Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I'm always entertained by how identity works in America. Trump is a traditional conservative, his jingoistic nationalism is right in line with the icons of the right, Goldwater and Reagan, his approach to civil rights is, too, his economics are really not far off (cut taxes and all else follows), his court appointments look identical .... he's just even more of an asshole and a moron than they were, which is why conservatives try to redefine conservatism without him.
Dr. Frankenstein, meet your monster.
|
It seems everyone has a slightly different definition of conservative. None are necessarily wrong, but they differ enough that the term really has no meaning anymore.
To demonstrate, my grandparents on one side were classic conservatives. They were in favor of low taxes and non-intervention in foreign conflicts unless absolutely necessary. They were not absolutist on anything. They understood the need for regulation but wanted it to be as minimal as possible while still effecting desired oversight. They were involved in finance, but my grandfather hated greedy people. I recall the old man emphasizing hard work and being quiet -- slow accumulation and no ostentatious behavior. Boring.
He refused to trade with people who treated their livestock badly. The idea of "conserving" applied roundly, to everything -- to not being wasteful or consuming more than you needed.
Those values are what I understood to be "conservative." This continues to color my view of the term. I think of conservatives as good stewards of resources, as reasonable people.
I fear your definition is probably now a lot more accurate than mine. But it's hard for me to get the old definition out of my head. It's hard for me to see these interventionist, activist people who don't really give a shit about individual liberty or "conserving" anything for the next generations as anything but dumb, reckless people who want to enforce their stupid rules on others.
Threaded Mode