Britain Why Conservatives conserve nothing

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Progressivism is not something that can be fought effectively by trad cons, because most trad cons do not want to adapt strategies or tactics effective against progressives.
Yes, a lot of the "trad cons" have missed out on the need to effectively spread their ideas in institutions and fight the culture war "on the ground" in the process.
Most 'classical liberals' these days are part of the Right now, because the progressives forced them out with their insanity, and are trying to help the right fight more effectively.
Trying does not inherently mean their suggestions are good.
If their ideas for fighting progressives were a proverbial golden bullet, DNC would be a classical liberal party. Instead they are getting pushed out of that party. Let that sink in.
The right is only managing to keep progressivism from "long marching" through their political institutions, and in some cases, as this thread shows, they too fail at that.
The longer trad cons try to cling to past paradigms, instead of learning to adapt to current realities, the less relevant they will be on the Right going forward.
Yes, they do need to adapt, that everyone agrees. OTOH in many ways this adaptation would need to make them *more* ideologically intense than before, and certainly does not include compromising with progressives and their ideology.

Don't concede so easily. NAP is very prominent in libertarian thinking as well. (y)

It was directly inspired by the works of Murray Rothbard. He's a foundational economist of libertarian thinking andfrom the Austrian School of Economics.

I understand that libertarians (or more precisely 'classical' liberals) have been trying to gatekeep Austrian economic thought out of libertarianism so they can justify everything from strong borders to national health care to public schools etc but NAP has always been a foundational value of libertarianism even if not in a literal sense, certainly in an ideological one.

And libertarianism by and large is terrible at conserving traditions and founding principles. They're fine for when its a war of words but little beyond that when more then intellectual debate maybe required.
Libertarianism, on the face of it, is ideologically neutral. Its technically compatible with any "culture war" position that's not big on pushing its ways on the general population, in my abovementioned classification expressed in point 2 low interventionism... Believe what you will, just sod off from other people who believe otherwise, and expect the same deal from said other people (and if their side of that deal is not delivered, then there's no deal, a part that disturbingly many libertarians forget to apply). Those not particularly expansionist ideologies aren't the most common ones though, what a coincidence indeed, and that's the problem.

It is not, however, an unsolvable one. Just because you think state shouldn't be used to push a specific socio-cultural narratives on citizens, doesn't mean you shouldn't advocate, favor or campaign for your preferences in that regard by all other means. In fact it's even more of a reason why you should, because nature abhors a vacuum, and if you won't do it and the state won't do it, then some of these other ideologies certainly will promote theirs instead, and you probably won't like the results of that, because sure as hell they don't like you.

Political libertarianism is a manifestation of a certain particular (sub)culture with its own values, preferences, ideas and outlook on the world, and if libertarians won't spread it, who is supposed to do it for them, and if no one will do it, where do they plan to get enough members for that social group to possibly get more voters in the future? The progressives certainly won't promote (and probably not even tolerate) libertarian ideals, narratives and worldview in any media, social or educational institution they control, that's one thing that's absolutely certain.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Mongols, for one. And they were pretty fucking successful, given 1/3 people in Asia is a direct decendants of Chingus or Koblai.

And I'd point to the Spartan's as well for how they viewed theft as a survival instinct needed for the battlefield, which influenced a lot of their culture.

As well, monogamy has not been the norm. Before recently marriages were mostly about inheritance and building power bases, not love or religious teachings. Having a mistress or two on the side, who's kids weren't in for inheritance, was rather the norm for most men with enough wealth to marry.


"Penalties were also decreed for rape and to some extent for murder. Any resistance to Mongol rule was met with massive collective punishment. "


"A Spartan citizen in good standing was one who maintained his fighting skills, showed bravery in battle, ensured that his farms were productive, was married and had healthy children. Spartan women were the only Greek women to hold property rights on their own, and were required to practice sports before marriage. "

Property rights means that theft is illegal. You know, for people who are considered people, not property themselves, which is something the Spartans had a notable problem with. I'm also amused that, even though I didn't pose my question about monogamy, you saw fit to call it out in particular.


So yes, your two examples don't seem to be panning out here. Just because they had other laws and mores which clash with the universal sufferage Christianity has pushed forward in the modern era, doesn't mean that murder, theft, or rape were considered normal or acceptable, so long as the target wasn't part of an 'other' group who didn't count as 'people.'

Care to try for some other examples? I'm genuinely curious.
 

LifeisTiresome

Well-known member
It logical.Christians do not try conserve anything in ancient Rome,but change it.The same goes for everybody who achieved anything.
If you say,that conserving status quo is enough,you are arleady dead.
Conservatism's problem, as it is throughout the Western World, is that it isn't so much an "ideology" but more of a check and balance on progress. As we know it, conservatism evolved alongside classical liberalism, which was an ideology far more interested in the freedoms of the individual instead of overhauling civilisation in general. Together, liberalism and conservatism presided over the flowering of Western Civilisation in the 18th and 19th centuries. However, in the early 20th, liberalism was usurped/infected by socialism, a ceaselessly advancing force bent on creating utopia by any means, no matter how long it took. Conservatism, being a check and balance petrified of rocking the boat, was ill equipped in evolutionary terms to not only contain radical leftism, but be dragged along with it as it shifted the overton window.

Essentially, conservatism as we know it is hopelessly out of date and we need an alternative to combat out of control "progress." Traditionalist Nationalism seems to be the best we can get, but Britain's had a problem with that since forever because our Nationalists (Morgoth here among them) seem to be hopelessly incapable of vacating Mosley's shadow.
As stated in the video, conservative parties are not really conservative. They are either leftist lite or just serve the corporations who are all for leftism.

I now agree.
Lol

Most White nationalists tend to be Lefty retards pretending to be right wing.
Which Right wing are you talking about here? US or European or Rest of the World?

White Nationalists are hypocrites, they hate multiculturalism yet they want all whites to unite, they hate welfare for non whites yet they want welfare for whites only. They love to call people degenerates when they're degenerates themselves.
Where is the contradiction?

Everyone on the left treats all white people as the same anyway. Hence White nationalists saying all white people need to band together to defend themselves

They hate welfare for non-whites but want welfare for their own. Isn't that basically the very point of White nationalism?

The only point you have is the degenerate point. But again, so what? By your logic, cause we are degenerate in one manner, we cannot call out pedos.

It is quite simple, actually. Politics, especially in a democracy, come down to either consensus or compromise. If you have one side which constantly seeks change, and other which merely seeks to preserve the existing situation, then compromise will always lead to a little bit of change.

In short: conservatives are useful idiots. If you want to maintain a balance in society without progress pushing everything off the bridge into abyss, you need traditionalists to balance progressives out, not conservatives.



See above for why conservatives simply cannot balance progressives.
Yes. Conservatives are honestly leftist lite cause they are not really conservatives. They just make things go slow aka slowly boiling frog.


@everyone else

This video must be taken in the context that even thought the Tories are in charge, immigration has not stopped but increased.


You can't apply something concerning UK conservatism to US conservatism. They're two quite different movements both in origination and ideology.

I would also posit that the premise is flawed. Compare the UK prior to the very Conservative Prime Ministry of Margate Thatcher to after her. She made some DRAMATIC changes that arguably returned the UK to a much earlier place economically and socially than it was before her Prime Ministry. You also have the entire Brexit situation that is an inherently conservative movement which won, despite the heel dragging from the entrenched bureaucracy.
Thanks for your reply btw. But immigration in the UK has not decreased under the Tories, its increased apparently and they are trying to hide it. The video points out that the Tories have no reason to try and lower down immigration despite thats what the people who voted for them want cause they ultimately serve the corporations who want more immigration.
 
Last edited:

LifeisTiresome

Well-known member
Oh, don't misunderstand me. I consider "conservatism" a hopelessly out of date thing for the current situation for the very reasons you mention. We need Traditionalism, a force willing to turn the clock back in some cases.
Personally? I consider "Conservative parties" to be allies of the left.

They do everything they can to help corporations who are all leftists or support leftism. A corporation does not care for example if Notre Dame Cathedral gets turned into a stripper Club and with that the loss of culture and history. It matters not to them.

Japan no longer being Japan and instead now is all Arabs with Arabic culture? As long as they buy smartphones over and over again, the corporation doesn't care.
 

Lord Sovereign

Well-known member
Personally? I consider "Conservative parties" to be allies of the left.

They do everything they can to help corporations who are all leftists or support leftism. A corporation does not care for example if Notre Dame Cathedral gets turned into a stripper Club and with that the loss of culture and history. It matters not to them.

Japan no longer being Japan and instead now is all Arabs with Arabic culture? As long as they buy smartphones over and over again, the corporation doesn't care.

They do aid the left in some ways, but I wouldn't necessarily call them "allies." Conservatives are ideologically ill equipped to handle progressives, so compulsively try to compromise, mediate and appease an opponent that cannot be appeased. Thatcher understood this, hence why she won reelection a few times. Otherwise, conservatives are unwittingly dragged along for the ride.

Big business and Neo Liberals meanwhile, whilst they are making the situation worse, are pretty much cashing in on left wing stupidity; they aren't in the driving seat of this madness.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Some of you people seem to be forgetting, that the corporate culture turning completely to the hard left is a very, very recent thing.

As recently as ten years ago, sports was still functionally completely apolitical, most tech companies were seen as politically neutral, and most other industries could and did go either way.

Thirty years ago, business was more likely to be conservative-aligned than liberal-aligned.


Conservative organizations failing to have already responded to this, is as much a problem of inertia as anything else. It's only really in the last five years that it's become obvious to even part of the public how hardcore leftist a lot of the corporate culture has become.
 

Fleiur

Well-known member
Again, you are over-simplifying things, and also making assumptions that are not necessarily true.

Not every culture developed the same or similar social values; your conceit only really applies to the large scale cultures of certain western groups.

My view encompasses far more than that, from tribes deep in the Amazon or high in Papua New Guinea, to the Eastern groups like Shintos and Sikhs, and recognizes all morality/values are subjective to the surroundings, situations, and environmental realities they are faced with.

Clinging to the idea of any sort of 'objective values' is part of why trad cons are ill-equipped to handle the modern Far-Left and Marxists, while classical liberals and libertarians can fight them more effectively.
Classical liberalism rises and falls and falls with objective values. Those values are individual liberty and right to property.

Once the narrative is "speech is violence" and "owning property" is violence, what do you do?
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Classical liberalism rises and falls and falls with objective values. Those values are individual liberty and right to property.

Once the narrative is "speech is violence" and "owning property" is violence, what do you do?
Move to Mars.

No seriously, if the Right wants to create a bastion the Left will have a hard time touching, make the 'Red Planet' name literal. With Musk and his stuff in play, this is actually a medium-to-long term option now.

Edit: Space colonization is the best way to escape and rebuild from the Left's idiocy, if they get more power down here. Pay Musk to plop down some pre-fab equipment to make it self-sustaining, do it in multiple locations, and start moving conservative/centrist people out of easy reach of the Left.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
Move to Mars.

No seriously, if the Right wants to create a bastion the Left will have a hard time touching, make the 'Red Planet' name literal. With Musk and his stuff in play, this is actually a medium-to-long term option now.

Do you realize that eventually they’ll go off and try and “liberate” Mars whilst citing stuff about the lack of “free education”, too much “fossil fuels”, too much “nuclear energy”, too much “free markets”, too much “decentralized education” and too much “hate speech”?

Because this sounds like the plot of a Space Libertarian novel, except I don’t think they can win against the might of earth or a sudden number of guys from earth coming to take over

And if the people resist and disapprove in public so much, even on their home turf, they’ll end up being wiped out one way or another
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Do you realize that eventually they’ll go off and try and “liberate” Mars whilst citing stuff about the lack of “free education”, too much “fossil fuels”, too much “nuclear energy”, too much “free markets”, too much “decentralized education” and too much “hate speech”?

Because this sounds like the plot of a Space Libertarian novel, except I don’t think they can win against the might of earth or a sudden number of guys from earth coming to take over
Luckily asteroids make great MAD weapons.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
Luckily asteroids make great MAD weapons.

Please no

They did that in The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress

Sure the guys on Earth were already willing to mass murder on the Loonies, but that doesn’t mean its okay to hit them back and so hard

It’s inhuman to kill so many people with WMDs regardless of the need or even if they DO want to do horrible shit to you and are actually prepared to do it when given the opportunity

Just so you know, I count even killing in self-defence to be murder, hell I counted Superman killing Doomsday in BVS as murder
 

Duke Nukem

Hail to the king baby
Move to Mars.

No seriously, if the Right wants to create a bastion the Left will have a hard time touching, make the 'Red Planet' name literal. With Musk and his stuff in play, this is actually a medium-to-long term option now.

Edit: Space colonization is the best way to escape and rebuild from the Left's idiocy, if they get more power down here. Pay Musk to plop down some pre-fab equipment to make it self-sustaining, do it in multiple locations, and start moving conservative/centrist people out of easy reach of the Left.
It would be amazing to get live to see a mars colony.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag

And killing no matter what, is murder, even in self-defence and Superman's supposed to be above such actions even if he has done it in the comics or killed Zod in that Superman movie from decades ago that wasn't Man of Steel

It would be amazing to get live to see a mars colony.

I expect it to mostly be Arcologies, terraforming may take awhile and lots of water to fill new oceans
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
I expect it to mostly be Arcologies, terraforming may take awhile and lots of water to fill new oceans
Look up the 'shell-world' concept.

It's a lot easier to terra-form if the atmo cannot be blown away by solar wind and easier to dock ships in low orbit than bring them all the way to the surface.
 
And killing no matter what, is murder, even in self-defence and Superman's supposed to be above such actions even if he has done it in the comics or killed Zod in that Superman movie from decades ago that wasn't Man of Steel


the term murder has a very specific defenition related to circumstances, just like self-defence or piracy
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top