• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rugged Individualism: Liberal or Conservative

Is rugged individualism really conservative?


  • Total voters
    10

Daktoria

Banned
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
3,245
Reaction score
397
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
I've been thinking about this more and more, and the more I do, the more it seems to be a liberal rather than conservative idea.

Liberals constantly stand up for the working class, and constantly advocate the redistribution of wealth away from the "greedy" towards the "needy". Those who are needy are those who work hard and get stuff done.

Conservatives seem to advocate rugged individualism, but only when they embrace social liberalism on the side. I have never heard from a social conservative that rugged individualism is a way of life. Libertarians? Yes. Authoritarians? Yes.

Conservatives? No. Conservatives understand the value of balance and relaxation, not living a life of vanity, and not driving yourself crazy. Conservatives understand that we work to live, so you don't overheat yourself just to get a job done. If you're a rugged individual, a conservative justifies it because of an intense way of life, not "just because".

Liberals don't seem to grasp this, though, and even big government liberals seem to embrace rugged individualism because they enjoy humiliating non-politicians/bureaucrats into doing dirty work so they don't have to. They're basically spoiled brats who enjoy making others feel guilty as if they have to prove their dignity to be entitled to respect. On top of that, the government supposedly offers health care and welfare so hard workers can keep on trucking while not actually having lives.

I'm a customs broker, and this really hit home today when I was discussing the matter with some coworkers. On one hand, they were imitating how truck drivers and cargo handlers struggle in the docks. On the other, they were saying society needs to make sure people like that are OK.

It seemed very elitist because my coworkers come from privileged backgrounds. I don't. I come from a working class background, and it's partially because I wasn't bullied as much as my peers that I was able to study, focus, and mentally prepare for my brokerage license and socially network into my office. My peers struggled in school growing up because they just couldn't think about what was being taught. They were always wondering "How is this going to help me in life?"

Liberals seem to thrive on rugged individualism because it preserves their social status while making people feel guilty until proven innocent. If people aren't rugged, then they don't deserve respect. They deserve to endure frustration and humiliation such that they can't elevate in social status.
 
Last edited:
"Rugged individualism" is a highly overrated value.
 
"Rugged individualism" is a highly overrated value.

Rugged, in 2012? most of those who think they are rugged would be considered citified sissies back in the day when this country was still untamed. Life has become far too complicated, and at the same time too interesting, to try to live like our pioneers did. It is a rare person who would forsake all our modern conveniences and go back even as far as 1950....much less 1850....
 
Anyone who can only think in terms of Liberal or Conservative is part of a Pack and not an Individual.

Only truly manly men and womanly women become members of The Logical Party. Specklebang for President 2012.

images.jpeg
 
I've been thinking about this more and more, and the more I do, the more it seems to be a liberal rather than conservative idea.

Liberals constantly stand up for the working class, and constantly advocate the redistribution of wealth away from the "greedy" towards the "needy". Those who are needy are those who work hard and get stuff done.

Conservatives seem to advocate rugged individualism, but only when they embrace social liberalism on the side. I have never heard from a social conservative that rugged individualism is a way of life. Libertarians? Yes. Authoritarians? Yes.

Conservatives? No. Conservatives understand the value of balance and relaxation, not living a life of vanity, and not driving yourself crazy. Conservatives understand that we work to live, so you don't overheat yourself just to get a job done. If you're a rugged individual, a conservative justifies it because of an intense way of life, not "just because".

Liberals don't seem to grasp this, though, and even big government liberals seem to embrace rugged individualism because they enjoy humiliating non-politicians/bureaucrats into doing dirty work so they don't have to. They're basically spoiled brats who enjoy making others feel guilty as if they have to prove their dignity to be entitled to respect. On top of that, the government supposedly offers health care and welfare so hard workers can keep on trucking while not actually having lives.

I'm a customs broker, and this really hit home today when I was discussing the matter with some coworkers. On one hand, they were imitating how truck drivers and cargo handlers struggle in the docks. On the other, they were saying society needs to make sure people like that are OK.

It seemed very elitist because my coworkers come from privileged backgrounds. I don't. I come from a working class background, and it's partially because I wasn't bullied as much as my peers that I was able to study, focus, and mentally prepare for my brokerage license and socially network into my office. My peers struggled in school growing up because they just couldn't think about what was being taught. They were always wondering "How is this going to help me in life?"

Liberals seem to thrive on rugged individualism because it preserves their social status while making people feel guilty until proven innocent. If people aren't rugged, then they don't deserve respect. They deserve to endure frustration and humiliation such that they can't elevate in social status.



I'm sorry.... but that whole post just didn't make a damn lick of sense.
 
Rugged, in 2012? most of those who think they are rugged would be considered citified sissies back in the day when this country was still untamed. Life has become far too complicated, and at the same time too interesting, to try to live like our pioneers did. It is a rare person who would forsake all our modern conveniences and go back even as far as 1950....much less 1850....

Are you claiming "rugged" is primarily a physical attribute?

If anything, it's a mental attribute since it involves how sensitive you are to being impressed or dealing with frustration.
 
I've been thinking about this more and more, and the more I do, the more it seems to be a liberal rather than conservative idea.

Liberals constantly stand up for the working class, and constantly advocate the redistribution of wealth away from the "greedy" towards the "needy". Those who are needy are those who work hard and get stuff done.

Conservatives seem to advocate rugged individualism, but only when they embrace social liberalism on the side. I have never heard from a social conservative that rugged individualism is a way of life. Libertarians? Yes. Authoritarians? Yes.

Conservatives? No. Conservatives understand the value of balance and relaxation, not living a life of vanity, and not driving yourself crazy. Conservatives understand that we work to live, so you don't overheat yourself just to get a job done. If you're a rugged individual, a conservative justifies it because of an intense way of life, not "just because".

Liberals don't seem to grasp this, though, and even big government liberals seem to embrace rugged individualism because they enjoy humiliating non-politicians/bureaucrats into doing dirty work so they don't have to. They're basically spoiled brats who enjoy making others feel guilty as if they have to prove their dignity to be entitled to respect. On top of that, the government supposedly offers health care and welfare so hard workers can keep on trucking while not actually having lives.

I'm a customs broker, and this really hit home today when I was discussing the matter with some coworkers. On one hand, they were imitating how truck drivers and cargo handlers struggle in the docks. On the other, they were saying society needs to make sure people like that are OK.

It seemed very elitist because my coworkers come from privileged backgrounds. I don't. I come from a working class background, and it's partially because I wasn't bullied as much as my peers that I was able to study, focus, and mentally prepare for my brokerage license and socially network into my office. My peers struggled in school growing up because they just couldn't think about what was being taught. They were always wondering "How is this going to help me in life?"

Liberals seem to thrive on rugged individualism because it preserves their social status while making people feel guilty until proven innocent. If people aren't rugged, then they don't deserve respect. They deserve to endure frustration and humiliation such that they can't elevate in social status.




You seem to be confusing the terms "Liberal and Conservative" with the terms "Rich and Poor".
 
Liberals constantly stand up for the working class, and constantly advocate the redistribution of wealth away from the "greedy" towards the "needy". Those who are needy are those who work hard and get stuff done.

Second paragraph and already into straw men. Stopped reading. If your whole argument is "the other guys are poopy heads", I just am not that interested.
 
Second paragraph and already into straw men. Stopped reading. If your whole argument is "the other guys are poopy heads", I just am not that interested.




Is the word "Poopy" allowed? ;)
 
Conservatives have this idea that all liberals are effeminate...I know I was one of them for decades...having said that this is childish its like the kid that takes other kids lunch money..until one day he smacks him and blows his fascade and makes a punk out of him...I guess he grows up to be a liberal then ? grin...
 
Are you claiming "rugged" is primarily a physical attribute?

If anything, it's a mental attribute since it involves how sensitive you are to being impressed or dealing with frustration.

true, and over the years I have improved my "ruggedness" considerably. Frustration used to be a problem, in my youth, now it takes a lot to get me upset.
 
Conservatives have this idea that all liberals are effeminate...I know I was one of them for decades...having said that this is childish its like the kid that takes other kids lunch money..until one day he smacks him and blows his fascade and makes a punk out of him...I guess he grows up to be a liberal then ? grin...

when my son was about 12, he was being hassled by a couple of kids in sunday school, among other places. One of them was the instigator, a new kid in town, while the other had been my son's freind, but now he was a follower of the instigator.
Instigator kid went too far and my son gave him 2 punches to the face, in Sunday School, in front of a classroom full of other kids of the same age.. Instigator never messed with him again, the other kid decided he would rather go back to being my son's friend.
Heard it all from the sunday school teacher, not my son.....
 
when my son was about 12, he was being hassled by a couple of kids in sunday school, among other places. One of them was the instigator, a new kid in town, while the other had been my son's freind, but now he was a follower of the instigator.
Instigator kid went too far and my son gave him 2 punches to the face, in Sunday School, in front of a classroom full of other kids of the same age.. Instigator never messed with him again, the other kid decided he would rather go back to being my son's friend.
Heard it all from the sunday school teacher, not my son.....

Good for him :) hes going to grow up a liberal conservative slayer...lolol...
 
Liberals constantly stand up for the working class, and constantly advocate the redistribution of wealth away from the "greedy" towards the "needy". Those who are needy are those who work hard and get stuff done.

Well, that's how the liberals portray it, anyway.

The reality is rather different. It is the working class who primarily bear the burden of having their wealth “redistributed”, to the “needy” which include, in large part, an unproductive parasite class who produce no wealth, contribute nothing to society, and only live on wealth “redistributed” to them from those who did create that wealth.

Those in the working class who think that liberalism is on their side are deceived.
 
Well, that's how the liberals portray it, anyway.

The reality is rather different. It is the working class who primarily bear the burden of having their wealth “redistributed”, to the “needy” which include, in large part, an unproductive parasite class who produce no wealth, contribute nothing to society, and only live on wealth “redistributed” to them from those who did create that wealth.

Those in the working class who think that liberalism is on their side are deceived.

Those in the working class who think that either the libs or the cons care about them are deceiving themselves..
 
On the actual topic of individualism, it is quite true that too much individualism is detrimental, even to the individual. Just like too much communialism is. The generalizations of liberal a conservative in this thread are of no consequences, but the idea of balance is crucial. We are too much in love with individualism in this country, to the point where we harm ourselves and our neighbors in a vain quest to be superior. We think that we can have everything. Of course we can't. There isn't everything to go around, and we all try to have it all, then we'll spend our lives just trying to take from each other. Instead, we need to be content to share, and to strive to improve ourselves. If we work together, we all prosper. But we need to each prosper in our individual ways, to cultivate our unique aspects and talents that make us stand out.
 
Conservatives have this idea that all liberals are effeminate...I know I was one of them for decades...having said that this is childish its like the kid that takes other kids lunch money..until one day he smacks him and blows his fascade and makes a punk out of him...I guess he grows up to be a liberal then ? grin...

I don't think politics has anything to do with being a bitch. Theodore Roosevelt had a lot of liberal qualities, and he wasn't anybodies bitch.
 
I don't think politics has anything to do with being a bitch. Theodore Roosevelt had a lot of liberal qualities, and he wasn't anybodies bitch.

Yes he was.

Teddy Roosevelt was used by capital to breakup land. His trustbusting was exclusively against oil, railroads, and steel, not New England finance.
 
Yes he was.

Teddy Roosevelt was used by capital to breakup land. His trustbusting was exclusively against oil, railroads, and steel, not New England finance.

Where the **** do you get any of that from what I wrote? The topic is rugged individualism, quit being an attention whore.
 
Where the **** do you get any of that from what I wrote? The topic is rugged individualism, quit being an attention whore.

?

Rugged individualism was built on the frontier, yet Teddy Roosevelt trustbusted the frontier.

What's your point?
 
?

Rugged individualism was built on the frontier, yet Teddy Roosevelt trustbusted the frontier.

What's your point?

it existed before the frontier....we would still be peasants in Europe otherwise.
Wall Street will have to be dealt with by someone else, and I hope it happens soon.
 
Back
Top Bottom