AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Gorbachev is still a 'hero' here, a star especially with the conservatives and the tabloids.

Generally, he's seen mainly in his role as "the last warrior of the cold war" and as a neo-conservative.

Gorbachev is still a 'hero' here, a star especially with the conservatives and the tabloids.

Generally, he's seen mainly in his role as "the last warrior of the cold war" and as a neo-conservative.

And to re-iterate, Hitler was undoubtedly a leftist, using any objective measure of left-right in America.

No wonder you don't understand American conservatism. Gorbachev is obviously a leftist by any logical standard here.

So you call Nazis and Fascists leftists.

Who do you or the Americans (in your, okie's opinion) than call 'right''?

Classical liberalism (or Modern American Conservatism MAC)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Classical liberalism (also known as traditional liberalism[1], laissez-faire liberalism[2], and market liberalism[3] or, outside the United States and Britain, sometimes simply liberalism is a doctrine stressing individual freedom, free markets, and limited government. This includes the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, individual freedom from restraint, equality under the law, constitutional limitation of government, free markets, and a gold standard to place fiscal constraints on government as exemplified in the writings of John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, David Ricardo, Voltaire, Montesquieu and others.

As such, it is the fusion of economic liberalism with political liberalism of the late 18th and 19th centuries. The "normative core" of classical liberalism is the idea that laissez-faire economics will bring about a spontaneous order or invisible hand that benefits the society, though it does not necessarily oppose the state's provision of some basic public goods with what constitutes public goods being seen as very limited. The qualification classical was applied retroactively to distinguish it from more recent, 20th-century conceptions of liberalism and its related movements, such as social liberalism Classical liberals are suspicious of all but the most minimal government and object to the welfare state.

Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and Milton Friedman, are credited with influencing a revival of classical liberalism in the twentieth century after it fell out of favor beginning in the late nineteenth century and much of the twentieth century. In relation to economic issues, this revival is sometimes referred to, mainly by its opponents, as "neoliberalism". The German "ordoliberalism" has a whole different meaning, since the likes of Alexander Rüüüüstow and Wilhelm Rööööpke have advocated a more interventionist state, as opposed to laissez-faire liberals. Classical liberalism has many aspects in common with modern libertarianism, with the terms being used almost interchangeably by those who support limited government.

Nazi-ism and Facism are considered 'left' by MACs because they do not believe in individual liberty, natural rights, capitalism, private ownership of means of production, etc. etc. etc.. ...

okie wrote:

And to re-iterate, Hitler was undoubtedly a leftist, using any objective measure of left-right in America.

So you call Nazis and Fascists leftists.

Who do you or the Americans (in your, okie's opinion) than call 'right''?

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Nazi-ism and Facism are considered 'left' by MACs because they do not believe in individual liberty, natural rights, capitalism, private ownership of means of production, etc. etc. etc.. ...

okie was speaking "any objective measure of left-right in America".

So your definition (or what you mean MACs think) is the ultimo ratio of political sciences in the USA?

I think most American historians rightly refer to Nazi-ism as a 'rightwing' ideology in Europe. It is only when you apply the principles of modern American liberalism versus modern American conservatism that it becomes confusing.

I think part of the reason for that, Foxfyre, is an intentional distortion, because alot of the academics and historians at universities here are lefties, thus they do not wish to paint Hitler into their camp. You see the same line of reasoning right here on A2K, but they ignore the real facts about what Hitler espoused, how he rose to power, and what he wanted to do.

The facts are pretty stubborn things. Thankfully, history books and history are not the exclusive property of so-called historians and high brow professors.

And the leftist always want to sacrifice individual rights for the greater good, as they see it, which always ends up worse, with them in charge, and often leads to usually persecuting, imprisoning, taking from, or killing anyone that disagrees with them.

Extreme right wing, I would perhaps include the radical libertarian, that doesn't want hardly any government whatsoever. Perhaps there are a few holed up out there in the mountains somewhere, hoarding their guns and stashing their cash or gold in the mattress. There are not that many of them.

Virtually all people on the right simply want the government to leave them alone, keep the criminals off the street, and allow them to succeed or fail. They also expect the government to maintain an orderly society, enforce the law, but believe strongly in the freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom of the press, in short - they believe in the constitution and the bill of rights.

okie wrote:

I think part of the reason for that, Foxfyre, is an intentional distortion, because alot of the academics and historians at universities here are lefties, thus they do not wish to paint Hitler into their camp. You see the same line of reasoning right here on A2K, but they ignore the real facts about what Hitler espoused, how he rose to power, and what he wanted to do.

The facts are pretty stubborn things. Thankfully, history books and history are not the exclusive property of so-called historians and high brow professors.

Well, you might be right, okie.

I've read the diaries of both grandfather, one (mother's father) a right libertarian while the other grandfather was a 'centrist' (not only by his party's name).

Certainly they were blinded and had diffuse views which thankfully are corrected by your insights and knowledge about what was going on here.

And as so-called historian I will thankfully follow your research results.


Have a nice time.

Okie is right that everything 'right' of center here is not something truly reasonable people would aspire to. People who bomb abortion clinics, for instance, or who would picket a funeral for some ideological cause are as much anathema to MACs as are far leftwing wackos who would presume to force their ideology on the rest of us. Anarchy is also not the MACean way no matter how much the liberals want to misstate our position as anti-government.