Xbox Mod Chips | Ringtones | Personal Loans | Personal Loans | Ringtones
What Happened to Goldwater, WFBuckley, Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan Conservatism? [Archive] - FreeConservatives

PDA

View Full Version : What Happened to Goldwater, WFBuckley, Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan Conservatism?


maxparrish
03-07-2007, 11:50 PM
After listening to most of Tancredo's video it prompts me to ask - what the heck happened to real conservatism? Tancredo was quite right, they started "hyphenating" the label as if it were an embarrassment - George Bush the first started it with his stupid "kinder, gentler" conservatism, followed by George Bush the second's discovery of "compassionate conservatism" - in the meantime the left was busy attacking the 'evil' sinister Zionist "neo"-conservatism and Pat Buchanan's "paleo-conservatism" derailed itself over fear of free trade, Jews, and foreign interventionism.

At one time conservatism was a single strand, a core ideology that may have had slightly different flavors but all of them were based on on a unified understanding of human nature and economics. Among those understandings were:

- The state (government) is, at best, a necessary evil - at worst, the only human institution capable of destroying our liberties.

- Political freedom is not possible without a free economy.

- The free market and capitalism are the most productive means to human improvement and well-being ever known, and its basis is in natural rights liberty and the free choice of the individual. Without it, we are slaves.

- Government is antithetical to freedom, a succubus upon the productive energies of a people, an abusive force often used by elite minorities to "design" human society and its agents for their totalitarian society agendas.

- America, as an ideal, has been the land of freedom, the providential promise of God's City on a Hill that embraced the common man, freedom of the individual, merit and the self-made man, and international protector of free Republics. To conservatives these ideals were one coherent concept - liberty, individualism, freedom, capitalism, exceptionalism and patriotism.

Conservatives were people that saw all these connections as coming from its understanding about human nature - that when men were left alone to work in their own self-interests, they also work in societies interests. The strongest society's were those formed by mutual and voluntary relationships, not the "collectivized" society of the Soviet Union (that failed once the binding force of fear was removed).

This is some of what all conservatives, of any stripe, once believed:

- A strong defense whose first priority was our protecting national interests and our security. And when forced to war, only massive and uncompromising force to assure victory was the appropriate moral response to a provocation.

- A smaller, leaner, federal government. Lower, flatter, and simplified taxes without special deductions.

- Federalism and State's Rights: local control of education and taxes. Local control of welfare and moral issues. Ending the departments of energy and education.

- Serious border security. A limited and selective immigration in order to meet the needs of our fellow Americans, not to meet the needs of failing third world governments.

- Free trade, low regulations, and the right of contract.

- Equality before the law, including REAL equality without gender, racial, or ethnic "points" and quotas for jobs and education benefits.

- Individual responsibility. Government was not your nanny, your retirement system, your medical system, or your provider of subsidized housing. Its purpose was not to rob from the fruits of the labors of some, to give it to others as "compensation".

- The Law as written, not as invented by activist judges seeking to impose their social values on society.

YET, I only know of ONE candidate (and one possible candidate) that believes in conservatism: Tancredo and Gingrich. While I would guess that at least an 80% majority of rank and file conservatives believe in ALL of the above, I am perplexed that almost NO high profile conservative leader does.

Rhino
03-08-2007, 07:38 AM
Beats me.

DoctorDoom
03-08-2007, 08:12 AM
Conservatism is no longer a political, social and ethical philosophy. Now it's a flexible commodity to be changed and shaped and redefined to meet the needs of the moment. Conservatism in our time has all the consistency and uniformity of regional dialects. A 2007 conservative in Texas is not the same as a 2007 conservative in New York or California.

Conservatism is whatever sells in a particular area, and doesn't offend anyone. Therefore, Guiliani is a conservative, Romney is a conservative, McCain is a conservative, etcetera, etcetera. And Ronaldus Maximum is spinning in his grave.

Lazarus
03-08-2007, 08:53 AM
The Country Club Republicans are making a strategic thrust to take over the party again... They lost control when Reagan came to office and have been desperately trying to reassert their dominance ever since...

When the founding fathers established this great political experiment we call the United States, they set up proabably the most perfect government in human history... But all tey can do is set the formula out there for us - We, each subsequent generation, must assume the responsibility to feed, maintain, and defend this greatest of Constitutions... Its truths are self-evident and eternal, but in the practice of it, WE the People must maintain it...

The same holds true for Conservatism... It is the truth that threatens all those evil concepts that the Left has foolish sold their souls to... It is the responsibility of each subsequent generation to maintain and feed the practical application of the truths of Conservatism...

The Country Club Republicans are dedicated to remaining in power simply for the sake of power itself... They are driven by power lust and personal greed... As a result they are perfectly happy to compremise with the left... They are not dedicated to maintaining the great experiment that Washington, Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John Adams, John Jay, etc., risked their lives and fortunes to establish - They care not for the principles of freedom... They care only for their own personal gain...

Ronald Reagan was our modern day George Washington - He fearlessly stepped forward and said, "Dont be afraid of the truth - Follow Me!" He set our feet on that path that was neglected and hidden for so many years...

But as much as it grieves us, he cannot stay here and be the daddy forever... We must become the daddy - We must step into his shoes and fight to keep Conservatism as the controlling power of the Republican party - Or failing that, create a new party...

We have more than one opponent in this political struggle... We have the forces of the Left - Democrats, Socialists, Communists... And we have those who would slip in, in the dark of night, and steal our party... The CC Pubs...

They would gladly put a stake in Reagan's heart and close the book on Conservatism... For in Conservatism, the great experiment is kept alive - It is the polical philosphy that empowers the people to be free... And that flies in the face of purpose of the CC pubs...

This is why we MUST NOT allow the Left or the CC Pubs to choose OUR candidate... There comes a point where taking a stand for the truth must be more valuable to us than winning the short term battle...

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

So sayeth Lazarus...

dPrasse
03-08-2007, 09:20 AM
... Now it's a flexible commodity to be changed and shaped and redefined to meet the needs of the moment....
Conservatism is whatever sells in a particular area, and doesn't offend anyone....

Situational Conservatism ...

Naturalized-Texan
03-08-2007, 09:59 AM
In 2000 the Country Club/establishment Republicans tried to force their candidate - John McCain - down our throats, but grass-roots conservatives and religious conservatives rose up against the establishment and nominated George W. Bush, the anti-establishment candidate.

Who is the viable anti-establishment candidate for 2008? As I view it, it's Newt or Fred Thompson, both unannounced. I see no others at this point.

Lazarus
03-08-2007, 10:02 AM
...Who is the viable anti-establishment candidate for 2008? As I view it, it's Newt or Fred Thompson, both unannounced...But both still considering... Its smart for them, IMO, to be unannounced at this time... Its too early to get into the mud-fight... They still have more than enough time to announce and take the lead, while avoiding unnecessary damage during an unnecessary period...

Its a good strategy and smart politics... Its becoming embarrassingly evident in the media now that conservatives are NOT pleased with the 3-bean soup that is being dished up for them... Everyone is talking about it... Newt or Thompson could easily capture the hearts of conservatives - its just a matter of timing...

Im still hopeful...

Republican_Legion
03-08-2007, 11:05 AM
A 2007 conservative in Texas is not the same as a 2007 conservative in New York or California.

Congressmen: Dana Rohrabacher, Ed Royce, Duncan Hunter, Darrel Issa, John Cambell and Gary Miller would disagree with that. In fact Royce and Rohrabacher vote better on Spending and Immigration than any Congressman from Texas.

Southern conservativism is less Fiscally conservative than that of the Midwest, Southwest or parts of the Northeast(New Hampshire and Pennslyania). However Socially the South is the best.

Arizona IMO has the best overall conservative congressmen.
Shaddeg R-AZ, Jeff Flake R-AZ and Trent Franks R-AZ.
Senator Kyl appears to be that of a strong PORK fighter.

HomeschoolrsRUs
03-08-2007, 02:58 PM
YET, I only know of ONE candidate (and one possible candidate) that believes in conservatism: Tancredo and Gingrich. While I would guess that at least an 80% majority of rank and file conservatives believe in ALL of the above, I am perplexed that almost NO high profile conservative leader does.

Exactly!

Glad I wasn't the only one who picked up on all this, :smirky: .

MrSanity
03-08-2007, 05:28 PM
Situational Conservatism ......has overthrown principled conservatism in mainline politics.

Timberwolf
03-08-2007, 07:20 PM
But both still considering... Its smart for them, IMO, to be unannounced at this time... Its too early to get into the mud-fight... They still have more than enough time to announce and take the lead, while avoiding unnecessary damage during an unnecessary period...
Bingo.



Its a good strategy and smart politics... Its becoming embarrassingly evident in the media now that conservatives are NOT pleased with the 3-bean soup that is being dished up for them... Everyone is talking about it... Newt or Thompson could easily capture the hearts of conservatives - its just a matter of timing...
How about Newt AND Thompson?

Im still hopeful...
Ditto that.