Some Thoughts on Liberal vs Conservative Philosophy

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
Watcher
Offline
Joined: 03/23/2008 - 12:32pm
Some Thoughts on Liberal vs Conservative Philosophy

Got this in an email. Liked it. We have seen it before or something like it but this is succinct.

THESE ARE ABSOLUTE TRUTHS THAT SOCIALIST/LIBERALS REFUSE TO ACCEPT.

These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by
Legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for,
Another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that
The government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not
Have to work because the other half is going to take care
Of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it
Does no good to work, because somebody else is going
To get what they work for, that is the beginning of the
End of any nation.

Can you think of a reason for not sharing this?
Neither could I......

Thrasybulus
Offline
Joined: 03/16/2008 - 9:59pm
I wonder how many people in

I wonder how many people in Greece have read this. My guess: not many:-)

Islander
Online
Joined: 02/13/2009 - 12:16pm
Probably not many politicians

Probably not many politicians in DC either have read this.

pmconusa
Offline
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Gets back to the basic and

Gets back to the basic and only necessary law, " Thou shalt not steal" and the only reason for government, to protect our lives, our liberties and our property, from others including themselves.

Vic Berardelli
Offline
Joined: 12/26/2001 - 1:01am
Someone mentioned Greece on

Someone mentioned Greece on this thread and that situation is akin to the public employee union demonstrations under statehiuse domes. It raises another axiom which has contributed to the breakdown of societies:

Once government gives something away, the recipient acts as if it is a permanent entitlement rather than a one-time gift or short-term assistance.

Economike
Offline
Joined: 11/28/2006 - 9:09am
Every leftist believes that

Every leftist believes that his political enemies, the capitalists and the bourgeoisie, are holding out on a big pot of cash that will pay for the revolution.

Let's riot! Maybe they'll cough it up!

Mike G
Offline
Joined: 02/17/2000 - 1:01am
The disparity between incomes

The disparity between incomes in the world is a large part the result of government. Those with the huge pots of cash benefit from government to a greater degree than the welfare mom, the rich know how to play the system and they are quite good at it.

Those in the lower class may get benefit from redistribution of wealth, but mostly just for feeding and clothing themselves.

The idea that rich people who influence banking laws and trade laws are justified in their huge payments and down right thefts is counter to a free society.

Many of the investment houses and bankers who have benefited greatly, as the middle and low and mid upper class suffer, should be tried and put in jail for theft. Those that raided retirement plans through the advancement of false investments should be tried and put in jail.

Politicians who helped pass laws and promote wars and industry payouts should be tried and jailed for taking defacto bribes.

I cannot see how many of these rich are owed their booty for doing and producing nothing but derivative paper and debt. Why should conmen, thieves and politicians be allowed to keep their booty?

I'll agree with the first post in this thread, but get government and their corporate masters off our backs and we will all do fine. Certainly neither of the two-party politicians will do that.

The government that governs least, governs best, many in office or campaign will mouth those last words, but their hands are out stretched for the payola and the POWER.

wv_republican
Offline
Joined: 11/23/2004 - 1:01am
A democratic government is

A democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it.

Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.

In the United States, the majority undertakes to supply a multitude of ready-made opinions for the use of individuals, who are thus relieved from the necessity of forming opinions of their own. (hello PC Thugs!)

Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith.

The Americans combine the notions of religion and liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive of one without the other.

When the past no longer illuminates the future, the spirit walks in darkness. (Hello "reinterpretation of history"!)

All quotes from
Alexis de Tocqueville

I strongly suggest you read up on him sometime...

J Fred
Offline
Joined: 06/22/2005 - 12:01am
Conservatives and liberals

Conservatives and liberals support government predation for different reasons.

Government is the problem.

Thrasybulus
Offline
Joined: 03/16/2008 - 9:59pm
Mike G wrote: Many of the

Mike G wrote: Many of the investment houses and bankers who have benefited greatly, as the middle and low and mid upper class suffer, should be tried and put in jail for theft. Those that raided retirement plans through the advancement of false investments should be tried and put in jail.

When the South Sea Bubble burst in England "punishment was the only cry.... Several Parliamentarians speakers indulged in the most violent invectives against the directors of the South Sea project

But the author also notes: Nobody seemed to think that the nation itself was as guilty as the South Sea Company. Nobody blamed the credulity and greed of the people or the degrading lust for gain, which had swallowed up every noble quality in the national character. Nobody blamed the greed which had made people run with such frantic eagerness into the net held out by schemers.

http://www.thesouthseabubble.com/

Cuz
Offline
Joined: 05/08/2005 - 12:01am
Here's an interesting site on

Here's an interesting site on some of the differences between liberals and conservatives...haven't done a lot of research into the group that put it out, but find little to argue with on this page of comparisons.... This was shared with me by a friend. Enjoy. - Ken

[url=http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/]Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs[/url]

Guizot
Offline
Joined: 04/03/2011 - 3:46pm
WV Republican: Try reading

WV Republican: Try reading Tocqueville in French. Some of those little aphorisms are bad or inaccurate translations. In particular, the term socialism as you currently misunderstand it did not exist in 1831.

Guizot
Offline
Joined: 04/03/2011 - 3:46pm
Everyone else in the Western

Everyone else in the Western World understands that liberals put the individual first, while socialists and conservatives believe that society takes precedence. It's simple, but why is it so hard for Americans to understand it? Liberals are not socialists. Conservatives are never, ever, libertarians. Libertarians are right-wing liberals. Conservatives put God, Country, and the Military ahead of individual rights: always have, always will, whether they are in the UK, US, France, Chile, Russia, or Germany. One may believe in a lot of government and be either a liberal or a conservative. A conservative, though, will never believe humans can get along without government, nor will socialists, though both may believe that government can be voluntary and spontaneous.

Thrasybulus
Offline
Joined: 03/16/2008 - 9:59pm
I've read, and believe, that

I've read, and believe, that there are no conservatives in America. I mean, who here believes in the primacy of the state, or even the military? And certainly not the church. Just different species of liberals. Reagan was a Classical Liberal, Truman was a New Deal Liberal. Different animals, but not different breeds.

But in recent years I have reluctantly concluded that there is a new animal in the mix. An import from Europe, by way of Progressive ideology, called totalitarian socialism. Known as communism when armed. These people DO exalt the state. And they may succeed in destroying our great Enlightenment Experiment.

Guizot
Offline
Joined: 04/03/2011 - 3:46pm
There are plenty of people in

There are plenty of people in this country who believe the state exists primarily to serve God and His representatives on Earth, the US Marines. Socialism is a foreign import that has been failing to catch on since long before all of those children in the mural that used to hang in the Department of Labor died to defend it.

Mike G
Offline
Joined: 02/17/2000 - 1:01am
"An import from Europe, by

"An import from Europe, by way of Progressive ideology, called totalitarian socialism."

I feel the pain, it is what our founders revolted against at our nations beginning 2.5 centuries ago.

A return to a monarchy maybe, while we revolted against the British crown so any years ago are we striving again to have a benevolent dictator, one who we can serve and gain a modest amount of security.

Or the new world order, a chance for untold possibilities of servitude?

Mike G
Offline
Joined: 02/17/2000 - 1:01am
Guizot The translation of

Guizot

The translation of your last post fails me. What?

Thrasybulus
Offline
Joined: 03/16/2008 - 9:59pm
Guizot writes: There are

Guizot writes: There are plenty of people in this country who believe the state exists primarily to serve God and His representatives on Earth, the US Marines

I think that is a very recent development, and a sort of antibody reaction to the socialist bacterium. But I do agree that crowd may have the allegiance of 10% of the US populace - an unprecedented development in our history. Cotton Mather did not have Marines, as I recall.

Vic Berardelli
Offline
Joined: 12/26/2001 - 1:01am
J Fred is 100% correct!

J Fred is 100% correct!

Conservatives don't like to hear it but the truth is that some of their followers -- especially theocrats -- are hypocrites. They will attend rallies and shake their fists at mention of "big government" when it means government intervention for things perceived to be liberal like regulatory agencies and taxes and social service programs. But then they try to use their political influence to get the iron hand of government to enforce their social agenda which basically means government imposing a view of morality on all citizens regardless of beliefs. Government should be neutral and exist to protect all belief systems and to protect the village atheist. If the theocrats fear someone is going to hell in a hand basket then they should deal with it by their own private initiative without the aid of government enforcement. I often think they're so weak in their own voluntary compliance with the code into which they've bought that they need government controls to make their social views mandatory on even the non-compliant just to keep the flock in the fold. The basis of a belief system is to follow it by individual choice no matter how difficult and have faith that actions come from the heart.

As Bill Buckley said years ago, "A government does not act from eeliomosinary motivation."

Economike
Offline
Joined: 11/28/2006 - 9:09am
I've read, and believe, that

I've read, and believe, that there are no conservatives in America.

To nail down some of the terms we're batting around, I'd say we might look back that the political alignment that arose from the Glorious Revolution. The original "conservatives" are Tories, the hereditary, land-owning, Royalist country party of England. These are the conservatives described by Guizot.

In contrast are the original "liberals," the Whigs, representing the interests of the bourgeoisie, Great Britain's rising manufacturing and commercial interests. Smith, Hume, and Burke, for examples, represent Whig ideas.

The modern American "conservative" movement - I'm thinking here of William F. Buckley, Jr. - found its roots among the British Whigs, not British conservatives.

In precise (and, I think, arcaic) usage, an American "conservative" is a "liberal." In common usage an American "liberal" is a species of socialist or progressive.

Thrasybulus
Offline
Joined: 03/16/2008 - 9:59pm
I know there is a lot of

I know there is a lot of animosity between the progressive/socialist utopianists and the religious (see Vic above). The progressive/socialists have no belief in any higher power, which makes their doctrines, however similar in some ways, anathema to a religious worldview.

I find it even more interesting that to the progressive/socialists there is no such thing as MAN. We are just a collection of impulses animated by chemical processes that can be adjusted, managed, planned, projected and altered. The way you "alter" a pet, is what they probably have in mind:-)

Even a secular humanist (another dirty word to the religious) believes in something - that man is the measure of all things, infinite in his possibilities. The progressive/socialist worldview sees man as a malfunctioning widget, and society as a vast plumbing diagram that they can alter by moving a few pipes around (direct election of Senators, abolishing the electoral college, campaign finance "reform", hate crimes, majority minority redistricting, segregation or desegregation or resegregation, etc). Human nature never enters into their calculations, except as something to be curbed, by force if necessary. For the common good, of course.

Thrasybulus
Offline
Joined: 03/16/2008 - 9:59pm
And by the way, could we hear

And by the way, could we hear from Tim Wright on this? He doesn't appear to be any species of liberal I am aware of.

Guizot
Offline
Joined: 04/03/2011 - 3:46pm
If have to disagree,

If have to disagree, Economike, about Buckley. Much as I admire him, he would be the first to tell you he was a disciple of Burke and Enlightened Conservatism and no kind of Whig, which was pretty much synonymous with being a Protestant. Buckley's best achievement was to remind us that Conservatism can be democratic, too.

Economike
Offline
Joined: 11/28/2006 - 9:09am
Guizot - I'm not sure where

Guizot -

I'm not sure where we disagree. Burke was a Whig.

apondsong
Offline
Joined: 02/23/2004 - 1:01am
1. "Sell all that you have,

1. "Sell all that you have, give it to the poor, and follow Me."

2. "Look to the Lillies of the Fields, they neither worry nor toil...yet they are dressed as kings by your Heavenly Father.

3. "Give unto Ceaser that which is Ceaser's and unto God, that which is Gods."

4. "And they passed around what fishes and loaves were in the baskets, and the multitudes were fed".

5. I'd say it's time to look at our fellows as Thous..and that is the begining of a New Earth.

A perfectly imperfect post at playing the Devils ( errr "Lords" ) advocate. It was interesting. I tire of whiners.

Thrasybulus
Offline
Joined: 03/16/2008 - 9:59pm
apondsong proves my thesis

apondsong proves my thesis that modern "liberalism" is just a watered down Christian heresy.

A true classical liberal might point out the He said ""Sell all that you have, give it to the poor, and follow Me."/ NOT / "Seize everything everybody else has, give it to the poor, and meet me in Hollywood for the Testimonial Awards Dinner."

Guizot
Offline
Joined: 04/03/2011 - 3:46pm
Economike, What you say about

Economike,

What you say about Burke is the most plausible alternative to my scenario that I have encountered in a while. I'm still pondering it. It might also be useful to look at Walter Lippmann's distinction between liberalism and Jacobinism. As a society, we seem to have confused the two at our peril.

Log in to post comments