And this is exactly the type of F-you buddy, I'll do whatever I like BS response that is everything wrong with modern conservatives and makes them a joke of walking contradictions.
Usually I get a polite reply when trying to keep a thread on track. Most don't try to explain, they just get back on topic.
But if you and the others who have sidetracked onto wars and war policy can't exhibit a little self control... then sure, I have no problem asking for help in keeping the thread on track.
No response yet I see, just cannot seem to locate that
slavery- traditional conservatism nexus perhaps? Your whole OP was a joke,
never intended to be taken seriously.
First, the title:
Traditional Conservatism: Back away from the edge...
What is that supposed to impart? Just meant as a slap in the face of conservatives.
Then what, you go right into modern conservatism, make an offensive never related, never defined comment about it being a walking contradiction of itself… [ another slap in the face. Two in the first two sentences and you want this to be taken seriously, a matter to be discussed civilly? ] as if that is supposed to mean something? If so, explain yoursef [ and if you have written a treatise on it elsewhere, it’s not cited here, so what are YOU EVEN talking about? ]
Do you then ever go into an actual description of traditional conservatism?
No, rather you amble off into some autobiographically nonsensical story about your father being conservative and his father, blah blah as, I don’t even know, as if that is to have some meaning, some significance in the annals of traditional conservatism, somehow alluding to some fuzzy descriptors of what your idea of traditional conservatism must be somehow? Traditional to you maybe, hardly traditional in the historical context. Add the fact that what might be traditional conservatism as practiced in Europe is different from what is the traditional conservatism as practiced here in the USA… so which are you even talking about?
"Take care of your people and your obligations first....". A nice and noble sentiment of an individual who employs others, no doubt. Where is that expressed anywhere in traditional conservatism, please? Wages are intended as remuneration. One might have the expectation of providing good and honest work to individuals, with pay commiserate with value brought, but there is no expectation of payment beyond worth that I am aware of in US conservative tradition. I could be wrong, but prove it to me… that is one of the aspects of what debate is supposed to be about. Teach us something, if you have something to teach...
If there is anything left over, only then pay yourself? So your family may have to starve in the meantime so you can serve those that work for you first? That is why one is to create a business, that is why one risks their capital, maybe entire life savings and money borrowed, that is why one puts in all the extra hours planning, why one arranges for obtaining the raw materials, purchase the tools and equipment and hire and train the necessary labor? I rather doubt that. One of the tenets of capitalism, which traditional conservatism does adhere to, is the concept of self-interest. Not greed, self-interest, there is a profound difference.
Then you go into a discussion, ostensibly, of increasing the minimum wage. If someone works 40 hours a week you should pay them enough to live independently. How is that traditional conservatism? Is that stated anywhere in the traditional writings? Is it even logical or prudent? No.
The post is so muddled, nothing being nailed down, nothing defined except with some allusion, a waving of your hand in the direction of whatever it is you are going on about, nothing of any particular use with which to discuss.
Then ending your first post with more slaps in the face. Silliness beyond absurdity culminating in this classic paragraph:
I won't post beyond this as I don't believe this issue is up for debate. In all honesty, all attempts to refute this will be viewed in my humble opinion, as pathetic attempts to reconcile the christian right hypocrisy with justifications... a waste of space and time.
Which, of course, was soon proven false as you have posted several times…besides which, why would you put a discussion up that you don’t think has any justification of being discussed? It was a joke thread and can/should be treated no more seriously than that.
So, the reality is that we were only supposed to be here just to discuss your disgust? Or some inanity you considered traditional, which does not very well comport with any of the concepts of traditional conservatism that I am aware of... so would you care to elucidate where you got these apparently erroneous concepts?
And as for your:
And this is exactly the type of F-you buddy, I'll do whatever I like BS response that is everything wrong with modern conservatives and makes them a joke of walking contradictions.
one should possibly consider flushing instead of hitting the submit reply button at times, eh?