• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

When did conservatives become "anti-elitists", anyway?

Einzige

Elitist as Hell.
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
2,655
Reaction score
942
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Flashback to 1933: the primary opposition to That Man In The White House came from well-heeled upper and upper-middle-class WASP Republicans in New England ("as Maine goes, so goes Vermont"). Franklin Delano Roosevelt was perceived as a class-traitor to the old money circles he was born and reared in, a patrician who, like Julius Caesar, agitated politically on the side of the plebs. FDR was both a supporter of welfare capitalism and committed ideologically to free-trade; his wealthy conservative opponents wanted laissez-faire domestically and protection from competition abroad. The Great Unwashed rallied around Roosevelt; his supporters were as retarded in their day as Trump's are in our own, though they've tarded out over very different positions.

Why are modern conservatives repackaging the world-view of Jacob Astor and Henry Cabot Lodge Sr. and trying to sell it as populism?

Cicero was a conservative and he would have hated you all.
 
Last edited:
Flashback to 1933: the primary opposition to That Man In The White House came from well-heeled upper and upper-middle-class WASP Republicans in New England ("as Maine goes, so goes Vermont"). Franklin Delano Roosevelt was perceived as a class-traitor to the old money circles he was born and reared in, a patrician who, like Julius Caesar, agitated politically on the side of the plebs. FDR was both a supporter of welfare capitalism and committed ideologically to free-trade; his wealthy conservative opponents wanted laissez-faire domestically and protection from competition abroad. The Great Unwashed rallied around Roosevelt; his supporters were as retarded in their day as Trump's are in our own, though they've tarded out over very different positions.

Why are modern conservatives repackaging the world-view of Jacob Astor and Henry Cabot Lodge Sr. and trying to sell it as populism?

Cicero was a conservative and he would have hated you all.

f21553d8d6669bbeadcbae4f6ef9e53ea96453052a410cde3623a7a561724e3e.jpg
 
Flashback to 1933: the primary opposition to That Man In The White House came from well-heeled upper and upper-middle-class WASP Republicans in New England ("as Maine goes, so goes Vermont"). Franklin Delano Roosevelt was perceived as a class-traitor to the old money circles he was born and reared in, a patrician who, like Julius Caesar, agitated politically on the side of the plebs. FDR was both a supporter of welfare capitalism and committed ideologically to free-trade; his wealthy conservative opponents wanted laissez-faire domestically and protection from competition abroad. The Great Unwashed rallied around Roosevelt; his supporters were as retarded in their day as Trump's are in our own, though they've tarded out over very different positions.

Why are modern conservatives repackaging the world-view of Jacob Astor and Henry Cabot Lodge Sr. and trying to sell it as populism?

Cicero was a conservative and he would have hated you all.

Just because an economic model works for one group does not mean it does not work for an other one. In the case of "market economics", which is more or less the view of most conservativism this is the case, when the rules are tweaked and nudged in a few aspects. It helps everyone and does it better than the alternative we have at today's technological levels.
 
Totally serious. The conservatives of a century ago were conserving their place in the social pecking order.

Trumptards are more like right-wing William Jennings Bryan Democrats than conservatives, with less Jesus and more methamphetamine.
 
Totally serious. The conservatives of a century ago were conserving their place in the social pecking order.

Trumptards are more like right-wing William Jennings Bryan Democrats than conservatives, with less Jesus and more methamphetamine.

Are you really completely ignorant of the changes that our major political parties have undergone in the past century?
 
I object to the notion that a genuine conservative would accept those changes, rather than trying to roll them back to the status quo ante bellum (that obtained prior to the Second World War).

These people aren't actually "conserving" anything, or at least anything worth conserving. They are rabble and mob.
 
Flashback to 1933: the primary opposition to That Man In The White House came from well-heeled upper and upper-middle-class WASP Republicans in New England ("as Maine goes, so goes Vermont"). Franklin Delano Roosevelt was perceived as a class-traitor to the old money circles he was born and reared in, a patrician who, like Julius Caesar, agitated politically on the side of the plebs. FDR was both a supporter of welfare capitalism and committed ideologically to free-trade; his wealthy conservative opponents wanted laissez-faire domestically and protection from competition abroad. The Great Unwashed rallied around Roosevelt; his supporters were as retarded in their day as Trump's are in our own, though they've tarded out over very different positions.

Why are modern conservatives repackaging the world-view of Jacob Astor and Henry Cabot Lodge Sr. and trying to sell it as populism?

Cicero was a conservative and he would have hated you all.

I guess by the time they nominated an actor for their candidate, they were anti-elitist.

FDR's politics were greatly influenced by his polio, after which he became much more empathetic to others who are faced with dire consequences not of their own making, and which they were powerless to change. FDR was very aware that he was able to at least do something about his situation because of his wealth, much of which was inherited.

But it's because the party had to become anti-elitist to continue to appeal to their base, since the base of white men became less wealthy and included more working men. At least that's my guess.
 
Flashback to 1933: the primary opposition to That Man In The White House came from well-heeled upper and upper-middle-class WASP Republicans in New England ("as Maine goes, so goes Vermont"). Franklin Delano Roosevelt was perceived as a class-traitor to the old money circles he was born and reared in, a patrician who, like Julius Caesar, agitated politically on the side of the plebs. FDR was both a supporter of welfare capitalism and committed ideologically to free-trade; his wealthy conservative opponents wanted laissez-faire domestically and protection from competition abroad. The Great Unwashed rallied around Roosevelt; his supporters were as retarded in their day as Trump's are in our own, though they've tarded out over very different positions.

Why are modern conservatives repackaging the world-view of Jacob Astor and Henry Cabot Lodge Sr. and trying to sell it as populism?

Cicero was a conservative and he would have hated you all.

I'll point out two things:

1) "Conservative" is obviously a term that means different things in different contexts.

2) Modern American conservatism as a political vehicle is a recent phenomenon, traceable to the post-war period. Before then, of course, "conservative" principles were certainly alive - indeed, they have been integral to the republic since (and before) the Founding - but they weren't neatly packaged and touted with consistency by any politician or party.
 
Back
Top Bottom