You're viewing a single thread.
I like the idea of conservatism, but not the way it is executed.. Like why aren't these people for conservation of the environment, or actually financially conservative? All I'm noticing is greed, and corporate corruption.
Because by "conserve" they mean conserve the status quo.
Rich people stay rich poor people stay poor and anyone who tries to change that is a commie.
Rich people *get even richer and poor people *become even more poor.
The status quo can include trends, it doesn't necessarily mean a static state. "If the status quo is me getting [richer, more powerful, more control], then that's the one I want."
I.e. conservation of momentum not velocity
It seems useful to note that the EPA was signed into law by Nixon. We have fallen a long way since Reagan took office.
The EPA was the idea of the progressives who seemed to have some momentum toward eventually achieving it. The conservatives (and their polluting corporate benefactors) were threatened by it. So, Nixon co-opted it while conservatives were still in power with the purpose of making sure it was ineffective. They achieved that.
You'll notice that when conservatives have power, they castrate the EPA and make sure it does not affect any of their benefactors. The Dem neo-liberals usually bend a little toward the progressives and will re-instate some of the EPA's power when the Dems are in charge, but it's never enough to undo whatever damage the last GOP administration did. This is because neo-liberals are conservatives. (They aren't as conservative as Republicans, but they are conservative by every international standard.)
Do not give credit to Nixon for the EPA. Like everything else ever done by a conservative, it was an act of self-serving deception. Nothing good in all of human history has ever come from conservatism. Nothing at all.
In the US: regulatory capture is a such a bipartisan effort you can call it non-partizan unironically.
I totally agree that conservatives and conservatism don't get the credit. However, it's a pretty stark contrast with the situation today where progressives are only marginally capable of bullying the Democrats. Today's Republicans consider cooperation with progressives to be political suicide.
True. We really have devolved, haven't we?
They only thing they want to conserve is their capital/social status.
Conservatism has been those things many times and in many places. It's traditionally moderate liberalism. Conservatism in the US today is regressivism wearing a conservative hat for branding. Were the Nazis socialists? No, but it was in their name. Are conservatives conservative? No, they're authoritarian regressivists, because the goal isn't to be conservative. It's to be anti-progressive. But the conservative hat gives it recognizability and credibility.
Yes! Been calling them Regressives for a while