Three Pillars of Leftdom

[CountDeMoney]

Prohibition seen as progress by whom?

LOL Progressives, Protestants, organized women's groups, and other organizations that saw alcohol for what it was:  a contributing factor to domestic violence, substance abuse and the perpetuation of unemployment and poverty.   Kinda like, you know, now.

[Razgovory]

Prohibition seen as progress by whom?

LOL Progressives, Protestants, organized women's groups, and other organizations that saw alcohol for what it was:  a contributing factor to domestic violence, substance abuse and the perpetuation of unemployment and poverty.   Kinda like, you know, now.

Now I bet Seedy here Aced every History exam he took.

[Ideologue]

Listen to Beeb.  "History has shown"?  Man, it's like some Orleanist official in the 1830s going on about how history has shown that republicanism is dead.

[garbon]

How far back to go till we find that everything is "Pretty damn good"?

But that's reactionary views which is different. Conservatives, at their best, have a sense of perspective. Things aren't that bad. The likelihood of them making a radical change is slim. The likelihood of a radical change being for the best is almost nil.

Therefore the goal's to bend with the wind and manage change in an organic way while maintaining that sense of lightness. Long after we're gone there'll still be English shires or prairie fields. The best we should hope for or want from our leaders is that they're a wise steward of the nation passing it on in not too much worse condition than they found it.

[Siege]

Shelf nailed it.

[Valmy]

Sure, because the Dems get to re-write their history and are forgiven for all their racism and discrimination.

This makes no sense.  This is all within living memory.  And no history was rewritten and no Democratic politicians who were racist or discriminatory were forgiven...well except for maybe Robert Byrd.

[Valmy]

Shelf nailed it.

Sure.  But you already said that American Conservatives are not that.  They are far more radical.

[Barrister]

Shelf nailed it.

Sure.  But you already said that American Conservatives are not that.  They are far more radical.

Depends on which conservatives and which tradition you listen to.  The Tea Party?  Sure, they have little in common with Burkean conservatism.    But the Conservatism of Romney, Dole, Bush Sr, even Reagan?  Does that sound so different?

[Razgovory]

Sure, because the Dems get to re-write their history and are forgiven for all their racism and discrimination.

This makes no sense.  This is all within living memory.  And no history was rewritten and no Democratic politicians who were racist or discriminatory were forgiven...well except for maybe Robert Byrd.

Most of what he says doesn't make any sense.

[Martinus]

One example of an issue embraced by progressives and opposed by conservatives, and later largely discredited and discarded nowadays - the Eugenics movement.

Yep. And he's from Canada, so I imagine has something of the British conservative tradition which isn't legitimist or reactionary. It isn't entirely opposed to change.

It was conservatives who passed Catholic Emancipation (and Jewish Emancipation), the proportionally largest increase in suffrage, the first universal education law and have always had strands like Villa Conservatism or One Nation Toryism.

I think that's different from an often more rigid conservative heritage in much of Europe - especially Catholic countries.

Well, to be fair, it was also British conservatives who passed Equal Marriage. 

[LaCroix]

No, the best are the true (classical, if you will) conservatives.  They figure everything is pretty damn good as it is, so why go messing things up.

Doesn't it sort of discredit those sorts of conservatives that they really came to the forefront in an era that we now recognize as really sucking compared to current times?

"everything is pretty damn good as it is, so why go messing things up.", has been wrong for hundreds of years; sure that doesn't exactly prove it is wrong today, but a historical pattern has developed....

Not at all - the historical record ahs in fact vindicated the conservative point of view.

Look - it's not that a conservative says "nothing should ever change". but rather "our society has evolved this way for a reason, so let's be careful and cautious when we change things".

Look, I think we all agree that the modern social democratic welfare state is a place that 100 or 200 years ago would sound like a socialist paradise.  But every time that liberals tried to make the change all in one big jump it has failed miserably (French revolution, communism).  The "slow and steady" approach demonstrated by the west has been the winner.

there are different kinds of conservativeness, though. there's the risk-adverse crowd, then there's groups like rural communities. rural communities are more prone to tradition, hence why things move a little slower there -- there's not much exposure to outside ideas (and it's sometimes accompanied by xenophobic hostility). someone can be conservative without being "conservative." i consider myself a liberal, but i tend to have a conservative approach to law.

in many respects, the "conservative" approach has not won throughout history. you mentioned socialism and today's world, but i think that oversimplifies it. each victory socialism achieved 80-100 years ago were separate acts where the individuals involved had an opportunity to go against the grain. so, while progress throughout history may be considered "careful and cautious" from one perspective, it can easily be seen as a series of quick advances, which at the time spurned the conservative mentality.

[Duque de Bragança]

Prohibition seen as progress by whom?

LOL Progressives, Protestants, organized women's groups, and other organizations that saw alcohol for what it was:  a contributing factor to domestic violence, substance abuse and the perpetuation of unemployment and poverty. Kinda like, you know, now.

So are they still clamoring for a new Prohibition?
I still don't get how Prohibition can be described as "progressive" when nativism, rural ultra-conservative areas, sectarianism (vs Catholics and Jews), xenophobia, and even anti-German sentiment played such a part in enabling its enforcement. Not to mention fundie Protties behind it.
As for domestic violence, it's has been known for quite a while that dry islamic societies have no domestic violence 
It's a factor in domestic violence, yes but educating, fighting against alcoholism was already known back then as Christian moderation or whatever else.
As for unemployment and poverty, workers in breweries, wine yards and bars disagreed I believe.

[Sheilbh]

Well, to be fair, it was also British conservatives who passed Equal Marriage. 

Yep. Over not insignificant opposition from within the party.

When the first gay marriages were happening they flew the rainbow flag over government buildings across the country. Here's Whitehall:

And as Cameron pointed out gay marriage is a conservative policy.

[Martinus]

They are right. In fact I think that if Western conservative parties dropped (where applicable) their silly opposition to gay marriage and women's reproductive rights, I think majority of voters would support them, especially in the current geopolitical climate. Leave homos and sluts alone, and go after towelheads and Russkies instead, I say.

[Eddie Teach]

They are right. In fact I think that if Western conservative parties dropped (where applicable) their silly opposition to gay marriage and women's reproductive rights, I think majority of voters would support them, especially in the current geopolitical climate. Leave homos and sluts alone, and go after towelheads and Russkies instead, I say.

That might make them more palatable to homo 1%ers, but they'd probably lose votes doing that, as the Religious Right start losing their faith in Wall Street.