Conservatism as an ideology is dumb by definition

[SNC]

The premise behind conservatism is dumb by definition.

I love how you redefine words so that you can attempt to make an argument for or against something. Or is that just more of what you are railing against, maintaining an established method of communication that everyone agreed upon. You talk about intelligent conversation but you pretty much start every post with a childish insult to those you wish to converse with.


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conservatism

• Definition of conservatism

1. 1capitalizeda : the principles and policies of a Conservative partyb : the Conservative party
   
   
2. 2a : disposition in politics to preserve what is establishedb : a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change; specifically : such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage)
   
   
3. 3: the tendency to prefer an existing or traditional situation to change <religious conservatism> <cultural conservatism>
   

Nothing in Webster's definition intimates your assertion. Now had you prefaced your comment with I believe or feel, then your statement would have some validity, but to make the claim that the definition of conservatism is dumb it blatantly false. Your posts are humorous if nothing. Perhaps it's not Conservatism that is the dumb one here....

 

[mikeymikec]

Hey, Mikey, Conservative and Liberal are interchangeable, in your example. Ideologues will always work toward their own personal interests. Can't throw that on one without seeing in the other.

Even a recent example of protests against Trump worldwide is one that shows people of a liberal mindset who are not working in their own personal interests (ie. that which benefits them personally and directly). Some of the most famous historical examples of liberalism at work were not to the personal benefit of those who championed them. Also, I would also bet that there's at least a dozen males on this forum who consider themselves to be feminists, as well as a bunch of egalitarians.

I don't expect a reasoned argument from you especially after the last time I attempted to discuss a topic with you, but at least refrain from false equivalence and obviously false statements. Perhaps also read the wikipedia articles on conservatism and liberalism before claiming that they're interchangeable.

 

[agent00f]

I love how you redefine words so that you can attempt to make an argument for or against something. Or is that just more of what you are railing against, maintaining an established method of communication that everyone agreed upon. You talk about intelligent conversation but you pretty much start every post with a childish insult to those you wish to converse with.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conservatism

Nothing in Webster's definition intimates your assertion. Now had you prefaced your comment with I believe or feel, then your statement would have some validity, but to make the claim that the definition of conservatism is dumb it blatantly false. Your posts are humorous if nothing. Perhaps it's not Conservatism that is the dumb one here....

"2a : disposition in politics to preserve what is established
b : a political philosophy based on tradition"

Thanks for verifying that the topic of this thread will never be mistaken for thinkers, or even readers for that matter. Evidently the conservative brain trust is limited to argument via dictionary semantics, and can't even do that right. I do recall that you specifically has real trouble with basic arithmetic, which really doesn't help the ideology's case here.

 

[Grooveriding]

I disagree. Conservatism is fine. I think you are mixing up the Republican party of the US as all encompassing of what conservatism is. I've voted Conservative here for years until the most recent federal election.

The US Republican party is partly an extremist group, making them insane/dumb/whatever you want to call it. Once you have a party that denies factual realities (anthropomorphic climate change) and using fairy tale religious theocratic principles to guide them, you have a serious problem. Worse are those so partisan they will believe complete fantasy because of it.

I guess from the inside looking inside, the view can become myopic. But it's the Republican party that is inherently insane, not Conservatism.

 

[agent00f]

I disagree. Conservatism is fine. I think you are mixing up the Republican party of the US as all encompassing of what conservatism is. I've voted Conservative here for years until the most recent federal election.

The US Republican party is partly an extremist group, making them insane/dumb/whatever you want to call it. Once you have a party that denies factual realities (anthropomorphic climate change) and using fairy tale religious theocratic principles to guide them, you have a serious problem. Worse are those so partisan they will believe complete fantasy because of it.

I guess from the inside looking inside, the view can become myopic. But it's the Republican party that is inherently insane, not Conservatism.

I'm simply observing that intelligence is defined by learning/adaptive ability, in diametric opposition to the definition of conservative ideology. It might well be the case that american conservatives are extremely unintelligent, but that's tangential to the point at hand.

 

[SNC]

"2a : disposition in politics to preserve what is established
b : a political philosophy based on tradition"

Thanks for verifying that the topic of this thread will never be mistaken for thinkers, or even readers for that matter. Evidently the conservative brain trust is limited to argument via dictionary semantics, and can't even do that right. I do recall that you specifically has real trouble with basic arithmetic, which really doesn't help the ideology's case here.

So wait you are actually READING the word "dumb" in that definition? You can't really expect to be taken seriously can you? I think you are trying a bit to hard to look smarter than you are. You might just try having an honest conversation with people and drop the constant attempt to belittle everyone you disagree with. You are actually arguing that the word "dumb" is in the definition I copied, and claiming I'm the one with a compromised ability. What a twisted world you must live in.

 

[agent00f]

Tradition carries with it a lot of wisdom. Science is a foundation worthy of taking it down, love for those suffering direct harm is another

But as a progressive social scientist, I implore you not to trade common sense for whatever comes out of the sociological/psychological/anthropological dogmas.

It's really quite disgusting how bad our social "science" is.

To reiterate, the point is only that stubbornly doing the same thing by definition lacks intelligence.

It's certainly true social science is less rigorous by nature than let's say the stratospheric standard set by physics, but it's beyond doubt just about any form of coherent thinking is superior to this perpetual lack of it:

So wait you are actually READING the word "dumb" in that definition? You can't really expect to be taken seriously can you? I think you are trying a bit to hard to look smarter than you are. You might just try having an honest conversation with people and drop the constant attempt to belittle everyone you disagree with. You are actually arguing that the word "dumb" is in the definition I copied, and claiming I'm the one with a compromised ability. What a twisted world you must live in.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Well that explains your love of all things islam, now doesn't it? While the world moves forward, including Christian conservatives, moslems stay put, or move backwards.

In the late 1980s, Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto, concerned about the growing strength of the Islamist movement, told President George H. W. Bush, "You are creating a Frankenstein."

These things happened. They were glorious and they changed the world... and then we fucked up the end game.

Charlie Wilson

 

[Londo_Jowo]

If I had not looked to see who the OP was, I would have sworn it was Moonbeam thread.

 

[NTMBK]

I don't think a conservative mindset is fundamentally a bad thing. People come up with new ideas all of the time. Some of them will be good (civil rights), some of them will be bad (physiognomy). Without scepticism of new ideas, society would bounce around all over the place like a ping pong ball. I like to think that good ideas will prove themselves over time, and become the values defended by the next generation of conservatives. Bad ideas, on the other hand, will fail to get a foothold and die out.

Think of it like dampening a spring.

 

[MajinCry]

To be Conservative is to pine for the old days. It's the old grandpa way of thinking; change is frightening, and what is frightening should be pushed away. Have to give up slavery? Fuck no, we've had slavery for decades.

It's no coincidence that the most conservative parts of the world, are also the most fucked up. Check out Saudi Arabia. Extremely conservative, and thus, extremely religious.

 

[agent00f]

In the late 1980s, Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto, concerned about the growing strength of the Islamist movement, told President George H. W. Bush, "You are creating a Frankenstein."

These things happened. They were glorious and they changed the world... and then we fucked up the end game.

Charlie Wilson

In the same vein I think the funniest part of that post is Anonymous & friends are basically the people on the right no matter how much they desire to steal credit from western liberalism.