Am I some shade of conservative?

[StarryNightshade]

I currently attend a rather progressive leaning seminary. On more than one occasion, I have been called a "conservative" by some of my classmates. Amidst the Bernie supporters and accusations of "mansplaining", a part of me wonders if this is true?

I don't want this to be paragraphs long, so I will do bullet points.

• Social change is good, but it is best when it's gradual, as well as organic and within the context of a given society.

• Conversely, society is interconnected and almost like a living organism. Individual freedoms are important, but society functioning smoothly is just as important.

• I think cultural and socio-religious traditions are important and help give identity, but aren't mandatory for people to follow if they don't wish.

• Separating church and state is important. As such, I have incredibly mixed feelings of taxing any religious organizations; Christian or otherwise.

• I'm not for raising or decreasing taxes. Rather, the taxes we have should be better utilized.

• Social programs are important, but it must be ensured that they are not abused.

• A market economy with *some* regulation is ideal. Not a completely "free market", but not completely socialized.

• Conversely, the rich should provide their part in helping the less fortunate (like charities), but don't have a "right" to rule based in their elite status.

• I believe in a strong national defense, but am against interventionism. The United States isn't the police of the world.

• I'm glad that same-sex marriage was legalized, but individual churches have the authority to not perform them if they don't want. I don't see the purpose of trying to force the Catholic church to bless same sex marriages when that's not going to happen anytime soon. Or a little backwater Baptist church for that matter. There are plenty of churches, temples, and synagogues who will perform same-sex marriages to choose from.

• I personally am Pro-life, but legally am Pro-choice. To me, being pro-life is more than just about the child, but also about the mothers well-being. That, and more should be done to prevent unwanted pregnancies to begin with. Such as better sex education and better quality healthcare.

These are just a few, but what are your thoughts? Keep in mind that these stances aren't set in stone and I'm always willing to reevaluate based on evidence and well made arguments.

 

[sayak83]

I currently attend a rather progressive leaning seminary. On more than one occasion, I have been called a "conservative" by some of my classmates. Amidst the Bernie supporters and accusations of "mansplaining", a part of me wonders if this is true?

I don't want this to be paragraphs long, so I will do bullet points.

• Social change is good, but it is best when it's gradual, as well as organic and within the context of a given society.

• Conversely, society is interconnected and almost like a living organism. Individual freedoms are important, but society functioning smoothly is just as important.

• I think cultural and socio-religious traditions are important and help give identity, but aren't mandatory for people to follow if they don't wish.

• Separating church and state is important. As such, I have incredibly mixed feelings of taxing any religious organizations; Christian or otherwise.

• I'm not for raising or decreasing taxes. Rather, the taxes we have should be better utilized.

• Social programs are important, but it must be ensured that they are not abused.

• A market economy with *some* regulation is ideal. Not a completely "free market", but not completely socialized.

• Conversely, the rich should provide their part in helping the less fortunate (like charities), but don't have a "right" to rule based in their elite status.

• I believe in a strong national defense, but am against interventionism. The United States isn't the police of the world.

• I'm glad that same-sex marriage was legalized, but individual churches have the authority to not perform them if they don't want. I don't see the purpose of trying to force the Catholic church to bless same sex marriages when that's not going to happen anytime soon. Or a little backwater Baptist church for that matter. There are plenty of churches, temples, and synagogues who will perform same-sex marriages to choose from.

• I personally am Pro-life, but legally am Pro-choice. To me, being pro-life is more than just about the child, but also about the mothers well-being. That, and more should be done to prevent unwanted pregnancies to begin with. Such as better sex education and better quality healthcare.

These are just a few, but what are your thoughts? Keep in mind that these stances aren't set in stone and I'm always willing to reevaluate based on evidence and well made arguments.

You are the kind that actually has a hope of working in practice. That means you are the best kind of liberal, a grounded one.

 

[Laika]

The desire for a "strong national defence", autonomy for churches to decide whether or not to perform same-sex marriages, preference for gradual change within existing institutions, importance of cultural and socio-religious traditions, strike me as "conservative". If the case for intervention in a market economy is to respond to economic crises and remove socio-economic roots for instability that could also be conservative.

However, those are individual positions which may or may not reflect your overall political beliefs (and therefore whether the label is appropriate). Conservativism can be quite relativistic because it depends on the kind of society and political context you are "conserving". it is more of an attitude to social change that you need to "stick with what has worked" rather than a fixed set of political positions. the way I would read your list in a US context is that you are probably a "Democrat" and rather Liberal in many respects. At a guess, I think you probably can understand the Republican view on many issues and would have been comfortable as a Republican back in the middle of the 20th century (before the religious right, neo-conservatives and libertarians became a major force). the word "conservative" has been appropriated for causes that would have been called "reactionary" a while ago.

But really, they are probably calling you a conservative in order to dismiss your point of view on the basis of sterotypes (which is unfair). that isn't very constructive for political debate and very often is the sign of an inferior intellect who is insecure in their views and unwilling to discuss contary views, prefering name-calling as a way to end an argument. it is possible to intelligently and convincingly argue for practically any position in the political spectrum. that can be a bit of a shock when someone starts making the case for the "unthinkable". the ability to tolerate differences of opinion is an important part of living in a free society. Our ideas aren't about competition or status or about wearing the right label, but about finding out what works best, is right and is truthful. it is remarkable how people can reach different conclusions based on the same evidence and that is why debates are necessary-even when they make us uncomfortable. resist the temptation to "pick sides" in an argument based on loyalties and don't be afraid to speak up if you think someone is wrong or you disagree. it is how we learn and change for the better.

 

[StarryNightshade]

the way I would read your list in a US context is that you are probably a "Democrat" and rather Liberal in many respects. At a guess, I think you probably can understand the Republican view on many issues and would have been comfortable as a Republican back in the middle of the 20th century (before the religious right, neo-conservatives and libertarians became a major force). the word "conservative" has been appropriated for causes that would have been called "reactionary" a while ago.

So I've heard. From what I've read, I do think that conservatism in the mid-20th century is what I most align with nowadays. The modern Republican (and Democratic, to be fair) party has become a joke. I think the closest modern equivalent would be the "Conservative Democrats".

I do like some aspects of Classical Conservatism, but I don't like how it advocates near social stagnation and this idea that an Aristocracy has a kind of divine right to rule over everyone else.

But really, they are probably calling you a conservative in order to dismiss your point of view on the basis of sterotypes (which is unfair). that isn't very constructive for political debate and very often is the sign of an inferior intellect who is insecure in their views and unwilling to discuss contary views, prefering name-calling as a way to end an argument. it is possible to intelligently and convincingly argue for practically any position in the political spectrum. that can be a bit of a shock when someone starts making the case for the "unthinkable". the ability to tolerate differences of opinion is an important part of living in a free society. Our ideas aren't about competition or status or about wearing the right label, but about finding out what works best, is right and is truthful. it is remarkable how people can reach different conclusions based on the same evidence and that is why debates are necessary-even when they make us uncomfortable. resist the temptation to "pick sides" in an argument based on loyalties and don't be afraid to speak up if you think someone is wrong or you disagree. it is how we learn and change for the better.

Unfortunately, I see this in a lot of both Progressive and NeoConservative circles. Intellectual and political discourse is all but a joke in the US. Not very many want to consider the notion that someone who believes differently than they do might have a few good points.

 

[Augustus]

The terms liberal and conservative are very simplistic and not particularly helpful as they lump together all sorts of beliefs that are not in any way connected.

For example: Why should an attitude towards religion or abortion relate to attitudes about taxation or welfare? Why should attitudes towards national defence relate to that about regulation of business?

In America (and many other places), politics has become a binary and the issues attached to the labels are not necessarily reflective of historical perspectives. Even the terms themselves have been recast. Liberals used to be on the right of the spectrum, believing in free markets and individual liberty. Progressive as a label could have applied to communists or Nazis, but now means centre-left. Conservatives used to be the party of monarchy, and often opposed parliamentary democracy.

• Social change is good, but it is best when it's gradual, as well as organic and within the context of a given society.

• Conversely, society is interconnected and almost like a living organism. Individual freedoms are important, but society functioning smoothly is just as important.

The idea that society can be made into whatever we want it to without recourse to existing conditions is one of the most dangerous ideas we have ever created (if not the most dangerous). Changes often have unpredictable effects, and things we think are useless or harmful often have a hidden, but important, role. This is one thing I side with the 'conservatives' on, although probably for different reasons to most of them. Why though should this affect my attitude to other beliefs considered 'conservative'?

Many 'conservatives' now support plutocracy, and don't realise that 'classical liberals' such as Adam Smith (whose 'invisible hand' was Divine Providence not some 'rationality' of the market) understood that there must be a moral dimension underpinning free market economics. Modern 'scientific' economics doesn't factor this into the equations though. In this sense modern 'conservative' economics is radically new, a market fundamentalism that has no connection to the past.

People who happen to agree on every single issue with whatever liberal/conservative agenda exists probably should start asking if they are actually thinking things over themselves or just following some herd mentality.

Forget the labels and just hold whatever beliefs you see fit.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

You sound perhaps like a liberal conservative, a very real category that would be called an oxymoron by many Americans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_conservatism

 

[StarryNightshade]

You sound perhaps like a liberal conservative, a very real category that would be called an oxymoron by many Americans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_conservatism

I've heard of this before. Seems like Classical Conservatism with a bit of Classical Liberalism thrown in.

I can dig it.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

These are just a few, but what are your thoughts?

Strictly-speaking, a conservative is one who wishes to conserve the current laws and social dynamics. At least in the states, few people appear to fit this definition these days, as everyone appears to be upset with the current legal and social formulation, and wants to change it. My experience is that if you don't accept all standard ideals of a group, you may be labeled as part of the other group. I have been called a "Trump supporter," a "Bernie supporter," told that I "want free s***," a "male privileged ***hole," you name it. My advice: give up the labels.