Would you abolish the Republican Party?

[America Needs R'hllor]

I'd support repealing it and then later replacing it with something tremendous once we figure out what the hell is going on.

We're going to repeal the Republican Party, which is a disaster, and it'll be essentially repeal and replace, maybe in the same week, or the same day... could be the same hour. We're gonna be very proud in what we put forth having to do with the Republican Party. It'll be tremendous.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

^^

Well American Conservatism during the 1920s was basically Libertarianism and on the Domestic Side was Libertarianism from 1896-1932 and maybe even 1876-1932.

I encourage you to read through this: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/PCom/?20130714-0

It is long I admit, but it is well worth the read.

I dont think you can say that America is worse off now than it was before the Neo-Liberal Era began.

Yes I can, it depends on which communities you are in and who you ask, but yes I most certainly can say that.

Also even during the Wilderness years American Conservatism was basically Libertarianism till around 1960 and then basically became Neo Liberalism after that.


So I dont think there ever was an era where Conservatism wasnt Libertarian or Neo Liberal

Yes there was.

The opposition to the classical liberalism of the 19th century Democratic Party, was the 19th century  conservatism embodied in the Federalists, Whigs and early Republicans (aside from some who joined to just oppose slavery like Marx).

The American Constitution was written by 18th Century Conservatives who were aghast the anarchic tendencies springing up in the all too libertarian Articles of Confederation.

These same conservatives opposed the French Revolution because the French Revolution was mob rule, anarchy and here again "arbitrary law". Thomas Jefferson loved the French Revolution. Jefferson is not a Conservative, he was the father of "liberalism" in America. He had all the tropes of Classical Liberalism and his opponents all the tropes of classical conservatism.

18th and 19th century Conservatism
- Opposed to arbitrary law
- Hierarchical
- Religious
- Protectionist
- Skeptical of Immigration
- Horrified by extremists, revolutionaries, radicals and anarchists

Classical Liberalism
- In Favor of Chaotic Revolution
- Egalitarian
- Secular
- Free Trade
- Pro-Immigration
- Horrified by Aristocracy, elitism and and reactionaries

When Liberalism began to evolve in the late 19th century (with Populism and Progressivism in the US and New Liberalism in Britain) the right responded by making common cause with the classical liberals who did not hop on the government bandwagon.

Yes there are libertarian elements because Conservatism has to adapt to accept things like you know democracy and voting as part of its traditions. But there is a marked difference between conservatism and libertarianism.

Conservatism in a sensible world for instance would not be in favor of abolishing public education, because they would see it as a method of instilling values and skills necessary to make society cohesive and allow people to engage in civic institutions and you know live. They would seek to reform it though, to make sure it was effective and worked.

Libertarians would favor abolishing public education in favor of alternatives like vouchers.

Conservatism would never accept unrestrained immigration or trade

Libertarians are for unrestrained movement of people and goods.



But don't get me wrong there is nothing wrong with libertarians, I fully agree with them on some points as my previous effort post should indicate. The problem is not that we have libertarians as allies on the right, the problem is the spokes of the wheel extending out too far and being too out of touch with reality on the ground.

[DataGuy]

Conservatism should quite simply be constitutionalism. The Constitution clearly defined the boundaries of government by delegating specific and limited powers to Congress, and conservatives should only support government up to the point that the Constitution does.

For me, the 10th Amendment sums it up. Anything not explicitly delegated to Congress is reserved to the states and the people. That's what it says and it's the supreme law of the land, whether people like it or not.

But FDR's New Deal was the last straw for the 10th Amendment. The Supreme Court was reining him in during the mid-1930s but they eventually relented to his political coercion (namely the court-packing plan) and started upholding many policies they knew perfectly well were not within constitutional bounds. Since then, the 10th Amendment and many constitutional limitations generally have been dead letters, only resurrected when most convenient. The vast majority of today's sprawling federal bureaucracy is nowhere authorized by the Constitution, but no one cares any more. Politicians talk about their newest bank-busting schemes as if the Constitution doesn't even exist. That has often included many people who call themselves conservatives.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Yankee, you know I appreciate your commentary, but I don’t see the logic of throwing an effortpost at people that want to cos-play as a combination of John Calhoun and Mussolini and quite clearly do not care about rights or liberties.

I’m any case, hatred for Lincoln by modern “conservatives” seems to me to speak to hatred for the concept of America as a nation, but oh well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yankee, you know I appreciate your commentary, but I don’t see the logic of throwing an effortpost at people that want to cos-play as a combination of John Calhoun and Mussolini and quite clearly do not care about rights or liberties.

I’m any case, hatred for Lincoln by modern “conservatives” seems to me to speak to hatred for the conceit of America as a nation, but oh well.

The post wasn't aimed at them necessarily.

Also, in the immortal words of Extra History, "Why let a thing like logic get in the way of a good effort post".

[Santander]

Lincoln was a tyrant who caused a genocide and sought to end slavery for economic, not moral reasons (although you could argue that economic reasons are moral reasons, and I would be generally inclined to agree), and wanted to send freed slaves to Liberia. There is little to admire there.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Lincoln was a tyrant who caused a genocide and sought to end slavery for economic, not moral reasons, and wanted to send freed slaves to Liberia. There is little to admire there.

Okay.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

If you'd abolish it, you would need to abolish the Democratic Party as well.

[RINO Tom]

Yankee, you know I appreciate your commentary, but I don’t see the logic of throwing an effortpost at people that want to cos-play as a combination of John Calhoun and Mussolini and quite clearly do not care about rights or liberties.

I’m any case, hatred for Lincoln by modern “conservatives” seems to me to speak to hatred for the conceit of America as a nation, but oh well their racism, deceptive romanticism of the Confederacy or edgy libertarianism with a complete ignorance for the importance of motive and end result over method.

[DC Al Fine]

Yankee, you know I appreciate your commentary, but I don’t see the logic of throwing an effortpost at people that want to cos-play as a combination of John Calhoun and Mussolini and quite clearly do not care about rights or liberties.

I’m any case, hatred for Lincoln by modern “conservatives” seems to me to speak to hatred for the concept of America as a nation, but oh well.

Yeah I don't get it. He trampled on rebel scum. What a delightfully conservative thing to do. Its that Washington fellow they need to reconsider.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Yankee, you know I appreciate your commentary, but I don’t see the logic of throwing an effortpost at people that want to cos-play as a combination of John Calhoun and Mussolini and quite clearly do not care about rights or liberties.

I’m any case, hatred for Lincoln by modern “conservatives” seems to me to speak to hatred for the concept of America as a nation, but oh well.

Yeah I don't get it. He trampled on rebel scum. What a delightfully conservative thing to do. Its that Washington fellow they need to reconsider.

You forget the Whiskey Rebellion?

[DC Al Fine]

Yankee, you know I appreciate your commentary, but I don’t see the logic of throwing an effortpost at people that want to cos-play as a combination of John Calhoun and Mussolini and quite clearly do not care about rights or liberties.

I’m any case, hatred for Lincoln by modern “conservatives” seems to me to speak to hatred for the concept of America as a nation, but oh well.

Yeah I don't get it. He trampled on rebel scum. What a delightfully conservative thing to do. Its that Washington fellow they need to reconsider.

You forget the Whiskey Rebellion?

Consolidating power in the aftermath of the Revolution. If that's conservative, Lenin's a Tory!

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Yankee, you know I appreciate your commentary, but I don’t see the logic of throwing an effortpost at people that want to cos-play as a combination of John Calhoun and Mussolini and quite clearly do not care about rights or liberties.

I’m any case, hatred for Lincoln by modern “conservatives” seems to me to speak to hatred for the concept of America as a nation, but oh well.

Yeah I don't get it. He trampled on rebel scum. What a delightfully conservative thing to do. Its that Washington fellow they need to reconsider.

You forget the Whiskey Rebellion?

Consolidating power in the aftermath of the Revolution. If that's conservative, Lenin's a Tory!

You thinking of Shay’s Rebellion?

[Leinad]

Yeah that is a great idea, make them into martyrs! There is a growing sect of conservatives who (very ironically!) think of themselves as countercultural badasses. Banning the Republicans just means they'll come back as the "Jesus, Money, and Cops Party" or whatever and be stronger than before, with a rallying cry that the far-left-liberal-Marxists are censoring them and they're cool. Like pirates, but instead of stealing things they play a Bible Trivia Game and there's bonus points for deporting illegals and mocking people without health insurance, and instead of being in bright colors (which is gay) their parrots are in camo! AHOY, MATEYS!

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Well American Conservatism during the 1920s was basically Libertarianism and on the Domestic Side was Libertarianism from 1896-1932 and maybe even 1876-1932.

No.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yankee, you know I appreciate your commentary, but I don’t see the logic of throwing an effortpost at people that want to cos-play as a combination of John Calhoun and Mussolini and quite clearly do not care about rights or liberties.

I’m any case, hatred for Lincoln by modern “conservatives” seems to me to speak to hatred for the concept of America as a nation, but oh well.

Yeah I don't get it. He trampled on rebel scum. What a delightfully conservative thing to do. Its that Washington fellow they need to reconsider.

You forget the Whiskey Rebellion?

Consolidating power in the aftermath of the Revolution. If that's conservative, Lenin's a Tory!

The American Revolution was not a social revolution, it was political one.

It also has been considered a "conservative Revolution" because it was fought to preserve/restore natural rights, as had been established in the aftermath of the Glorious Revolution. The Glorious Revolution itself counts as the father the concept of a "Conservative Revolution".

Both Revolutions were also legitimized by Edmund Burke in contrast to the French Revolution, which he was reflecting on.

Shays Rebellion, The constitution and the Whiskey Rebellion was the pre-established order in the Colonies stamping down any chance at a social revolution, even while codifying the gains of the revolution.

[gerritcole]

Pathetic drivel in this thread. We can't win elections, shall we silence thought? The left might be the greatest threat to this nation's future