3 ms·

I would say that a conservative wants to preserve the status quo, and a reactionary wants to return to a time period before the status quo with more limited gov

I would say that a conservative wants to preserve the status quo, and a reactionary wants to return to a time period before the status quo with more limited government. Libertarians are reactionaries (this is not a slight on libertarians, just making it clear there is a distinction between people who like what we have now and people who want to roll back even what we have now). There are a lot more conservatives than reactionaries, most of the tea party is talking about rolling back spending/government to right about the day President Obama was sworn in. They didn't suddenly become Libertarians.

Semiapies 16y ago
The whole "left-right" single-spectrum metaphor, particularly the American reduction of it into a column A-or-column B mindset, is such a thought-killing meme. "a conservative wants to preserve the status quo" A fourth-grade textbook explanation, but one that has little connection to the ideology or to the political party most commonly deemed "conservative". What's status quo about wanting things like overturning Roe v Wade, constitutional amendments to stop gay marriage, stringent anti-immigration efforts, or invading the Middle East? Hell, what on Earth was status quo about 2001-2008? "this is not a slight on libertarians, just making it clear there is a distinction between people who like what we have now and people who want to roll back even what we have now" More making it clear that you don't know much about libertarians, or are only dimly aware of libertarians not wanting particular government programs you're fond of. What's "reactionary" about wanting to abandon the military imperialism of the last, oh, century or so? What's "reactionary" about open borders, or wanting to end the drug war, the war on terror, agriculture subsidies, and eminent domain abuse? ETA: And how do anarcho-capitalists fit into this setup? :)
- webXL 16y ago
  Bravo. Early in the GWOT, liberals attacked Bush for having a with us or against us attitude, or actually saying it. He wasn't nuanced at all. I see the same close-minded thinking coming from self-described liberals. Why can't we just talk about basic philosophy and not Team A vs. Team B? My original point was that conservatives should want legalization, or at least tolerate it, because they want to conserve limited government. It has nothing to do with republicans, democrats, libertarianism, etc. Conservatives were not favored in CA this election cycle. It's been the case since 1988. Liberals who want legalization can't simply blame conservatives for the banning of pot. They should call convvatives out on their supposed limited government, pro individual liberty ideals in order to convince them that legalization should be supported!
webXL 16y ago
So once liberals get their wish list of policies, they will instantly turn into conservatives? You're being too literal. There's a big overlap between the tea party and libertarians. Both groups don't just want to roll back to Jan, 2009, they want to go back to 1900, when local governments had more power than the national government did, and people could vote with their feet.

Semiapies 16y ago

The whole "left-right" single-spectrum metaphor, particularly the American reduction of it into a column A-or-column B mindset, is such a thought-killing meme. "a conservative wants to preserve the status quo" A fourth-grade textbook explanation, but one that has little connection to the ideology or to the political party most commonly deemed "conservative". What's status quo about wanting things like overturning Roe v Wade, constitutional amendments to stop gay marriage, stringent anti-immigration efforts, or invading the Middle East? Hell, what on Earth was status quo about 2001-2008? "this is not a slight on libertarians, just making it clear there is a distinction between people who like what we have now and people who want to roll back even what we have now" More making it clear that you don't know much about libertarians, or are only dimly aware of libertarians not wanting particular government programs you're fond of. What's "reactionary" about wanting to abandon the military imperialism of the last, oh, century or so? What's "reactionary" about open borders, or wanting to end the drug war, the war on terror, agriculture subsidies, and eminent domain abuse? ETA: And how do anarcho-capitalists fit into this setup? :)

webXL 16y ago
Bravo. Early in the GWOT, liberals attacked Bush for having a with us or against us attitude, or actually saying it. He wasn't nuanced at all. I see the same close-minded thinking coming from self-described liberals. Why can't we just talk about basic philosophy and not Team A vs. Team B? My original point was that conservatives should want legalization, or at least tolerate it, because they want to conserve limited government. It has nothing to do with republicans, democrats, libertarianism, etc. Conservatives were not favored in CA this election cycle. It's been the case since 1988. Liberals who want legalization can't simply blame conservatives for the banning of pot. They should call convvatives out on their supposed limited government, pro individual liberty ideals in order to convince them that legalization should be supported!

webXL 16y ago

So once liberals get their wish list of policies, they will instantly turn into conservatives? You're being too literal. There's a big overlap between the tea party and libertarians. Both groups don't just want to roll back to Jan, 2009, they want to go back to 1900, when local governments had more power than the national government did, and people could vote with their feet.