PDA

View Full Version : Pseudo-cons



Chris
12-28-2015, 07:36 PM
Pseudo-cons are not much different than pseudo-libs.

Why Politicians Want You to Panic (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/panic-american-politics-213386)


For all our talk of steady hands and rugged individualism, there’s a long and hallowed tradition of sheer barking panic in American politics. “There’s no country in the world that can get more hysterical!” Sinclair Lewis wrote in It Can’t Happen Here, his 1935 novel about a folksy American politician who leads a panicky nation into fascism. And indeed, we’ve done our part to prove him right. Over the decades, Americans, minds afire with doomsday visions of wild plots and schemes, have lost it over the illuminati, the Masons, the pope of Rome and his marauding Jesuits, the League of Nations, the U.N., communist infiltrators, welfare queens, Willie Horton, Jeremiah Wright, birtherism, gay plots, “death panels,” Jade Helm, no-go zones, the aforementioned Mexican rapists/ethnic cleansers/Ebola-infected ISIS supporters, and so on.

And throughout, most of those eruptions have come from a certain spot on the American political spectrum. Writing in 1954, historian Richard Hofstadter, borrowing a term from the social theorist Theodore Adorno, dubbed these people “pseudo-conservatives.” In his essay “The Pseudo-Conservative Revolt,” which Hofstadter wrote in response to the rise of far-right demagogues like Joe McCarthy and groups like the John Birch Society, he defined the type:



“Although they believe themselves to be conservatives and usually employ the rhetoric of conservatives, [pseudo-conservatives] show signs of a serious and restless dissatisfaction with American life, its institutions and traditions.” They may call themselves conservatives, Hofstadter noted, but they do so mainly for the veneer of political legitimacy the term confers. In reality, they are more a mix of ultraconservative, isolationist and, occasionally, radical. “They have little in common with the temperate and compromising spirit of true conservatism in the classical sense of the word.”


The pseudo-conservative, Hofstadter continued, “is likely to be antagonistic to most of the operations of our federal government except congressional investigations.” He is preoccupied with his loyalty and the perceived disloyalty of others and prone to constant patriotic “self-advertisement.” He “sees his own country as being so weak that it is constantly about to fall victim to subversion; and yet he feels it is so all-powerful that any failure it may experience in getting its way in the world ... cannot possibly be due to its own limitations but must be attributed to its having been betrayed.” He believes that “those who place greater stress on negotiation and accommodation are engaged in treasonable conspiracy or are guilty of well-nigh criminal failings in moral and intellectual fiber.”

Tahuyaman
12-28-2015, 07:43 PM
One of the problems today is that there are too many people who believe that you need to be in 100% agreement on all issues. When did this hapoen?

Chris
12-28-2015, 07:47 PM
One of the problems today is that there are too many people who believe that you need to be in 100% agreement on all issues. When did this hapoen?

That pretty well describes pseudo-cons aka partisan Republicans, and pseudo-libs aka partisan Democrats. They hate each other and dismiss disagreement and dissent. See last paragraph of OP.

I think it started with Hoover/FDR (a pseudo-progressive). New conservatism (Buckley, Kirk) arose in reaction to that. Then neocons and sociocons....

Captain Obvious
12-28-2015, 07:49 PM
That pretty well describes pseudo-cons aka partisan Republicans, and pseudo-libs aka partisan Democrats. They hate each other and dismiss disagreement and dissent. See last paragraph of OP.

I think it started with Hoover/FDR (a pseudo-progressive). New conservatism (Buckley, Kirk) arose in reaction to that. Then neocons and sociocons....

There will never be political unity in this country for a number of reasons. It's human nature in secure settings to clusterfuck the shit out of everything. That and many if not most of our partisans don't know shit from shit.

It's why democracy failed.

Chris
12-28-2015, 08:46 PM
There will never be political unity in this country for a number of reasons. It's human nature in secure settings to clusterfuck the shit out of everything. That and many if not most of our partisans don't know shit from shit.

It's why democracy failed.

One would hope there'd never be unity. This nation was built on dissent.

"I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power." --Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820.

Captain Obvious
12-28-2015, 08:50 PM
One would hope there'd never be unity. This nation was built on dissent.

"I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power." --Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820.

I know, unity wasn't the right word. Partisanship then.

What we have is the opposite, it's approaching absolute division.

Mister D
12-28-2015, 08:54 PM
I disagree. I think what you see is a great deal of conformity. What do our drones argue about? Anything substantial? We all like to blame the system etc. but I think the fact that nothing ever changes is due to the fact that Americans simply accept the system as it is and have no alternative visions for society.

I'd also like to know what exactly our genuine conservatives are conserving.

Chris
12-28-2015, 08:57 PM
I disagree. I think what you see is a great deal of conformity. What do our drones argue about? Anything substantial? We all like to blame the system etc. but I think the fact that nothing ever changes is due to the fact that Americans simply accept the system as it is and have no alternative visions for society.

I'd also like to know what exactly our genuine conservatives are conserving.

The pseudos demand conformity and it's divisive.

Conservatives light to conserve the traditions, institutions, norms of society. Not rigidly, but allow for small, gradual, prudent change.

Captain Obvious
12-28-2015, 08:57 PM
I disagree. I think what you see is a great deal of conformity. What do our drones argue about? Anything substantial? We all like to blame the system etc. but I think the fact that nothing ever changes is due to the fact that Americans simply accept the system as it is and have no alternative visions for society.

I'd also like to know what exactly our genuine conservatives are conserving.

That's my theory you're stealing actually, the first point. And why democracy fails.

True conservatism isn't represented in a great deal through our current system. Neither is true liberalism but I would suggest progress is a good seller to the masses.

Mister D
12-28-2015, 09:03 PM
That's my theory you're stealing actually, the first point. And why democracy fails.

True conservatism isn't represented in a great deal through our current system. Neither is true liberalism but I would suggest progress is a good seller to the masses.

I just don;t know what "true" conservatism refers to anymore. Conservatives, it seems to me, have retreated into the realm of abstractions and ideas. For example, they talk about preserving the Constitution (a piece of paper) or America as a "propositional nation" (a "true" conservative would abhor such a formulation) instead of a living social organism.

Captain Obvious
12-28-2015, 09:08 PM
I just don;t know what "true" conservatism refers to anymore. Conservatives, it seems to me, have retreated into the realm of abstractions and ideas. For example, they talk about preserving the Constitution (a piece of paper) or America as a "propositional nation" (a "true" conservative would abhor such a formulation) instead of a living social organism.

That's a fair point.

Structurally, we shouldn't be at odds with our definition but we are. The pieces have been in place for a long time now, there's no need to reinvent the wheel.

But I think the system devolves and creates all of these "pseudos" that the OP is suggesting and I don't disagree with it, and it's divisionary. It's a product of personal agenda-driven motives.

Mister D
12-28-2015, 09:12 PM
The pseudos demand conformity and it's divisive.

Conservatives light to conserve the traditions, institutions, norms of society. Not rigidly, but allow for small, gradual, prudent change.

You touch on a common misconception about conservatism. It's not a hostility to change per se but the advocacy of prudent, cautious change. The sentiment rejected entirely is change for its own sake.

Mac-7
12-28-2015, 09:16 PM
Pseudo-cons are not much different than pseudo-libs.

Why Politicians Want You to Panic (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/panic-american-politics-213386)

politico is a democrat party front group

And you Chris are a packmule for them.

Try posting a story by those liberal assholes attacking hillary the way they attack Trump

but of course you cant and wont.

Chris
12-28-2015, 09:18 PM
You touch on a common misconception about conservatism. It's not a hostility to change per se but the advocacy of prudent, cautious change. The sentiment rejected entirely is change for its own sake.

I think that goes with the idea of preserving society as an organism, a growing or evolving organism. Pushed too fast you lost footing and bearings.

Chris
12-28-2015, 09:18 PM
politico is a democrat party front group

And you Chris are a packmule for them.

Try posting a story by those liberal assholes attacking hillary the way they attack Trump

but of course you cant and wont.


As usual, no contribution to discussion.

Tahuyaman
12-28-2015, 09:22 PM
That pretty well describes pseudo-cons aka partisan Republicans, and pseudo-libs aka partisan Democrats. They hate each other and dismiss disagreement and dissent. See last paragraph of OP.

I think it started with Hoover/FDR (a pseudo-progressive). New conservatism (Buckley, Kirk) arose in reaction to that. Then neocons and sociocons....

Another problem is those who do not agree with conservative principles seem to think they know what's best for the conservative movement.

Tahuyaman
12-28-2015, 09:25 PM
politico is a democrat party front group

And you Chris are a packmule for them.

Try posting a story by those liberal $#@!s attacking hillary the way they attack Trump

but of course you cant and wont.

I wouldn't call politico a front group, but they are quite biased and partisan. The left doesn't need to develop front groups within the media. Generally, people who go into journalism are very liberal by default

Mister D
12-28-2015, 09:34 PM
I think that goes with the idea of preserving society as an organism, a growing or evolving organism. Pushed too fast you lost footing and bearings.

It is true though that conservatism is always in danger of a tendency toward stagnation. Conservatives must be on guard.

Mister D
12-28-2015, 09:35 PM
politico is a democrat party front group

And you Chris are a packmule for them.

Try posting a story by those liberal $#@!s attacking hillary the way they attack Trump

but of course you cant and wont.

So what did yu disagree with? Oh wait...you didn't even address the OP. Why are you here again?

Chris
12-28-2015, 09:38 PM
Another problem is those who do not agree with conservative principles seem to think they know what's best for the conservative movement.

I tend to agree with most conservative principles. But I only know what I think's best in my opinion. And when I see another with a good message, like the OP. So I post it to see what others have to say on the topic.

Chris
12-28-2015, 09:39 PM
It is true though that conservatism is always in danger of a tendency toward stagnation. Conservatives must be on guard.

Stagnation is probably a minor concern though. Society changes on its own, the conservative tries to guide it, the liberal tries to drive it.

Mac-7
12-28-2015, 09:55 PM
So what did yu disagree with?

The idea of politico that is parroted by the libs here that liberals are good and conservatives are bad?

All of it.

the far left attacks republican politicians who are not washinton establishment sell outs but who you really hate most are the ordinary conservative voters who support them

Mister D
12-28-2015, 09:56 PM
Stagnation is probably a minor concern though. Society changes on its own, the conservative tries to guide it, the liberal tries to drive it.

But it feeds a caricature of conservatism that we often see. IMO, it's a real danger. When that happens conservatism becomes lifeless and and really doesn't represent ideas.

Mister D
12-28-2015, 09:57 PM
The idea of politico that is parroted by the libs here that liberals are good and conservatives are bad?

All of it.

the far left attacks republican politicians who are not washinton establishment sell outs but who you really hate most are the ordinary conservative voters who support them

I didn't mean politico. Can you be a little more specific about the OP?

Chris
12-28-2015, 10:01 PM
But it feeds a caricature of conservatism that we often see. IMO, it's a real danger. When that happens conservatism becomes lifeless and and really doesn't represent ideas.

Worse one is the conservative want to return to the past.

Mac-7
12-28-2015, 10:05 PM
I wouldn't call politico a front group, but they are quite biased and partisan. The left doesn't need to develop front groups within the media. Generally, people who go into journalism are very liberal by default

True, and in this case libs like Chris are letting Politico do his thinking for him.

All we every hear from the so-called non partisans on this
board is criticism of conservatives and republicans which is written for them by dedicated leftists.

Mister D
12-28-2015, 10:07 PM
Worse one is the conservative want to return to the past.

Yes, exactly. We hear that one all the time.

Mac-7
12-28-2015, 10:08 PM
I didn't mean politico. Can you be a little more specific about the OP?

The whole thing is liberal bile that has no specific point except that we should not trust any republican like trump or cruz who is not approved by the washington establishment

Mac-7
12-28-2015, 10:10 PM
Yes, exactly. We hear that one all the time.

Who are you voting for?

Tahuyaman
12-28-2015, 10:10 PM
Worse one is the conservative want to return to the past.

Actually, it's the liberals who want to return to the past. They want to erase much of the progress we have made over the years in improving our life style.

Chris
12-28-2015, 10:21 PM
True, and in this case libs like Chris are letting Politico do his thinking for him.

All we every hear from the so-called non partisans on this
board is criticism of conservatives and republicans which is written for them by dedicated leftists.

Your making things up sure gets tiresome.

Mac-7
12-28-2015, 10:28 PM
Your making things up sure gets tiresome.

thats a standard form of denial for you.

Mister D
12-28-2015, 10:29 PM
Who are you voting for?

Whoever wears a flag lapel.

Mac-7
12-28-2015, 10:33 PM
Whoever wears a flag lapel.

I didnt think you would give a straight answer from you.

Because libs are just against everything but never for anything

You worry that if you named a candidate that would open you up to the kind of attacks you do to others.

Chris
12-28-2015, 10:35 PM
thats a standard form of denial for you.

How does one deny lies, mac?

Mister D
12-28-2015, 10:35 PM
I didnt think you would give a straight answer from you.

Because libs are just against everything but never for anything

You worry that if you named a candidate that would open you up to the kind of attacks you do to others.

Yes, I often attack people for supporting candidates. Um...yeah

Mac-7
12-28-2015, 11:11 PM
Yes, I often attack people for supporting candidates. Um...yeah

You are a non partisan?

Fagan_the_Pagan
12-29-2015, 02:03 AM
I think this idea of the Pseudo-con actually throws things into perspective. It reminds me more of why I used to consider myself a conservative. The Republican Party of today doesn't represent that idea, which is why I have completely abandoned them. I am currently registered as a libertarian, though my leanings have been more to the left lately. What I really object to are people like Trump who prey on fear to gain power. The best thing that can come from Trump is to fracture the Republican party, and separate true sensible conservative principles from those who are obsessed with scapegoating immigrants and muslims for all of our problems.


Whoever wears a flag lapel.
Lol.

Actually, it's the liberals who want to return to the past. They want to erase much of the progress we have made over the years in improving our life style.
What? How do you figure?

Mac-7
12-29-2015, 06:13 AM
I think this idea of the Pseudo-con actually throws things into perspective. It reminds me more of why I used to consider myself a conservative. The Republican Party of today doesn't represent that idea, which is why I have completely abandoned them. I am currently registered as a libertarian, though my leanings have been more to the left lately. What I really object to are people like Trump who prey on fear to gain power. The best thing that can come from Trump is to fracture the Republican party, and separate true sensible conservative principles from those who are obsessed with scapegoating immigrants and muslims for all of our problems.


Lol.

What? How do you figure?

The "fear" as you call it is based on real harm that immigrants are doing to America.

The voters who support Trump have been warning the political class in washington to put the best interests of Americans first and they have been ignored.

But trump is not ignoring them and he's being rewarded with high poll numbers

donttread
12-29-2015, 08:07 AM
Pseudo-cons are not much different than pseudo-libs.

Why Politicians Want You to Panic (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/panic-american-politics-213386)


Sounds kinda like "lock up the guys that talk about the Constitution too much" propaganda

Chris
12-29-2015, 08:11 AM
Sounds kinda like "lock up the guys that talk about the Constitution too much" propaganda

Constitution is a traditional institution at this point, worth preserving.

donttread
12-29-2015, 08:29 AM
Constitution is a traditional institution at this point, worth preserving.

Admittedly I didn't review the material very well by bad. To me the false cons are greedy attention whores who have no feelings for people but spend just as much as the dems. Their poster child would be John Bonener

PolWatch
12-29-2015, 08:45 AM
Mister D is a liberal? whodathunkit?

Chris
12-29-2015, 08:52 AM
Admittedly I didn't review the material very well by bad. To me the false cons are greedy attention whores who have no feelings for people but spend just as much as the dems. Their poster child would be John Bonener

Your point was legitimate as some pseudo-cons hide behind the Constitution just as they wrap themselves in the flag.

Chris
12-29-2015, 08:53 AM
Mister D is a liberal? whodathunkit?

If everything looks like a liberal perhaps....

Tahuyaman
12-29-2015, 10:46 AM
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/55782-Pseudo-cons/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Tahuyaman
Actually, it's the liberals who want to return to the past. They want to erase much of the progress we have made over the years in improving our life s









What? How do you figure?

Progressives believe our lifestyle is destroying the earth. They want to undo the progress we have experienced over the decades.

donttread
12-29-2015, 01:03 PM
Your point was legitimate as some pseudo-cons hide behind the Constitution just as they wrap themselves in the flag.

To me, true Constitutionist are fiscal conservative, social liberals.

Chris
12-29-2015, 01:07 PM
To me, true Constitutionist are fiscal conservative, social liberals.

Agree, the government should just leave people alone, let society be. But too many think they know better how society should be.

Mac-7
12-29-2015, 01:13 PM
To me, true Constitutionist are fiscal conservative, social liberals.

In that case abortion and homosexuality should be state issues.

Chris
12-29-2015, 01:18 PM
In that case abortion and homosexuality should be state issues.

They shouldn't be political issues at all.

Mac-7
12-29-2015, 01:21 PM
They shouldn't be political issues at all.

They should be political issues at the state level.

texan
12-29-2015, 01:56 PM
That's a fair point.

Structurally, we shouldn't be at odds with our definition but we are. The pieces have been in place for a long time now, there's no need to reinvent the wheel.

But I think the system devolves and creates all of these "pseudos" that the OP is suggesting and I don't disagree with it, and it's divisionary. It's a product of personal agenda-driven motives.

Its also a product of too many lawyers wordsmithing everything. That is what has been put in place of common sense.

donttread
12-29-2015, 02:12 PM
In that case abortion and homosexuality should be state issues.

Not necessarily are they may involve inaleianable individual rights"

Fagan_the_Pagan
12-30-2015, 02:24 PM
Progressives believe our lifestyle is destroying the earth. They want to undo the progress we have experienced over the decades.
Oh, you mean climate change. That is a flawed understanding of the issue then. Most are not saying "let's just get rid of all of our carbon emissions!" The idea is that technologies that are polluting the environment should be gradually replaced with NEW, BETTER options. Solar power, wind power, & other renewable resources. That's hardly "undoing progress."

Tahuyaman
12-30-2015, 05:07 PM
The "new and better options" are not yet viable or reliable options. When and if they are, they will be implemented.