I can’t square conservatism with freedom.

No, it's not. And I did not read the rest after that part, as your argument is built off of a false premise. As a conservative, I in no way want to maintain the status quo, which is the current state of affairs, which is where men can be women and women can be men; which is where abortion can be legal in every state; which is where the definition of marriage is not just between a man and a woman; which is where white people, particularly white men, face de jure discrimination within the framework of affirmative action; which is where voting day is now voting season, due to the astronomical implementation of mail-in voting; which is where 18-year-olds can vote, when the minimum voting age should be 25; etcetera, etcetera. No, no. I, as a conservative, am definitely not for "maintaining the status quo."

 

Good, so you see the authoritarian streak on the left… I see it too. Now tell me what conservatives have tried to outlaw or have outlawed. If this request strikes you as weird then clearly you have spent little to no effort looking to see where your side does or has done what you criticize the left for. Abandon your loyalty and join me in the center and you will then see the rampant hypocrisy of both sides.

 

Good, so you see the authoritarian streak on the left… I see it too. Now tell me where conservatives have tried to force their will on others. If this request strikes you as weird then clearly you have spent little to no effort looking to see where your side does or has done what you criticize the left for. Abandon your loyalty and join me in the center and you will then see the rampant hypocrisy of both sides.

 

The Republicans have tried to make killing babies illegal.

 

All rights are invented.

 

So what you're saying is that you can't square liberalism with freedom?

 

Guess what, you don't have the right to the best defense possible.

 

There is a difference between a conservative status quo and a liberal status quo. I am not arguing that conservatives want to maintain a general current snapshot of America. I limited the argument to a generalized conservative status quo that conservatives see as slipping away and which they are fighting to preserve or bring back. Like Trump said, “Let’s make America Great again” thus an expression of a desire to bring back the status quo of days gone by as opposed to maintaining the current status quo.

 

Sorry but your trying to move back to what was the status quo, and then keep it there.

 

I'm aware of your subservient belief system where you think that rights are privileges granted by the government.

Nothing is further from the truth

 

Freedom is a natural right.

 

Correct. Neither liberalism nor conservatism can lead to freedom as it goes against human nature which is tribal and authoritarian. I am more critical of the right as most of my life I was a member and feel betrayed by the do as I say and not as I do culture of a group that led me to believe morals and ethics matter. In reality both sides are awash in bias and hypocrisy and seemingly oblivious to their own moral and ethical failures… but boy oh boy can they see it in the other!

 

Except that's not true.

 

Human nature disagrees. Oppression and domination is our nature. The tribe will allow for a range of freedom so long as it is not out of sync with tribal norms. Norms that violate the political and/or religious dogma of the in-group is where the oppression and domination comes in. For example the overturning of Roe vs Wade, a right supported by most Americans but overturned by a minority group, the Republican Party… not to mention the immoral means the right used to achieve victory. That my friend is machiavellianism and authoritarianism in action.

 

that is a myth, schools are run by both republicans and democrats

 

First, I wasn't questioning the legality of the lockdown, I only observed that the lockdown was authoritarian. Even if you support it, and pretty clearly you do, you have to admit it's authoritarian. Legality doesn't make it less so.

Secondly, if you deny that anyone can ever know what the constitution really means, even after the Federalist Papers and the many other letters and notes supplied by the founders, then you're saying it can mean anything...in other words nothing.

So you start a thread accusing the right of being authoritarian, but in the course of our discussion you seem to support the lockdown policies, the most authoritarian policies implemented on the civilian population in US history AND you don't believe the constitution can really mean anything, it's just whatever the right people says it means. So you don't really believe we have actual constitutional rights since those are whatever the establishment says they mean. So tell me again how the right is authoritarian? Because from where I'm sitting you are a helleva lot more authoritarian than me.

 

The status quo is the current state of affairs. It's not the days of yesteryear; it's the current state of affairs; and, currently, the status quo is much more left than right. It would not make sense for Trump to say, "Let's make America great again," if he was talking about the status quo. Furthermore, Trump is not the most conservative politician; he is not the gold standard of conservatism.

 

This was a brilliant post. Best one I've read in this forum in a very long time. Thank you.

 

Weak argument? Well let's us see...

...on one side you got the Webster's dictionary and the agreed upon position that so long as you ain't hurting anyone else you should be left alone as is your right.

On the other side you got - "you can't eat cupcakes in class unless you bring enough for everybody", fairness (which is short hand for greediness) and "Billy cut himself with scissors so nobody can touch scissors except Teacher"- Because feelings matter.

 

Nah, freedom is a state of nature. Liberty is a natural right.

For instance I am free to kill my neighbor in that I have the means to do so. But I am not at liberty to kill my neighbor because it would be a violation of my neighbor's right to life. Just because you can does not mean you should and just because an action is right does not mean your government will let you do the right thing. Liberty is the freedom to be completely free with the condition that you do not harm others.

 

It's not the conservatives in the US who seek to change the Constitution. What do you think the Constitution protects if not freedom and liberties?

 

Because they do the same thing.

 

If we are going to discuss the virtue of the "left" and the wrong of the "right" then I think you first need to define the two terms. Just so everyone is on the same page.

 

Yes, lets be honest.

Saying both sides destroy property and leaving it at that implies that it's at least close to equal. If you are willing to be honest, then you should be willing to admit that when it comes to rioting, looting, destroying property, etc....it's the left that does the vast majority of it and no, it's not close. Everybody knows this, the only question is who's willing to be honest and admit it.

For the most part, conservatives absolutely do not engage in cancel culture in the same way the left does. The right boycotts, they don't cancel. The right is not calling for bud light to be forced out of business, they are simply buying different beer. If the result is them going out of business, so be it. But they aren't being forced out of business. The left actually wants peoples lives destroyed. They don't ask for boycotts, they ask for lives to be destroyed over political views. Did they simply choose to not shop at a particular bakery, or did they want the bakery forced out of business? Again, if you're willing to be honest, you'll see the difference.

Book bans are another blown out of proportion issue. Not allowing a book in a school library is a far cry from banning the book. Again, you said lets be honest....so lets not try to exaggerate what's really going on.

Limiting freedom of speech on conservative social media platforms is another statement that's simply not true. Private companies can do what they want. That's not limiting freedom of speech. If whatever social media platforms you're referring to are engaging in the same behavior that twitter use to and facebook currently does, then I'd certainly disagree with it. However, did you really have a problem when a conservative got banned from twitter or facebook? Or are you now able to complain because you think conservative media platforms are doing it too?

If you want to be honest, then do it and don't pretend to do it.

 

Your first sentence sounds like a libertarian argument of which I respect over republican or democrat propaganda. Both the left and right make and support laws prohibiting many things. I see your point as injurious to the left and right.