'Conservative' means 'Politically Correct'

Great Debates
1

You heard me right.

To be conservative is to support established ideas. That’s it. None of this ‘more freedom/less freedom’ bullshit. Religion is a well-established set of ideas, and conservatives embrace it. Likewise fee enterprise (and the businesses that it spawned), patriotism, gun ownership, etc. are etablished. Call them traditional. Alchohol and tobacco are OK but marijuana is not because here too, these rules are established.

Political Correctness is when an idea is condemned by the apparant mainstream because it conflicts with established ideas, regardless of whether it is actually true or fair or innocuous.

Bear with me here.

There are plenty of examples of right-wing PC:

  • Schools learned recently that it isn’t PC to diss the Boy Scouts
  • It isn’t PC to oppose making the Pledge of Allegience mandatory
  • It isn’t PC for govt-supported family-planning agencies to provide abortion referrals
  • Christian groups are increasingly complaing of ‘discrimination and bigotry’ and pursuing ‘victim status’ mentality.

OK, but what about the more familiar brand of PC, that of hypersensitivity on behalf of racial minorities, etc, isn’t that liberal?

No it’s not.

The idea that there is ‘systemic racism’ has become well established in recent decades. Minority advocates believe in systemic racism the way Christian fundamentalists believe in Satan.

It’s still left-wing tho. Dig that ‘Left-wing’ and ‘liberal’ do not mean the same thing. The Left-wing is a set of positions supported in order to correct apparent past injustices. Liberalism is a willingness to challenge established ideas, esp in the light of new information or new thinking.

What we have here is a new kind of Lleft-wing conservatism.

In Russia, Boris Yeltsin and his followers were Right-wing liberals; the Commuists were the consevatives.

Some of the re-thinking coming from the Right might arguably be condidered ‘liberal’ in a sense. There was some carping about ‘elites’ and challenging the power of elites is pretty standard liberal fare. Welfare reform might qualify, in that it had become established that you’re entitled to free money if you’re out of work, but recent exprience shows this can be counter-productive and should be reformed (refom is typically a liberal concept). OTOH, the senses that conservative means ‘restricted’ and liberal means ‘generous’ or ‘permissive’ still apply.

Take MLK’s famous statement that people should not “be judged by the color of their skin but on the content of their character”. This is classic liberalism. But affimative-action ain’t; it’s Left-wing. So if you’re a Republican who is for color-blindness and meritocracy , yer a damn liberal.

2

Good luck, sqweels. Folks have been trying to recapture the “real” meanings of words since before the time of Sam Johnson.

I’ll leave a bundle of used lances, for you, over by the next windmill.

3

well at least that’s a non-disareement, T&D. But waitaminit! Isn’t it yet another form of political correctness to maintain that these terms mean what people think they mean rather than the correct meaning?

4

You’d right, if you could find a dictionary old enough. But the meanings of words do change over time, generally due to sufficiently-repeated misuse such as the type you’ve described. Eventually, one reaches a point where it has to be acknowledged that the popular definition is the correct one. Just ask Scylla about “hacker” vs. “cracker”, for instance.

Sorry, pal, we’re already there. “Liberal” now does mean “left-wing” even if there was a time when it didn’t.

5

Shouldn’t this be in IMHO? You haven’t asked us to debate anything?

I admit that is a conservative response, from one who is more liberal than many.

6

If you are going to try to twist things arouind at least do it in a sensible way.

7

Unless, of course, you are in Australia because:

  1. The Conservatives there are known as the Liberals, but appear to be more progressive in thinking than Labour.
  2. Labour does its very best not to and still demand high wages for doing little if anything.
  3. The Democrats are not by any means.
  4. One Nation has been excellent at dividing the nation.
  5. The Greens are color-blind.
  6. The Nationals are concentrated in one state.
8

So it’s not like I’m wrong in my definitions, just swimming aginst the tide of idiocy.:wink:

9

I’ve been on a progessives’ E-mail list with people from other countries. When I describe my beliefs as “liberal”, some of those in Europe or South Africa react with dismay, as though I’d been advocating unrestrained capitalist multinational corporations taking over the world. Because in their countries, they use the term “neo-liberal” to mean that.

So I had to explain what all “liberal” means to an American. What is otherwise known as “progressive” or “left.”

Experiences like this make me wary of using short & snappy labels to summarize my position. It’s clearer and less confusing to go the long way around and spell out my positions on various issues.

10

it’s really not that difficult to understand. words are symbols that mean what people understand them to mean. you can slap your forehead all you like and say ‘but it should mean this!’, but if people do not think that it means this, then guess what?

they’re right. you’re wrong.

i used to have a primary school teacher who maintained that ‘terrific’ was a word with negative connotations, since it derived from the word ‘terrified.’

he seemed to have missed the fact that everyone was in fact using the word ‘terrific’ positively.

11

i am so arrogant.

12

OK, so what do these terms mean then, and why?

We use them so frequently, and yet we just assume everyone is clear on the meaning, even though we often deliberatly distort the associations in the midst of the ongoing ideological contest.

The idea the conservative=more freedom, liberal=less freedom is obviously incorrect because there are far too many exceptions and its blatantly perjorative toward one side.

So let’s have some better definitions if mine are no good.

13

1500—The Roman Catholic Church has the sacred duty to employ the blessed Inquisition to purify itself from the heretics sent by the Devil to corrupt its perfect doctrines. This is an established idea.

1850—The right of the Southron States to safeguard their “peculiar institution” of slavery from those consarned Yankee abolitionists is an established idea. Why, it has even been affirmed by the Supreme Court!

1900—The manifest destiny of the White nations to colonize the entire colored world and civilize them, with gunboats if necessary, is obvious, because the European civilization is superior to all others. An established idea!

1950—The Negro does not want to be integrated. He is much better off under the wise, paternal system of segregation that has his best interests at heart. This is an established idea.

2000—Globalization of free trade in favor of multinational corporations is the inevitable development of the world economy. Workers in poor nations had better knuckle under or else they will get nothing!

As you can see, these Established Ideas are ipso facto correct. Who would dare defy them? Only troublemakers and malcontents.

14

Thank you, Jomo.

As you can see, these are examples of consevatism. Those who opposed them were–or could be–called liberals.

One example you might have included:

1750 - The British Crown had the authority to rule by divine right–an established idea.

Ergo, the Founding Fathers were liberals. But it wasn’t ‘politically correct’ to be a traitor to the Crown, which what they were called.

And to look at the example from 1950 along the lines of my main point, it wasn’t politically correct to be a ‘nigger lover’.