Random Politics & Religion #07

Heh. Oh, well that's embarrassing.

no.

/folds arms

If you actually read the article that was a fictional story based on the similarities of April 20th 1775 when the British went to Confiscate the colonists guns.

Which was one of the primary reasons the revolution took place. And yes citizens died defending there right to protect themselves and

yes the British considered us much like what Washington DC considers any American that owns a weapon. A right wing extremist because we believe in our rights.

I could tell what the article was about from the title... fooling girlboy is no great accomplishment he's blissfully unaware of his own gender...

but yes stay vigilant everyone you never know when those damned redcoats are going to come back and try to burn down washington again.

keep your powder dry and your head on a swivel!

I skimmed it, yeah I get it now. >.>

It expired. There was an unsuccessful push for renewal.

The really funny / scary thing is that the Article is not wrong. Everything they wrote happened, but instead of using the traditional perspective / language they instead used a modern progressive perspective / language. The individuals who founded the USA would of been considered radical right wing extremists by the same progressives that dominate this board. The British sensed the unrest could get dangerous and had their soldiers confiscate firearms from the colonists to reduce their ability to rebel. That was the spark that started the Revolution and why the writers of the Constitution were extremely clear that an armed population is the best security against a tyrannical government. Those guys absolutely didn't trust large centrally managed governments.

You don't say?
Along with anyone from so long in the past.

And this is the problem with progressives ... they think that anything newer is better regardless of it's legitimacy.

i agree. as a white land owning male, i can't find one negative for me if we returned to the laws exactly as they were written as of july 4th 1776.


lesgo!

Libertarian town hall is airing tonight on CNN, for those Gary Johnson fans.

You have NO concept of history.

The individuals who founded this country started off asserting their rights as British citizens. As in the right to have parliamentary representation.

You know, the whole taxation without representation bit.

This is outside the boundaries of right and left then, let alone now.

I HATE TV.

I will read about it tomorrow.

That's the same argument that would have been used by nomads to defame agriculture. New doesn't mean better, better means better. Progressives are focused on changing things for the better. They don't get it right all the time, but not changing anything for fear of change is exactly the kind of thing the founding fathers would scoff at.

No change vs. constant change? From a philosophical standpoint, those are two extremes that need each other to keep the other in check. Either one, unfettered, would destroy this nation.

I don't have a problem with conservatism or progressivism as a general rule, because I think both are necessary. I do, however, have a huge problem with some of the incredibly shallow fights they pick.

I think caution vs exploration would be a better balance. Everyone is just too concerned with what other people do in private.

I honestly think that a lot of my fellow citizens have not thought about why our first President George Washington stepped down after two terms mind you he was not part of a political party organization . His own reasoning for doing that was because he did want this nation or its people under a Monarchy.

Fast forward to when both the Democrat and Republican political parties slowly took control over Washington DC NOT WITH A BLOODY REVOLUTION BUT WITH THE DECEIT OF WORDS WITH THE VOTE.

We can see we are under a Monarchy with two royal families not related by blood but the front of different ideologies between Democrat and Republican.

We the people of the United States of America are deceived into thinking we have to be part of these two royal families and believe there ideology like the gospel to ever have a chance to govern.

Re-education yourself and get familiar with the Constitution that founded our nation with the first 10 amendments. Absolutely no where in the constitution does it say that you must be part of a political party organization to run for office.

If your a citizen who loves the nation and are tired of political parties like I am research your State and Congress election requirments like others like myself and challenge the establishment and take back our nation and the power structure of Washington DC and put the Constitution back in charge that represents ALL OF US AND NOT THE FEW.

Didn't @ damn auto type on a cell phone

I think that's a bit of an oversimplification, but I get your point.

I just don't fully understand how the different factions got to where they're at. How does the group that treasures peace, open-mindedness, and liberation from traditional morals become the group of forced equality, speech control, violent protests, and bullies to those who fall out of step? I could create a similar scenario for modern conservatism, but the political atmosphere is in such disarray right now that I might have to wait until the dust settles to pass judgment. Suffice to say that I think the movement has started to turtle itself so hard in response to the opposition's efforts that it has allowed its enemy to define it, and therefore has lost sight of many of its original ideals.

The royal Democrat party walks out of congress for a moment of silence for the victims in Orlando because they want to force through law restricting 2nd amendment rights anytime a tragedy happens.

These same royal Democrats who have armed protect who CLAIM to be civil rights protectors WANT to take away the civil rights of Americans to arm and protect themselves.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/muslim-anti-isis-march-not-covered-by-mainstream-media-outlets-say-organisers-a6765976.html

US Intelligence Officer: “Every Single Terrorist Attack in US was a False Flag Attack

Because both the Conservative and Liberal factions were long since infiltrated by a different set of entities that have since usurped the title while changing the core platform.

Conservatism is a fiscal platform, a political philosophy focused on being conservative with national financial resources, not spending money before you have it. Under a Conservative philosophy you don't start a war until after you've accounted for the costs and created a plan to pay for them, you don't enact a new program without first analyzing the costs and making sure you can recoup them. It's a philosophy that focus's on minimal government expenditure (and thus size) and prefers private entrepreneurship to handle as much economic activity as possible. Socialism is the exact opposite, it prefers large government expenditure on the population. Liberalism is about maximum personal freedom and responsibility, it's not opposed to Conservatism.

What happened to the Republican party is that the Super Religious Southern Democrats defected in mass during the civil rights movement. They were Democrats, they were very fond of big government programs that spent lots of money on the people, especially the poor. They were the descendants of the upper class plantation owners who were forced to give up their livelihood after the civil war and they were extremely racist and bigoted. It was the Democrat party that was super racist. Then during the civil rights movement, the Democrat party picked up that cause and the racist Southern Democrats felt betrayed and jumped ship out of spite. The Republicans, as a party, didn't really care either way though some of their southern members were bigoted as ***. They were concerned about what costs would be associated and whether it was the Governments job to interfere in the first place. And thus the religious racists got into the Republican party and within a few decades had taken over the core platform because lets face it, religious rhetoric is more emotionally powerful then economic coin counting.

The Democrat party suffered it's own infiltration after WWII. With the spread of Socialism / Communism there was a focused effort to subvert the US political system via the Universities. McCarthyism made the "big evil Government" a prime target and many young college kids started were taught how great Socialism / Communism was by their liberal professors who had been subverted. There was an active effort to recreate the "Soviet Socialist Revolution" in all Allied nations. So all during the 50's, 60's and 70's you had this sort of political subversion happening in the Democrat party that shifted their platform into one against the US Government. The civil rights movement also played into this as it was a prime bandwagon to use for the whole "your Evil Capitalistic Government is taking all your money, keeping you down, join us and we'll change it" line. Lots of mistakes made by the Federal Government who just incited the thing and created the very harsh atmosphere we have now. Eventually the Democrat party stopped being about free ideas and started being about pushing Communism / Socialism into government as much as possible, regardless of the cost.

Now you have two Authoritarian parties, one wants a Religious Theocracy and the other a Socialist Aristocracy. The only reason neither was succeed is they are too busy fighting each other to move forward with their plans. Both parties spend too much money, both want to grow the Government, both want to dictate to citizens how to live their life.

I posted a link above about Regressive Liberals, frequently known as "Progressive SJW's". That is the mentality of many posters on this board. One just demonstrated by using "Because Reasons" as an argument point.

What I liked about the University where I did my undergraduate (History & International Relations) was that my professors were very impartial in this respect and were not afraid to call out *** when they saw it. I saw a lot of leftist-lunatic-types challenge the conservative aspects of topics get absolutely shot down in flames.

Two examples of this spring to mind. Put in spoilers if you want to read them.


Especially with regards to the humanities there are many stupid and irrelevant 'disciplines' emerging, all from the extreme left, but the worst has to be postmodernism. Not only do you have to be a pretentious *** of the highest order to proclaim that your point of view is that of the future and that all dialogue to have come before you is invalid but it also prompts leftists to venture into disciplines they have no right to be in. The most hilarious example of this happening was the infamous Sokal Hoax of 1996.

Conservatism is absolutely not a fiscal platform. It is a political philosophy focused on essentially preventing change to social norms. It has no bearing with socialism.

Now, being fiscally conservative is completely separate from conservatism. Tossing words such as conservative or liberal around without context (social vs fiscal) is rather misleading.

That is complete and utter ***. I has absolutely nothing to do with social norms or changing them.

If the GOP dumps Trump for Dr. Carson, he has my vote.

To quote Buckley:

"A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it."

He was part libertarian, part social conservative, and I think I'll take his word on what constitutes a conservative. Your variety and view of conservatism may differ, but don't pretend the grander view of it in society isn't exactly that; resistance to change of social norms.

As Mil pointed out, fiscal conservatism is something entirely different, and not a thing anyone is practicing these days, so it hardly even matters