Conservatism - What are its benefits and weaknesses?

To me, only 1-5 seem to be the necessary conservative positions. The rest are somewhat contingent on further premises, although certainly popular amongst cons.

I've seen conservatism often described as a temperament moreso than a coherent political position. I think that's a valid point; especially given what we know about the link now between political positions and personality traits. And as such a temperament around members of the group, it's useful to have; it prevents radical and potentially destructive changes that have not been adequetely tested from being enacted.

I probably am not temperamentally conservative, but my work on trying to understand human social dynamics has taught me that it seems that it is one of the more valid attempts to approach the problem - the intuition that there is not something perfectible about humans tells us that we should instead mold our societies to best contain our defects is a powerful one and I think the great counter to modern trends of globalisation, hyper-capitalism, and social liberalism.
 
Change with the progression of time is the nature of the universe, and evolution towards adaptation and improvement is the nature of life; to cling to an old method when it contravenes adaptation and improvement is therefore against nature. This is not to say that some old methods are not still in reasonable use, but when a better option comes into epistemic being, it is against the physics of the universe to go with the lesser option.
 
So should we have a massive military industrial complex or not because American conservatives never seem to actually have a consistent position on that.
You can't conserve much of anything else if you get invaded. The True Conservative™ position is that we need the strongest military in the world by far just to make sure we don't have to use it.
 
Currently American conservatism is based around spending as much money to sustain the military-industrial complex and uphold the status quo.

Basically, everything that pisses off the average person on a day to day basis.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Steve Mayers
I think conservative and liberal are two halves of a body.

Conservatives, as discussed above, will try and resist or slow down change while liberals will try and prompt or accelerate it. In my view, conservatives are a necessary temper to the desires and ambitions of liberals. In other terms, liberals are the voice in our collective head that urges us to go faster and try new things regardless of consequences. Conservatives are the voice that urge us to slow down and carefully consider what we are doing so we don't do something irreparable.

I suppose my view is best described as Hegelian. We have thesis, antithesis, and a resolution in the form of synthesis.
 
Well, I didn't get that impression by the way you were "defining" it.

That's because I was describing and justifying it the way a conservative would, I know I may not have made that entirely clear but I don't see how people could have misinterpreted my post as agreement with conservatism unless they had at least the small amount of brain cells necessary to realise that just because you set out an ideology(?)'s points and arguments for it doesn't mean you agree with it.
 
OP made me laugh, good job. That Captain Obvious bullshit at the end was a nice touch. "I really hate conservatism", lol. No fucking shit mate.

I always chuckle when people who are fanboys of a political ideology attempt to discuss ideologies they think are shit at best but usually evil. They always try to paint themselves as rational people who just want to learn what makes people who are so goddamn stupid to follow whatever ideology they're shitting on tick and want to know why they thinks it's so great.

College sports fans in the US are the same. They post some rambling bullshit trying to make themselves look smart for following their favorite team and are simply engaging fans and alums of other schools with simple questions in order to "learn more".

Edit: sentence structure
 
OP made me laugh, good job. That Captain Obvious bullshit at the end was a nice touch. "I really hate conservatism", lol. No fucking shit mate.

I always chuckle when people who are fanboys of a political ideology attempt to discuss ideologies they think are shit at best but usually evil. They always try to paint themselves as rational people who just want to learn what makes people who are so goddamn stupid to follow whatever ideology they're shitting on tick and want to know why they thinks it's so great.

College sports fans in the US are the same. They post some rambling bullshit trying to make themselves look smart for following their favorite team and are simply engaging fans and alums of other schools with simple questions in order to "learn more".

Edit: sentence structure

That was not my intention, I didn't want to paint conservatism or its adherents in a bad light despite me hating it, literally every point can be found in books written by actual political experts that discuss ideologies. You're being incredibly paranoid. I added that sentence because someone thought I was arguing in FAVOUR of it even though I wasn't.

What negative bias have I added to any of it?! Any of those points I described can be found (or said) almost verbatim in texts that describe conservatism such as Political Ideologies: An Introduction or from conservatives themselves. I can even give you the link to that particular text I mentioned so you can see a preview of it (not that I expect you to be interested anyway, but just a thought).

Conservative politicians and pundits, I've noticed, never specifically mention hierarchy or organicism because that kind of stuff tends to be either abstract theory that voters don't know or care about (that sort of thing can't be made into a soundbite), or mentioning it would lose them votes. Not many people like to be told they need to have a master above them unless it suits them, after all, even if it's sometimes necessary.

I didn't make this thread just to get shat on by random strangers with a chip on their shoulder who don't understand the concept of constructive criticism. I made sure the definition was as accurate as possible, it's not my fault ignorant twits who don't care about politics beyond making memes out of it and poking fun at it, or have a very impressionistic, superficial view of it informed only by news and buffoonish pundits, also happen to be pedantic know it alls who act in such a pointlessly aggressive manner and get personal instead of taking a fucking chill pill.

Honestly, I just don't understand what's going on here. I'm leaving this thread, you all can do whatever you want with it even if it all turns into shitposting, making unfunny comments and everyone simply being flippant. I tried my best
 
That was not my intention, I didn't want to paint conservatism or its adherents in a bad light despite me hating it, literally every point can be found in books written by actual political experts that discuss ideologies. You're being incredibly paranoid. I added that sentence because someone thought I was arguing in FAVOUR of it even though I wasn't.

What negative bias have I added to any of it?! Any of those points I described can be found (or said) almost verbatim in texts that describe conservatism such as Political Ideologies: An Introduction or from conservatives themselves. I can even give you the link to that particular text I mentioned so you can see a preview of it (not that I expect you to be interested anyway, but just a thought).

Conservative politicians and pundits, I've noticed, never specifically mention hierarchy or organicism because that kind of stuff tends to be either abstract theory that voters don't know or care about (that sort of thing can't be made into a soundbite), or mentioning it would lose them votes. Not many people like to be told they need to have a master above them unless it suits them, after all, even if it's sometimes necessary.

I didn't make this thread just to get shat on by random strangers with a chip on their shoulder who don't understand the concept of constructive criticism. I made sure the definition was as accurate as possible, it's not my fault ignorant twits who don't care about politics beyond making memes out of it and poking fun at it, or have a very impressionistic, superficial view of it informed only by news and buffoonish pundits, also happen to be pedantic know it alls who act in such a pointlessly aggressive manner and get personal instead of taking a fucking chill pill.

Honestly, I just don't understand what's going on here. I'm leaving this thread, you all can do whatever you want with it even if it all turns into shitposting, making unfunny comments and everyone simply being flippant. I tried my best

Damn, gangsta, I get it. You're the biggest brain/swinging dick in the room. It's cool, nigga, don't split my wig. I bow to your superior understanding of whatever political theory a real OG like you adheres to and will now flog myself for not being in lock-step.
 
For awhile there I figured I'd try to stop hating the American right with all my being and actually try to understand them. I subscribed to National Review, read people like Leo Strauss and Barry Goldwater, forced myself to watch FOX..I made a conscious effort to have an open mind, I really did.

I learned that at its best conservatism is just idiotic pining for a past that never existed.
 
conservatism is different depending on where you live
but everywhere you follow the same rule - they want to keep the current situation, aka the status quo
and you have reactionaries who want to "go back" and reverse some reforms
so depends on what conservatism you mean, what is conservatism for you may not be for me
i guess you mean american conservatism?

i'd consider myself a social democrat, a market capitalist system with certain benefits for the working class and social programs
however i'm also pro-military and think that the mandatory military service should come back to my country (until 2010 you had to serve 6 months here, then the social liberals scrapped it) which i think was a mistake since we live in a hostile society
 
conservatism is different depending on where you live
but everywhere you follow the same rule - they want to keep the current situation, aka the status quo
and you have reactionaries who want to "go back" and reverse some reforms
so depends on what conservatism you mean, what is conservatism for you may not be for me
i guess you mean american conservatism?

i'd consider myself a social democrat, a market capitalist system with certain benefits for the working class and social programs
however i'm also pro-military and think that the mandatory military service should come back to my country (until 2010 you had to serve 6 months here, then the social liberals scrapped it) which i think was a mistake since we live in a hostile society

This thread really illustrates the discrepancy between Anglo-Saxon conservatives and European ones.
Hailing from Europe myself (the cucked part), my country is well known for its social benefits and amounts of money spent on the less fortunate.
I still consider myself to be a conservative, although my local party has become increasingly drunk on power and seem to use more & more inflammatory rhetoric (their current majority stems in part from disgruntled extreme right wingers).
Who knows, I might even vote for the (classic) liberals this time around.

Generally, it's about wanting to keep things the same, or at the very least being slow to introduce change.
Doing so too quickly can often lead to disastrous results.

I also agree that the military draft should've remained, preferably 1 year as opposed to 6 months, mainly because
it renders the participants in good shape, gives them a good circle of friends and a taste of adult work ethic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KemChy
Back