[Wolfman]

I've been doing some reading lately, and I'm curious who fits in where of Pofo's Conservatives. That is American-centric, I'll admit, so, Brits and Canadians and everyone else feel free to throw in your countries Conservative groups. So, the five major American conservative groups (atleast at some point).

Eisenhower Republican: Supportive of moderate social programs and regulation, expansion of military size, but avoiding unnecessary conflict, and significantly supportive of government involvement in infrastructure.

Religious Right: Key points are anti-gay marriage, pro-life, anti-stem cell research, and anti-gays in the military. Seems to be strong support for Goldwaterism, which ironically hates/distrusts the Religious Right

Goldwaterite: Key points are drastic reduction of regulation size, reducing military size, reducing or dissolving all social programs and Social Security. Seemed indifferent to, or vaguely supportive of Civil Rights movements for racial, gender, and sexual orientation cases.

Reaganite: Basically, Goldwaterism plus major support for military expansion and foreign intervention (seemingly Goldwaterism and Eisenhowerism)

Neoconservative: Seemingly Reaganism plus the interests of the Religious Right.

So, just curious, who fits where, or who is closest to where, as the case may be.

[Daktoria]

To understand Eisenhower, you have to appreciate the Cold War. He didn't want to expand the military industrial complex. He only did it because the times demanded it, and actually complained about it in his farewell address. This actually included criticizing the interstate highway system and institutionalization of research.

Xbow's sympathized on this with me before as well:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=137784

I'd call myself religious right except I don't like religion. You don't need teleological appeals to sublime ceremony, mystery, and scripture to appreciate the autonomy of perspective, imagination, and judgment.

Goldwater's hard to sympathize with the longer you study him. His appreciation for freedom of assembly seems very marginal. No, you can't legislate morality, but you can prohibit immature people from taking adult action by demanding they have adult attitudes.

Reagan had the same problem. His Hollywoodization of the Republican base encouraged consumerism which discouraged social values.

[Jackal]

I am a Traditionalist Conservative. Sure, my strand of conservative can also be attributed to the "Paternalism & Corporatism" sub-forum but it is conservative none the less. Goldwater has been associated with Traditionalist Conservatism but I did not identify with that group since I see myself much more of an... Evola-ite (?)... in that I favor a much older and more traditional form conservatism than Barry Goldwater (which is more American traditional conservatism I suppose).

[Wolfman]

Is it fair to call you something of a Crypto-Libertarian with strong Paleoconservative elements, or possibly a Producerist, Jackal?

[Drlee]

I think that you would not want to characterize Goldwater'ism' with a reduction in the military. Goldwater, a General, was for a very strong defense and somewhat activist in advocating its use.

Perhaps you might want to add Buckley'ism' but then you have to differentiate "God and Man at Yale" Buckley from the far wiser "Old Conservative Icon" Buckley.

Goldwater was a social libertarian. His ideas are the anthetical to those espoused by modern libertarians.

Here we seem to be obsessed with labeling. Why do we need to do that. Labels make the labeled uncomfortable and are rarely very accurate. Besides. From where I stand there are few conservatives on this forum with the possible exception of FRS, Cartertonian and I. And I am the only one of those three who self identify as conservative and it drives the neocons and libertarians batshit crazy. But then they are batshit crazy already.

[Daktoria]

Sometimes, Drlee looks like just an old drunk who needs to project his own crazy on everyone else just to feel good about himself.

I always wonder why he never explains the reason for what he believes in. Well... not always. Sometimes, it's just not worth wondering about.

Anyway, if Wolfman's really interested in paleoconservatism, he should check this out as well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Right_(United_States)

[Jackal]

Is it fair to call you something of a Crypto-Libertarian with strong Paleoconservative elements, or possibly a Producerist, Jackal?

I do not agree with Paleolibertarianism (what you are referring to as Crypo-libertarianism) and I would say I am Producerist leaning as I think many fascists and quasi-fascists are in some way (and some more than others). I have identified myself with Paleoconservatism rather recently, as well. As far as an economic standpoint, I probably identify closely with conservative corporatism:

based upon the normative value of conservatism and the structural layout of corporatism, arose as a response to liberal pluralism and Marxist radicalism by rejecting the pluralism of liberalism, the dialectical materialism of Marxism and the mutually held secular attitudes of both liberalism and Marxism. Economic systems of conservative corporatism are identified as involving a status-related welfare state, pronounced but not extreme income differentials, moderately hierarchical status rankings, moderate social rights and some social exclusion.

But I am not in 100% adherence to this system, either, it is just the one I favor the most. I also have views in meritocracy, Platonism and aristocracy (whether achieved through a meritocratic or hereditary way).

[Wolfman]

I think that you would not want to characterize Goldwater'ism' with a reduction in the military. Goldwater, a General, was for a very strong defense and somewhat activist in advocating its use.

He also said he wouldn't use nuclear weapons in Vietnam, and he wanted to pull out early in the war, and I think there was also something about reducing the size of the military.

Perhaps you might want to add Buckley'ism' but then you have to differentiate "God and Man at Yale" Buckley from the far wiser "Old Conservative Icon" Buckley.

I'm not sure who Buckley is.

Here we seem to be obsessed with labeling. Why do we need to do that. Labels make the labeled uncomfortable and are rarely very accurate. Besides. From where I stand there are few conservatives on this forum with the possible exception of FRS, Cartertonian and I. And I am the only one of those three who self identify as conservative and it drives the neocons and libertarians batshit crazy. But then they are batshit crazy already.

I have a theory which is relevant to which group of conservativism Pofo's conservatives call themselves. Basically, no one is a Neoconservative. Everyone who votes GOP (whose program is Neocon) is a Goldwaterite, Eisenhower, Reaganite, or Religious Right, and they don't really like/trust Neoconservatives, but vote for them so that the DNC doesn't get elected.

I do not agree with Paleolibertarianism (what you are referring to as Crypo-libertarianism)

I was unclear. When I said Crypto-Libertarianism, I meant you are not explicitly Libertarian, but support many similar economic policies (reduced regulation and social programs). Although in general Jackal, you seem like one of the more interesting members.

[Drlee]

He also said he wouldn't use nuclear weapons in Vietnam, and he wanted to pull out early in the war, and I think there was also something about reducing the size of the military.

Wolfman. God bless you. Don't guess. Especially when you are talking with people who remember him, have met him and worked on his campaign.

I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle.
Barry Goldwater

So dear Wolfman. Guess what you are full of?

And. No shit GI. Untill you learn who William F. Buckley jr is you have no fucking business talking about conservativism. You simply do not know enough about what it is. Google WFB. Seriously.

[Wolfman]

Wolfman. God bless you. Don't guess. Especially when you are talking with people who remember him, have met him and worked on his campaign.

I'm new to being a conservative. I'm allowed to be stupid.

And. No shit GI. Untill you learn who William F. Buckley jr is you have no fucking business talking about conservativism. You simply do not know enough about what it is. Google WFB. Seriously.

I need sleep. I'll do that monday, OK?

[Drlee]

That would be great. You will enjoy learning about Buckley. He is considered by some to be the best spokesman for American Conservatism in the decades of the 1960's through the 1990's.

[Daktoria]

...other than Russell Kirk.

The guy was so conservative he wouldn't even drive cars, watch TV, or use computers.

[Jackal]

I was unclear. When I said Crypto-Libertarianism, I meant you are not explicitly Libertarian, but support many similar economic policies (reduced regulation and social programs).

I understand where you are coming from now. I still do not think my views are anywhere close to being similar to libertarianism although I do probably support reduced regulation than my corporatist ideological brethren. As for social programs, I am in support of them but certain restrictions and standards to be met as opposed to the catch-all programs instituted by ideologies such as social democracy.