Does Republicanism = Conservatism?

TheMrs · 08-01-2006, 02:33 PM

I'm a Republican (officially) and while I have been such since 1988, I have noticed something over the past ten years or so. It doesn't seem to me that Republicanism equals conservatism any longer. Now just hear me out.

I realize there are extremes to both 'sides' of the (simplified) political spectrum but what I've witnessed for the past few years goes totally *against* what the GOP and Republicanism was originally intended to represent.

Never before had I heard Republicans using religion as a strong hold in pushing their political agenda. Nothing like what I've heard recently.. not even close. What am I talking about you ask? How about the issue of Homosexual marriage? Last time I checked.. conservatives would have wanted LESS government involvement in personal and private lives... NOT more. But here we sit... having some talking heads of the GOP telling the rest of us that "good Republicans are against gay marriage because it's a sin".

Alright... I don't begrudge anyone for their beliefs in God, religion, faith, higher powers, etc.... but why is it that homosexuals marrying is seen as such a sin and yet in the same breath we hear the ones chanting that saying how we should "carpet bomb" Iraq (or insert country name here who has just made the enemy dirtbag of the week). And I'm not only referring to political pundits such as Coulter or Hannity... both of which I think are major propagandists, much like Moore is... I'm talking every day people.

Let me be clear. Not *ALL* Republicans who say they are Christians are saying this or necessarily hold these beliefs.... because after all, I am one of them (Republicans) and I certainly could care LESS if two homosexuals want to get married and I am not a supporter of this ongoing "War on Terror" because quite frankly.. this is a war that is neverending and unwinnable.

The public debt. Yes, I realize there is a "war" going on and Yes, I understand that there will ultimately be more spending in a period of time where that is the case. However, never before have I seen such posturing and excuse making from a party about why the spending is so out of control. Whatever happened to responsibility? Didn't the Republican party used to believe in and tout the "personal responsibility" mantra? I know I sure as hell believe in it..... so why the finger pointing at Dems?

Funny that we have a Republican administration, a Republican majority in the house and senate, and YET.... some of them are STILL pointing their fingers at the Dem camp.

The Real ID and the Patriot Act. Oh sure... we all know that since 9/11 we need the government to keep us safe. We are a nation of scared little rabbits anyway, right?

But yes, back in the day... real conservatives *again* didn't WANT government to become so powerful and so personally intrusive. What happened? Of course, I know I'll get the answer of "9/11" happened... and I'm fully aware of that, having had lost a family member in tower II that day.... but let's face facts here. While we should be protecting our country from outside attacks... implementing such things as the P.A. and a national/real ID is *not* the way to go. Too late for both, I know.. as they are both here to stay. Republicans years ago, would have never gone for this... ever.

How about we work on buckling down on expired VISAS? How about we tighten the reigns on illegal immigration? Those two things for starters, should have been done, IMHO, rather than start stripping citizens of this country down to sheep status and keeping tabs on all of our personal lives.

So, my question would have to be... if you are a Republican, do you feel the same way I do... or are you of the opposite opinion that these changes to this party have been a good thing?

I think it's far from good. It's the wrong direction and like many other long term members of the GOP... I'm jumping ship.

I have a feeling this man is rolling in his grave:

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

~Ronald Reagan

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.

~Ronald Reagan

I don't believe in a government that protects us from ourselves.

~Ronald Reagan

ballz2wallz · 08-01-2006, 02:36 PM

there are 3 parties today...democrats, republicans, and conservatives.

JaJae · 08-01-2006, 02:39 PM

I agree whole heartedly. It's why the libertarians are trying to take over and they're gaining so much clout. Republicans had a good thing going, but the party has moved so far off base it's getting a bit ridiculous. It was only a matter of time. The Democrats constantly pander to their groups (seniors, illegals, minorities, etc).. the Republicans had to start pandering as well to stay competitive.

As horrible as it sounds, if the Republicans weren't so messed up politically, they wouldn't have nearly as much power as they do now. The gay marriage issue for example is what arguably won them the Senate.

7960 · 08-01-2006, 02:39 PM

people are conservative

parties stand for their platform and right now neither platform is conservative

Concept · 08-01-2006, 02:57 PM

If one were to analyze this on a two-dimensional political spectrum, one would say that the many Republicans in America are just-off-center-right centrists. Because so many Republicans aren't as conservative as the 'normal' Republican conservative is, a kind of new voice is created for the party.

Though Republicans are becoming more larger-government orientated socially, they are still very conservative in their economics; this is what truly asserts the Republican 'identity'

As the Republicans cry out for security under the Patriotic Act and anti-terror legislation, they are ironically switching places with the Democrats, who are crying out for more freedom from government.

ballz2wallz · 08-01-2006, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by Concept

As the Republicans cry out for security under the Patriotic Act and anti-terror legislation, they are ironically switching places with the Democrats, who are crying out for more freedom from government.

this is true...i've been wondering, at what point will i become a democrat?

TheMrs · 08-01-2006, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

I agree whole heartedly. It's why the libertarians are trying to take over and they're gaining so much clout. Republicans had a good thing going, but the party has moved so far off base it's getting a bit ridiculous. It was only a matter of time. The Democrats constantly pander to their groups (seniors, illegals, minorities, etc).. the Republicans had to start pandering as well to stay competitive.

As horrible as it sounds, if the Republicans weren't so messed up politically, they wouldn't have nearly as much power as they do now. The gay marriage issue for example is what arguably won them the Senate.

I've always had Libertarian leanings, although I strongly disagree with them on a few key issues that for me, I just couldn't overlook. Also, their platform while it looks good on paper - isn't very specific and is somewhat utopian.

As someone stated after your reply.... the Republicans and Democrats seemed to have 'switched' places in some regards. Funny... but when I mention this to others I sometimes get a raised eyebrow and a dismissive "Those two are no where NEAR alike".

Ah.. isn't that why they'd like us to believe.

Concept · 08-01-2006, 03:13 PM

Heh. It's true.

JaJae · 08-01-2006, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by TheMrs

I've always had Libertarian leanings, although I strongly disagree with them on a few key issues that for me, I just couldn't overlook. Also, their platform while it looks good on paper - isn't very specific and is somewhat utopian.

As someone stated after your reply.... the Republicans and Democrats seemed to have 'switched' places in some regards. Funny... but when I mention this to others I sometimes get a raised eyebrow and a dismissive "Those two are no where NEAR alike".

Ah.. isn't that why they'd like us to believe.

I too like the libertarian party, but my belief is that it sounds good on paper and even then there's a bunch of key issues that would prevent me from voting for them.

I really like Ross Perot and the Reform party he started. But nobody cares about them. Even though Ross Perot is a wackjob, he does have some good ideas I think.

Ardentfrost · 08-01-2006, 03:18 PM

Republicans have moved DOWN on the 2-D political spectrum, not back towards the center. The instituting of legislation to control morality is a statist thing, not a conservative thing.

But really, political affiliation should be measured in a 3-D space, not a 2-D. If you look at the group of people who want a lot of social and economic freedom, understood widely to be libertarians, you still have a LOT of different types of them. Pro-war, isolationist, anarcho-capitalist, consequentialist, etc... and they're all not necessarily mutually exclusive.

What I'm getting at is the labels mean very little. Conservatism has a floating meaning. Republicans cling to the word because they've used it to describe themselves for a long time, and if they abandoned it because they are moving away from it, people would likewise abandon their party.

But the meaning of words change... hell, you want to investigate something that will make your head spin at first, look up classical liberalism and see how it and classic conservatism and modern libertarianism are all basically the same thing. So don't let words and labels affect what you believe is right or let that change your ideals. And certainly don't be afraid to change what you consider yourself as your party moves away from your ideals. It's all just words.

Concept · 08-01-2006, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Republicans have moved DOWN on the 2-D political spectrum, not back towards the center. The instituting of legislation to control morality is a statist thing, not a conservative thing.

But really, political affiliation should be measured in a 3-D space, not a 2-D. If you look at the group of people who want a lot of social and economic freedom, understood widely to be libertarians, you still have a LOT of different types of them. Pro-war, isolationist, anarcho-capitalist, consequentialist, etc... and they're all not necessarily mutually exclusive.

What I'm getting at is the labels mean very little. Conservatism has a floating meaning. Republicans cling to the word because they've used it to describe themselves for a long time, and if they abandoned it because they are moving away from it, people would likewise abandon their party.

But the meaning of words change... hell, you want to investigate something that will make your head spin at first, look up classical liberalism and see how it and classic conservatism and modern libertarianism are all basically the same thing. So don't let words and labels affect what you believe is right or let that change your ideals. And certainly don't be afraid to change what you consider yourself as your party moves away from your ideals. It's all just words.

Very f'ing well said.

Here, have a Cookie of the Champions.

*gives you really tastey cookie*

Ardentfrost · 08-01-2006, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by Concept

Very f'ing well said.

Here, have a Cookie of the Champions.

*gives you really tastey cookie*

mmm.. cookie

TheMrs · 08-01-2006, 03:27 PM

I'm well aware of what classic liberalism is, thanks for the politics lesson.

And I know myself well enough to know that I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal. In the modern sense and very basic definition of conservative and liberal there.

The Republican party is STILL using the word 'conservatism' they have not abandoned using it, and they are losing people as we speak. I mean, come on. I'm 37 years old and for the first time since I've been old enough to vote, I will be leaving the GOP. Why? Because I realize they are not what they are portraying themselves to be. I actually feel as though I've been screwed by my own party.

I believe this is why I will be registering Indy.

Ardentfrost · 08-01-2006, 03:35 PM

Well, them moving away from conservatism but still using the word is why the word "neo-conservative" came about.

But I didn't mean to seem like I was lecturing

I just meant that parties and the meanings of words change. The democratic party is changing too. There is no real answer if you have strong political ideals and no party exactly fits that, you just gotta look at your choices and pick someone who believes the same as you on your "hot topics."

My dad votes republican because his hot topics are "gays shouldn't be allowed to marry" and "people shouldn't get abortions." Those two things don't even matter to me

SoFlaJDM · 08-01-2006, 04:01 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

this is true...i've been wondering, at what point will i become a democrat?

when will i be a republican

i got you quoted

ballz2wallz · 08-01-2006, 04:07 PM

republican is the new democrat

lew · 08-02-2006, 10:19 AM

Republicans and Democrats are both heading towards the edge of a cliff.

The only difference between them is the slightly different route they're taking.

True conservatism no more equals Republicanism than true liberalism equals Democratism.

DosEquis · 08-02-2006, 10:34 AM

I think the conservative republican party started to become... not so conservative in 1980. Republicans are conservative socially, ie abortion, sex on tv, etc. They are not conservative any place else.

Concept · 08-02-2006, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

I think the conservative republican party started to become... not so conservative in 1980. Republicans are conservative socially, ie abortion, sex on tv, etc. They are not conservative any place else.

They also adhere to conservative economics.

But I don't think the Republican party is becoming less conservative as it is becoming more Statist.

DosEquis · 08-02-2006, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by Concept

They also adhere to conservative economics.

But I don't think the Republican party is becoming less conservative as it is becoming more Statist.

During the clinton administration we added 1 trillion in debt.
From 1776 to 1980 we ran up 1 trillion in debt (adjusted for inflation)...this is also despite ww2, korea, vietnam, and a variety of other misc conflicts.

We will have about 9.2-9.5 when george bush is done. That means 7 of the 9 trillion dollars has come from the last three republicans.

If cutting taxes for the wealthy is "conservative" economics, i guess you are right. But they are doing it at the countries expense because they do not and will not reduce spending. We are financing these tax cuts and it is not trickling down. It might drip once in awhile, thats about it.