|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
Haven't looked at the links yet, so I may be going off half cocked, but, whatever they say, let's not get into wars over politics here. Let's treat idiots of all political persuasions as the idiots that they are. Politics with a small "p" is the best sort. We can rise above partisan stuff.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yusime
|
 |
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: April 2008
Messages: 195
|
|
|
This is not about conservative ideology or liberal ideology. This is about the greater battle between the confederacy and the United States. The confederacy was more liberal with governmental power than Lincoln's government ever was and they are still trying to take over the US government. The confederates could never be politically conservative it goes against their very dignity as human beings. They never stop trying to gain more power than anyone can successfully manage to wield without extreme corruption. I think I've mentioned this once before but it was not a length.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake since for him a spinal cord would suffice. Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Pat, I agree that greed for power is dangerous but I don't know what to do about it. I've heard it said that wanting to stand for president ought to be a disqualification.
How do you stop people getting more power than they can handle without doing the rest of us harm? Is there any amount of power that is safe for anyone to have?
I think the near-absolute power that people have over their children, when young, may be doing some people immense harm, but I'm not proposing to allow someone else to take children from their parents.
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yusime
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: April 2008
Messages: 195
|
|
|
One way to ensure that people can not get away with abusing immense resources of power is to attempt to block them from gaining power in the first place. One odd problem with conservative ideology is the reluctance of its believers to question their own leaders. The major problem with the confederates happens to be that they believe they deserve special protection for believing in God and through that belief they seek absolute control over people.
The main check on the authority parents have over their children happens to be other relatives and the friends of the child. Unless the child is taught to be terrified of everything in the world they should grow up to be thoughtful and reasonable.
With the checks that exist within the government of the US that is more than enough to stop most ideological extremes from gaining too much power. It is good to have a system of checks and balances on the authority of the people who rule governments or any institution. In most places however there are not enough ways to check the power of an institution that exists.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake since for him a spinal cord would suffice. Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimB
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: December 2006
Messages: 349
|
|
|
In the article “Behind the Jeffersonian Veneer” I found the following paragraph very interesting and rather frightening:
> Woods is talking not merely about the expansion of federal power but about the triumph of Northern "radical individualism," religious liberalism, and other cultural evils. He favorably quotes a 19th-century Southern theologian who described the defenders of slavery as "friends of order and regulated freedom," and portrays the Civil War as "a struggle against an atheistic individualism and an unrelenting rationalism in politics and religion, in favor of a Christian understanding of authority, social order and theology itself." The Southern cause, he concludes, is "the cause of us all."
The radical individualism and religious liberalism he speaks of are some of the most important freedoms that I enjoy as a US citizen. The “Christian understanding of authority, social order and theology” are what the extreme right conservatives want to force upon the rest of us and have failed.
pat wrote:
> The Civil War in the US is far from over!
Not necessarily the Civil War, but there will always be people who want to dictate to others what they are to think, how they are to live and who they are to worship.
JimB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pat, you wrote:
With the checks that exist within the government of the US that is more than enough to stop most ideological extremes from gaining too much power.
Tell me whether you think an atheist or a pagan could get elected to be president and then say that religion doesn't have too much power in the USA!
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yusime
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: April 2008
Messages: 195
|
|
|
That's exactly what the Confederacy was trying to do to the Union (impose slavery not defend the institution). The current ideals of the Republican party are in fact the same ideals of the Confederacy. I have little doubt that if the Confederacy had won the Civil War the leaders of the Confederacy would have wasted little time in trying to execute their opponents anywhere in the country. Only around half of the people who call themselves conservatives are political conservatives the other half are ideologically part of the confederacy. Thats part of the reason the Confederacy was unsustainable they had around 70-75% of the country against them even though most of the people against them, in the boarder states and the south, were not willing take up arms against the Confederacy.
The Confederate population is very similar to the percentage of the total population, around 30%, who were loyalist to the monarchy in Britain during the Revolutionary War. I was referring to the ideological split between those who value individual liberty and those who value unquestioning adherence to authority not the actual fighting in the Civil War. The 30% of a population of a state either in the most Liberal state Massachusetts or Mississippi the most Conservative state are the major detractors on ballot initiatives like Income Tax a very liberal idea or the Marriage Amendments very "conservative" idea. Getting rid of the State Income Tax failed in Massachusetts by 70% to 30%. Passing the Marriage Amendment in Mississippi occurred by a 70% to 30% vote.
To simplify the United States is split into a set of 30%, 30%, 30%. 30% are very "conservative" usually side with the confederacy on issues. 30% are very liberal usually side with the union on issues. The last 30% are the centrist who break either heavily to one side or split evenly depending on which issues are being debated. National elections are always split 40% base around 20% independents. That is why only FDR was able to get 61% of the popular vote at most and why Regan was able to get only 60% of the popular vote. The overarching ideals of the Confederacy are still in play in national politics throughout the United States. That's what I meant when I said the Civil War is not over.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake since for him a spinal cord would suffice. Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yusime
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: April 2008
Messages: 195
|
|
|
I said ideological extremes could not manage to gain absolute power in the United States. I never said religion was irrelevant to elections. JFK nearly lost in 1960 largely because he was a Catholic. It is highly improbable that a member of the Religious Right who does not believe in the religion that a majority of the Republican's subscribe too could ever successfully become president or the leader of their political party. Since atheist only account for around 10-15% of the population of the United States it is highly unlikely that an atheist could become president. I was referring to political ideologies not religious ideologies that are exclusively religious ideologies.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake since for him a spinal cord would suffice. Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Re: The Republican Party's True Ideology 
