Updated Pics in Conservative Group

[Minister of Truth]

I added a bunch of historical conservatives to the Conservative Coalition group. Plug for any cons out there to join up and get a discussion going (not much happens when its just me and Damo, and the rest of the members are useless).

I just thought I'd take a poll on who among the pictures is the best (I have a feeling I know who will win...). Check out the pictures while you're at it!

 

[ironhead]

Hamilton was not a conservative in his time. His ideas about the Federal government were not Whig, nor were they republican. He wanted a fusion of monarchy and plutocracy.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Hamilton was not a conservative in his time. His ideas about the Federal government were not Whig, nor were they republican. He wanted a fusion of monarchy and plutocracy.

Yeah, according to that clown Thomas Dilorenzo. Anyway, Hamilton was a deeply flawed man, and it led him to destroy his own party, wind up in a scandal, and get shot in a duel...

I refrained from putting in Lincoln, because all the Southerners would have a heart attack...

Another great Whig that I was too lazy to put in was Webster, and I also was too lazy to put in Q. Adams.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Hamilton was not a conservative in his time. His ideas about the Federal government were not Whig, nor were they republican. He wanted a fusion of monarchy and plutocracy.

Yes, Hamilton was a conservative. Monarchism and plutocracy are conservative ideologies.

 

[ironhead]

Yes, Hamilton was a conservative. Monarchism and plutocracy are conservative ideologies.

Monarchism certainly is, but Hamilton disdained the agrarian farmer ideal espoused by Jefferson. Hamilton was a mercantilist, but a forward-thinking one. One could argue that Hamilton's ideas have, over time, won out (in terms of actual governance).

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Monarchism certainly is, but Hamilton disdained the agrarian farmer ideal espoused by Jefferson. Hamilton was a mercantilist, but a forward-thinking one. One could argue that Hamilton's ideas have, over time, won out (in terms of actual governance).

Although things have shifted so much over time that it's hazardous to try to compare them to modern movements (because whenever someone does it is usually no more than an angry rant and an attempt to disparage the other side), I'd usually think of Jefferson as the liberal (despite his support for slavery) and Hamilton the conservative. Conservatives over time have adopted a lot of liberalisms tenants, and become something of conservative liberals. Liberalism is something of an extremely successful ideology, whether they be progressive or conservative liberals.

Hamilton was a lot of things, but he certainly wasn't the liberal, what with his opposition to the bill of rights and support of huge tariffs. In that way, he much more closely mirrored the British Tories.

Of course, monarchism and such wouldn't be accepted by today's conservatives, but conservatism is really just a statement of opposition to change, rather than any single cohesive ideology. Notably, their opposition to the federal government comes more from hatred for the civil rights movement than anything else. It contrasts with progressivism, not liberalism. Liberalism is a philosophy, and it contrasts to fascism.

 

[ironhead]

Although things have shifted so much over time that it's hazardous to try to compare them to modern movements (because whenever someone does it is usually no more than an angry rant and an attempt to disparage the other side), I'd usually think of Jefferson as the liberal (despite his support for slavery) and Hamilton the conservative. Conservatives over time have adopted a lot of liberalisms tenants, and become something of conservative liberals. Liberalism is something of an extremely successful ideology, whether they be progressive or conservative liberals.

Hamilton was a lot of things, but he certainly wasn't the liberal, what with his opposition to the bill of rights and support of huge tariffs. In that way, he much more closely mirrored the British Tories.

Of course, monarchism and such wouldn't be accepted by today's conservatives, but conservatism is really just a statement of opposition to change, rather than any single cohesive ideology. Notably, their opposition to the federal government comes more from hatred for the civil rights movement than anything else. It contrasts with progressivism, not liberalism. Liberalism is a philosophy, and it contrasts to fascism.

I wasn't trying to make the case that Hamilton was a liberal.

I don't view the political spectrum as a two-axis model (liberal vs. conservative). I view it as a two-axis model, with state vs. individual axes in social and economic spheres.

Hamilton was a hardcore statist. Some might have considered anti-federalists to be conservatives during Hamilton's time. This is what I was alluding to.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I wasn't trying to make the case that Hamilton was a liberal.

I don't view the political spectrum as a two-axis model (liberal vs. conservative). I view it as a two-axis model, with state vs. individual axes in social and economic spheres.

Hamilton was a hardcore statist. Some might have considered anti-federalists to be conservatives during Hamilton's time. This is what I was alluding to.

Only if you define conservatism by opposition to the state, which I don't really consider correct. Otherwise anarchy would be the most conservative ideology imaginable, which would be somewhat of a hard pill to swallow.

But whatever.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Different strands of conservatives in the early 20th Century were influenced by either Hamilton or Jefferson. Men such as Teddy Roosevelt and Calvin Coolidge came from Hamilton's school while men such as Robert La Follette and William Borah were influenced more by Jefferson.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Different strands of conservatives in the early 20th Century were influenced by either Hamilton or Jefferson. Men such as Teddy Roosevelt and Calvin Coolidge came from Hamilton's school while men such as Robert La Follette and William Borah were influenced more by Jefferson.

La Follette was a progressive. A left-winger. I think the socialist party actually didn't run a candidate in 1924 because they endorsed him.

 

[Minister of Truth]

La Follette was a progressive. A left-winger. I think the socialist party actually didn't run a candidate in 1924 because they endorsed him.

The progressive party picked him up. And while La Folette is identified with the progressive movement, he was very conservative in many ways. For example, when he voted against Taft's appointment to be Chief Justice, he claimed it was because Taft betrayed the country by voting for the League of Nations.

Remember, a progressive is simply a person who believes that society can be made better simply by passing new laws. This can apply to both conservatives and liberals.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

the terms conservative and liberal should really be done away with. They are too subjective.

 

[ironhead]

the terms conservative and liberal should really be done away with. They are too subjective.

I agree, they're very imprecise. They tend to be convenient at times, if inaccurate at others.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

The progressive party picked him up. And while La Folette is identified with the progressive movement, he was very conservative in many ways. For example, when he voted against Taft's appointment to be Chief Justice, he claimed it was because Taft betrayed the country by voting for the League of Nations.

Remember, a progressive is simply a person who believes that society can be made better simply by passing new laws. This can apply to both conservatives and liberals.

If someone were a progressive conservative it just wouldn't make sense anymore. The two words would cancel each other out. It's like liberal fascist - you believe in liberty and getting rid of liberty?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

If someone were a progressive conservative it just wouldn't make sense anymore. The two words would cancel each other out. It's like liberal fascist - you believe in liberty and getting rid of liberty?

moron, thats what YOU do!!! Are you a liberal fascist? You SAY you believe in liberty, but what you really want is one party control over the people. you want to define how people SHOULD live, according to your own ideals.

Maybe what you should try doing is wresting control over a small nation state and declaring yourself dictator.

 

[Epicurus]

The terms are all but completely useless. I only use them as insults.

They mean different things depending on whether you are talking social or fiscal issues, and they mean completely different things everywhere else in the world.

In any case, the assumption that the sum of all policy positions can be measured on a left-right scale is laughably absurd.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

moron, thats what YOU do!!! Are you a liberal fascist? You SAY you believe in liberty, but what you really want is one party control over the people. you want to define how people SHOULD live, according to your own ideals.

Maybe what you should try doing is wresting control over a small nation state and declaring yourself dictator.

It's true I hope that the Republicans win no seats in the next election, but that's just because I'd like them to be replaced by Greens. One party rule isn't fascism if the people vote for it overwhelmingly and without intimidation.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

The terms are all but completely useless. I only use them as insults.

They mean different things depending on whether you are talking social or fiscal issues, and they mean completely different things everywhere else in the world.

In any case, the assumption that the sum of all policy positions can be measured on a left-right scale is laughably absurd.

In America liberal and progressive are synonymous, and to make things more confusing, we often refer to right wingers as neoliberals even though this makes no sense with the current political lexicon where "liberal" means "social democrat".

All large political terms lose their meaning after a while. You could say the same thing about the term socialist in europe.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I will vote for the Republican party when the day comes that they propose that we legalize pot, end the drug war, abolish the death penalty and most mandatory minimums, and allow gays to wed. Otherwise I'm stickin with the Dems, for no other reason than the alternative parties are pitiful and don't leave me with any other choice.

 

[Epicurus]

Why? The Dems don't even promise any of that.