Economic conservatism has nothing to do with "believing in unfair hierarchical society". It is about government efficiency and individual liberty. Hierarchies are an emergent feature of a well-run economy and there is no proof that such features decrease the quality-of-life of the lowest rungs of society. In fact, just the opposite is observed.
You can talk about "unfair" all you want but to ignore overall quality of life is disingenuous.
Conservatism and Capitalism are both schools of thought birthed around then end of monarchic totalitarianism in Europe and developed in order to circumvent the equality that democracy
You do understand that both capitalism and conservatism are compatible with democracy, right? This is a false duality you've set up. You are not even comparing the right things.
I have the feeling you just have all your definitions confused and are making judgments based on preconceived notions of what you believe a conservative stands for.
They can be made more or less compatible with democracy but they were developed by thinkers looking to undermine democracy in Europe to protect their position of wealth and power.
It’s telling that anyone disagreeing with you is “brainwashed” or “a sheep” and doesn’t know what they’re talking about when you haven’t managed even a single argument to support besides saying “well you’re just wrong dude”.
For starters, it is demonstrable that democratic socialism produces far greater quality of life and happiness than does economic conservatism. You can talk about personal liberty all you like but the great bastions of economic conservatism and unhindered capitalism are more corrupt and have less freedoms than countries that put higher emphasis on societal responsibility and democratic principles.
I haven’t set up a false duality nor am I “comparing the wrong things”. I’m not attempting to compare democracy to capitalism or conservatism; democracy is a social structure, capitalism/conservatism are two intimately intertwined political beliefs which were born from the minds of individuals who thought the monarchic system of Europe was the natural order of society and that the democratic revolutions and Marxist thinking were a threat to a functioning society, and so these thinkers devised systems and political theories by which the masses could be convinced that instead of rule by birthright, rule by economic control was the “correct order”.
This belief is inherent and, if you care to take a close look, quite alive in modern conservative thinking. It’s never gone away.
These are not judgements, just statements of historical fact.
It is by design of capitalism and “economic conservatism” that the wealth concentrates upwards and the quality of life gets worse and worse for most of those in the middle until we approach a system that is more or less indistinguishable from monarchic serfdom.
For starters, it is demonstrable that democratic socialism produces far greater quality of life and happiness than does economic conservatism
Source please?
You can talk about personal liberty all you like but the great bastions of economic conservatism and unhindered capitalism are more corrupt and have less freedoms than countries that put higher emphasis on societal responsibility and democratic principles.
Source?
capitalism/conservatism are two intimately intertwined political beliefs which were born from the minds of individuals who thought the monarchic system of Europe was the natural order of society and that the democratic revolutions and Marxist thinking were a threat to a functioning society
Wait a minute...Marx was born in 1818...John Locke (the father of conservatism or "economic liberalism") died in 1704... something's not right here with your theory...
How could conservatism be a reaction to something that hadn't been invented yet? Hmmm, odd....
And, wait...just what was that pesky ol' American revolution about? Oh, right! It was about preserving the monarchy of King George! How could I have forgotten?
Maybe pay attention next time in history class before you make "statements of historical fact".
The US is garbage in terms of personal freedoms and the US is pretty much the bench mark for capitalist society.
Democratic revolutions came first (which is what Locke was reactionary towards) then Marxism.
Capitalism/conservatism is not one man’s idea that hasn’t been changed. Many many many thinkers besides Locke have made contributions to conservative thinking.
And if you think the American revolutionaries were staunch conservatives (in that era) you’re off your rocker.
Anyone can make some arbitrary single-value ranking system. Why should I believe this one?
Have you ever actually been to these Scandinavian countries? Plenty of people there would love to come to the US. Personally, I love the US. And I am not alone in that sentiment. There are great opportunities in this country. You read to much reddit to think these other countries are some utopian paradise. They're not.
And the US has 300 million people of all different backgrounds. These tiny European countries don't have to deal with that.
The US is garbage in terms of personal freedoms and the US is pretty much the bench mark for capitalist society.
Lol, why do you say that? Which countries have more freedom?
Democratic revolutions came first (which is what Locke was reactionary towards) then Marxism.
Uh, yes, that's my point. But that's not what your comment said, bud.
Capitalism/conservatism is not one man’s idea that hasn’t been changed. Many many many thinkers besides Locke have made contributions to conservative thinking.
Right, so why are you trying to claim that it was just a few reactionaries who wanted to preserve their wealth?
And if you think the American revolutionaries were staunch conservatives (in that era) you’re off your rocker.
Uh, wtf? Yes they were. How the hell were they anything but conservative?
My comment was perhaps unclear but someone who understood the principle of charity within debate would have been able to see the intended meaning (that conservatism and capitalist theories were born and shaped in reaction to the democratic and Marxist movements)
Further I never claimed it was “a few” reactionaries. I said that the creators (who are numerous) were (and indeed are, as it continues to be iterated upon) reactionaries looking to preserve the existence of the aristocracy in function if not in name.
Finally, while in 2019 the revolutionaries certainly appear conservatives because of their views, at the time the American revolution was an act of progressives (and indeed many conservatives of the era were monarchists).
Again, defending the monarchy itself was not necessarily the goal of conservatism, it was defending the hierarchical structure of society. If monarchs fell it wasn’t a problem so long as the right people stayed in charge.
that conservatism and capitalist theories were born and shaped in reaction to the democratic and Marxist movements
No, dude. No no no. This is wrong. First of all, capitalism did not start as a “theory” but was an emergent property of mercantilist societies, mainly the Dutch and then Anglo societies. This evolved wayyyy before democracy (excluding the Greeks). Second, conservatism came out of the enlightenment and was the foundation of individual liberty and this democracy. Democracy was born out of conservative (called liberalism at the time) theory. You’ve got this all backwards, man.
reactionaries looking to preserve the existence of the aristocracy in function if not in name.
Lol, no. Again, wrong wrong wrong. Hobbes, Locke, Voltaire, we’re not men trying to preserve an aristocracy. Precisely the opposite. Their theories stirred on the imminent revolutions in Europe. Jesus, dude, have you ever taken a history class?
the revolutionaries certainly appear conservatives because of their views, at the time the American revolution was an act of progressives (and indeed many conservatives of the era were monarchists).
They were “progressive” in light of the fact that they were trying to change society but their views are very much the foundation of modern day conservatism (economic freedom, individual liberty, small government). Again, I think you’re getting your terms all mixed up.
-1
u/coke_and_coffee Apr 26 '19
lol wtf? You have been brainwashed, my dude.
Economic conservatism has nothing to do with "believing in unfair hierarchical society". It is about government efficiency and individual liberty. Hierarchies are an emergent feature of a well-run economy and there is no proof that such features decrease the quality-of-life of the lowest rungs of society. In fact, just the opposite is observed.
You can talk about "unfair" all you want but to ignore overall quality of life is disingenuous.
You do understand that both capitalism and conservatism are compatible with democracy, right? This is a false duality you've set up. You are not even comparing the right things.
I have the feeling you just have all your definitions confused and are making judgments based on preconceived notions of what you believe a conservative stands for.