Why Conservatism isn't the right ideology to believe in now

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Kranes56, Jul 2, 2016.

  1. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Now before I begin- I am not saying Conservatism is a bad ideology. I'm saying that the conditions needed for the ideology to function do not exist and therefore a new belief is needed. Also the exact same problem that Conservatives are having affects Liberalism as well. It just effects Conservatism more- so pay attention Liberals.

    So what do I mean by this? Why is "Conservatism" a bad ideology to hold right now? Now for starters I hate thinking in terms of this- when we're talking about modern conservatism we're really talking about a subset of Neoliberalism (which is just a bad ideology too but that's for a different thread). This one takes combines the pro-market, anti regulation drive and aggressive foreign policy of Neoliberalism and gives it a conservative spin to it. Instead of the individual being the center of everything, the community has a greater role in the form of religion and social organizations.

    Here's the basics of how the ideology works: When the market is allowed to be as free as possible everyone as a whole benefits but there are problems with the market running the show on its own. There is no need for investments outside of making a profit. But there are plenty of things that need to be invested in in order to make a profit. Think about market failures. Even if a company ran the streetlights, what's to stop me from enjoying the usage of them without paying for it? But that's fairly simple to correct- how am I generating a profit standing outside when I could be inside working? In the quest to make more money freedoms are lost because the only goal of businesses is to make money- there is no time for free speech in a market economy. This is where religion comes in to play. It provides a counter to businesses' profit driven needs. Religion provides not only a way to mitigate the effects of capitalism but it can also make sure that business owners see the needs of their fellow believers and make sure that they are helping their fellow man. In of itself, the beliefs underlying Conservatism are pretty solid. Churches and social organizations provide regulations to businesses who in turn create jobs and opportunities for others to use. They in turn with their power and influence can hold churches and other social organizations accountable for their actions by providing people competition for who to believe in.

    So what's the problem? All ideologies need certain conditions in order to exist, here it's businesses and social organizations. Problem is that social organizations are in decline. Social organizations need social capital in order to exist. Basically it's this idea of people engaging in activities that benefit their community. It's these bonds of reciprocity that make communities possible. Voting is a good example of this. So is volunteering and attending church. People aren't volunteering and voting as much as much as needed and society is suffering because of it. Church membership has been going down as well. This has been going on, to some estimates since the end of WW2. Conservatism needs social capital in order to work. Without it, Conservatism does not work as an ideology.

    Want to see the consequences? The commodification of lifestyles. The market is picking up the slack by selling lifestyles. Think about Target and why it supports the LGBT movement or why Ben and Jerries supported the Occupy Wall Street movement. They didn't do it because of their responsibility- they did it because they wanted to attract customers. Now you could say that this is the work of social organizations that pressured companies to adopt these measures. That's true but it's also missing out on the larger picture, social organizations need businesses more then businesses need social organizations. Think about how much businesses spend lobbying the government compared to labor unions. They simple have more power then them. The Keystone pipeline is another good example. It wasn't existing social organizations that stopped the production, it was grassroots. Sure in the end it was stopped in part by social organizations but also because there were profit loses as well.

    To sum up, Conservatives need to improve social capital otherwise there will be a need for a new ideology to replace it. An ideology that doesn't need social capital to run? Who knows what that would look like. Who knows.
     
  2. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are talking about fiscal conservatism which is only a subset of conservatism.
     
  3. rickysdisciple

    rickysdisciple New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are in search of nationalism. Go look up Marine Le Pen for a modern take on it. You can also study China, Japan, and south Korea for other forms.

    Welcome to the party.
     
  4. Mr. Swedish Guy

    Mr. Swedish Guy New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2012
    Messages:
    11,688
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    0
    hmm, well, conservatism is very broad.. I am a conservative, but I'm not religious at all. The religious conservatism might be on the decline, but other forms are doing just fine, and don't need religion to survive.
     
  5. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I wouldn't say that it is only for fiscal conservatism, it's for all conservatism.
     
  6. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    That was my concern. But Religious Conservatism is not in the decline, it's actually expanded in recent years. Russia and Turkey are good examples of this. Even if it were, then there is still the problem of decline in social organizations. There are noticeable declines, at least in the US of civic participation.

    - - - Updated - - -

    That is one of the solutions yes. If there is nationalism, it can help foster the development of social capital.
     
  7. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One thing you have to understand about ideologies is that none of them are sustainable on their own. They also are only generalized guidelines for belief systems. So the question isn't of its the wrong time for conservatism but how much conservatism should be part of societies rules and laws.
     
  8. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    it is contrary, conservatism is on the rise because we are in the season of not liking the rich.

    the liberals are in power, so they will take the blame.

    england conservatives won because of this, their nationalists told their conservative leader he is not fooling them he's a rich liberal.

    the religion will bring back power to conservatives, it is based on being humble and kind, and liberals that pay for clinton are rich global corporations and mean.
     
  9. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes liberals are becoming the corporate party and also the party of the elite. They are going to lose a lot of voters over this. Just look at how Hillary is in bed with Goldman Sachs for evidence.
     
  10. MRogersNhood

    MRogersNhood Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2015
    Messages:
    4,401
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wall of text.I guess you met your quota.
    Ask me how much I care? If you guess not at all? you are correct!
     
  11. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    The answer is still the same. The conditions for society to use Conservatism as its norms and laws are not present or are in decline.This in turn means that a new belief is needed to rule instead.
     
  12. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Occupy Wall Street?

    No. Liberals are not in power. Democrats and Republicans are in power. The ideology for the two are very similar. They're just different versions of Neoliberalism.

    What are you talking about? That proves my hypothesis correct, not wrong.

    [/QUOTE]the religion will bring back power to conservatives, it is based on being humble and kind, and liberals that pay for clinton are rich global corporations and mean.[/QUOTE]

    Yeah... About that, that's not going to happen any time soon. The reason for that is fairly simple. Declining church membership. It's been going on for decades, even during the Christian resurgance under Ronald Reagan social capital was declining.
     
  13. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    donald-hillary-800.jpg

    Or how about the Chamber of Commerce's history of supporting the GOP? Or the largest donor to both the GOP and Democrats is banks?

    Now while it is possible that the Democrats can become the new "Conservative" party due to their support of Neoliberal policies, the chances of this happening will depend on too much that isn't clear yet. After this election then we can get a better idea of where things stand.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Cool! That's nice to know, why did you post then?
     
  14. jackson33

    jackson33 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,445
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    con·ser·va·tism
    (kən-sûr′və-tĭz′əm) n.
    1. The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order.
    2. A political philosophy or attitude that emphasizes respect for traditional institutions and opposes the attempt to achieve social change though legislation or publicly funded programs.
    3. Caution or moderation, as in behavior or outlo


    Notice the word "traditional", meaning IMO adherence to the history and cultures formed since the Nation was born. This includes in order the Constitution and Independence that established the guide lines for law and order of the society. That guideline also gives the power of the people for orderly change, under the amendment process.

    Without going over all the threads questions, basically it has also provides every citizen the opportunity to achieve. Your president today, could have never achieved the political power, in any other society on the planet, past or present and frankly life around the world, has benefited from this so called "Conservatism".....even as he fights the system himself.
     
  15. Texas Republican

    Texas Republican Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2015
    Messages:
    28,121
    Likes Received:
    19,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Small government conservatism (maximum freedom for the people) always makes sense.
     
  16. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    That definition is too broad to be used. I highly doubt most modern conservatives would support traditional institutions like slavery or denying women the right to vote. Also what you're saying is not inherently Conservative, it's actually Liberal. A constitution that puts checks on one branch's power that provides everyone with individual rights and liberties, is an example of Liberalism. All modern western ideologies either support or refute Liberalism in some form or another. So what we're saying is modern Conservatism has to be some type of refuting Liberalism. In this case, it's trying to refute Neoliberalism.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Yeah it does. It does make sense, but the logical decision doesn't always work. The conditions for it to work do not exist, it's dying off.
     
  17. Texas Republican

    Texas Republican Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2015
    Messages:
    28,121
    Likes Received:
    19,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That would be a shame, because it means becoming slaves to government.

    I grew up in the 1960's and 70's. Freedom is a zero-sum game and the people have lost a lot of ground to the government in the last 50 years. Very sad. I'm so glad I wasn't born in 2016, never to have known how things were in the mid-20th century.
     
  18. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I don't know if slaves is the right word, but more dependent yes.

    For the exact same reason that Conservatism is dying out. Social capital is dying out as well in the US. Something needs to change in order to bring it back.
     
  19. jackson33

    jackson33 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,445
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48

    Changes that have come about through the "Amendment Process" (mentioned) are acceptable by the conservative definition, which I did not write. Few conservatives would deny the procedural process for change, even if they disagree with the motive. Few of Obama's executive or special orders have gone through any process, then some of GWB and Clinton's.
     
  20. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    This has nothing to do with Obama, that's a red herring. This is a discussion of why Conservatism as an ideology needs Social Capital, something that is disappearing. If you want to bring up his relationship to the 2016 eleciton however I would see that as relevant to the discussion.

    As for the amendment process, because that's inalignment with Conservative thinking. While the process is slow, it's still a form of Liberalism. The constitution is liberal, no question about it. So this is why when we're talking about conservatism we're really talking about another form of Liberalism. It's an odd form of it, but it the basic tenets of it are Liberal in origin.
     
  21. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    don't fear religion when it is not oppressive it is a good thing, when times are bad the Christians get more memberships and conservatives will regain power again because of this.

    even the liberal catholic church is against the rich, so as conservatives rule they will make the rich pay the poor instead of them for special favors as before since that is what their whole religion is based on, and the tithes will be monitored.
     
  22. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Things have been steadily getting bad since the 1980's.

    Most Americans are not Catholic. There are Republican Catholics. Why would the rich pay the poor instead of asking for "special favors"? Why only the Catholics instead of any of the other Christian sects?
     
  23. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    there are good conservatives who are rich, and not bad like most rich liberals.

    the rich liberals are called globalists, and they infect both republican and democrat parties by outsourcing jobs, and allowing illegal immigrants to drive down salaries at home with cheap labor.

    the reason bad rich guys are liberals is because they are not innocently ignorant being led by rich bad Christians, but intentionally ignorant due to greed.

    conservatives have an innocent ignorance where they don't know any better when they support bad things, but liberals are intellectuals and they use their intelligence for evil. look up the term 'evil genius', and that is the modern day liberal who is rich.

    we need a reformed evil genius like Donald Trump, who knows America was made great by humble conservative minded people.

    Luke 12:48

     
  24. Kranes56

    Kranes56 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    29,311
    Likes Received:
    4,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Ever heard of a guy named Dani Rodrik?
     
  25. hellofromwarsaw

    hellofromwarsaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Reaganism has killed the middle class. Now EVERYONE pays 20-30%, all new wealth stays with richest, and demand is weak. Great job!

    The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

    Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

    1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

    Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

    But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

    1950 = 101%
    1960 = 105%
    1970 = 105%
    1980 = 105% – Reagan
    1990 = 100%
    2000 = 96%
    2007 = 92%

    A 13% drop since 1980

    2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

    Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

    1950 = 35%
    1960 = 34%
    1970 = 34%
    1980 = 34% – Reagan
    1990 = 40%
    2000 = 47%
    2007 = 50%

    An increase of 16% since Reagan.

    3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

    The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

    1950 = 6.0%
    1960 = 7.0%
    1970 = 8.5%
    1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
    1982 = 11.2% – Peak
    1990 = 7.0%
    2000 = 2.0%
    2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

    A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

    4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

    Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

    1965 = 46%
    1970 = 45%
    1980 = 50% – Reagan
    1990 = 61%
    2000 = 69%
    2007 = 95%

    A 45% increase after 1980.

    5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

    Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
    and the bottom 80%:

    1980 = 10%
    2003 = 56%

    A 5.6 times increase.

    6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

    The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

    1945 = 12%
    1958 = 6%
    1990 = 3%
    2000 = 2%

    A 10% Decrease.

    Links:

    1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
    1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
    1 = http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Zh1bveXc8rA/SuddUhLWUaI/AAAAAAAAA7M/iU2gefk317M/s1600-h/Clipboard01.jpg
    2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
    3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
    3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...able=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2008&LastYear=2010
    4 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php/household-sector-debt-of-gdp
    4 = http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/
    5/6 = http://www.businessinsider.com/15-c...lity-in-america-2010-4?slop=1#slideshow-start

    Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts
     

Share This Page