“I feel for you” means that I have an appreciation and respect of your comments and perspectives. But also that you - by no fault of yours - are in a situation here where sensitivities are heightened. I feel that you and I could be friends. I’m glad you are here.
1 Like
I also very appreciate your patience, and all the information, reflections and experience you share.
Let’s continue thinking how to improve/strengthen democracy and freedom.
2 Likes
Yes! Friend.
And more words. 
1 Like
Sure. Why not? How much current conservative literature do you read?
Less than half of the voting population thinks that. Voter’s are less than half the country. Many of that half have deep reservations, but limited choices at the polls.
Conservatism is opposed to feminism, atheism and supports traditions.
Read Edmund Burke, De Maistre, Bonald, Scruton, the theorists of conservatism.
Yes, I thought “voting” population was implied. My bad.
Edit to add: The polls show half of the voters favor Trump. Perhaps they don’t believe the “gift” part but judging by the signs/flags/bumper stickers I see, it’s most of the right. I stand by the gist of my statement.
1 Like
So…
Belief that God determined election. About a third (35%) of republicans believe god is involved. 20% of democrats believe that.
“Free Market” is not the same as "Unrestricted “Capitalism”.
A Free Market has a natural balancing function due to competition.
OTOH, unrestricted Capitalism is a parasitic function (greed), that always results in an unbalanced economic environment.
A free-market economy must have regulations. It does not self regulate externalities.
1 Like
I know conservative feminists and atheists. And tradition is a value that is shared by many. Depends on the tradition.
You really need to stop thinking in absolutes and false dichotomies.
2 Likes
Maybe pedantic on my part, but the 50/50 split is part of the illusion. It’s maintained to make it look like they need to fight harder, to feel more threatened, to entrench further, to not even talk to those others.
This was my source:
LINK
I’m not going to dig into the methodology right now, but polls are usually registered voters, likely to vote this time. It’s hard to know what the other 1/3 to 1/2 are thinking
1 Like
Humanism is universal? That would be news to most of the world. Humanism exists in a few Western countries at most.
As for economic freedom and personal freedom going hand in hand – I agree. You’re not really free without economic freedom.
Yes, groups like Incas and Aztecs were more sophisticated than any indigenous groups here. Although, I doubt that has anything to do with the local politics since then.
Somehow I had a feeling you’d put that spin on it. First, The Incas were taken down in the 16th century and NA Indians were still signing treaties in the 19th. The Spanish were small groups of soldiers, operating in a harsh jungle environment, but they still won with superior fire power. The US was colonized and a standing army was established that kept building forts as it moved west. NA Indians very quickly adapted to fighting on horseback, making battles more difficult. In both cases, disease played a role, something that wasn’t understood when Europeans first got here.
The difference I pointed out was the cities that SA natives built. Nomadic life isn’t more or less sophisticated, it was just suitable to the wide-open plains and a climate that wasn’t near the equator. I wouldn’t call sacrificing children sophisticated either.
conservatism, political doctrine that emphasizes the value of traditional institutions and practices Far from believing that human nature is essentially good or that human beings are fundamentally rational, conservatives tend to assume that human beings are driven by their passions and desires—and are therefore naturally prone to selfishness, anarchy, irrationality, and violence. Accordingly, conservatives look to traditional political and cultural institutions to curb humans’ base and destructive instincts. In Burke’s words, people need “a sufficient restraint upon their passions,” which it is the office of government “to bridle and subdue.” Families, churches, and schools must teach the value of self-discipline, and those who fail to learn this lesson must have discipline imposed upon them by government and law. Without the restraining power of such institutions, conservatives believe, there can be no ethical behaviour and no responsible use of liberty. Conservatism is as much a matter of temperament as of doctrine. It may sometimes even accompany left-wing politics or economics—as it did, for example, in the late 1980s, when hard-line communists in the Soviet Union were often referred to as “conservatives.” Typically, however, the conservative temperament displays two characteristics that are scarcely compatible with communism. The first is a distrust of human nature, rootlessness (social disconnectedness), and untested innovations, together with a corresponding trust in unbroken historical continuity and in the traditional frameworks for conducting human affairs. Such frameworks may be political, cultural, or religious, or they may have no abstract or institutional expression at all. The second characteristic of the conservative temperament, which is closely related to the first, is an aversion to abstract argument and theorizing. Attempts by philosophers and revolutionaries to plan society in advance, using political principles purportedly derived from reason alone, are misguided and likely to end in disaster, conservatives say. In this respect the conservative temperament contrasts markedly with that of the liberal. Whereas the liberal consciously articulates abstract theories, the conservative instinctively embraces concrete traditions. For just this reason, many authorities on conservatism have been led to deny that it is a genuine ideology, regarding it instead as a relatively inarticulate state of mind. Whatever the merits of this view, it remains true that the best insights of conservatism seldom have been developed into sustained theoretical works comparable to those of liberalism and radicalism.
(…)
The claim that society is too complex to be improved through social engineering naturally raises the question, “What kind of understanding of society is possible?” The most common conservative answer emphasizes the idea of tradition. People are what they are because they have inherited the skills, manners, morality, and other cultural resources of their ancestors.
(…)
Conservatism has often been associated with traditional and established forms of religion. After 1789 the appeal of religion redoubled, in part because of a craving for security in an age of chaos. The Roman Catholic Church, because of its roots in the Middle Ages, has appealed to more conservatives than has any other religion. Although he was not a Catholic, Burke praised Catholicism as “the most effectual barrier” against radicalism. But conservatism has had no dearth of Protestant, Jewish, Islamic, and strongly anticlerical adherents.
I opened a thread to discuss about the topic of conservatism.
It is universal because those values can be shared by any people accross the globe, irrespective of their ethnicity.