Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
Ferd ... my position is this ...
extreme conservatism can result in fascism
extreme liberalism can result in socialism or communism
both use totalitarianism or Dave's Messiah theory to subjugate people.
The analogy would be that UCs and ULs usually end up in the same place ... cultic and proporting to be the possessors of ALL TRUTH.
Are all religious conservatives legalists ... probably not.
|
I
apologize for this long post….But bare with me. You might find it.. Enlightening (if you don’t mind my pun.)
Chris, take note, there is a place for a long post. see below.
And my contention is that you are mistaken.
AND it is a very common mistake. AND it is one that I myself once believed.
Then I started looking into things a bit more deeply. (Very interesting I might add.
Fascism and Marxism (father of both communism and socialism) found their roots in the perceived failures of laissez fair liberalism.
Where Marx wanted to overthrow corporations and manipulate economies by strict government control, doing what was best for the collective at the expense of the individual, Fascism wanted to co-opt the corporations marrying the will of the state to the power of the business structure, and again, the will of the individual was subjected to the benefit of the state.
Both of these ideals were reactions to
Liberalism
Liberalism which flows from the Enlightenment sought to place the individual at the center. Classical Liberalism seeks to extend individual rights and limit the power of government.
To understand the flow here you have to understand Europe in the min 1800's. Conservatives held to a strong belief in the Monarchies that existed, they saw the emerging industrial revolution as a method of making the state strong and robust.
Liberals sought to limit the state and saw the industrial revolution as a method of expanding the rights of the individual at the expense of the state.
Both of these views ran into serious trouble. Workers were exploited to a staggering degree, Governments became weak and inept in dealing with the power of the new Industrialist class.
Where Marx and the Communists focused on the workers who were being exploited, the Conservatives focused on harnessing the power of industry for the nationalist goals.
NEITHER sought to expand the true LIBERAL ideals of freeing the individual.
And so here we are a hundred and fifty years later and it’s all jumbled.
Modern American Conservatives are TRUE CLASSICAL LIBERALS in the vein of
Montesquieu, Adam Smith, and Thomas Paine.
This doesn’t relate to either Fascism OR Marxism.
Both Fascism and Marxism are reactions (and bad ones at that) to failures of older economic models like Mercantilism.
Bottom line here, Progressives in American Politics (like FDR and his New Deal warriors) were very odd blends of both Marxism and Fascism.
Reformed Dave is absolutely historically accurate, when he points out that many of FDRs leaders in the New Deal were very much keenly aware of the goings on in Italy under Mussolini. (Sp)
They viewed Fascism’s collectivist model as very beneficial to the American situation. They viewed the power of co-opting the corporations as vital to getting out of the depression they were combating at the time.
That isn’t rhetoric, it is historic fact. They wrote about it, they talked about it, they created some aspects of it in the New Deal.
But they also saw many ideas from Marx that they liked as well. Those things became incorporated as well. What you end up with is a blend of Classical Liberalism, Marxism, and Fascism and we call it Progressivism (Which is what Hillary calls herself)
Modern American Conservatism is "conservative" because it seeks to hold a line against Progressivism. NOT because it is connected to European Monarchies. Modern American Conservatism, IS simply Classical Liberalism.
Long live Voltaire!
Linear Mode
