Do Conservatives really believe in Equality? I do not think so personally

What else is there? What else is anybody asking for? Except for, possibly, equal enforcement of the law.

 

I'd bet that more people die driving to abortion clinics than by people shooting them up. Sad, but all violence is sad.

 

People shunning each other because of politics or ideology is a somewhat recent phenomenon, but it isn't isolated to Conservatives. I have read commentary over the last few years of people abandoning friendships over political beliefs, women who won't date, say, a Republican, people who find out someone's religious beliefs and decide not to be friends any more.

However I have read this attitude is more common among liberals than among conservatives. Its a cliche, but one that seems to be revealed every day. Conservatives think Liberals are wrong, but Liberals think conservatives are evil.

What do you mean by "equality"? Equality of result or equal standing before the law? Individuals will NEVER be "equal" if by equal is meant "the same". Individuals all have different strengths and weaknesses. The genius of the American system is that people can take advantage of their strengths individually and prosper and as a result, all of us are better off. The most egregious sins and evils in history have been perpetuated in the name of forced "equality".

 

I think that every single individual is unique, and therefore no person is equal to another. Uniqueness implies inequality.

 

1. What, do you still have a time machine and live in the 60's? All of the ills you discuss have been ILLEGAL for decades. There are colleges in which applications for positions specifically indicate ONLY people of "color" will be considered. Companies are drowning their employees in "diversity" programs to make sure minorities and women and the whole panoply of LGBTXNAU&VLDE&K sexual aberrancies are represented (my son works for one of the big promoters of this kind of stuff). Leftists perpetuate the meme that "Women are not paid the same as men" for political advantage even though it has been illegal for decades to discriminate against women in pay who are doing the same job as men. Women overall do not earn the same on average than men because of career choices in occupations (say being teachers rather than transmission mechanics), they take more time off, they refuse difficult positions or overseas assignments, etc. Lefties do the same with others of the ills you describe - perpetuate myths.

2. Conservatives are the ones who do NOT divide people up into the various victim groups (tribes), its liberals who do that. Its liberals who infest colleges and business and government with various groups promoting one or another of the groups supposedly victimized (Hispanic Lawyers Association, Congressional Black Caucus, LGBTQXUNIA$Z Personnel Executives Association, etc.).

3. Women should make up 50% of the military? This is the kind of thinking that will get lots of people killed. Men and women are NOT the "same". They do NOT have the same capabilities, strengths and weaknesses. As predicted when Obama's SJW defense department dictated women be given positions in the combat arms, we find that even the Marines are in the news because they have been forced to lower standards (e.g. reducing the number of pull ups recruits are made to do in training) or there would be virtually zero women qualify for combat positions. Already the armed forces have "gender normed" training in order to get women to qualify for various positions (E.g. women at West Point are required to only do, say, 12 pushups to get the HIGHEST score while men are required to do 19 to barely pass).

 

I believe in tribalism and different roles for groups with different strengths and weaknesses.

 

Well. I say this as someone who's wanted to, I suppose, be a modern conservative. Yet the same thing always occurs.


I've seen this drama play out in workplaces time and time again:

-Under 40 conservatives try and be what to them is a modern version of conservatism

-Immediately over 40 conservatives butcher them for "not being conservative enough or not being some bygone version of a conservative".

EVERY single time this occurs, the outcome is the same and I have seen it time and time again. The under40 conservatives are thrown under the bus by the over 40 ones and then, like clock work, the younger conservatives are essentially forced to join rank and file with the left against the older conservatives because they obviously have no place among them and are attacked by them. The end result is that, usually, those older conservatives become embittered because they now have attacked their own AND in the process were destroyed by the left who obviously took advantage of the situation (who can blame them?)


I simply do not believe, whatever you want to call it, "Old-School Conservatism" can remain. I've seen it destroy its own. It's insane because you'll have tons of would-be conservatives that end up being pushed to be leftists because some idiot 45 year old deemed them not conservative enough and in the process made a fool of him or her self and created democrats.

The sad truth is conservatives in my experience are their own worst enemy in respect to disenfranchising would-be conservatives. What does that mean for conservatism? I don't know. But I do know that something very structural has to happen to the US conservative movement or it is in very deep trouble for decades to come.


Example:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/the-eclipse-of-white-christian-america/490724/

 

Conservatives embrace exceptionalism, tempered with social conformity. Morality ensures civility. All people are judgemental, perhaps to different degrees, but judgemental.

 

You either have principles or you don't. You believe in freedom of religion, the right to practice that religion as guaranteed by the constitution or you don't. I don't think a constitutional conservative who actually believes in limited government, economic liberty, the primacy of the individual over government is going to be persuaded to become a believer in a socialist type of society in which the individual is subsumed by the government, in which the 2nd Amendment, national sovereignty, religious liberty, economic freedom are trashed.

It seems from your posted article that you have adopted the leftist argument that people have to be for homosexual marriage and abortion and devolution of the traditional family and religious beliefs or they have no legitimacy. All the rest of conservative belief is secondary to those issues, so you will become a high tax, spread the wealth, open borders, one world socialist, say, instead of a free markets, strong national defense, individual liberty supporter who defends constitutional government of laws not men.

You have apparently accepted the caricature of what conservatives are supposed have "evolved" in a modern society to believe instead of the principles that make conservatives.

 

Birds of a feather flock together. Has NOTHING to do with being "conservative." It is in human dna and a necessary trait to form societies and for self protection.The same exists in the animal world.

You can see that around here when the birds gather in trees at night. They'll use the same trees, but each species will be its own.

 

There's plenty of gays at most companies now. Every time I go the local CVS there's gays with purple hair and such at the pharmacy. So what? If that's what they want to do with their free time, so be it. What do I care? I don't is the answer. Do I think gays have a made a good life decision? No but I could absolutely care less about that decision. Gays contribute to the economics of society and don't do any real damage whatsoever so who truly cares about them other than nut types?

You are wholly wrong in your view of conservatism. Your version of Conservatism is incompatible with the modern and future world. I'd be insane to adopt your dying form of conservatism. It has no relevance to the modern world. It just doesn't I'm sorry.

 

But do they actually? I'd say no.

Conservatives will always sit and rant about their virtuous belief in their supposed love of equality of opportunity and yet isn't denying someone an income via discriminating against them for having purple hair, for wearing certain clothes, for not being religious, isn't that the definition of unequal opportunity? It sounds like pure hypocrisy to me.

To me and many other tens of millions of Americans it sounds like what conservatives really mean is "We want equality of opportunity for other conservatives with the knowledge that we'll unofficially officially discriminate and disenfranchise non-conservatives the first chance we get".


I'm not saying liberals and progressives don't do this too, because they do. I'm just saying that you and others need to acknowledge the ideological and moral house of conservatism is as dirty and full of bull5hit as the left's.

 

Whether you want to admit it or not, I work in manufacturing....We have engineers, mechanical, electrical, manufacturing; there are 3 women working in the engineering department, and one black guy the rest are white or Asian...That is about a hundred engineers...It's not that they wouldn't hire them, it's that none apply. I've been to the engineering department at UT (Texas) in Austin, you can count the number of blacks and female students on both hands. That is not the problem of the employers, there are plenty of opportunities for minorities to receive scholarships for college. And I am a minority.

Secondly, if you are catering to a business clientele whether as a clothing store, or upscale restaurant, you don't want some kid with purple hair and facial piercings interacting with your clients. There is such a thing as decorum...some people don't fit in, and if you want to be a rebel and look like a pincushion with purple hair, then you have limited your opportunities yourself...That is not discrimination, that's good business.

 

Conservatives believe in the equality of opportunity.

Liberals believe in the equality of results.

The tension between these two ideas explains 95% of the political conflict we have in 2016.

 

I have no qualms with the fact that some groups are better than others at certain things. Nobody likely would deny that.

However I do think you're 100% wrong about the image of the company thing.


I'm a straight progressive white guy, just as most my generation are progressive (whether they know it or not officially) and are not anti gay or even thinking about gays. Your example is simply wrong in relation to reality. When I walk into random CVS's, random Krogers, random gas stations, random pet stores, random banks, random any business I see tons of obvious gays with overtly feminine speech, purple, red, pink, green hair, the works. Nobody seems to care. Sure you'll see some person over 60 with a big frown on their face although even that seems rare to me considering how many open gays seem to be mainstreamed now in business.

So your entire logic there collapses completely. Obviously those fortune 100 companies have no problem hiring people with purple hair and still making a massive profit. You have no argument there. Equality, true equality, not fake conservative supposed equality, actually works.

 

Yes, because conservatives do not all march in lockstep. To say so would be broad brushing. Fiscal Hawks tend to clash with Warhawks. Libertarian Conservatives tend to clash with Law and Order Conservatives as well as Christian Conservatives.

Just my opinion here.

 

Are you pleased with the increasing Balkanization in America?

 

Yes but doesn't the very notion of conservatism imply that you are "conserving something against or away from others". In terms of fiscal conservatives, to me what that label really reads is "People who don't want to pay for society yet do want to benefit from that society to which they don't want to pay into".

 

That's the problem with labels and viewing politics thru ones own prism. Not saying it isn't wrong, but it not necessarily objective. That's why I think it's important to hear people out and not jump on the words conservative or liberal.

 

But you didn't answer my question I noticed.

Isn't conservatism essentially, in a nutshell, "Let me hide my wealth or supposed better values away from society oh but I still want to benefit from that society which I'm hiding from"? Tell me how that is wrong.

 

No, that's your take on what it means. And that's fine. However, To some it means not excessively borrowing money that isn't backed by proper revenues and than compounding the problem by throwing more borrowed money it at when it does not always fix the problem. Different people will have different definitions of what it means.

Does that answer the question?

 

I didn't notice it was increasing. I do note a rising tension between the tribes which is unfortunate.

 

First liberals are for unregulated capitalism.
democrats are communists

short answer: yes equality under the law, NO to equality of same stuff, because that would mean stealing from producer to give to lazy
equality of outcome ignored who produced the wealth

see USA showed that you dont take wealth

you make it

you make money

make new wealth

so no not everyone with have same in freedom and free market
thats just fine
inequality doesnt imply inequity
some people produce much much more
the only way to get rich is to give people what they want millions of times at best price

cronyism is a feature of the state
capitalism is only system to fix crony and end slavery
yaron brook explains so well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ7P1SCRQjE

 

There is a constant tug of war between liberals and conservatives. Liberals prefer to keep everyone indefinitely in their ethnic groups. Conservatives hope all immigrants leave the bulk of their traditions behind and fully assimilate into a common American culture.

Over the last 50 years, we've sadly and slightly moved further left on this issue.

 

Do you have anything substantive to support this?