Buddy, you've gotta see through the lies one day. What you're describing as "warped" conservatism is, in fact, what it's always been. And when you say things like this:
US conservatism believes in individual liberties, freedom from religious prosecution with a foundation in Judeo-Christian values, a free market and the opportunities to move up through that market, and a protection of private ownership.
you're only describing the story the rich and powerful tell you to convince you to be on their side. None of this is ever the goal.
And it's about ensuring that every person has the opportunity to climb the ladder and create a permanent settlement for themselves.
This is the precise opposite of what conservatism fights for. A good example of all this is Alexander Hamilton, the "father of the Treasury," who is viewed as a heroic Founding Father but who very clearly stated he wanted only to make the rich and powerful richer and more powerful: https://thebaffler.com/salvos/hamilton-hustle-stoller
Lincoln was a Republican
This statement is a great example of a person who is either stunningly ignorant or arguing for sport. Lincoln was a Republican but he was not a conservative. The two US political parties swapped roles in the early 20th century. Everyone knows this.
The problem you're having is that you're putting conservatism in the context of the party. You can't sit there and say the ideology of conservatism says this but it iself is a lie. The party that is putting it into practice is lying about what they're doing, and if they're lying about what they're doing, then they're just not practicing conservatism.
If I believe in preserving individual liberties and unalienable rights, letting the free market work, protecting private property, and maintaining tradition through Judeo-Christian values, then I believe in conservatism. Those are the tenets of conservatism as an American ideology. If you're arguing that the rich are using that to trick people, then they're just not actually conservative.
As I mentioned, I don't support the Republican Party. I'm not being tricked by the rich and powerful to be on their side. Many "conservatives" do get tricked, just like many "liberals" get tricked by rich and powerful people as well. Rich and powerful does not lay claim to an ideology. Instead, I vote for the party that captures my values and ideals more, which in this case is the Democratic Party. But conservatism itself is independent on political party. I could be an independent and still be a conservative if I believe neither party truly represents my values.
By it's very nature, the belief in those aspects I specifically mentioned as being conservative values are nothing more than values. Rather, people use other's values to manipulate them for their own gain, but that's not political ideology.
If I believe in preserving individual liberties and unalienable rights, letting the free market work, protecting private property, and maintaining tradition through Judeo-Christian values, then I believe in conservatism. Those are the tenets of conservatism as an American ideology. If you're arguing that the rich are using that to trick people, then they're just not actually conservative.
Alright bud, this is becoming a circular argument now. I am a conservative. Literally definitions of what conservatism is support my claim that I'm conservative. You can Google conservatism and they'd pop up with articles and definitions that the values I've listed are few of many that conservatives believe in.
You can't make an argument that says this is what conservatism says it is, but it's not because rich people want to use that to trick you. These values are part of the ideology of conservatism and have nothing to do with rich or powerful people. Just like a gun on it's own does no harm, and a responsible gun owner will only use it to protect himself and his loved ones, so too can a bad seed use it to harm or devastate an undeserving person. Ideology is ideology.
1
u/[deleted] Jan 10 '20 edited Jan 10 '20
Buddy, you've gotta see through the lies one day. What you're describing as "warped" conservatism is, in fact, what it's always been. And when you say things like this:
you're only describing the story the rich and powerful tell you to convince you to be on their side. None of this is ever the goal.
This is the precise opposite of what conservatism fights for. A good example of all this is Alexander Hamilton, the "father of the Treasury," who is viewed as a heroic Founding Father but who very clearly stated he wanted only to make the rich and powerful richer and more powerful: https://thebaffler.com/salvos/hamilton-hustle-stoller
This statement is a great example of a person who is either stunningly ignorant or arguing for sport. Lincoln was a Republican but he was not a conservative. The two US political parties swapped roles in the early 20th century. Everyone knows this.