- Navigation
- Hot
- New
- Recent Comments
- Activity Feed
- Marketplace
- Members Directory
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
Previous comments... You are currently on page 5.
I did not know that. . I thought that we should be talking about
current conservatives who want smaller government,
less -- or NO -- corruption, a military designed for defense
rather than nation-building, the elimination of punitive taxes,
and the like. . That is Pertinent to Today, IMHO. -- j
.
talk about conservatives -- they use God, temporal and
human fallibility crutches to undergird their arguments. -- j
.
with the word reverence? . your sensitivity to a side concept
seems amazing to me. . I have reverence for your rights
as an individual. . I adore them, 'cuz they are exactly like mine.
I have reverence towards nature 'cuz she continually
surprises me with intricate complexity beyond my wildest
dreams. . I could go on and on. . reverence is just a word. -- j
.
I believe, and always have believed, that Madison,
Jefferson, Adams et al, were creators of a societal
form which we should sustain and emulate because
it is good. . in that sense, it's reverence for their work
and appreciation for what we have. . this has not changed;;;
only the words which tickle your fancy have. -- j
.
My understanding isdbhalling is saying conservatives revere whatever is from the past. A non-conservative may revere some things that happen to be from the past, but not because they are from the past.
I think the important question is more properly, why would Conservatives, or Liberals, or Socialists, or Christians, or any form of irrational Statist want to be welcomed in the Gulch. Why would a person with those beliefs have any interest in what Objectivists discuss or gain from Posting irrelevant information, questions, comments, make contradictory expressions of their positions in different posts or even on the same post or thread, or ask Objectivists to compromise or agree to question their own principles and values?
Objectivists live in a reality and state of mind which is in direct opposition to nearly everything that Conservatives avow and do, politically and in fact. The real question then becomes, what value do Conservatives bring to honestly and openly trade with Objectivists.
That lasted until the majority under the teachings of democracy voted themselves a pay raise and traded their sovereignty and freedom for.....Government, Country, People as cannon fodder and baby factories.
The idea and one other known as the Monroe Doctrine which stated one may help one's neighbor without taking over his property were our historical contributions to the world.
Our country today is a stark warning of the consequences when citizens fail in their duty as citizens.
May the next go round pay attention to the lessons of history.
A dream, an Idea, a concept thus tested and deemed practical then tested again against another possibility without a ...safety net... is someone elses metaphor, a reframed redefined nightmare
.
and its creators, then reverence for work done in the past
might be appropriate, don't you think? -- j
.
tend to draw people towards irresponsible conception
and neglect of children -- before and after birth. . I despise the
inducements which tend to draw people towards welfare
instead of work. . I despise those which tend to reward lying
instead of honesty, to reward corruption rather than integrity.
and the government is at the center of most of these inducements,
in my humble opinion. . we who have a sense of healthier life --
however we're labeled, objectivist or whatever -- need to
band together to change this society. . soon! -- j
.
.
For those of us who were legitimate volunteers it had no meaning because it wasn't necessary. The exception was it legally focused us on owing allegiance only to the Constitution. Not to the government, nor the people, nor the President. They were implied but not stated and their were exceptions for example if they became enemies domestic. There was no exception to the first part and no 'to the best of my ability escape clauses.'
The similarity is they are opposites and can exchange definitions over the course of one general election or by other means. The same as In and Out.
Fascism large F you nailed it but all despotic totalitarian governments are fascist small f including religious governments (Islam, Vatican) and secular in any form the two forms of socialism extremists are National and International Socialism with only one slight difference between them.
What matters more is what someone actually believes for themselves & practices in their daily life.
You may feel comfortable stating your distain for "Conservatives" but you must really in the end ask yourself why? "Liberals" are almost identical to "conservatives" just with a different set of dogma, much as Fascists and Communists are 2 sides of the same coin just with a different set of Elite leaders.
Now when it comes to the writings of Ayn Rand, if you actually objectively look at things, you'll find that many "Conservatives", respect her work and read it, as compared to "Liberals" who are much more likely to be found denouncing it.
I have been thinking a lot about "conservative", especially since there are many positions they take with which I agree. But I come at those positions in completely different ways. For example, a conservative deplores illegitimate births because they feel it is against Gods plan and contrary to the way things used to be. I abhor the fact that our country and society not only allows but encourages men and women to be completely irresponsible , as they know they will suffer no negative consequences to their actions. Their behavior also gives them an unending claim on my life and my productivity. All in all, a complete denial of reality.
I think that your thinking is more like mine than the conservative thinking. Am I wrong?
That would be a contradiction. To be, is to be something. A conservative is someone who is not exclusively guided by reason. That was the point of my posts on David Hume and Edmund Burke. A conservative by definition is someone who thinks reasons role in determining reality is limited at best and must be tempered by tradition and historical practices.
That is not to say that someone might mislabel themselves a conservative and only be guided by reason.
at the door, however. . mine kinda stick with me -- like honesty,
integrity, refusing to fake anything about reality, and the
abiding love for life which makes your enjoyment important
to me, as well. . if I can help to brighten the future for someone
who shares "our" premises -- or who can be drawn into them --
then, my life is just that much better. . my 51 percent rule
tends to help me remain optimistic about others! -- j
.
Load more comments...