4 ms·

> Being truly conservative means supporting the precedent that was decided nearly 50 years ago, and has served us thus far. That's a specious argument, since a

> Being truly conservative means supporting the precedent that was decided nearly 50 years ago, and has served us thus far. That's a specious argument, since at its core you're just picking an arbitrary reference point that gets you the result you want. Also I don't think that "conservatism," properly understood, is about arbitrarily "conserving" everything.

mindslight 5y ago
I wasn't picking a point in time, rather pointing out that 50 years is a pretty long time - nearly two generations of people. Someone who was 15 years old for Roe v Wade would be 63 years old today. We feel sorry for the twenty-somethings of Afghanistan, who only ever knew freedom, seeing the Taliban take over their country. This is over twice as long. To me, the core of conservatism involves respecting existing institutions and customs, and wanting change to happen slowly. This has direct bearing on the topic, because it's incorrect to say this CEO had to step down due to having a "conservative" opinion. Rather, business is intrinsically conservative. It's just that our societal values in 2021 involve things that religious fundamentalists do not like, such as women's healthcare and rainbow flags. Big business isn't embracing these symbols so they can be activists pushing change, but rather to ingratiate their businesses with consumers by embracing change that has already happened. This CEO didn't have to step down because they were against some change or wanted to slow it down, but rather because they were advocating for a change that most people find repulsive. There would be similar pushback for any political opinion that was equally unpopular.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > To me, the core of conservatism involves respecting existing institutions and customs, and wanting change to happen slowly. To you, but your definition is 1) mostly theoretical, 2) co-opts a label that applies to a real things that are different, and 3) appears to be a kind of "exo-definition" (e.g. applied from outside). IMHO, the "conservatism" you define doesn't have any real political life to it in America, and it never has. You might have something closer to real life if your "core" included recovering "institutions and customs" that had value but were lost, but that would still probably be lacking. > but rather because they were advocating for a change that most people find repulsive. Honestly, that sounds like a view from a bubble.

mindslight 5y ago

I wasn't picking a point in time, rather pointing out that 50 years is a pretty long time - nearly two generations of people. Someone who was 15 years old for Roe v Wade would be 63 years old today. We feel sorry for the twenty-somethings of Afghanistan, who only ever knew freedom, seeing the Taliban take over their country. This is over twice as long. To me, the core of conservatism involves respecting existing institutions and customs, and wanting change to happen slowly. This has direct bearing on the topic, because it's incorrect to say this CEO had to step down due to having a "conservative" opinion. Rather, business is intrinsically conservative. It's just that our societal values in 2021 involve things that religious fundamentalists do not like, such as women's healthcare and rainbow flags. Big business isn't embracing these symbols so they can be activists pushing change, but rather to ingratiate their businesses with consumers by embracing change that has already happened. This CEO didn't have to step down because they were against some change or wanted to slow it down, but rather because they were advocating for a change that most people find repulsive. There would be similar pushback for any political opinion that was equally unpopular.

tablespoon 5y ago
> To me, the core of conservatism involves respecting existing institutions and customs, and wanting change to happen slowly. To you, but your definition is 1) mostly theoretical, 2) co-opts a label that applies to a real things that are different, and 3) appears to be a kind of "exo-definition" (e.g. applied from outside). IMHO, the "conservatism" you define doesn't have any real political life to it in America, and it never has. You might have something closer to real life if your "core" included recovering "institutions and customs" that had value but were lost, but that would still probably be lacking. > but rather because they were advocating for a change that most people find repulsive. Honestly, that sounds like a view from a bubble.