"Rugged individualism" is a highly overrated value.
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.
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....
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.
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.
Is the word "Poopy" allowed?
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.
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.....
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.
Frederick Jackson Turner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here's some reading on the probable origins of this thinking.
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.
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.
?
Rugged individualism was built on the frontier, yet Teddy Roosevelt trustbusted the frontier.
What's your point?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?