Can conservatism or Republicanism exist without enemies?

Question

It seems that the conservative Republican philosophy is dependent on a "them" for "us" to hate. In order to present a platform, there has to be a target: Gays, Immigrants, Muslims, welfare recipients, the working class, government, even those who dare raise a voice contrary to the party line. Is it truly necessary to present an enemy before one's constituents before introducing a policy?

Chuckles: Refusing to convert America into a Christian theocracy isn't anti-Christian. Raising dissent isn't anti-American. Disagreeing with failed presidential policy isn't anti-Bush.

Goldwater and nonalc-
Good point. I should have said neo-conservatism.

Sjean- You need to back up those accusations with facts or at least the theories that you have.

Lady Sable- 9/11 was carried out by criminals. We should bring them to justice, not kill everyone who looks like them.

sarge: the dem congress started today. They haven't fixed everything yet, true, but it's only been a few hours. Difficult takes a day, impossible takes a week is a saying you might be familiar with.

Answer 1

Fiscal conservatism is the economic and political policy that advocates restraint of governmental taxation and expenditures. Fiscal conservatives since the 18th century have argued that debt is a device to corrupt politics; they argue that big spending ruins the morals of the people, and that a national debt creates a dangerous class of speculators. The argument in favor of balanced budgets is often coupled with a belief that government welfare programs should be narrowly tailored and that tax rates should be low, which implies relatively small government institutions.

Answer 2

One might also argue that Liberals have an enemy based philosophy. In their case, the enemies are the rich, and their philosophy is based on class warfare and redistribution of wealth from rich to poor.

The truth is most people, Democrats and Republicans alike, have honest belief systems. Only the hard-core demagogues on both sides resort to attacking enemies to support their own position.

These are the traditional Republican attitudes on the topics you raised:

1. Gays. Republicans (and most Democrats) oppose Gay marriage but otherwise support equal rights for all regardless of sexual orientation. Bush has spent more government money on AIDS research by far than any other president.

2. Immigrants. This issue really crosses party lines. The "conservative" position would be to support immigration when it is legal. The "liberal" position would be to treat illegal immigrants in the same manner as the legal ones.

3. Muslims. There really is no difference between the parties in their attitude toward Muslims. Bush has never made anti-Muslim statements and has, in fact, encouraged openness and acceptance of Muslims in our country. To my knowledge, Democrats feel the same way. However, it is true that in the current war on terror (started by Al Qaeda), the terrorists are all Muslims who use religion as the basis of their war.

4. Working class. Again, there is very little difference between the two parties on this topic. Working class Americans got the biggest tax cuts in history under Bush and Reagan, though Clinton and JFK also enacted moderate tax cuts. The difference is that Republicans want to extend tax cuts to upper income brackets, and Democrats do not. Nonetheless, the top 5% of income earners pay over 90% of the taxes, and this burden is increasing. Another difference is in Capital Gains taxes. Republicans support reduced Capital Gains tax rates, which results in much more money in retirement funds and home savings, as well as increased investment in business. Democrats view Capital Gains as a tax break for the rich. The reality is that you cannot divide the economy by classes, because everything is intermixed. If you overtax businesses, you will hurt the job market, and the working class will be out of jobs. If you hurt the working class, the economy will grind to a halt, and the rich will become poor. The only real solution is to keep the economy growing and ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to participate and get a good education.

5. Welfare recipients. Both Clinton and Bush supported welfare reform. Clinton went against his party to enact reform that restricted how long people can be on welfare.

6. Government. Here, there is a real difference. Republicans tend to view the government as a something that must be limited, while Democrats view it as an institution that should be expanded.

Intolerance exists in both political parties, but most people have political beliefs based on their own self-interest and understanding of society. Name-calling or reducing one party to a group of hatemongers is itself an intolerant -- and false -- position.

Answer 3

And liberals don't do the same thing? PLEASE!!! What's worse, the liberals are such hypocrites about the whole thing. They claim to be the people who are more enlightened, more open-minded, more accepting, more understanding (you know; "I'm OK, you're OK") but any time liberal ideology is questioned or criticized the liberals respond with a maturity level that makes Pee Wee Herman look like Ward Cleever. Instead of defending their beliefs and positions with logical, cogent, well-thought-out arguments, they resort to belittling and name-calling. How are liberals supposed to be taken seriously when almost all we hear from them is criticism and they can't develop a plan to fix all these so-called "problems" that can stand up to the slightest amount of scrutiny?

How does the old saying go? If you're a teenager and you're not a liberal then you have no heart, but if you're an adult and you're not a conservative then you have no brain...

Answer 4

Please stop equating conservatism and Republicanism. The current Republican party has strayed so far from the ideals of conservatism that it is an embarrassment that it uses that name. The GOP is no longer conservative, but neo-conservative.

Conservatism is respectable and does not depend on a scapegoat. Neo-conservatism is idiotic and has no logical basis so it must find someone to target to preserve power.

Answer 5

12 Years old ? 147 qualified IQ -Rolling on the floor guffawing my Fuucking Azz off!!!!!! ? image dressmaker wannabe ? Secular Humanist- Anti-Christian Bigot ? Liberal Queerocrat ? Anti-American Communist you have this style of low IQ you will desire to lie approximately it. actuality #a million. those with intense IQ's will in no way ever inform you what it incredibly is. actuality#2. I even have examine your posts long sufficient to understand your a flaming Liberal and now you're bitterly ashamed which you voted for Obummer so now you will desire to lie. actuality#3.you're a flaming gay.

Answer 6

Conservatism and liberalism are both antiquated reactionary philosophies that have been around for centuries. We as a species either need to move past ignorant pissing contests, or we're doomed to kill ourselves off.

Answer 7

The enemy is real - or have you not been paying attention? Do you think that the death and destruction of 9/11 was carried out by our friends?

Republicans did not attack the terrorists nor do we appease them!

Answer 8

The way I understand your question, it seems you are suggesting that Conservatism is a reaction to liberalism.

Sorry, it's the other way around.

Answer 9

In my experience liberals are the ones with the big list of enemies and abundant conspiracy theories. One difference is the enemies of the liberals are almost all American and Christian.

Answer 10

you are in luck,
there were two men that could answer that question,
one died just a few days ago and the other one is still with us,
just write to president Jimmy Carter and ask him about Gerald R. Ford.
but i am sure he will say,
yes to all above. they were the best of friends as all of us should be.