>


Conservatism isn’t solely about “the way things used to be”

It's literally the definition of conservativism.  So, it's about that.
Can a conservative support individual progressive ideas?  Sure.
That support doesn't make those progressive ideas conservative ideas, nor does it make the conservative a progressive.

if you dig deeper into conservative philosophy you will see that their idea of freedom isn’t really about being able to do or be anything you want; instead they have this abstract idea of freedom as simply being the state of harmony with natural hierarchy.

And, in their place in that "natural hierarchy", they get to do whatever they want.  So, it's not an actual difference.

My point is simply that there’s little purpose in trying to distill their philosophy into a bite-sized chunk that we can easily dismiss.

You are correct.  As I've described conservativism by it's definition, and that definition is in line with their actions, this description cannot be honestly dismissed.

The uncomfortable reality that we need to accept and work with is that in fact there are many many people in our society who deeply embrace a conservative worldview, and like it or not we will only be able to build a better society by learning to engage with them and find ways to compromise.

Which is something I'm willing to do.
I'm not going to support their demonstrable bigotry, cowardice, or incompetence, though.  And, as that's where they demand the "compromise" come from, they refuse compromise.
The GOP isn't conservative.
They spend money like fucking crazy.
They want to use the government to control peoples personal lives.
They advocate using up nonrenewable resources and shit-talk renewables needlessly.
They aren't even holding to traditional values. Look at Donald Trump and ask yourself how in the fuck he embodies family values, excluding the values of a crime family.  
It's all just a story they tell themselves and their constituents. It's completely divorced from reality. >


Look at Donald Trump and ask yourself how in the fuck he embodies family values

One time I asked my conservative parents which of the 7 deadly sins Donald Trump least exemplifies.  It's genuinely a head scratcher for most people because he shows all of them.
They said "sloth."  I bout lost it. >


They said "sloth."

Two words: "Executive Time" >

The dude rode a golf cart while other leaders walked a few hundred feet. >

My favorite part about this little tidbit is it's almost true yet 1000% misunderstood.  Humans, and most animals have an emotional battery which over expending it does diminish your lifespan. I'm sure that's where he heard this. But it's Donald. He heard the first few words and spaced out. And also doesn't know batteries can be recharged. All good lies start with a grain of truth and I didn't know if he was lied to or just fucking spaced out and missed the rest of the concept. >


Humans, and most animals have an emotional battery

how can you hear something as stupid as what trump said, then go and top it yourself? >

Oh great wise one. Sayer of truths. What is wrong with what I said. Without going into terminology or phonetics, what do you the king from his wheeled throne have. >

In a human body, where is the emotional battery located? >

Oh my bad. Most of us have this thing called a brain, apparently not all of us, that require energy to handle social situations without being a tool. It's generally located inside the head of humans and a shit ton of animals called a brain. When that part of the brain gets exhausted or over taxed it uses the rest of the body to act irrationally and violently. I can understand why you don't understand this concept. >

The GOP has been dysfunctional my entire life and now they've crossed the tipping point where their chaos making is smashing full speed into hard realities. Have they finally hit bottom? Probably not. >

Sarah Palin used to be rock bottom.
I no longer believe there is such a thing as rock bottom for that garbage bin. >

GWB used to be rock bottom >

Nah, he was standard post-Reagan GOP bullshit. He even managed to pass as semi-moderate with his appeals to "compassionate conservatism." Fucking silly, but at the time, a lot of us outside the US were thinking, "well, the USA has really shit the bed here, but at least he isn't Pat Buchanan or Newt." >

We only can say this in hindsight. I lived through GWB and remembered the general consensus among the people I knew. We thought that GWB was the worst it could get, and we were very wrong >

Nixon has entered the chat via Ouija board >

Compared to the fascists and psycho clowns in the GOP today, Nixon was downright progressive on some of his domestic policies. >

the EPA and the Endangered Species Act were started during his administration. go figure! >

Conservatives in general used to go hard on environmental protection, because they have a lot of hunters and outdoorsmen among their ranks and they saw the obvious destruction of the wilderness habitats they liked to enjoy.
But over the past 50 years, "corporations should be able to do whatever they want" rose up as party dogma and completely squashed their love for the outdoors. >

Ah yes the fiscal conservatives who nuked the deficit with tax cuts for the rich. >

Right? They always say they want to balance the budget. They may cut spending BUT THEY ALWAYS ALSO cut taxes for the rich. That is the opposite of balancing the budget. >

They also boost spending. See the spending under gwb and Trump. It goes up every year. >

The only thing they give a shit about conserving is their own power. That is why they are more than happy to team up with a gay con artist and protect him from any consequences. Because by doing so they gain a tiny bit more power in the form of that 1 vote. >

A conservative is a person who favors traditional values. They do not "conserve" anything. >

That's a farce as well. Nothing about how the GOP is behaving today reflects values of any sort. >

Sure it does. I think you are missing the point that values (from your individual perspective) can be either good or bad. So a concept like racism or sexism, is something that is traditionally valued.
Also, traditional values go back pretty far. Many conservatives will point directly to one of the 2,300+ year old lines of text in the Bible and say that they value that more than current US laws. >

You are being pedantic. Obviously "values" can be good or bad. 🙄 >


You are being pedantic.

I am not attempting to be. There is a critical difference between conservatives and conservationists. In modern English, someone suggesting that republicans want to "conserve" something is most likely just a person misunderstanding what the word conservative means. Suggesting that they are a political party that wants to preserve their authority and maintain traditional values is far more accurate. >

There is very little difference in common English between "preserve", "conserve" and "maintain". They all indicate a party that perceives the world works in a certain way and they don't want that way to be damaged, changed or replaced with something else.

There is a critical difference between conservatives and conservationists.

Yes, conservationists work to conserve the environment, forests and wildlife, while conservatives work to conserve what they perceive to be traditional values and processes that have always worked throughout the past. >

The only thing they want to "conserve" is the gravy train of oligarch money (domestic and foreign). >

The GOP hasn't been conservative for a long time. They moved to "authoritarian" and are approaching fascist. If anything, they are regressive, wanting to go back to some make-believe golden age - you know, when white men ruled everything and women and people of color knew their place and everyone was happy with it. >


If anything, they are regressive, wanting to go back to some make-believe golden age - you know, when white men ruled everything and women and people of color knew their place and everyone was happy with it.

As far as I can tell, this is *exactly* what conservativism is and it can't really be anything else.
Conservative ideology is (as I understand it) explicitly about conserving the way things were, instead of embracing progress/change.
It will always look to demonstrably worse times and demand those times were better because the entire ideology is predicated on the idea that those times must be "conserved". >

Not really.  The conservatives of today are the progressives of yesterday who never grew. Conservatives of today will earnestly tell you the Bible doesn't condone slavery or racism, even though the conservatives of the past did exactly that .. within living memory. 
It's not about how things were. It's about how they want things to be and they pretend they used to be like that. Ask one sometime when America was Great and bathe in the blank stare you'll get. Any time they mention, you can mention a horrific thing about that time period and they get all defensive or confused. My father in law yearns for the 50's .. despite the fact that he had to stay after school and write "I'm a dirty Jew" on the black board 100 times and black people were openly lynched with no consequences. It's insane. >


Not really.  The conservatives of today are the progressives of yesterday who never grew.

I see no actual evidence of this.  The same stupid conservative ideas and regression have been pushed by multiple generations of conservatives, all using the same lies.
People convincing themselves that the past was different that what it was doesn't change the fact that conservative ideology is backwards and regressive, as it's wholly about "conserving the way things were" (even if that history is imagined), instead of embracing progress/change.

Conservatives of today will earnestly tell you the Bible doesn't condone slavery or racism, even though the conservatives of the past did exactly that .. within living memory.

That doesn't actually change anything I've said.
Conservative ideology actively wants to "conserve the past".  Even if that past is a bad memory.
Conservative ideology is regressive and anti-progress.

It's not about how things were. It's about how they want things to be and they pretend they used to be like that. Ask one sometime when America was Great and bathe in the blank stare you'll get. Any time they mention, you can mention a horrific thing about that time period and they get all defensive or confused. My father in law yearns for the 50's .. despite the fact that he had to stay after school and write "I'm a dirty Jew" on the black board 100 times and black people were openly lynched with no consequences. It's insane.

Right.  It's all about wanting things to go backwards.  It's about trying to "conserve" the past.
So, my initial comment stands:
As far as I can tell, this is *exactly* what conservativism is and it can't really be anything else. >

I think the real issue with this whole thread-wide exercise in debating what conservatives “really believe” is kind of a distraction. 
Political movements often have multiple facets and just like Stephen Hawking failed to come up with one unifying theory to explain all of reality, few political philosophies ever boil down easily to one succinct phrase. 
Conservatism isn’t solely about “the way things used to be” or “less government” or “authoritarianism” or racism or sexism or any of those things. It is several things at once, and in many cases the people who subscribe to the framework will cite reasons that are very different from the way that you see it. That doesn’t mean that they are lying, either; just that they see other aspects than what you see. 
There are definitely some unifying overarching themes, yes. In general, conservatism tends to be focused on an idea of their being a “natural order” of things which is fundamentally hierarchical. They preach about “freedom” as an ideal and of course authoritarianism and freedom seem naturally at odds, but if you dig deeper into conservative philosophy you will see that their idea of freedom isn’t really about being able to do or be anything you want; instead they have this abstract idea of freedom as simply being the state of harmony with natural hierarchy. So from their mentality there actually isn’t any inconsistency at all between having a police state with a prison industrial complex and legalized slavery, as we do, and their philosophical ideal of individual freedom. 
My point is simply that there’s little purpose in trying to distill their philosophy into a bite-sized chunk that we can easily dismiss. The uncomfortable reality that we need to accept and work with is that in fact there are many many people in our society who deeply embrace a conservative worldview, and like it or not we will only be able to build a better society by learning to engage with them and find ways to compromise. 
Of course that seems like an absurdly lofty ideal with the current political climate. But it is possible.