankalicious profile image91
      crankaliciousposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      It's really quite simple: conservatives fear change. They want the status quo. A lot of that belief is rooted in religion, which is generally averse to change.

      You can see this basic belief in almost everything they support and do.

      Sometimes the status quo can be a good thing, as in "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Other times, that resistance to change is a bad thing. However, I think when you go through the list of things they tend to oppose (e.g. gay rights, women voting, scientific inquiry into various subjects), it seems objectionable.

      1. GA Anderson profile image93
        GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        I disagree Crankalicious. I do not think Conservatives fear change, Like all things in life, moderation is the watchword. I think Conservatives fear radical change. Change that upsets the applecart without a known outcome. Change that ignores the basic prescriptions that have worked for man for ages, in the hope that the change will be better.

        Of course, there are plenty of examples of the Religious Conservatives appearing to fear change, but I think that fear is because of their beliefs and satisfaction in their life situation. I don't think you can lump the two together to come to your "conservatives fear change" thought.

        If it would help your understanding there are plenty of sources that explain this much better than I can. Although I don't agree with all of his 10 Principles of Conservatism, Kirk Russel might be a good starting point for you to seek a better explanation for what I am saying.

        GA

        1. crankalicious profile image91
          crankaliciousposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Fear is perhaps too extreme, but conservatives almost always want the status quo and protect the status quo.

          Progressives are the opposite of conservatives, not liberals.

          1. promisem profile image98
            promisemposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Yes. True progressives favor change only when it makes sense to change. They oppose changing something that already works.

            Right-wing propagandists have lumped liberals and progressives together to muddy the waters.

            But even Republicans can be progressive.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              You mean like border walls that have shown it nearly shuts down illegal crossing where they exist?

              1. TessSchlesinger profile image94
                TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                Which walls would that be?

                Do share.

                1. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image96
                  Wesman Todd Shawposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Have you ever heard of Israel?

                  Oh wait. I apologize. I mean I apologize for speaking to you. You are the holy woman of God who has THE TRUTH, and I know persons who contradict YOUR HOLY TRUTH shouldn't be allowed to even speak.

                  Sucks to be you. I can't imagine being that insecure. You should write more, so we could see what it is like.

                  1. TessSchlesinger profile image94
                    TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Yes, Israel is guilty of war crimes. Israel should not exist. As a Jew - the daughter of a holocaust victim, a respected member at the committee of the leading synagogue in my country, I am more than aware of what goes on in Israel.

                    The Jews went in on the teaching of Theodore Hertz and bought up property. Right from the start, there were problems with that because the Palestinians were nomads, and suddenly they couldn't pitch tents where they used to. Jews increasingly bought more and more land. Both Palestinians and Jews were promised the land by the British in secret deals. Eventually, the Brits just gave up the mandate, and war was fought between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

                    The Israelis won.

                    But they won the battle and lost the war.

                    There has been no peace, and everyday there is a suicide bomber - wall or not.

                    The bottom line is that Israel has stolen the land from the Palestinians.

                    https://interactive.aljazeera.com/aje/p … _main.html

                    And while the rate of suicide bombers dropped, it did NOT stop. Nor has the violence ceased. The Palestinians just found other ways.

                    After all, how would you feel if the Russians came in, bought up some property in America, and then bought it in sufficiently large tracts of land to declare America to be Russia. That's exactly what the Jews did.

                    The wall has not solved any problems. It has increased the violence in other ways. And I repeat - Israel is guilty of war crimes.

                    Just to set the record straight, I am Jewish, second generation holocaust survivor.

            2. gmwilliams profile image83
              gmwilliamsposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              +100000000000000000, A RESOUNDING THANK YOU.   When I say conservatives, I am defining a person with a restrictive, narrow-minded mindset & philosophy.  These are the people who refuse to see things outside their particular paradigm whether it is traditional, religious, or sociocultural paradigm.   There are conservative Democrats, believe it or not.

            3. GA Anderson profile image93
              GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Uh oh. Another agreement. What is the world coming to?

              GA ;-)

          2. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Do you really think conservatives wish:
            1) to remain static in income or standard of living
            2) keep our universities a hotbed of liberal indoctrination denying free speech
            3) keep our government full of "public servants" that care more for themselves than the country
            4) maintain the invasion across the southern border
            5) maintain corporate policies price gouging people that have no choice (think of some drug pricing here)

            Conservatives want change just as much as liberals...but ONLY change that may lead to a better life.  Of course, that "better life" does not always agree with liberals and the path to getting there can be far different.

            1. crankalicious profile image91
              crankaliciousposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              This just represents a basic misunderstanding of what conservative means. Just because you may be conservative, doesn't mean you toe the party line all the time. But to address your individual points:

              1. maintaining the status quo does not mean remaining static in life, but conservatives generally (notice I'm generalizing) want their ability to do things in life to remain as they are, so change is usually opposed.
              2. This is just a clear misunderstanding of everything Universities do and shows no practical experience on a college campus. While some examples of these things exist, they are not the norm.
              3. The government is a large employer and if you want to insult those of use who work in the public sphere, that's your right.
              4. There's no invasion. That's a word that conservatives use when immigration is more than they want. Immigration is always too high for conservatives.
              5. Conservatives tend to be the party of corporations and support the free market, so if price-gouging is the product of a free market, conservatives would argue that you can take your business somewhere else.

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                1. "..."but conservatives generally ... want their ability to do things in life to remain as they are".  Or improve.  Few people want their life to remain static, never improving, and that was the point.

                2.  Well, we just got a new top administrator at the college in my town, and the first thing she wants is new, special rooms to cater to Muslims wanting to pray, a whole new set of classes teaching white advantage and something else I don't remember but was along the same lines.  I would disagree that our typical, public, universities and colleges are not a hotbed of liberal indoctrination - they have a natural audience in front of them and take advantage of it.

                3.  Apologies: while I DO feel that many govt. jobs are over-staffed, under worked and with tremendous benefits, the comment was intended to refer to legislators in congress.  A great many workers do wonderful work, but precious few (federal) politicians do.

                4.  I guess we could argue terminology all day long, but when hundreds of thousands of people have cross our border each year in violation of our laws and take up residence illegally unless we catch them, I term it an "invasion".  You can choose whatever word you like to try and change the perception of the harm being done but it will remain an invasion to me.  Just don't choose "immigration" as immigration to the United States requires certain things be done and those people have no intention of doing them or of ever becoming citizens of the country that provides their support.

                5.  That's why we see such an uproar, a non-partisan one, over the price gouging in prescription drugs, right?  I disagree.  Conservatives DO recognize that business and corporations supply their needs (most liberals don't seem to), but that does NOT mean that they think it's OK to gouge, ruin the environment or perform other actions that are unethical or illegal.

                1. crankalicious profile image91
                  crankaliciousposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Cool. We're actually moving toward agreement. I'll just point out that the word "conserve" means what it means. It's reflective of "conservative" and means "aiming to preserve" from the Latin.

                  1. Conservatives want to preserve their way of life. Who doesn't? But they usually see change as more threatening than progressives.

                  2. An administrator shouldn't have much to do with whether Muslims have a place to pray. Where I work, student groups have equal access to office space, so a Muslim group of students should have the same access to the space as any other and if they want to use it as a prayer space, they can. And they do. This does not make colleges a hotbed of liberal activity, but it's certainly liberal if you compare it to some point in time where Muslim students were not allowed equal access to space.

                  3. On this we agree. Govt. is frequently overstaffed (but that's usually because the quality of worker is not as good as the private sector and therefore inefficient, so it takes more workers...). Legislators are nobody's favorite.

                  4. We agree there need to be limits on immigration. We agree we can't have open borders. I'm just pointing out that generally speaking, conservatives usually oppose any sort of immigration levels. They're always too high for conservatives.

                  5. In a free market, a company can charge whatever price they want and the consumer has a choice whether to purchase or not. Consumer protections are generally a progressive issue and not a conservative one. Conservatives tend to side with business on this issue.

                2. TessSchlesinger profile image94
                  TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Interesting conversation between CRANKALICIOUS and Wilderness.

                  1. Nope. Liberals and progressives do not think that conservatives do not want to improve their lives. We are only too aware that they do. However, they do not want to change their lives, and that is something very different. The basic difference is that liberals/progressives are prepared to do with less in order for everybody to be able to live well. Conservatives look after their particular group. Liberals say "We're all human - let's share." So while we do want improvement, we're prepared to drop our standard of living in order for others to have a better chance of a life. This is not what conservatives say. Conservatives say "Our lives are getting worse, and people we don't like/approve of/are different to us are getting more. We don't like that. We don't want to share."

                  2. In a country which advocates religious freedom, one cannot say "Well, Christianity comes first - everything else comes a long way behind." Precisely because religions do contract each other, all of them should be completely eradicated from both school and state. Unfortunately, the current lot of conservatives in power want a Christian government, and they want Christianity taught in schools. I certainly don't agree with Islam been taught in schools (and this is where, as a progressive, I differ from liberals). I don't think any religion should be taught in schools. Again, the current far right mandate is to ensure that America is a Christian country. This is not the liberal (or progressive) mandate. In the liberal view, religious freedom is permitted. By making it a Christian country, there is no more religious freedom in America. I, of course, would just prefer everyboy to be athiest. smile

                  3. Agreed.

                  4. Ah. Immigration. Well, first, liberals confuse 'settling' which stopped at the turn of the 20th century with immigration. Up until the late 19th century, people from the old world (Europe, Russia, China) went to the New World (Africa, the Americas, Australia) and settled there. They took what they want, and nobody asked any questions. Might was right.

                  Then at the beginning of the 20th century, immigration arrived. Immigration is a legal process whereby documentation is required. In other words, not everybody and anybody could arrive anymore. As the years went on, immigration requirements became stricter and stricter. As someone who has immigrated and relocated to more than a few countries, let me state here the general requirements for any legal immigration process.

                  a) Crime free police record - this is checked.
                  b) Carrying no disease - there is a thorough medical examination.
                  c) A certain degree of education and skills required. Generally one brings skills that are in short supply in the country admitting immigrants.
                  d) Evidence that one will not be a financial burden to the country.

                  The people that are coming across the border 'to settle' in America are NOT immigrants. They are breaking the law of the country. However, they wouldn't be able to survive in America, if American business owners didn't hire them - knowing full well that they are illegal.

                  I give you, as an example, an employer in San Diego who hired my daughter shortly after we arrived in the States. On her first day,s he worked hard. At the end of the day, he paid her $2 per hour. She was shocked and said that wasn't the minimum wage. He told her she wasn't legal. She told him she was and provided her green card. Who is at fault here? The 'illegal' taking advantage of a 'silent-pleads-consent' set of conditions set up by American business, or people looking desperately to improve their own conditions? Fault on both sides, but if American business owners were told that they faced 5 years jail if they were caught employing illegal settlers, the practice would soon stop.

                  5. Too many people confuse an economic system with a business system. While business can be the way in which an economy is run, it doesn't have to be. An economy is essentially any way in which production and distribution is conducted. There are probably a thousand ways in which this can be done - people work freely and get whatever they need freely. The state owns all industry and distributes everything that is needed. Whatever. My point is simply that an economy is not necessarily one that is about 'business.'

                  So it's not that liberals do not see that business 'provides its needs.' It's that liberals see that business is inefficient, highly destructive, and that while some business can be good provided it is regulated, there are other ways in which production and distribution can take place. Currently, we haven't spoken about this sufficiently. Liberals haven't got a brain in their head and it's all about 'let's share.' Unfortunately, it's not about 'how are we going to get the work done.' Progressives are saying "Hey, this system isn't working - let's talk about how to make one that works better for all of us.' Conservatives yell "That's communism - they're communists, and I'm not going to shrae what I have!"

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image90
                    Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this



                    Well I agree, that is the version of how it was as 'Liberals' understand it, and are taught it.

                    Of course, like almost all "history" and "social stories" of the past being taught today, it is a fabrication of the truth meant to paint those of European descent in the worst light possible.

                    A well written and well researched historical narrative, White Cargo does an excellent job telling of a buried and hidden part of our colonial past by telling the story of the tens of thousands of Britons who lived and died in bondage before African slaves were ever transported to the New World.

                    The brutal practice of indentured servitude of Whites by Whites is conveniently forgotten by the Left.  But more Europeans came to America as indentured servants than Africans did as slaves, more European whites died from transportation and abuse than Africans during the 16th-18th centuries.  These trends only turned very late in the history of indentured servitude and slavery, and this was largely due to the coming Industrial age.

                    Due to harsh working conditions, beatings, starvation, and disease, survival rates for indentured servants rarely exceeded two years.  Thus, the high level of demand was sustained by a continuous flow of white slaves from England, Ireland, and Scotland from 1618 to 1775, who were imported to serve America’s colonial masters. 

                    During its height, this extended to Germans, Poles, Russians, etc. even land owners could be swindled out of their land and promised riches in the new world, only to arrive in America and receive nothing, being forced into servitude, families split apart upon their arrival.

                    The 'crimes' Whites did to other races was no worse than what they visited upon themselves.  Those with the money and power were equal opportunity oppressors regardless of race.



                    This is true, it is in fact the corporations that coerce the politicians to keep the borders open, to not enforce the labor laws, and to support those millions of illegal immigrants with generous social supports.

                    Beyond that it is part of Agenda 2030, Global Compact for Migration, Global Coalition on Migration and a variety of other plans for the world that the UN summits meet about and work to implement around the world... these Pacts and Agendas actually give the migrants more rights and protections than are available to the 'native' populace, and yet another reason why Democratic Politicians today advocate for not only open borders, but universal healthcare for them, as well as social welfare.

                    I really do wish Americans would wake up, and take a moment to read the official documentation of some of these UN Agendas, they might begin to realize that they have no rights, and no protections, under a Global NWO... their Freedoms and Liberties would be forfeit, as well as their rights to own private property, grow their own food, and just about everything else we as Americans take for granted.

                  2. wilderness profile image95
                    wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    1.  LOL  the mantra from liberals is not "I'll do with less so someone else can do better", it is "you do with less so someone else doesn't have to work to get what they want".  Big difference.

                    2.  On this I agree.  The far right (a poor representation of a conservative) DOES want a nation ruled by Christianity.  But in general most of even Christians recognize the danger there.  I'm not so sure about liberals not wanting freedom, or at least not wanting a separation.  When we use taxpayer money to build special facilities for one religion but not another it appears, very clearly to me, to violate our constitution.  And liberals are doing that every day, from foot washing stations in airports for Muslim cab drivers to prayer centers in colleges, again for Muslim use.

                    4.  Agree again.  I have long advocated strong penalties for hiring illegal aliens as workforce labor, up to and including confiscation of the business doing it and/or jail time for the criminals hiring them.  And, of course, deportation of the illegal alien.

                    5.  Not sure of your point except that you don't seem to like free enterprise - the system that has built what the world has accomplished and the only one that has stood the test of time.  Many others have been attempted, from communes to actual communism to socialism and everything in between and every time it has either failed or returned to capitalism.  People MUST be rewarded (or punished) for their accomplishments - they are not built to build something themselves only to have it taken away and given to someone that didn't bother to build for themselves.  Without real incentive to produce/improve for those doing the work no system will work for the human animal.

          3. GA Anderson profile image93
            GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            I think that is closer to the point Crankalicious. Although I would generously add that I think it is the status quo of values that most Conservatives want to protect.

            Of course, there are Conservative blocks, (semi-fringes?), that do feel as your first comment said, but, like jihadists and Muslims, I don't think they represent the concept of Conservatism.

            GA

        2. GA Anderson profile image93
          GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Oops, that should have been Russell Kirk and Ten Conservative Principles.

          It must have been an aging memory and a dyslectic night ;-)

          GA

    3. TessSchlesinger profile image94
      TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      I think they want the way of life that used to be...

      1. The male is the wage earner and head of the family.
      2. The male can do and say as he likes to the female because he has all the power.
      3. Females couldn't walk away because they didn't have the money and the power, and now they do.
      4. They don't want black people, foreigners, etc. to have power because that detracts from their own power.

      One of the really interesting things about all the shooters of school kids and other mass shootings is that all the individuals hated women and had issues with women.

      I honestly believe that if conservatives are honest with themselves, they will find that their real issue is that they don't feel powerful anymore. They used to feel powerful because they were superior to women, superior to anyone who was not a white male, and superior to the rest of the world.

      Their sense of superiority has been challenged. They need to feel superior.

      I guess some people just need to feel superior to others.

      1. gmwilliams profile image83
        gmwilliamsposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        Exactly, Conservatives don't want a progressive society but a regressive society.  However, society will continue to evolve & progress.   In fact, society is progressing at a faster pace than ever before.   The 20th century was fast past- started w/buggy& horses & progressed to computers.  The 21st century will ever be much faster paced. 

        With the progression of education & enlightenment, conservatism will DRASTICALLY DECREASE.  There are people who are becoming more awake & questioning of the old paradigms.   There will be fewer & fewer conservatives.   Reactionaries, right-wingers, & other retrogressives will become near to extinct. They are a DYING breed.

        1. TessSchlesinger profile image94
          TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          The reason the world is moving towards fascism is precisely because the world is becoming more progressive, and conservatives cannot stop this through the voting booth.

          So they are using gerrymandering, unethical practice, lying, etc. to get into power. And that is the danger.  Because they will do anything and everything to retain power, fascism is the only answer. It is the only way they can force the system to return to what it used to be.

          I'm not sure I know how it will end.

          I joined my first progressive political party in 1966. I'm still progressive.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            I don't know that the world is moving towards fascism as much as Marxism: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".  Without, needless to say, any regard for long term effects of society or individuals.

            1. TessSchlesinger profile image94
              TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Define communism.

              Have you ever read Marx?

              You do know that communism has never existed, that although Cuba, the USSR, etc. used the word 'communism,' it never actually came to be?

              Your world view that some people are superior because they 'work,' 'take personal responsibility,' is a delusion that gives you your 'feel good' feeling about yourself.

              When the Czar fell, it was thought to make Russia communist. Marx said that in order to make it communist, socialism (in which the government owned all industry) should first take place.

              That way, government could organise it, and then when communism was organised, the government would dissolve itself. Communism exists by small communities producing and then trading with other small communities. There is no government.

              What the USSR had was called Totalitarianism. It organised every part of a person's life. And it never worked. They had 5 year plans, and they took children from their parents, checked out what they were good at, and then sent them for training.

              The dreaw that Russia would one day be a 'communist' state never happened - not according to Marx's definition of communism - community run.

              Read Marx sometime.

              You might learn something.

              1. Ken Burgess profile image90
                Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this



                The end destination for Democratic Socialism, National Socialism, Communism, and anything else not based on the merit system and fair compensation for production (otherwise known as Capitalism).

                "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

                Well I don't have Liberty and I can't pursue Happiness, if the government has decided to take 80-90% of everything I earn or produce.

                Communism never makes life better for the masses, it equally oppresses, and subjects them to the State's whims.

                1. TessSchlesinger profile image94
                  TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  The USA does not base wages on a fair system or a merit system. It is a dog-eat-dog society that pays cheats and liars. This is demonstrated by the fact that 20% of CEOs and the superwealthy are psychopaths, and that only 1% of the general population are.

                  The rich trample workers in order to make greater profits.

                  Wanting a fair society is NOT an evil idea. Laissez-faire capitalism (neo-liberalism) is a heartless dog-eat-dog ideology that is and has destroyed the world. Capitalism is 100% responsible for poverty and climate change.

                  The fact that I note this does NOT make me a communist or a socialist or an anarchist or any of the other different economic systems.

                  I believe that we have to sit down at the table and work out a new economic system.

              2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image96
                Wesman Todd Shawposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                Communism has existed as purely as it can exist. Stalinism is the end result of the communist ideology. Why? Because the communist ideology is inherently against human nature. It's also inherently against successful economic principles. Communism doesn't progress past the point of brutal mass murderous dictatorship. That literally IS communism because the fantasy is at odds with the possibilities of reality.

                Read Marx? Seems like Marxists are the ones who didn't' read Marx. Marx spends quite a lot of time praising capitalism. I don't think a human's unhappiness should be blamed on capitalism, although we can make definite links to socialism, communism, and poverty.

                Also, when you read Marx you realize he wasn't much of a prophet. He couldn't see into the future, and he made a lot of predictions about how things would be, and a lot of them were not just wrong, but so wrong one wonders how there can still be Marxists.





                https://hubstatic.com/14724366.jpg

                1. Ken Burgess profile image90
                  Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Indeed, the most vile and evil system ever created.  It is essentially a tool to enslave the entire population under its domain.

                  Russian famines of 1921-22, 32-33, etc. had people by the tens of thousands a week dying of starvation, cannibalism was prevalent during these times.  Work Camps existed (much like they exist in China today) where millions went to die.

                  We are talking tens of millions who died horrible deaths, unnecessarily, merely because those who controlled the Communist state couldn't care less about the people or how many died, they were willing to take everything from them and leave them with no food to survive on.

                  The truth can be found, its well documented, though you will never find it through 'mainstream' sources.  Communism is the ultimate tool of evil against humanity, of all forms of government ever created, and Socialism puts you one step away from it.

                  1. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image96
                    Wesman Todd Shawposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    The American leftist is an interesting breed. They're history illiterate, and they don't have the intelligence to see they are suicidal. The term 'useful idiot' comes to mind.



                    https://hubstatic.com/14724484.jpg

          2. Pamela Nichols profile image86
            Pamela Nicholsposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

            I find it a little hypocritical that what you accuse the conservatives of doing is exactly how it's played out with the Democrats for the last 3 years and will continue to play out till they get their way.  Throughout my history, there's always been presidents that I didn't vote for that were elected. You accept it and move on. You don't resort to what the American people have had to put up with for the last 3 years. NEVER in American history has this happened before.

            1. promisem profile image98
              promisemposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

              Then again, never in American history has any President acted this way.

              The opposition he provokes with illegal and unethical behavior is well deserved.

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

                You obviously have't read your history.  We've had presidents that nearly killed people in a barroom brawl.  We've had presidents that killed people in a duel.  Trump's antics pale beside some of the characters that have sat in that seat in the past.

                1. promisem profile image98
                  promisemposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

                  You obviously aren't reading my comments again.

                  We aren't talking about duels and barroom brawls from the 18th or 19th centuries.

                  We are talking about Trump bribing a foreign government to destroy his main political rival in the 21st century.

                  We also are talking about Trump forcing government agencies and employees to spend millions of our tax dollars to stay at his resorts in clear violation of the emoluments clause.

                  I guess you haven't read our Constitution either, like Herr Trump.

      2. Ken Burgess profile image90
        Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this



        I think this tells us more about your perspective, than it does what Conservatism means.

        I wonder, how do you explain young men who are Conservatives, who never lived in a world dominated by men, a long gone society where women had to do what they were told?

        How do you explain American non-whites who themselves don't want to see their country flooded by immigrants, regardless of what color they may be, or what part of the world they hail from?

        1. TessSchlesinger profile image94
          TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          I explain them exactlhy the same way. I've met too many of them to think that they are any different.  They still want to be head of the house. They still expect a woman to 'submit to a man.'

          It's irrelevant when one is born. These cultural values are passed down.

          "How do you explain American non-whites who themselves don't want to see their country flooded by immigrants, regardless of what color they may be, or what part of the world they hail from?"

          Please give me numbers and examples (by name) of these people.

        2. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          That is wrong, Ken, we don't blame economic problems on immigrants but more on Conservstive/GOP policies. The immigrant boogie man is jus a right wing smoke screen.

          I question the validity of your clearly rightwing source.

          So, why did this attitude regarding immigration fail to translate into more support for Trump by AA?

          1. Ken Burgess profile image90
            Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Why would you say this is wrong?

            Immigrants, legal or illegal, come here for jobs, this lowers the opportunity for American workers, and it lowers wages across all 'blue collar' and some 'white collar' positions.

            This isn't boogeyman made up stuff, this is concrete fact.  And corporations large and small want it that way, lower wages means higher profits, pure and simple.

            https://www.fairus.org/issue/workforce- … ng-us-jobs

            https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pew- … nstruction

            https://www.huffpost.com/entry/insourci … b_11173074

            Whether its a Disney employee who loses his job to an H1-B Visa worker, or its a construction laborer that loses his job to an illegal immigrant, millions of American workers are displaced, and paid lower wages, because of these low wage, and oftentimes no benefits, workers.  Period.

            So, any AA that recognizes this issue is well informed and well educated on the matter... whether or not that translates to support for Trump is irrelevant.  That wasn't the point of the discussion.

            1. Credence2 profile image80
              Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              After further research, I stand corrected in your point regarding blacks favoring more restrictive immigration policies. But I must clarify that this issue has been more of a socio-economic one. The poor, those most vulnerable to have to accept jobs that immigrants fill, are resentful. That is among whites and blacks and since blacks are poorer in this society as a demographic, more are affected.

              But poor blacks and not so poor blacks couldn't care less about cultural assimilation concerns that more well to do Anglos focus on in its opposition to immigration. This is honestly another source driving the current immigration debate, I don't think that we can deny that.

              1. Ken Burgess profile image90
                Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this



                Well this is not something I can really quantify.  I don't know why "well to do Anglos" are opposed to Immigration... from what I can tell, this is where all the support for open borders and more immigration is coming from.

                Its working stiffs like myself, and others even less fortunate, that seem agitated by the open borders our government favors.

                The reasons for this may vary... loss of jobs, the fact that our government is fine with giving them benefits, tax rebates, and filling our schools with kids that can't speak English.  And of course good old racism.

                The corporations want the cheap labor, the politicians work on behalf of those corporations not the American people.  Global entities like the UN, IMF, WTO want open borders as well, they want to do away with the nation state... and most of all America's Constitution.

                The idiotic 'elites' who live in gated communities, run Hollywood, our top Universities and our Government are detached and fully engrossed in their SJW, PC, extreme left beliefs... of which Open Borders is one.

                Myself, I just point out the ECONOMIC realities... the more migrant workers, the lower OUR wages go, the working stiffs get lower wages and less benefits as they compete with foreign workers.

                Same way I point out the ECONOMIC realities in regards to China, how incredibly paltry our future looks in the face of the competition they are bringing against us on all levels... education to manufacturing and everything in between that is essential for a Nation to succeed, lead, and dominate on the global level.

                I don't worry about immigration because of race or assimilation.  I make sure my sons are learning Spanish in school, and I plan on taking a trip within the next year to Peru to expose them to a foreign culture (I admit my desire to see Cuzco and Machu Picchu in person is a driving factor as well).

                Its what I do, I assess what the future may look like, and I try to position myself to benefit from it.  I am doing this with my children, even if they don't realize it.  They will have an open mind in regards to cultures from South of the U.S. and hopefully they will be able to speak Spanish with some ability as adults.

                I have spent enough years outside the U.S. to not be xenophobic, I actually prefer many non-American cultures (not all for sure)  and would have no problem living outside the US and away from the 'rat race' and all our idiotic politics and propaganda media.

                1. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image96
                  Wesman Todd Shawposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Plus 1000000000000

                  People who hate white people are often white people, and they think they aren't racist because they hate white people. It's a leftist disease.

                  Just like being immune to economic theory is a leftist disease.

                  1. TessSchlesinger profile image94
                    TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Has it ever occurred to you that some of don't define people by their skin color?

                    Wanting people of other colours to have a part of the pie - a fair deal - isn't because one hates anyone. It just seems the right thing to do.

                2. TessSchlesinger profile image94
                  TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  I'm curious about something.

                  Before I left the States, I spoke to someone very high up in the Government Employment sector. They told me that the real unemployment figure was 25% of the population.

                  That is the same figure in South Africa and in the UK.

                  Computerisation, AI, Robotics, etc. play a huge part in unemployment, and that is going to get worse. More and more people are going to be unemployed.

                  While there are those who will compare this situation to the Industrial revolution where people had to train to become mechanics, electricians, bricklayers, etc., those skills were not outdated within 5 or 10 years.

                  The way our world is going, skills are outdated in the period it takes to learn them. And very few people are needed in order to manage huge output numbers.

                  Previously, one might have needed 100,000 people to produce 500,000 cars a year. Now one can do it with an automated facility run by a few hundred people.

                  It's just not possible anymore to give good employment to everybody.

                  Solutions?

                  1. Pay everybody a Universal Basic Income so that there isn't mass starvation and violence resulting from it.

                  2. Put everybody into dumb jobs that they are just paid for the sake of being paid.

                  3. Let people starve. It's their fault they aren't working.

                  4. Keep people in school all the time. As new occupations arrive, the people coming out of training are able to take those jobs, and the people who are made redundant because they no longer have the right skills then get re-eduated for the next wave.

                  We have reached a point where work is about to become redundant.

                  An inconvenient truth.

                  So my question is what your solutions are?

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image90
                    Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this



                    Well Tess, you're the one that bragged about having a 165 IQ before, so tell me, what are the solutions?

                    You spoke to someone "very high up in the government employment center" before you left the states... well how grand for you. I spent years working with people very high up in the government... it doesn't make you special or better informed.

                    I try to have some discussions on here with other Americans who too often see only the negatives.  I try to open up their eyes to the fact that we are at risk of letting everything good about this country, from its economic opportunity for anyone to its liberty and freedoms, be taken away.

                    Its sad that they believe propaganda outlets like CNN and the Washington Post, that feed them poison every day.

                    Its sad that they have never been to 'hell holes' like Somalia to see how truly desperate life can be, how terrifying reality is in some places far away from America.

                    They don't have that to refer back on, I do.

                    Its sad that they have never been to a country like South Korea, that went from a backwards mud patty to one of the most advanced and well off nations on the planet.  They did that... with the support of America.

                    Japan, Germany and all of the EU enjoy the lifestyles and freedoms they have largely because of America. 

                    And when America takes a back seat to China in a decade or so, what is going to happen to the EU then?  Or Australia, South Korea, Japan, or South Africa?

                    You think Communist China is going to play fair?  You think they are going to care one whit about your country or your freedoms?

                    You better get to work coming up with solutions for when that time comes when America isn't in control anymore and your leadership gets you eyeball deep in debt to the Chinese.

                    South Africa has ten times the problems America does, there is plenty to keep you occupied trying to find solutions for.

                3. crankalicious profile image91
                  crankaliciousposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Ken,

                  Total aside here, but I have been to Peru and did the Machu Picchu hike out of Cuzco (the start is a bus ride away). Spent three-and-a-half days hiking. Still have a t-shirt about hiking over the 13,800 pass (Dead Woman's, I think it's called). Lots of good stories. Got up at 3 am to make it to the Going to the Sun gate and see the sunrise come up over the ruins. Was in Cuzco while the FARC (I think it was the FARC) was protesting in the square and our guide told us to stay away unless we wanted to be hit with rocks, but I went anyway and watched.

                  Great memories from that trip. Best coffee I've ever had.

          2. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            By "we" you are referring to the open border crowd plus those so ensconced in their hatred of Trump that they deny he has ever done anything right?

            Because it seems that pretty much everyone else is strongly in favor on limiting immigration to far less than it is.  Black, white, brown, male, female, old or young; the large majority is very much in favor of slowing the influx of immigrants.  Including illegal aliens that never intend to actually become a citizen of the country they live in and that provides their support.

    4. blueheron profile image92
      blueheronposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      What do conservatives want for American society?

      Well, there is quite a list. For many of us, sound money would be at the top of the list, since it is fiat money that provides the underpinnings for most of our present evils: government overreach, out-of-control government spending in many areas (including the military), currency debasement, endless wars, financial fraud, the concentration of wealth among the .0001%, and much more.

      Other things conservatives want for American society include personal freedom, which necessarily includes personal economic freedom, meaning greatly reduced government intrusion into the personal and economic life of US citizens.

      Conservatives favor a reduction in tax burdens and regulatory burdens across the board.

      These last two imply an immense reduction in the size of government at all levels.

      Overall, conservatives would prefer that the purview of the federal government be limited to its Constitutional mandates, the chief of which is the defense of our national borders.

      Liberals, by contrast, are Statists of the deepest dye, preferring that the State be all-powerful, and the people powerless. Conservatives favor the opposite course.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image79
        Kathryn L Hillposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        Yep

  2. TessSchlesinger profile image94
    TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14723391.jpg

  3. TessSchlesinger profile image94
    TessSchlesingerposted 7 weeks ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14723392.jpg

    The problem with the status quo is that they came into power through theft, bullying, war, etc. and now they are trying to maintain the system using the same methods. Nothing ever changes.

  4. DoubleScorpion profile image79
    DoubleScorpionposted 7 weeks ago

    Something I find extremely funny...

    A bunch of folks who claim they are not conservative, but yet seem to think they know what conservatives are wanting...

    Kinda like a white person telling black folks what is the greatest threat to black folks...

    Or a straight person, telling a gay person that their sexual attraction is simply a choice...

    How about just let those who claim to be conservative answer for themselves...?

    1. crankalicious profile image91
      crankaliciousposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      There's this little thing called education and history that factor into things. I find that many conservatives barely understand what the word "conservative" even means. Not all conservatives are the same, but there are common beliefs that are generally consistent and that's what's being defined, not the belief of any ONE conservative.

      There seems to be this assumption that because there's one example of a conservative who believes something, it means one can't define the general beliefs of the group, which is untrue.

      Start with the definition of the word.

      1. DoubleScorpion profile image79
        DoubleScorpionposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        I agree...define the word...

        But, just as with anything...everyone is different...and while, some may fit a set mold, not all or even most fit...

        I read through most of the posts on this thread...and I see a lot of assumptions, bias, and profiling based on the personal definition used to define conservative by the author of the reply...

        So, why not just let those who claim to be conservative answer the OP...instead of someone who isn't a conservative making claims for a conservative... and then respond to what they have to say...

        Just as someone who isn't liberal, shouldn't be making claims for those who are liberal...

        If you aren't one...then how do you actually know what they want...unless they say it themselves...

        Most of the conservative types I know...want simple things:

        Freedom
        Privacy
        Work without being taxed to death
        Equal rights for everyone

        The liberal types I know want simple things as well:

        Free stuff
        Government ran programs
        Higher wages and higher taxes for those who work
        Different rights depending on various factors...


        But as I said, these are just the ones I know...and I can't judge all conservatives or liberals based on the few folks that I know...

        1. crankalicious profile image91
          crankaliciousposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          I have defined the word. It's from the Latin and means "aiming to preserve".

          From my point of view, there's a historical context to this and "conservative" is not defined by what any one conservative may believe, but by their consistent message over time and what is consistent among the group.

          1. DoubleScorpion profile image79
            DoubleScorpionposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            I would agree...

            There is historical context...

            But, the term varies depending on many factors...conservative in what regards? Politics? Religion? Culture? Society?

            If we look at everything...there are those who may be liberal in their political beliefs, but conservative in their cultural beliefs...or religious beliefs..

            I know someone who is extremely liberal in their political beliefs....but very conservative in their religious beliefs...

            So... if we follow the definition of the word only...then pretty much everyone is a conservative in some form or other...depending on the topic being covered...

            So, in this particular case, it would seem that the OP was curious of conservative political type folks...

            I would say that in a political scenario, I am more on the conservative side of the line, as I am not big on socialism or communist styles or associated type of politics...But, more liberal when it comes to society issues...such as abortion.
            But, overall, others tend to assume I am a conservative or liberal (depending on which side I may be talking with), simply based on the fact that I don't agree with every single opinion or view that they have...
            It is my experience, that those who tend to lump everyone in the conservative or liberal box, based simply on disagreements, are the ones that are on the more extreme side and very close-minded in how they view things...which would make them fit into the box of being a conservative by the definition (someone unwilling or fighting against change) in this case...their own firmly held beliefs despite other information or facts..

            1. crankalicious profile image91
              crankaliciousposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              I find that most conservatives can't even define Socialism, much less understand what it is. They just have a notion that it's bad.

              1. Ken Burgess profile image90
                Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                Well in that I would have to agree.

                I don't think what the Democrat politicians are representing is "Socialism", but I do think many of them may represent something of significant danger to the Nation.

                When they campaign on open borders, full healthcare for immigrants, banning weapons, these are 'Globalist' agendas and goals.

                “Globalism” is not simply international trade or commerce. Globalism is global governance.  America's government is supposed to derive its powers from the consent of the governed…not by UN Agenda or UN Accord, or by bypassing the Constitution of the United States.

                This is coming at a time when we have great economic weakness that could result in catastrophic collapse of the global economy.  The Petrodollar is being eclipsed by newer markets and new alliances.

                China has a gold backed currency waiting in the wings.  China has been building economic alliances around the globe designed to position the Yuan to replace the U.S. dollar as the international reserve currency. The Russians have already been very vocal in stating that is what they would like to see happen. Most of Asia and Africa ae onboard with this as well.

                We are in a global economic war, but you wouldn't know it based on the proposals being put forth by the Democrats, to them the enemy is Trump, not China. Perhaps nothing will have a greater impact on our way of life going forward than the outcome of our struggle with China to maintain our global leadership.

                Socialism isn't the big concern, Globalism being dressed up as Socialism and championed by Democrat politicians is.

                China's efforts to undermine (dethrone) America, is also a concern, and China has found ways of supporting the Clintons, Biden, and others who are all to happy to allow China to bury us.

                https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 … valry.html

                1. crankalicious profile image91
                  crankaliciousposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Ken,

                  You know as well as I do that "globalism" was a major talking point and action point of Republicans before it was one for Democrats. The tariff used to be something Democrats liked and Republicans hated, but now the roles are suddenly reversed. Protectionism has long been the position of Democrats and only recently, with Trump really, has it been owned by Republicans.

                  And while some Democrats talk about open borders, health care for immigrants, and banning weapons, these are the opinions of a fringe element and not positions held by the vast majority of Democrats, who do not want open borders, do not want free health care for immigrants, and believe in reasonable gun control.

                  You know I agree with you on China, but please stop with the other stuff, which is fear-mongering and just generally untrue.

                  1. Readmikenow profile image95
                    Readmikenowposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    I would like to clarify one part of your statement.

                    Democrats are for free healthcare for ILLEGAL immigrants.

                    I would also like to point out healthcare is never free.

                    Someone, such as US taxpayers will pay. I don't want my tax money going to illegal immigrants and their health care. I would prefer to help legal immigrants and any money put toward illegal immigrants should be spent to send them back to their home countries so they can obey our laws if they want to come back into the United States.  Just like everyone who immigrated here in my family.

                2. Kathryn L Hill profile image79
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Thank You

      2. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        The definition...as provided by liberals that are not conservatives themselves?  Or the definition as given by people that claim ownership of the word and its meaning?

  5. Onusonus profile image75
    Onusonusposted 6 weeks ago

    Conservatives want people to be judged by the context of their character rather than the color of their skin.
    https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/73099636_1220875848118448_1117657851716698112_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_oc=AQkNWOx2PMEwLm9_ELruSrtQ-CSFcSRlyiEWp5aKR9bl6M64SZ60NPTZmubb0NSdJeA&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=590559e61d5a884a33eaff5901554d7f&oe=5E53A8DA

  6. Kathryn L Hill profile image79
    Kathryn L Hillposted 6 weeks ago

    Conservatives want freedom.
      ... and fear the loss of it.
    It's that simple. We should all fear the loss of freedom. Its the only thing worth having in this world. By freedom, I mean being in touch with one's own self-guided will.
    By self, I mean Self.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)