So will we have to relearn why it's not a good thing for the state to be the master of individuals?
Printable View
So will we have to relearn why it's not a good thing for the state to be the master of individuals?
Apparently. Check out Giambattista Vico's theory of historical phases. It pursues civilization as the history of its own devolution and decline.
In Vico's own time this theory expressed the tragic, conservative sense of things. But something ironic happened in modernity's cradle: tragic necessity was transposed (Marx relied on Vico's theory) into a positive. Scientistic *progress* applied Vico in reverse. Mechanical and necessary progress toward an a priori good. In a way, scientific modernity at first did not so much show us a new face, as the mirror image of one, its predecessor.
Viz., the tragic view of existence, into which it falls itself.
Over and over could be, if we live so long.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
:lmao Unintentional comedy at its finest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Quote:
Originally Posted by SonOfAGun
"brah"?
brah
=
Reading/hearing that word is like fingernails on a chalkboard.
what's so funny? Conservatism has 100 meanings, some contradict the other. Conservatism is many things in many countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Extra Stout
And if you are laughing at WC's "changing others attitudes can be good,..." that was the whole point of the Abolition, Civil Rights, Abortion, any movement left or right.
I know you could do better than talk down on people.
And if somebody wants to say that Conservatism = Defending Traditions, that argument is a fallacy.
IF that's the case, then promoting flat taxes, fair tax, Social Security Reform, Privatization of Social Security, Privatizing Public Education, Vouchers.. are all liberal ideas. But they are not.
And none of those ideas are 1950's chic like Extras Stout would have you believe.
(stifles a cough)
Beg pardon. Carry on, profe.
? elaborate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Oh, you were just clearing your throat, too? I thought you were just starting to say something.
Were you already done? :lol
I'm not sure whether gtownspur likes building strawmen, maybe as a hobby or something, or if he really doesn't understand what I was talking about. I expect Wild Cobra not to understand what I am talking about.
But just in case, gtownspur, you really didn't understand, which again, frankly, I doubt, that wasn't meant to be an exhaustive treatment of all the conservative ideas which have ever been uttered by purveyors of right-wing ideology throughout the chronicles of time, but rather a lament of the sorry state of present political discourse in the United States of America. It would be truly lovely if the average American conservative's persona were as if he were the offspring of writers from First Things and The Economist, however, that is unfortunately not the reality in which I currently find myself. If it is in fact the reality in which you find yourself, and your reality is genuinely extant rather than simply the effect of your choice of mind-altering substances (cue WC here), please clue me in to where exactly it is you live so I can move there.
No i truly understand what you've been lamenting this whole time, That the GOP is made up of Bull Moose Theocrats with their dreams of Dominion doctrine and establishing Christendom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Extra Stout
Your point is overly exaggerated. Social Conservatism holds many idealogies and many of their beliefs are believed by people well outside their political camp. For instance gay marriage, abortion and mandatory sex education. Infact Social Con positions were held up in California not recently.
And while you like to lament the fact that the past 8 years was the dominance of Social Cons on Bush policy, that too is false. While GW bush professed his faith, he was on the fence about pushing the Defense of Marriage act, and was tepid on abortion. Social Issues are not a the forefront of the GOP. Mike Huckabee is the strongest political candidate for social cons, but even he, while being strong on traditional values, is no Falwell.
Social COns have always been an integral part of the Republican insurgence, they constructed the Moral Majority. Plus, you can also see that Evangelical Christianity is slowly changing and is not the same creature it was 30 years ago. To prop up some idea that Social Conservatives are going to build the New Jerusalem here in america is just as pure fearmongering as the So Cons use themselves.
Yeah, that's what I wrote. Nice strawman, liar. Go to hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by gtownspur
(Golf clap.)
heeheehee...
I guess you expected for me to forget your paranoid ramblings about the GOP being a Theocratic Rebel yell party this past election cycle, nice try doof.Quote:
Originally Posted by Extra Stout
You should be clapping for the simple fact that ES was talking about the "flavors" of right wing conservative thought, and when WC eleaborated his own, ES acted like a complete douche for talking about his own brand of conservatism or libertarian conservatism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Not surprising you find this whole thing amusing, you both are probably the same self important bully. Atleast, bully towards other people, i just laugh Winehole off.
A link or two from Spurstalk should suffice to refute ES, if you've really got the goods on him. Put up or shut up, gtown. The search function is your friend.
You wouldn't bs us now, would you? :lmao
What are you Extra Stout's wife? The guy has yet to deny that allegation. Let him speak for himself if he thinks i am lying?Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
ES's response to WC was not mild and accepting, no.Quote:
ES acted like a complete douche for talking about his own brand of conservatism or libertarian conservatism.
As usual, you conflate whatever you cannot distinguish.Quote:
Not surprising you find this whole thing amusing, you both are probably the same self important bully.
BS artists and bullies walk on my fighting side. You're both gtown. So is WC. I don't know what you're getting so chafed about. It's a discussion board.
ummm, yeah, i remember the national security debate we had, you sure were'nt acting chafed there...:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
bullying usually starts out with name calling, things which Winehole Stout lunges into head first.
And true "conservatives" such a gtown/Iginionkkt whatever wonder why the left wing of the DC party is in control of the Executive branch and the Congress, with a 60 seat majority in the Senate.
Yeah, its because we nominated that fascist theocrat Arch Rightwing Evangelist John McCotton Mather McCain. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
You mean McCain, the neoconservative whose idol is the progressive Theodore Roosevelt? Rather fitting that McCain was the one to follow Bush as the GOP presidential nominee.Quote:
Originally Posted by gtownspur
McCain was a teddy fan, you're right, but he defeated two false choices in Romney and Huckabee who split the other vote. McCain's progressive Campaign finance reform was hated by the base. McCain was not the base's wish. McCain was falsely touted as the favorite by the media and won in Liberal states where democrats were allowed to crossover and vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant