Was Our Revolution More In Line With Liberals OR Conservatives?

[Hamish Howl]

What say you?

The conservatives were tories.

 

[jnug]

Except that is exactly what they are doing.

It's about legal voters, not better voters. It's about ensuring voters are not voting more than once. Unless you think Democrats can only win by cheating, you should be in favor.


So, biased all the way over.


I prefer facts in the open to secrecy. Here's a plan--read the law.


That's narrow minded. People are still people.


Racist like Joe Biden?

Buckley did not invent conservatism. Though he was an apologist for the movement, it predated him. Conservatives helped Johnson pass the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act over Democratic opposition. In the day, Democrats were the white supremacists.

Trump did not have a tame media and law enforcement to use as storm troopers. That was Obama. They are still beholden to the Democrats. Ask yourself, why hasn't Hunter Biden been arrested?

I posted Contemporary Conservatism. Buckley was its originator its inventor. It was born with the National Review. But I will give you that the Conservative movement is and has been racist as hell for all of the 20th and 21 Centuries.

Biden is not racist though there is no such thing as a white man that knows what its like to be Black in this country and all of us that are White fall into racial tropes, racial memes and all sorts of blunders that are insulting to American Blacks. We are just TOO STUPID to do better. Then there are those Whites that do everything from purposefully dog whistle to bull horn racial insults. Please don't deny it. Doing so would just result in another clown show DP thread.

I have read the Georgia Law. Have you? Also, the Georgia Bill is not the only VOTER SUPPRESSION BILL on the table. There are several others and several other Republicans quite vocally telling us through comments about ":better voters not more voters" why they are trying to change their laws.

As for People are still people. That is irrelevant to a question of the revolution and founding of the country and 21 Century America. But I understand. You boys like to run around cloaked in the flag as if you have any idea what is in the Declaration and the Constitution and what those two documents are about and that YOUR UNDERSTANDING of our founding is what rationalizes your nonsense now.

 

[Variant]

That's what most did, in fact.

It doesn't take a majority to prevail..but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.

We see this over and over again, some minority interest gets propelled forward, and they stick to it long enough, until most people just accept that that's how things are going to be.

It's just easier to work around the things you don't agree with than it is to fight them, most people want easy, they want comfort, and even if what a tireless minority wants makes them uncomfortable it's still just easier to give them what they want and work around it, if you can.

Minority movements or not, the key is moving enough people on to your side to get to the tipping point of how ever many it takes.

With the revolution they would have needed to win quite a few to make the difference and they did this with a fairly extensive re-imagination of the contract between government and populace.

 

[Jay59]

I posted Contemporary Conservatism. Buckley was its originator its inventor. It was born with the National Review. But I will give you that the Conservative movement is and has been racist as hell for all of the 20th and 21 Centuries.

Buckley did not invent modern conservatism, which existed well before National Review started publishing. You calling the 1960s conservatives racist is projection. Back then the KKK was still the action wing of the Democratic party.

Biden is not racist though there is no such thing as a white man that knows what its like to be Black in this country and all of us that are White fall into racial tropes, racial memes and all sorts of blunders that are insulting to American Blacks.

Biden has always been deeply racist. There is far more evidence than there is of an active white supremacist movement of any substance.

We are just TOO STUPID to do better.

I acknowledge that humans will never get government right.

Then there are those Whites that do everything from purposefully dog whistle to bull horn racial insults. Please don't deny it. Doing so would just result in another clown show DP thread.

You say dog whistles because there is nothing factual to hang your insults upon.

I have read the Georgia Law.

I don't believe it. You are too superficial in your treatment.

Have you?

While it was still a bill.

A great deal of it refines the language of existing laws. Another large section is devoted to how a person can obtain a mail ballot and how that ballot is verified without signature matching. State level oversight is clarified and the AG is given the role rather than the Sec State. A fraud hotline is created, also under the the AG. Electioneering rules near polls are significantly revised, including the infamous no-water rule.

In short, the vast majority of the bill, now law, is about verification. Cheating is much harder, so the only ones who reasonably oppose it are those who plan to cheat.

As for People are still people.

You just raised the issue yourself.

That is irrelevant to a question of the revolution and founding of the country and 21 Century America. But I understand. You boys like to run around cloaked in the flag as if you have any idea what is in the Declaration and the Constitution and what those two documents are about and that YOUR UNDERSTANDING of our founding is what rationalizes your nonsense now.

I understand what the Constitution is about. It is designed to inhibit government and to empower the individual. hence, separation of powers, enumerated rights, broad limitations on governmental powers and purviews.

These were liberal ideas once, but the Democrats now believe the opposite, as do you it seems. You are focused on controlling the individual and empowering the government

 

[Geoist]

What say you?

The conservatives were the Tories who did not want to break away from England.

 

[Geoist]

Well ... unions are, in fact, labor cartels, and companies are forced, by law, to "negotiate" with them.

Until our economic system is co-op-friendly then we have no choice but to set up unions. The de-unionization of this country is a huge reason why the wealth gap is getting larger and larger. We don't want to go back to the 19th century.

 

[Geoist]

Buckley did not invent modern conservatism, which existed well before National Review started publishing. You calling the 1960s conservatives racist is projection. Back then the KKK was still the action wing of the Democratic party.

Which *gasp* was a far more CONSERVATIVE party at that time.

 

[Jay59]

Which *gasp* was a far more CONSERVATIVE party at that time.

Not really. If you are making reference to the notion that JFK would be Republican because of his supply side economic views, those were only his economic views.

Racism was very much a Democratic voting issue until 1968, which was one reason that Johnson declined to run again. In particular, Jim Crow was entirely Democratic. Equal rights history makes a hero of Johnson, because of the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act, but Johnson himself was racist. There are many references. Similarly, Democrats are now denying Biden's deep segregationist roots.

It's all just spin and projection, because the media never calls their when it stinks.

 

[Geoist]

Not really. If you are making reference to the notion that JFK would be Republican because of his supply side economic views, those were only his economic views.

Racism was very much a Democratic voting issue until 1968, which was one reason that Johnson declined to run again. In particular, Jim Crow was entirely Democratic. Equal rights history makes a hero of Johnson, because of the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act, but Johnson himself was racist. There are many references. Similarly, Democrats are now denying Biden's deep segregationist roots.

It's all just spin and projection, because the media never calls their when it stinks.

No one denies LBJ was a racist. So were pretty much all of the Founding Fathers. One can still praise the good while criticizing the bad. You are pretending as if the Democratic Party, and particularly Southern Democrats, were always progressive. They weren't. Stop pretending political parties and ideologies are the same thing.

 

[Grand Mal]

The conservatives were tories.

Still are in Canada and England. The Conservative Party still call themselves Tories.

 

[joluoto]

It was more liberal at the time than the side they broke free from.

 

[Jay59]

No one denies LBJ was a racist.

What planet are you living on? That is exactly what they are doing. See, for example, jnug's post just up this thread. They are claiming that the Democratic party is pure as the driven snow and always has been. It's how they maintain their position of moral authority in their own minds. It's a pattern we have seen throughout history--erase the past, censor the present, control education to ensure the future.

So were pretty much all of the Founding Fathers. One can still praise the good while criticizing the bad. You are pretending as if the Democratic Party, and particularly Southern Democrats, were always progressive. They weren't. Stop pretending political parties and ideologies are the same thing.

That is the narrative we live with, today. They claim pure motives, devotion to the rule of law and the Constitution, and all their unsavory qualities they project onto the opposition. Again, I refer you to jnug's posts just above.

 

[jnug]

Buckley did not invent modern conservatism, which existed well before National Review started publishing. You calling the 1960s conservatives racist is projection. Back then the KKK was still the action wing of the Democratic party.

The KKK were at least still wearing their sheets. Buckley brought racism and white supremacy out and made it a visible part of Conservative political philosophy and there it has stayed ever since.

"Biden has always been deeply racist. There is far more evidence than there is of an active white supremacist movement of any substance."

See above regarding Conservative political philosophy

"You say dog whistles because there is nothing factual to hang your insults upon."

Donnnie Rotten spewed more dog whistles and bull horns from 2014 through 2020 than you can shake a stick at. Are you saying you don't remember them or you didn't understand them? He was YOUR BOY. Still is from what I can see.

"While it was still a bill.

A great deal of it refines the language of existing laws. Another large section is devoted to how a person can obtain a mail ballot and how that ballot is verified without signature matching. State level oversight is clarified and the AG is given the role rather than the Sec State. A fraud hotline is created, also under the the AG. Electioneering rules near polls are significantly revised, including the infamous no-water rule.

In short, the vast majority of the bill, now law, is about verification. Cheating is much harder, so the only ones who reasonably oppose it are those who plan to cheat."

The AG should not have the role. How is that for a quick answer. The stripping of the powers of the State Election Apparatus and turning the Legislature loose on Election results THEY DON'T LIKE is a laughable absurdity, the means to corrupt elections even more than they have been in Georgia Elections past not less. They have hid them under a Fig Leaf and are parading around the fig leaf as their badge of honor.

Having cut polling places in Minority Communities for years there is now a formula for the number of polling places with drop boxes inside those polling places. So in effect they have possibly turned 9 hour lines to vote in those Minority communities into 5 hour lines to vote with no access to drop boxes unless the polling place is officially open. ANOTHER FIG LEAF.

Equally onerous is the new unlimited challenges rule for Registration Applicants. Any Elector can now challenge any Registration Applicant's Application and keep challenging it regardless of how many times a Registration Application corrects an error or errors on his Application. Now if Georgia really cared about a citizen's voting franchise would Georgia not insist that its Election Apparatus identify any and all issues with an Application at one time, allow the Applicant to correct them at one time and then close the loop by granting a Registration? This is now the modern version of "tell me how many jelly beans are in the jar and I will grant you a Registration". Its the very definition of Jim Crow and its aimed at those that are young and transient, Minorities and transient and Minorities that are regularly removed from the Registration Lists in Georgia. Its another FIG LEAF.

Funny how Kemp used the power of the Sec of State (head of the Georgia Election Apparatus) to usher himself into the Governor's Mansion eliminating 309,000 voters from the Registration Lists in the process and now strips the Sec of State of some powers when it suits him. Good Ole' Boys just doing what Good Ole' Boys do.

"I understand what the Constitution is about. It is designed to inhibit government and to empower the individual. hence, separation of powers, enumerated rights, broad limitations on governmental powers and purviews."

As it is with most members from the Right end of the political spectrum, you seem to ignore what should be obvious:
- The Constitution and the Declaration are equally important and should be taken as the foundations of the Country itself. One is not more important than the other.
- Taken together they are aspirational documents more than they are anything else. In other words whether the Right likes it or not the country was designed to be PROGRESSIVE that is unless you want to make the case that the founders aspirations were to create a REGRESSIVE COUNTRY or a country stuck in the mud of the late 18th Century. Though I must say that when one looks at the Right these days its pretty easy to make the case that they do in fact believe that was the founder's intentions. Now that the Right supports INSURRECTION I don't really know what they actually think of the Founders nor any other aspect of being an American.

 

[Nickyjo]

Well ... unions are, in fact, labor cartels, and companies are forced, by law, to "negotiate" with them.

++ Yes they are. Take a look at US labor history, pretty violent and brutal. See the story of the Ludlow killings in Colorado, or of the mass capture and deportation of over a thousand miners from Bisbee in cattle cars to New Mexico. Would you prefer the anarchy that existed before the NLRA?

Because progressive hero FDR committed the worst civil rights violation in US history (aside from slavery).

++ I presume that you are talking about the Japanese internment. That will be part of FDR's historical legacy, much as Lincoln's allowing the largest mass execution in US history will follow him (of rebellious Indians, as distinguished from his mercy towards southern rebels) and much as Reagan's cheerful support of mass murder in Central America stands as a disgrace. But Reagan also stood for freedom in Eastern Europe, Lincoln was the Great Emancipator, and FDR's New Deal created a template for workers rights which transformed our nation, produced widespread prosperity, and likely led within 20 years to the civil rights movement, Medicare and now, the ACA.

More precisely, not being forced to do business with anyone for any reason help to preserve freedom of association.

Have you noticed that your entire despicable ideology of progressivism is based on force and violence?

++ If freedom of association is limited by civil rights laws in employment, housing and public accommodations, fine. If I deny you service as a customer because you are black or female, to paraphrase Shakespeare, it "enriches me not but makes you poor indeed." We have decided as a society that everyone gets a chance to participate. Whites in the South decided post-Reconstruction to deny that right, "the pursuit of happiness" if you will, to black people. And of course, punctuated their society with hundreds of lynchings to emphasize their resolve. What do you think happened to Rosa Parks when she refused to give up her seat?: why it was "force and (the threat of) violence."

Again with the violence. Just because someone doesn't want to do business with you doesn't mean you may destroy his property. This is something an 8 year old would understand, so why can't you?

++ No my strategy would be the non-violent one of the freedom riders, of the people who sat in at lunch counters. But consistent violently dragging of people off buses and counter stools without changes in policy would lead to violence. As JFK supposedly said in another context, "when peaceful change becomes impossible, violent change becomes inevitable." The efforts of King and Chavez were just that, efforts, albeit heroic. Chavez went on one of his first debilitating fasts in protest of his own people turning violent. But in my experience with Cesar Chavez's Union, and stories I heard from volunteers in the 1960s South, I learned that was not easy to maintain non-violence universally. After you are dragged away from that segregated lunch counter 4-5 times, someone will pick up a brick.

There's nothing wrong with labor and management negotiating, but if one party wants out, then that's the end of it.

++ Management can walk away and face the consequences of a strike or boycott if it comes to that. But the law requires some negotiating in good faith, and as I noted above, this was done to prevent the anarchy that prevailed beforehand. We decided that we are better off with these laws, much as we did with anti-trust laws, zoning laws, building codes, and other rules that restrict business freedom.

 

[Geoist]

What planet are you living on? That is exactly what they are doing. See, for example, jnug's post just up this thread. They are claiming that the Democratic party is pure as the driven snow and always has been.

Was that the actual quote, that the DNC is as pure as the driven snow and that LBJ wasn't racist? If so, I strongly disagree with them. But let's see that quote.

It's how they maintain their position of moral authority in their own minds. It's a pattern we have seen throughout history--erase the past, censor the present, control education to ensure the future.

Ah, yes, the Illuminati controls the DNC. They are turning us all into woke feminized girly-men.

That is the narrative we live with, today. They claim pure motives, devotion to the rule of law and the Constitution, and all their unsavory qualities they project onto the opposition. Again, I refer you to jnug's posts just above.

I am not reading everyone's posts in the thread so please identify the specific quote. And I see you completely avoided my point: people know there were Jim Crow Democrats. There is no denial that I've seen except in the minds of the alt-right. Some people actually care about ideology, not teams. This is politics, not sports.

 

[Jay59]

Was that the actual quote, that the DNC is as pure as the driven snow and that LBJ wasn't racist? If so, I strongly disagree with them. But let's see that quote.

I already directed you to one source.

Ah, yes, the Illuminati controls the DNC. They are turning us all into woke feminized girly-men.

Can I quote you on that? You are the first to say it.

I am not reading everyone's posts in the thread so please identify the specific quote. And I see you completely avoided my point: people know there were Jim Crow Democrats. There is no denial that I've seen except in the minds of the alt-right. Some people actually care about ideology, not teams. This is politics, not sports.

If you do not want to know, why did you ask?

Some people do not know that there were Jim Crow Democrats. Some of them are posting in this thread.

 

[aociswundumho]

++ Yes they are.

Thank you. I wish all progressives were as honest as you are.

Take a look at US labor history, pretty violent and brutal.

Yes, and the violence is virtually always initiated by union thugs.

and FDR's New Deal created a template for workers rights which transformed our nation, produced widespread prosperity,

No, capitalism produced widespread prosperity, not just in the US, but around the entire globe. How much do you really know about the new deal?

If freedom of association is limited by civil rights laws in employment, housing and public accommodations, fine.

Again, thank you for being honest about it.

What do you think happened to Rosa Parks when she refused to give up her seat?: why it was "force and (the threat of) violence."

She was on a public bus, that is completely different from being on private property.

 

[OscarLevant]

Except classic liberals and modern liberals have almost nothing in common.

Both conservatives and liberals have as much in common with classic liberalism.

classic liberalism is the parent of the two. Both share the values embodied in the constitution.

As time progressed, as society grew more complex, modern liberals saw the need for more social activism, and conservatives did not.

Neither conflict with the parent, they just grew differently as children of parents grow differently.

 

[OscarLevant]

What say you?

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

 

[Geoist]

I already directed you to one source.

You said a certain poster said it. You did not provide a specific quote you are referencing.

Can I quote you on that? You are the first to say it.

You want to quote my hyperbolic sarcastic statement?

If you do not want to know, why did you ask?

Some people do not know that there were Jim Crow Democrats.

Perhaps elementary school children. Any adult who pays attention even a little bit to history and politics knows about Jim Crow Democrats of the mid-20th century. And most adults know they have nothing to do with the Democrats that exist today. Just about every racist southern Democrat who is old enough is now a Republican anyways.

 

[ChezC3]

It was a little of both, the Jefferson faction and the Adams/Hamilton faction.

They wanted liberty and a new way going forward but they also wanted to keep culture and traditions.

 

[Felis Leo]

This is like asking who were the liberals and who were the conservatives during the Thirty Years War or the War of Spanish Succession.

 

[jnug]

Both conservatives and liberals have as much in common with classic liberalism.

classic liberalism is the parent of the two. Both share the values embodied in the constitution.

As time progressed, as society grew more complex, modern liberals saw the need for more social activism, and conservatives did not.

Neither conflict with the parent, they just grew differently as children of parents grow differently.

Except the country is based on documents that are aspirational, mainly the Declaration, The Consititution and even the Federalist Papers for that matter. In other words the country was deigned to be PROGRESSIVE. Sorta' makes the argument from the other side absurd at best. The only way to make the case for the other side, you first have to believe the Founders were all dumbasses who designed the Country to either be REGRESSIVE or stuck in the late 18th Century mud.

 

[aociswundumho]

Both conservatives and liberals have as much in common with classic liberalism.

Specifically, what do modern liberals have in common with classic liberals?

 

[Nickyjo]

Thank you. I wish all progressives were as honest as you are.



Yes, and the violence is virtually always initiated by union thugs.



No, capitalism produced widespread prosperity, not just in the US, but around the entire globe. How much do you really know about the new deal?



Again, thank you for being honest about it.



She was on a public bus, that is completely different from being on private property.

The New Deal filed the rough edges off of capitalism, which is great at production, not so good at distribution. (The opposite tendency is found in socialism. In our wisdom, we have combined the two in the developed world since FDR.) Would you rather be a mine or factory worker in the 1880s or later on with the protections Roosevelt started? Slavery proponents used to use the way workers were treated in northern factories to defend their practice.

Would you rather be a farmworker sprayed by pesticides while you work, forced to use a short-handled hoe 7-8 hours a day that broke your back, as I witnessed or heard stories of, or one benefitting from regulation of pesticides or a banning of that hoe. My mother used to have to work at a garment factory, eight hours or so, and then bring work home to hand sew. ("That was before unions, Nicky."). As to union thugs, when did unions set up guns and fire into management's dwellings as at Ludlow? When did union thugs kidnap hundreds of management and move them on trains to another state as in the Bisbee strike? How many members of management were framed and executed as were Sacco and Vanzetti or Joe Hill?

Marx and other radical philosophers were not reacting to capitalism's great productive capacity, but to its capacity for brutality when unchecked. Workers of the western world did unite as he urged, and developed something different than he envisioned, with officials like FDR helping.

As to Rosa Parks, nice try. If she had taken her stand at a lunch counter or private bus company that discriminated, same thing would have happened. Something tells me you know that.