Something rotten in today's Conservatism

[myata]

If WWII period Conservatism was anything like today's the war would have gone to Hitler. And Europe. And the US, locked by the Axis in its little corner of the world, if not invaded.

Trump, Orban, Poilievre, Fizo, the entire Republican party under the heel. These are facts, more than coincidences.

Thatcher and Reagan, perplexed.

Try to argue that.

Edited December 14, 2023 by myata

[French Patriot]

7 hours ago, myata said:

If WWII period Conservatism was anything like today's the war would have gone to Hitler. And Europe. And the US, looced by the Axis in its little corner of the world, if not invaded.

Trump, Orban, Poilievre, Fizo, the entire Republican party under the heel. These are facts, more than coincidences.

Thatcher and Reagan, perplexed.

Try to argue that.

If morals are at issue, all one needs do is look at the right wing anti LGBTQ+ stance, as well as anti abortion, and one can easily the moral decay in the right wing camps.

[myata]

Conservative is not a solid whole, it's a mix. And at least one tribe, a current in it never accepted the democracy for real, as a foundation and necessity in a modern civilized society - only as a mean to advance to power. Their ideas and ideals about the power, not democracy.

"If conservatives could not get to the power democratically, they will not abandon conservatism, but the democracy". More than a phrase, it's playing out right before our eyes.

For a time, they were held in check by the other group, formal and educated, for which principles and the Constitution did matter. But they despised it, for staring down on them and for unnecessarily in their view, reservations resulting, in their view, in weakness. And then they figured out that by shouting loud and thumping they themselves could rule. They muzzle and suffocate the others, kick out the principled ones, and bring everybody to the heel. Perfect unity, 100% approval. You thought it was from another story? But what if the opposites attract - and converge, eventually, in a perfect harmony.

[French Patriot]

11 hours ago, myata said:

in a perfect harmony.

Perfect harmony is certainly what all LGBTQ+ want.

That is not what the immoral religious right want. They want to hate and not harmonize.

[myata]

45 minutes ago, French Patriot said:

what all ... want

And I'm weary of all folks who claim that they speak on behalf of an entire group. No, I'm better off with my own brain. There may be thousands or millions of groups, tribes and flavors etc in this humanity. Will they achieve a perfect harmony any time soon? I doubt that. But can we at least come to common terms about what's unacceptable and cannot be tolerated: violence; brutality; invasion? That's where the new conservatism is failing. They can excuse it, shrug off and tolerate it, if it's of the right kind. Echos of the past, or the call.

[French Patriot]

37 minutes ago, myata said:

But can we at least come to common terms about what's unacceptable and cannot be tolerated: violence; brutality; invasion?

How do you figure that?

Right wing Christianity is praying for Armageddon and violence, brutality and invasion. This would include the mass murder of all LGBTQ+.

Left wing Christianity are going the better and more moral way of loving their children even if LGBTQ+.

Which system is better?

[myata]

11 hours ago, French Patriot said:

Which system is better?

I don't like tags and labels. If they are fine walking around with a label attached to them, OK it's their choice. But this is not a LGBT discussion. Everyone can have a claim to peace and security, but no one has the right to impose their beliefs on others, even if better ones even if that could be proven.

[French Patriot]

10 hours ago, myata said:

I don't like tags and labels. If they are fine walking around with a label attached to them, OK it's their choice. But this is not a LGBT discussion. Everyone can have a claim to peace and security, but no one has the right to impose their beliefs on others, even if better ones even if that could be proven.

If you cannot say that it is better to love all children regardless of their label, your morals need looking at.

All are born in the image of God says religions, all with perfect souls, yet the religious think that God is screwing up on creating us.

So much for the faith of fools. 

[myata]

13 hours ago, French Patriot said:

If you cannot say that it is better to love all children

New conservatives claim to love all "babies", especially the unborn ones. I would be worried by the apparent similarity. Ideology is rarely a good answer to complex questions and problems in the society, even the great loving ones.

[French Patriot]

11 hours ago, myata said:

New conservatives claim to love all "babies", especially the unborn ones. I would be worried by the apparent similarity. Ideology is rarely a good answer to complex questions and problems in the society, even the great loving ones.

Ok.

Choosing to hate a few babies for not quite living to your expectations of a God created soul, is a better option; to the immoral.

Put love over gender and sex the way LGBTQ+ do and you will ascend to their level of excellence of mind. Putting sex and gender above love is just the wrong way to think.

[myata]

And again, its cool for everyone to f@ck whatever way they like but this topic is not about f-ing nor all the specific ways of accomplishing the feat. Surely there are other opportunities and avenues?

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, myata said:

And again, its cool for everyone to f@ck whatever way they like but this topic is not about f-ing nor all the specific ways of accomplishing the feat. Surely there are other opportunities and avenues?

It sounds like what FP is saying is on topic to me. Far as I can tell.

Or could it just be...

that something else is bothering you?

Perhaps you are not fully appreciating

something is rotten in today's liberalism...

 

[French Patriot]

22 hours ago, myata said:

And again, its cool for everyone to f@ck whatever way they like but this topic is not about f-ing nor all the specific ways of accomplishing the feat. Surely there are other opportunities and avenues?

??

I was talking of the haters being of lower character than those they hate because they put sex and gender above love.

Stop thinking of sex in what I put.

[August1991]

On 12/13/2023 at 8:17 AM, myata said:

If WWII period Conservatism was anything like today's the war would have gone to Hitler. And Europe. And the US, locked by the Axis in its little corner of the world, if not invaded.

Trump, Orban, Poilievre, Fizo, the entire Republican party under the heel. These are facts, more than coincidences.

Thatcher and Reagan, perplexed.

Try to argue that.

WWII?  World War 2?

For foolish reasons, the "world war" started in Summer 1814 - and it lasted until 1945.

===

Americans ended this nonsense in 1989.

[Yakuda]

On 12/13/2023 at 4:03 PM, French Patriot said:

If morals are at issue, all one needs do is look at the right wing anti LGBTQ+ stance, as well as anti abortion, and one can easily the moral decay in the right wing camps.

So if I understand you correctly the "right wing" is in moral decay because they oppose abortion??????? I am new here and I've only read a few of your posts but i have to hope you're trolling because if you actually believe some of the stuff I've seen you post then something is very wrong. 

[TreeBeard]

3 hours ago, Yakuda said:

So if I understand you correctly the "right wing" is in moral decay because they oppose abortion??????? I am new here and I've only read a few of your posts but i have to hope you're trolling because if you actually believe some of the stuff I've seen you post then something is very wrong. 

Is opposing someone's bodily autonomy immoral?  I would say yes, it is. 
 

We extend bodily autonomy past death, so of course someone who is living should be able to choose for themselves whether they wish to remain pregnant based on current medical ethics. 

[Yakuda]

11 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Is opposing someone's bodily autonomy immoral?  I would say yes, it is. 
 

We extend bodily autonomy past death, so of course someone who is living should be able to choose for themselves whether they wish to remain pregnant based on current medical ethics. 

If abortion affected only a woman's body I would agree but that just isn't the case. 

Forgive me but "current medical ethics" is not an impressive standard. 

 

[French Patriot]

On 1/9/2024 at 3:42 PM, Yakuda said:

So if I understand you correctly the "right wing" is in moral decay because they oppose abortion??????? I am new here and I've only read a few of your posts but i have to hope you're trolling because if you actually believe some of the stuff I've seen you post then something is very wrong. 

Your understanding is not on point.

I do not like to see any potential human aborted, but that does not give me the right to impose my desire to save it onto another.

Mine is a complicated view sometimes but I always take the moral position which is usually not where the religious are.

[Zeitgeist]

On 12/13/2023 at 8:17 AM, myata said:

If WWII period Conservatism was anything like today's the war would have gone to Hitler. And Europe. And the US, locked by the Axis in its little corner of the world, if not invaded.

Trump, Orban, Poilievre, Fizo, the entire Republican party under the heel. These are facts, more than coincidences.

Thatcher and Reagan, perplexed.

Try to argue that.

Myata, today’s conservative politicians generally are liberal compared to leaders like Thatcher and Reagan.    They wouldn’t privatize every last utility or railroad.

Also some of these leaders made their own weird and damaging policies that aren’t really conservative, like Thatcher’s poll tax that penalized people for having kids.  

The old right and left opposition doesn’t fit anymore except perhaps in the area of taxation.  The Republicans of the 80’s were a party of the elite.  Now that’s the Democrats for sure.  All major US and British parties are big spenders and have been for a long time.  Think of our debt under Mulroney.

I don’t know about Fizo, but Orban has tried to protect the local traditional way of life in the face of recklessly massive and unchecked immigration mandated in a top down EU that pressures national governments.

I like Italy’s Meloni and anyone who supports the family.  A nihilistic top down statism is destroying local decision-making and traditions.  We see this in Trudeau’s “Post-National” Canada, where billions of taxpayer dollars are spent trying to make Canada please international bodies without respect to the economic and cultural wellbeing of Canadians.

However, I have become a social conservative, not just an economic one.  I used to be a Liberal, but I see how the left has been overtaken by activist radicals who work against most of what I value about Canada and life in general.

Generally I support anyone who is against big controlling government and who is against destabilizing family through identity politics, EDI, gender ideology, Marxism, and nihilism.

Edited January 13 by Zeitgeist

[Zeitgeist]

On 12/13/2023 at 4:03 PM, French Patriot said:

If morals are at issue, all one needs do is look at the right wing anti LGBTQ+ stance, as well as anti abortion, and one can easily the moral decay in the right wing camps.

Wow you’re so wrong.  Abortion and LGBTQ+ behaviour/policies are big parts of the moral decay in the world today.  Same sex activity, abortion, and trans rights are literally destroying children and the family unit. The sexual revolution, radical feminism, and the rise of divorce are also causes of our waywardness and decay.  Violence and hatred have been scourges since the start of humanity, but we can and must have laws that prevent them where possible.

Even if the political reality is that the majority of the population supports abortion rights, do you think most people support current Canadian unlimited abortion rights that allow abortion up to 9 months gestation?  Do you think such policies are okay in terms of the right to life in our Constitution, or are bad sexual choices more important than protecting the lives of babies?

What do you think is more representative of moral decay?

Edited January 13 by Zeitgeist

[Zeitgeist]

On 12/14/2023 at 12:06 PM, French Patriot said:

Perfect harmony is certainly what all LGBTQ+ want.

That is not what the immoral religious right want. They want to hate and not harmonize.

First off, all of the groups in LGBTQ+ are not the same and they aren’t all unified.   That’s an assumption not unlike saying Asians and Blacks want the same things because both groups are minorities.  There’s huge range of opinion within each category.

Radical trans rights aren’t always supported by gays and lesbians.

Edited January 13 by Zeitgeist

[Zeitgeist]

On 12/14/2023 at 1:39 PM, French Patriot said:

How do you figure that?

Right wing Christianity is praying for Armageddon and violence, brutality and invasion. This would include the mass murder of all LGBTQ+.

Left wing Christianity are going the better and more moral way of loving their children even if LGBTQ+.

Which system is better?

Who is calling for the mass murder of LGBTQ+?  No one. No conservative leaders in any democracies are calling for that, nor are any Christian politicians.

Edited January 13 by Zeitgeist

[Zeitgeist]

On 12/15/2023 at 11:36 AM, French Patriot said:

If you cannot say that it is better to love all children regardless of their label, your morals need looking at.

All are born in the image of God says religions, all with perfect souls, yet the religious think that God is screwing up on creating us.

So much for the faith of fools. 

You’re missing a major distinction.  Yes all are created in the image of God, but no, we are not perfect and not all choices are good or of equal value.  

[Zeitgeist]

On 12/16/2023 at 12:05 PM, French Patriot said:

Ok.

Choosing to hate a few babies for not quite living to your expectations of a God created soul, is a better option; to the immoral.

Put love over gender and sex the way LGBTQ+ do and you will ascend to their level of excellence of mind. Putting sex and gender above love is just the wrong way to think.

You make it sound like there’s some kind of single moral framework that all LGBTQ+ people adhere to.  I’ve met nice gay people with many good qualities and I’ve met gays who seemed like a-holes.  People of all orientations and identities are capable of good or bad behaviour.  

Edited January 13 by Zeitgeist

[Michael Hardner]

On 12/13/2023 at 8:17 AM, myata said:

Thatcher and Reagan, perplexed.

Try to argue that.

These populists are not conservatives, any more than Biden and Trudeau are leftist.

The advent of social media changed the prescription on our public glasses. Nothing is as it was. Words have new meetings.

There are plenty of posters on here providing evidence for that.

Edited January 13 by Michael Hardner