Are conservatives against change even if it is positive change ?

Question

what does it mean to be a conservative is it a refuge for people that wish the social order of our country was as it was in the 1950's ? Or is this a huge misrepresentation of conservatives ?

Answer 1

I'm all for change if it is good change. But there is also a good saying. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Answer 2

If by conservatives do you mean neocons?

The extreme right is no more of a refuge than the extreme left. Most patriotic evangelicals act like they couldn't give a crap about their neighbor unless there was something in it for them. This is one reason Christianity is mocked relentlessly.

If we actually saw a group of people acting the way Jesus intended for them to act then we would find out that the only refuge is neither conservative nor liberal.

We must learn to look beyond the media to find the truth. It's almost like we have the choice between the red pill or the blue pill in the Matrix movie.

It's time to rage against the machine which owns/controls both the liberals and the conservatives.

Answer 3

It is a misrepresentation conservative are really the only party of change in this country there are institutions that are not working properly in this country and conservatives are the only ones trying to change the status quo I will give you some examples,Welfare reform, Taxes, Social Security, Public School, Immigration, whether you agree with attempted changes or not we are the only ones purposing them the Democrats wants to keep the status quo.

Answer 4

No, not at all. Conservatives support positive changes, but there just might be some strong disagreement on what is considered "positive" change.

Change, to be accepted by Conservatives, generally needs to maintain traditional values and constitutional liberties, and not inflict harm upon society or its necessary institutions. See the 10th point below.

Here are Russell Kirk's 10 principles of conservatism:
First, the conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order.
Second, the conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity.
Third, conservatives believe in what may be called the principle of prescription.
Fourth, conservatives are guided by their principle of prudence.
Fifth, conservatives pay attention to the principle of variety.
Sixth, conservatives are chastened by their principle of imperfectability.
Seventh, conservatives are persuaded that freedom and property are closely linked.
Eighth, conservatives uphold voluntary community, quite as they oppose involuntary collectivism.
Ninth, the conservative perceives the need for prudent restraints upon power and upon human passions.
Tenth, the thinking conservative understands that permanence and change must be recognized and reconciled in a vigorous society.

Answer 5

Conservatives are very slow to embrace change. Eventually, of course they come arount to the progressive laws and find they aren't so bad after all. They are timid, afraid of the unknown. They are afraid to try new things. Conservatives prefer to stay in their comfort zone. We need them around.

Imagine if all we had were progressives. Things would be changing at lightning speed and just as we get used to one thing something else comes about. The conservative is there to slow thing down. They let us take a rest, a break from the rapid advances of the progressives. They help us digest the changes and advances of the progressives. Sometimes they help us modify our laws and so on because the progressives move so fast one wonders if they miss something. Often they do. It is the conservatives who offer the role of devil's advocate so we can see the down side to the positive proposals. That makes for a compromise and thus a better law all around. I wouldn't call conservatives so much aginst change but cautious about it.

Answer 6

The terms are confusing... conservative in political usage really doesn't mean what the dictionary says it does... conservatives do not stand for keeping everything as it is... that much should be obvious... and liberals are not for changing everything... this too should be obvious...

A better way of defining the difference between liberal and conservative would be to say that conservatives are for less regulation over people's economic affairs, but for more regulation over people's personal affairs... liberals are the opposite... they are for more economic regulation, and less regulation over personal affairs...

But more than that, liberals are not just for letting people be with regards to personal affairs, but they are for attempting to "even the playing field" through reappropriation of monies, and prefrences for miniorities...

This isn't a perfect definition... as liberals generally are for more gun control, which would violate the "more personal freedom" mantra of the liberals, and conservatives are for less gun control, which is in opposition to the more control over personal affairs position of conservatives... but this is a pretty good way of discribing the difference between right and left...


At this point the obvious question must come up... what if your for more personal freedom, and more economic freedom? Where do you sit then?!... well, then you're a libertarian, and if you're for more government involvement in both personal and economic affairs, then you'd be a statist (communist, or fascist... or one of the myriad in-between 'isms)

Answer 7

Well, after the last time we had a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress, when Clinton was first elected.

And they cut federal education funding two years in a row.

The new Republican Congress in 1995, decided enough was enough, and started increasing education funding.


So, i'd say, that shows that republicans are for positive change.

They changed the democratic policy of cutting federal education funding, to a policy of increasing federal education policy.

Answer 8

Liberals and conservatives don't seem to agree on what "positive change" is. Positive change to me (as a conservative) would be less people being dependent on the government, and more people responsible for the betterment of their own lives. From what I see, liberals think that positive change requires more government funding and social programs to "help out the little guy." In my view, that is not "helping the little guy." That is keeping the little guy down and just making him more comfortable being there.

Answer 9

i am not opposed to changes for the better but change for changes sake doesn't seem to be working. i think all our leaders have failed us and i don't understand those that excuse one while castigate the others. to me, it is not logical.

we need to revamp our electoral process so that it represents the majority not just a vocal minority.

we need to set term limits on congress as well as the president so that they don't have time to become 'professional politicians' and corrupted by DC politics.

once again in this coming election. i will have to vote for the one i feel will do the least harm rather than the most good.

how can any independent thinker accept the rhetoric and scandals of leaders on EITHER side? WE should expect and we deserve to expect honest, ethical representation.

Answer 10

Of course, what is "positive" is in the eye of the beholder. If the Right is against change, per se, and the Left is always for it, why does the Right ever introduce Bills, and why does the Left ever oppose them?

Answer 11

Id love to see a 1950 Democrat again [ not a liberal] lets say like Harry Truman.