May 1, 2007
Defining Conservatism
Are you throwing around words like "neo-con" and "classical liberal" without knowing what they really mean?
Jim Panyard can help.
- Big Government Conservatives
- Classic Liberals
- Constitutional Conservatives
- Fiscal Conservatives
- Libertarian Conservatives
- Neo-Conservatives
- Pseudo Conservatives
- Social Conservatives
- Traditional Conservatives
He concludes:
There are a lot of nuances in conservative philosophy, which become principles for those who learn and adhere to what has been responsible for mankind's successes and failures. Real conservatives are slow to change their views and never forsake their principles.
The movement is one comprised of individuals. That is why our monolithic, socialist state is so difficult to overcome.
Philosophy
Posted by AlexC at May 1, 2007 12:19 PM
Mr. Panyard wants to bring down the socialist monolith by insulting all of his natural allies. We'll see how that goes.
Until the ending, I was certain that this was being written by a lefty who was studying conservatives as Jane Goodall studied chimpanzees. I disagree with about all of his descriptions and question his tome.
Other than that, it was great.
Mr. Panyard wants to bring down the socialist monolith by insulting all of his natural allies. We'll see how that goes.
Until the ending, I was certain that this was being written by a lefty who was studying conservatives as Jane Goodall studied chimpanzees. I disagree with about all of his descriptions and question his tome.
Other than that, it was great.
Posted by: jk at May 1, 2007 12:41 PMI didn't mean that comment to be quite so harsh. I was struck reading Brian Dougherty’s Radicals for Capitalism how badly these schisms dilute political power among the liberty minded.
I suppose that is his point but his incorrect and uncomplimentary descriptions of other groups don't help.
Posted by: jk at May 1, 2007 1:00 PMThe real tagline for ThreeSources ought to be "Can't We All Get Along?"
Posted by: jk at May 1, 2007 1:02 PMGeez JK, I felt like I just saw a great movie after it was panned by the reviewer. Methinks you're a little prickly on this subject.
I thought all of the descriptions were as accurate and matter-of-fact as could be in an effort to draw distinctions within the boundaries of a very big tent.
I, for one, (a classical/libertarian conservative) was not offended. Nor am I unwilling to link arms with any others described here (except pseudo conservatives) to "bring down the socialist monolith."
Posted by: johngalt at May 1, 2007 3:37 PM | What do you think? [4]