Note to the lurking Righties:You are NOT a Conservative. Stop calling yourself one.

[riqster]

https://bluntandcranky.wordpress.com/2015/02/23/you-are-not-a-conservative-stop-calling-yourself-one/

Lots of source info at the link.

Unless you actually fit the definitionof a “Conservative”:

noun
1: a person who believes in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society : a person who is politically conservative.
2: a: one who adheres to traditional methods or views
b :a cautious or discreet person.

Sadly, most “conservative” Americans bear little or no resemblance to the agreed-upon meaning of the word. Some examples:

Number A: The “Reagan Revolution”. Helpful hint: there is no such thing as a “conservative revolutionary”. Real conservatives abominate the very idea of radical change. So all you NRA machine-gun nuts, anti-abortion screechers, morals policemen and theocrats are not one damned bit conservative.

Letter 2: Intentional ignorance is not at all “conservative”, because existing knowledge is something built up over history, and thus part of our intellectual tradition. People who pretend that facts are debatable are not conservative; they are radicalized f***wits.

Thirdly: real conservatives respect the Constitution and its amendments. They do not advocate sedition, the violent overthrow of the government, secession, or unconstitutional disenfranchisement and/or discrimination against women, LGBT citizens, or non-whites.

And shut up with the “words can mean something different to me than you” horses***. The word means what it means, and all the NeoCons are doing is rebranding themselves so that people won’t see them as the violent, hateful, extremist, treasonous scum that they are. By changing the meaning of the word, a’la Orwell, the Raging Righties in Their Tightie Whities are trying to (and succeeding at) conning the populace into supporting them as they slowly slice our government’s throat.It’s lying, propagandizing, anti-American crap.

The crowning irony of all this: it is the Liberals who are actually trying to stop the right-wing, libertarian, teabagging revolutionaries from burning down and blowing up our democracy. Yes. Liberals (along with the few true centrists and other antidisestablishmentarianists remaining) have become modern America’s true conservatives, because they fit the definition.

Ain’t that some f***ed-up s***? But not as f***ed as all the crapnozzles who lie when they call themselves “conservatives”.

[onehandle]

1. Yep. There was a time when 'Conservative' didn't mean insanity.

Not only has the extreme right destroyed the world liberal, but they have also destroyed 'their' own word.

The pre-Southern Strategy, pre-gun nut, pre-libertarian loon, pre-war crazy Republican Party is dead and gone.

Abraham, Teddy, and Ike are spinning in their graves.

[riqster]

5. Yep. It's why I use scarequotes when referencing Repubs and Neocons.

Hijacking and repurposing words is a classic propaganda technique, and I'll have no truck with it.

[BlueCaliDem]

2. They are Neo-Confederates, not Conservatives by any stretch of the imagination.

They are racists, xenophobes, WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants), White Supremacists, and traitors to these United States and all she stands for - as they prove time and again. They are NOT Conservatives.

[riqster]

8. +1

[freshwest]

13. They only want to 'conserve' their ill gotten gains from Confederate crimes.

[BlueCaliDem]

17. Okay. In that, and that alone, they can be called conservatives.

But above all else, they're traitors to these United States and the principles of this country as envisioned by our Founding Fathers.

[freshwest]

24. Just as the Confederacy's main objection to the USA was Equality. It was counter to their view that

only wealthy, landowning, white males had the right to govern.

That is the meaning of the right wing radicals who want the USA government torn to pieces to 'Restore' their view of how the world should be run and its populations organized to serve them.

They exclude all women, all minorities and all conquered peoples as genetically incapable of governing white males and even their own bodies. Their view of innate inferiority of those persons came from philosophies from ancient times highly touted by Libertarians, etc.

There is good reason to resist them all. That is the survival for those of us they have declared their property.

[riqster]

25. Yep. They would have us all be slaves.

[riqster]

19. Point.

[RKP5637]

3. Quite true! True conservatives are sane. True conservatives you can discuss and work

solutions with. And true conservatives help provide a balance to politics with rational and intelligent thought on issues and events. These fools today that call themselves conservatives do not even come close to being true conservatives. They are loose cannons rolling around sinking the ship!

[riqster]

7. Ike was a conservative.

Reagan was a revolutionary.

[BlueCaliDem]

12. So was Republican President Theodore Roosevelt. He's liberal compared to today's Teapublicans.

My, but how low today's Republicans have fallen.

[riqster]

15. S'truth.

[Dont call me Shirley]

40. Reactionary would be a more accurate description.

PS...crapnozzle!?

[riqster]

41. Hey, using the same derogatory names gets old after a while.

Plus, some DUers are understandably offended by "douchenozzle", so a new term seemed in order.

[First Speaker]

43. Even Ike's conservative opponent in 1952, Robert Taft, would be too "liberal" for today's GOP...

...Taft was wrong about a lot of things, and at the end he got too cozy with McCarthy. True. But he looks like Pericles compared to today's GOP. He genuinely hated war and militarism, supported Federal aid to housing and education, and was a man of obvious stature. Around 1960 or so, he was voted one of the five greatest senators ever, along with Clay, Webster, Calhoun, and LaFollette, and deserved to be. I wouldn't have voted for him over Truman or Stevenson, but he deserved to be nominated by the GOP--his nickname was "Mr Republican", after all...and would be hated like poison by today's Teabaggers, a hate that he would have fully reciprocated...

[riqster]

44. And his son the Governor was convicted of crimes in office.

This being Ohio, he served out his term anyway, and is routinely praised.

[RoBear]

4. Excellent post! Thanks for saying it.

I keep preaching to others that if conservatives had won the rhetorical battle, there'd have been no revolution and we'd now be singing "God Save the Queen" as our national anthem.

Sadly, no one gets it, and mostly I get blank stares.

Ah well!

[riqster]

6. Yep. No such thing as a conservative revolutionary.

[Scuba]

9. K&R

[riqster]

10. Boink.

[Orsino]

11. The word conservative still seems to apply...

...but loosely, as our wingnuts happily inclue the Constitution and centuries of its legal interpretation among the institutions they are willing to dismantle...in the name of older traditions like bigotry and oligarchy.

[riqster]

18. Hmmm. Interesting take.

Mine is that one can not be a conservator if bent on destruction. Even if that destruction comes while trying to resurrect a prior tradition.

YMMV and all that, of course.

[Orsino]

20. Yeah, you'd think that a conservative should be distinct from a feudalist. n/t

[riqster]

21. I've been feuding with these "conservatives" for decades now...

I guess that makes me a "fuedalist".

[freebrew]

14. Rec'd...

Good rant. And spot on.

[riqster]

16. Thanks.

[ProfessorGAC]

22. Well, They Did Get Away With It, Right?

While all your points are salient, the Gingrich nonsense and Contract "on" America was also described as a Republican revolution and that was simply accepted into the lexicon, as easily as was "cool" in the late 1940's and early 50's.

We have been remiss is publicizing and fighting back against the Luntz approach of selling one's own definitions to certain buzzwords.

They actually have done a good job of kicking our butts in that regard. If they hadn't, they wouldn't have buffoons in every state of the union voting for guys like Bruce Rauner, or Cruz, or Paul, or Ryan. But, it's every damn state.

GAC

[riqster]

23. All true.

But hey, better late than never. Those windmills won't defeat themselves, ya know.

Sancho! My armor!

[Iliyah]

26. Present day GOPers are downright crazy

[riqster]

31. Would that it were so.

They have been spectacularly successful, if you compare 1976 with today.

[valerief]

27. Conservatives conserve wealth for the oligarchs. Liberal want to liberally spread wealth around for

all.

[riqster]

30. I dunno about that. Neocon motherfuckers start by stealing from us.

[fredamae]

28. More like "Reactionaries"?

"re·ac·tion·ar·y
(rē-ăk′shə-nĕr′ē )
adj.
Characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative: The principal is very reactionary; she wants the school to stay the way it has been for the last 50 years.

n. pl. re·ac·tion·ar·ies
An opponent of progress or liberalism; an extreme conservative.

Usage Note: Reactionary means "characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative." Sometimes reactionary is used to mean "tending to overreact; very reactive," but that sense is widely viewed as a mistake. In 2012, 86 percent of the Usage Panel found the sentence The principal is very reactionary; she responds to every little crisis by calling an emergency meeting to be unacceptable."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/reactionary

[riqster]

29. A good word.

But alas, 'tis too accurate for the GOPee.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

34. Reactionaries, in the historical sense, meant a return to the "Ancien Regime"

A return to the French Monarchy, and were opposed to the revolutionary factions in France.

Reactionaries, today, of course don't want to return to the French Monarchy, but they do want to return to the Antebellum South!

[riqster]

47. Interesting.

And true.

[bobclark86]

32. Umm... few notes for the author

NRA machine-gun nuts
--That's a conservative notion by definition, as it's against new laws and a changing worldview that says machine guns aren't necessary

anti-abortion screechers
--Again, it's the status quo

morals policemen
--traditional values, as opposed to those damn hippies and teh gheyz.

and theocrats
-- Pretty sure religious law predates democratic republicanism by a little bit.

Thirdly: real conservatives respect the Constitution and its amendments. They do not advocate sedition, the violent overthrow of the government, secession, or unconstitutional disenfranchisement and/or discrimination against women, LGBT citizens, or non-whites.
--So, they are against new things? BTW, secession is a totally conservative thing, as they're trying to get back to the Antebellum period.

The crowning irony of all this: it is the Liberals who are actually trying to stop the right-wing, libertarian, teabagging revolutionaries from burning down and blowing up our democracy.
--So, the ones pushing for major reform in economics, education, health care, equal rights... are now conservative by definition? The definition he/she used to begin the blog post? Umm...

[riqster]

33. Notes back atcha:

[blockquoteNRA machine-gun nuts
--That's a conservative notion by definition, as it's against new laws and a changing worldview that says machine guns aren't necessary.
No, the NRA wants to radically expand the types of weaponry available to us by eliminating all gun controls. That is not conservative.

anti-abortion screechers
--Again, it's the status quo No, they want to radically change existing law and roll back equality gains that currently exist in the Constitution.

morals policemen
--traditional values, as opposed to those damn hippies and teh gheyz. Whose "tradition"? If it ain't in the Constitution, imposing it is not conservative.

and theocrats
-- Pretty sure religious law predates democratic republicanism by a little bit. Imposing it in this country would require the abrogation of our constitution. A very radical and extreme act.

Thirdly: real conservatives respect the Constitution and its amendments. They do not advocate sedition, the violent overthrow of the government, secession, or unconstitutional disenfranchisement and/or discrimination against women, LGBT citizens, or non-whites.
--So, they are against new things? BTW, secession is a totally conservative thing, as they're trying to get back to the Antebellum period. The secessionists want radical changes to the status quo. Disestablishmentarianists are NOT Conservatives.

The crowning irony of all this: it is the Liberals who are actually trying to stop the right-wing, libertarian, teabagging revolutionaries from burning down and blowing up our democracy.
--So, the ones pushing for major reform in economics, education, health care, equal rights... are now conservative by definition? The definition he/she used to begin the blog post? Umm... Said reforms are already supposed to be in place per the Constitution. So they are not radical.

[bobclark86]

36. Try again (or not, I have a life outside of Internet semantics)

--That's a conservative notion by definition, as it's against new laws and a changing worldview that says machine guns aren't necessary.
No, the NRA wants to radically expand the types of weaponry available to us by eliminating all gun controls. That is not conservative.
-----Umm, you mean go back to what it was before modern gun laws? Until the 1934 National Firearms Act, you could buy a Thompson submachine gun from the Sears and Roebuck catalog and have it delivered to your house (the thing that changed was the full-auto part, from 1934 to 1968, you could buy a semi-auto like an M1 Garand and have it mailed to your house). Repealing laws which are younger than most in the conservative movement ain't radical, but reactionary -- and conservative.

anti-abortion screechers
--Again, it's the status quo No, they want to radically change existing law and roll back equality gains that currently exist in the Constitution.
-----See the bolded part. Roe v. Wade is a recent decision (within the lifetimes of the vast majority of elected officials).

morals policemen
--traditional values, as opposed to those damn hippies and teh gheyz. Whose "tradition"?
-----see "theocrats"

and theocrats
-- Pretty sure religious law predates democratic republicanism by a little bit. Imposing it in this country would require the abrogation of our constitution. A very radical and extreme act.
-----Tell that to the Puritans. And the Mormons until the 1970s. And the southern jackholes who used the Bible to allow slavery, ban gay marriage and discriminate against women -- and still do. That is, by definition, clinging to old ways, a la conservative. One would have to be pretty freaking blind to not see the effect of Abrahamic tradition in our laws.

Thirdly: real conservatives respect the Constitution and its amendments. They do not advocate sedition, the violent overthrow of the government, secession, or unconstitutional disenfranchisement and/or discrimination against women, LGBT citizens, or non-whites.
--So, they are against new things? BTW, secession is a totally conservative thing, as they're trying to get back to the Antebellum period. The secessionists want radical changes to the status quo. Disestablishmentarianists are NOT Conservatives.
-----no, they want a return to like 1850. That's pretty damn conservative.

The crowning irony of all this: it is the Liberals who are actually trying to stop the right-wing, libertarian, teabagging revolutionaries from burning down and blowing up our democracy.
--So, the ones pushing for major reform in economics, education, health care, equal rights... are now conservative by definition? The definition he/she used to begin the blog post? Umm... Said reforms are already supposed to be in place per the Constitution. So they are not radical.
------No, those reforms are pretty damn radical, and VERY recent, hence the push back from the right. You know there's still actual Klan today, right?

The author is trying (poorly) to use semantics to denigrate conservatives. You don't need to come up with stupid names and attack the use of the word "conservative" to know the modern conservative movement is full of shit. If the author has to rely on name-calling, the author is either pretty lazy or pretty dumb.

But wanting to go back from a progressive push is conservatism.

[riqster]

38. Rearranging the parameters is seen by amateurs as a surefire way to win a debate

As is redefining foundational terms and concepts.

An amateur might be impressed. Me, not so much.

[Jamaal510]

35. "Regressives" would also be a good term for them:

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/gop-ideals_b_1014396.html

A fundamental war has been waged in this nation since its founding, between progressive forces pushing us forward and regressive forces pulling us backward.

We are going to battle once again.

Progressives believe in openness, equal opportunity, and tolerance. Progressives assume we're all in it together: We all benefit from public investments in schools and health care and infrastructure. And we all do better with strong safety nets, reasonable constraints on Wall Street and big business, and a truly progressive tax system. Progressives worry when the rich and privileged become powerful enough to undermine democracy.

Regressives take the opposite positions.

Also, yeah, that was what I've been saying all along, too. Progressives are ironically the true conservatives. It is under our side that the deficit and unemployment actually lower, we're more cautious about sending troops to war, and people's rights get maintained (in contrast to the RW attempting to strip voting rights and contraceptive rights).

[riqster]

37. A good word. Methinks I shall steal it.

[Jim Lane]

39. A novelist weighs in

I remembered a quotation, can't remember the exact wording or which work it's from, but a search found a blogger whose quotation of it accords with my memory:

R.A. Lafferty wrote once (I quote from memory, but I'm pretty sure I have the essential gist): "People will tell you words are opposites when they are not even related. Listen to me: the opposite of radical is superficial; the opposite of liberal is stingy; the opposite of conservative is destructive. Therefore I am a radical liberal conservative."

[riqster]

42. Nice.

I must look into that author.

[IMG][/IMG]

[Jim Lane]

45. Lafferty wrote mostly science fiction.

If you're not into sf, though, don't let that deter you. As his Wikipedia bio states:

Lafferty's quirky prose drew from traditional storytelling styles, largely from the Irish and Native American, and his shaggy-dog characters and tall tales are unique in science fiction. Little of Lafferty's writing is considered typical of the genre. His stories are closer to tall tales than traditional science fiction....

The flip side is that even some science-fiction fans find his work too weird to enjoy. The first time I picked up Arrive at Easterwine I had to give up about 30 pages in. It was only when I came back to it years later that it became one of my favorite books.

I'd suggest you try to find his short-story collection Nine Hundred Grandmothers. His, uh, quirkiness is easier to get used to in a short story.

[riqster]

46. Thanks!

I have very eclectic tastes, so it'll be interesting to check out.