KilroywasNOTHere
"BEEP!"
If I said what I really thought about revolutionaries (of anykind really) i'd get banned for encouraging violence and sucide (Context and intent be darned.)
Last edited:
Neoreacshunary Kat Sez - NRx Memes And Stuff
- Thread starter Aldarion
- Start date
If I said what I really thought about revolutionaries (of anykind really) i'd get banned for encouraging violence and sucide (Context and intent be darned.)
This shows a shocking lack of understanding about what conservatives want, and comparing capitalism to democracy makes no goddamn sense either.
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
Read what neoconservatives write. More than once, I found statements and articles saying precisely that capitalism and democracy are one and the same, that is, that one necessarily results in the other.
There's a large difference between neo conservatives and conservatives. Also, every country needs capitalism, or their country is going to go to shit. Finally, saying that capitalism causes democracy is wrong. They aren't quite orthogonal to each other, but pretty close.
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
I am aware, but just as progressives have hijacked the label of liberals, so have neoconservatives hijacked the label of conservatives. Today, if you want people to understand you are talking about actual conservatives in the US context, you generally have to specify paleoconservatives or similar.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
It goes further than that. Most people who aren't Conservatives don't even know what the term actually means to those who apply it to themselves. Relentless propaganda in the media, and weakness on the part of many Republicans, has left almost anyone outside those circles who isn't old enough to remember Ronald Reagan unclear on what Conservatism actually is.
You don't just need to explain that 'Neocons' are not actual Conservatives, you have to explain what the term means in the first place.
There's a lot of people here on this forum who have no idea what the term means, and like to wail endlessly about how it's just 'liberalism from ten years ago.'
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
Thing is, that is what modern "conservatives" - as the term is used in the mainstream - are. Today, progressives are moving towards (openly) supporting pedophilia, while "conservatives" are moving towards openly supporting gay marriage.
Neoliberals and Neoconservatives: A Conservative Coin Standing on Edge over the Same-sex Marriage Question
The same-sex marriage question, recently decided favorably by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015, has generally been opposed by those who identify as conservative in the United States on various moral, normative, or religious grounds — but some conservatives are changing their minds. These...
Conservative case for gay marriage: Column
Conservatives' growing support for the freedom to marry is not wishful thinking.
eu.usatoday.com
In few decades, we will have "conservatives" supporting gay marriage, progressives supporting pedophilia, and the first signs of pedophilia advocacy among "conservatives" while progressives will be starting to advocate bestiality.
All of the above shows how Left is good at hijacking the terminology.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
So you claim, but I've seen no evidence of this, not in the US anyways. I understand that the UK has a serious problem with feckless conservatives, but here in the US, I have not seen any such shift.
Now, the Republican Party has always been weak to leftist social pressure, but that is not the same thing.
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
But it is. Humans are weak to social pressure, especially from the leaders. And fact that the Republican party is seen as conservative makes it dangerous because it can draw people with it.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
No, it isn't. If the Republican Party and the Conservative movement were the same thing, we'd have either a lot more conservative policy implementation, or a lot less unfulfilled demand for such. Influence between the base and the politicians goes both ways, but they are not the same thing.
Lord Sovereign
The resident Britbong
Ah yes, Civnats are famously in favour of mass immigration. It's not like every single person who declares themselves a Civnat isn't vigorously opposed to it, no sir.
KilroywasNOTHere
"BEEP!"
You know for all the talk about how libertarian and neo-cons are left light, how come I don't hear anything about removing pork barrel welfare programs. THAT will fix a good chunk of your immigration problems right there.
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
Civic nationalism essentially forms the ideological basis of the mass immigration...
Welfare programs are a big part of the "nanny state" and of modern society. They wouldn't be necessary if you still had old family relations (extended family, clans and so on), but individualization of people has left them at the mercy of the state.
They are evil, but they are merely a part of greater evil called "modernity".
KilroywasNOTHere
"BEEP!"
What I would give for give for an eye roll tribel. Dude seriously the concept of the nanny state is not a modern construct. In fact you'll notice that even as far back as *gasp* ancient Rome there were welfare programs specifically during romes decline. Also
ooooh how dare the crippled and lame actually be able to fight for surviva and not be forced into the lowest dregs of society so evil. Look I know you have this huge hatred for idustrilization and all but it has done good for at least some of us, and we aren't going to let it go without a fight.
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
Read what I wrote again instead of throwing out of the gate.
1) Concept of nanny state is a modern construct. Welfare programs =/= nanny state, because most welfare programs in the past were not run by the state. They were run by religious institutions such as temples and the Church. Nor are welfare programs only characteristic of a nanny state. Nanny state includes not only welfare, but specifically governmental interference into personal decision-making: such as mandatory public schools, overregulation of products (especially stuff which can be produced by families - such as agricultural produce), hyperproduction of legislature, attempts at regulating discourse (e.g. "protection" from "hate speech") and so on.
2) As I have pointed out, state-run welfare programs are merely an inferior substitute for services which were earlier provided by the extended family and the religious institutions.
KilroywasNOTHere
"BEEP!"
1.,sure let's completely ignore the likes of Caligula and Nero.
2. Call me the son of the devil if you wish but I'd rather work for my daily bread than beg on my hands and knees like an infidel dog. How about instead of giving me a fish you teach me how to fish or give me the ability to fish?
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
1. Caligula and Nero were a) overstated and b) had no capacity for anywhere near the scale of interference which modern state did. Fact is, most people in the Empire never felt whatever they cooked up.
2. So receiving help from Social Security is, somehow, not begging? And you completely changed topic here - I never denied that working is not preferable, or even suggested anything to that effect. If you are going to reply, reply to what I actually wrote, or don't reply at all.