>>739030281 Modern Republicans and Lincoln-era Republicans are a very different thing, anon. And the Trump Party may well be a different thing from both, to be honest. Personally, I do not identify myself with Lincoln because anyone with more than a middle-school level knowledge of history knows that Lincoln openly stated that he had no intention of making blacks equal to whites, of giving them the vote or property rights, and thought that as long as blacks and whites coexisted in the same area that they must always be held second to whites. Google "Lincoln Douglas Debates" or just "I am not nor have I ever been" if you don't believe me.
Obviously, I don't fly the confederate battle flag either. I did vote for Trump, though, but it had nothing to do with rallying around Lincoln nor that flag. No idea what news you've been watching.
>>739030281 Conservatives haven't been progressive since Teddy Roosevelt. They tried running the country like a business with hoover, and ended up with the worst depression in our history. they tried it again with Reagan but made it work with neoliberal policy. And again are trying the business run state with Trump... but we are all sick of neoliberalism. It is hard for america to crash like it did with Hoover, but it will not end well.
>>739032302 Negative. I joined the military at 18, born from a midwestern huge catholic irish/german family. I was born into conservatism. About 3 years into my military career i realized there are more than just privileged white people in our country, much less there are countries FAR worse off than us. Anyway, egalitarian or bust.
the very fact that you've swallowed the false marxist assumption that wealth is zero sum and only acquired by theft, shows you were never conservative to begin with. I.e., you are lying.
egalitarianism is inherently unfair. If Suzy does 4 hours of work and Jim does 1 hour of the same kind of work, then should Suzy and Jim get the same pay? An egalitarian says "yes," a rational person says: "no, that's inherently unfair."
Any system which allows freedom of exchange/contract is a system in which people will make different choices, act differently, and reap different rewards.
>>739030281 Lincoln was more of a modern Democrat than modern Republican >opposed state rights >provoked wars so that he could say "I didn't start this, but I will end it" >hired more people to the federal government than all previous presidents combined >hated the south so much he authorized the literal burning of the capital cities of two southern states
>>739033792 Jefferson stationed a large portion of the navy in the Mediterranean and north African Atlantic to protect US ships from attack by muslims Lincoln withdrew those vessels to starve people he considered US citizens
until SCotUS decided on Texas vs the United States (1870) the "perpetual union" clause was largely understood to mean that the states need do nothing to remain in the union, but had the option to leave in fact the northern states threatened secession several times through the 1840s and 1850s over the slavery clauses of the constitution
Lincoln issued an executive order ending slavery contrary to the constitution and established means of amendment
What about just having 2 elections. All party candidates compete in the first one, and first and second place are given 90 more days to campaign. This would eliminate 3rd party interference, and people wouldn't be afraid of throwing away their votes on a losing candidate in the first election. It will give the libertarian and green parties a fair chance.
>>739034486 so, you accept the premise that modern democrats are flaming marxists who want to burn the constitution and hand America over to Islam, and your strategy is to try to show that Lincoln was a flaming marxists who want to burn the constitution and hand America over to Islam?
>>739034551 make the popular election so that voters can vote for multiple candidates then the candidate that receives the most votes and all candidates that receive within 10% of the votes of the top candidate are sent to the electoral college for consideration that way the president has well more than half the popular support and the electoral college just weeds out candidates that have no practical experience relating to presidential responsibilities
>>739033792 >burn the constitution There is absolutely nothing in the US Constitution guaranteeing capitalism. If the US wants to adopt Communism the Constitution does not forbid it.
> hand America over to Islam Democrats would gladly pass a separation of church and state amendment right now. Who do you think stops that? Christian conservitard republicans who want to create their own Jebus Taliban right here.
You really are the worst kind of idiot...the kind who doesn't know he's an idiot.
>>739035607 I'm pretty sure they did >Camp Azure >anti-Japanese propaganda >US citizens of Japanese decent being lynched >refusing to even listen to a Japanese offer of surrender bc they wouldn't consider removing the Emperor while 117,000 to 260,000 Japanese and 20,000 allied personnel were killed
>>739030281 I know stupid. Most knowledgeable conservatives recognize this and living near the south a lot of republican hating democrats worship the flag. I'm a state individualist and through my perspective I can say the Confederates were doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. They lost though and Confederate symbolism doesn't belong on government property since weren't the Confederate states of America. BTW it just a battle flag.
>>739036451 most trust-fund babies are flaming liberals.
also: what's wrong with parents giving support to their children? who are you to tell people who earned their own money what they can or can't do it with it? what fucking business is it of tyrannical you to dictate the choices of other people?
>>739035913 lol >uses "we" like you had anything to do with that.
you don't know shit. first you weren't there. second, governments at time of war can easily make the public hate anyone they want to. making the public hate the enemy is no problem, but that's not the point. those with power who decided to drop the nukes did not do so out of hate. the opinion of the public had absolutely no effect on that decision
>>739036300 >restrict immigration based on religious identity Yeah, that's why they're doing it. Not because a certain religion has a higher percentage of murderous asssholes per capita than every other one put together.
>>739036302 You're up past your bed time kiddo. Capitalism was gone WAY too far. It's become the worst enemy of liberty not just here in the US but all over the world. Someday you'll have a job and learn that.
>those with power who decided to drop the nukes did not do so out of hate I know. We did it because it made our victory easier and less costly. That wasn't the point. Point was, anon said we didn't necessarily hate the Japanese, and that's laughably false.
>>739036797 I used too feel this way for the longest time, and it's true to some extent. However, what you refer to as capitalism going to far is actually not that far off in practice from the oligarchy. but we have to remember that capitalism gave birth to the middle class. i would much rather live in a merchant republic then a centralized bureaucracy. but i guess you've gotta have a bit of both
>>739036338 >If you did join he military indoubt you would ever become liberal. Differentfag here but that's where I became Liberal. Working for the government...serving around the world...it all opens your eyes to how things really are. If you think the military is inherently conservative then you have an uninformed stereotype in your head. I served for 7 years and it was the most diverse group of people I've ever worked with.
> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
>>739036969 >it does say that laws can't be made bc religion No, actually it says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
It was a direct response to the Church Of England, wherein everyone in England was required by the King to be a member of the CofE because it was England's official religion. It was started to make the King the de-facto head of religion as well as state, because King Henry VIII didn't like the fact that his subjects were also led by the Pope. More specifically, he didn't like the Pope telling him he couldn't get a divorce. The clause in the 1st Amendment means you can't establish the Church Of America as the official religion and ban other religions.
>>739037506 >you only accept exact quotes? Not him, but I only accept reading comprehension. "an establishment of religion" doesn't mean "law made bc religion", it means "establish the official religion of the country as _____"
>>739037158 stop saying "we" faggit. this is such a good example of idiotic group mentality, a group you have no power in or control over. yet you feel somehow you do and/or can take credit what other americans have done in the past. but ok i'll play, you are also fat, greasy and badly dressed.
>>739037780 Yeah, and "militia" only means the military, right? The First Amendment is there to prevent ANY religion from having de-facto government support, or being favored by law at the expense of everyone else.
Talk to me about reading comprehension, pretentious know-nothing motherfucker...
>>739037780 and it has been interpreted by SCotUS to include laws made purely based on religious doctrine as doing so makes that religion's doctrine the official doctrine of the US and by proxy taht religion the official religion of the US lrn2 judicial precedent and how to read supreme court decisions
>>739037165 My take on it is that there's no clear line between Socialist and Not Socialist. Unless you're living in Somalia we are all Socialist to a degree. We use the internet, we drive on public roads, we have police, a military and social services that we all use.
The question is how much Socialism are we willing to accept. Given the excesses that capitalism has pushed since the Reagan administration, most people in the US would benefit from a greater degree of Socialism. But the people who are making obscene amounts of money and hold an un-democratic amount of power because of the excesses of capitalism have half the country whipped into a terrified frenzy by convincing them a fair healthcare system and progressive tax code means Stalin is returning from the grave.
>>739037843 Learn how to spell "faggot", faggot. I'm saying "we" because it identifies me as an American talking about what Americans did in the past. You're reading more into it than I wrote, because you're a dumb faggot looking to start an Internet fight without having the capacity to properly spell the word "faggot".
>>739037896 it's the conformity that is worst about communism, you all have to stand together and usually the avarge joe won't have any say in where to stand. But it is also important to note that communism is fundamentally flawed and has never/will never be applied like "it was supposed to"
>>739038122 I agree that it's a matter of degree. But you're using false scare tactics to try to sway people into committing economic suicide.
There are many problems with the system, but most of them start with the government. Giving the government more control just exacerbates the problem, and requires a willful denial of government's massive inefficiencies and failures.
>>739030281 Bumping >me part of YAF for a year, Los Angeles bro. >go to conference in DC >turned off immediately by Reagan/neo con/Fox News shilling (for context, I was pretty much a centrist all my life, until I got hooked onto hating "libtards/sjw/safe space" all the buzzwords of 2016) >5 days of absolute uncomfortableness for me....autistic savants-college kids like me who reference French economists and ayn rand literally, kids who can't ask decent questions after having 40 minutes to form one during a speech, anti gay/abortion, and right wing think tanks >>>>but the worst was yet to com >get home, post on Facebook that the conservative movement also has dumb cunts when they criticized the left for having strawman/bandwagoning and I said it's funny that there's so many closeted homosexuals in there >>>and that triggered all my "friends" into the removing me from the club and calling me a shame
So I would've been still on the path to be a neocon fagtard, but I was saved by the suppression of my ideas by right wingers. That's why I'm not a "conservative"
Sorry for my shitty grammar, it'd be more concise were I on a computer.
>>739038122 you are operating from a false understanding of socialism. you are assuming anything more than anarchy is socialism, which is absurd. A completely non-socialist government can have government made/run roads, fire depts., police depts., etc.
socialism happens when the government undertakes centralized planning of the economy and owns the means of production/distribution.
for instance, Venezuela is a wonderful example of a socialist utopia.
>>739031431 Its actually not hard at all considering USA is essentially a retail nation. Our economy has the biggest influence on the rest if the world, but as we don't really produce anything, our economy is also the most dependant on other nations.
The 2 party system has successfully destroyed the country. It can be repaired if both Democrats and Republicans are forced to do their job and SERVE THE PEOPLE. Vote 3rd party as often as possible, when non-Republicans and non-Democrats get voted into high offices in large enough numbers; the Republicans and Democrats will start working to appease the voting public and make America functional for We The People. Do not be fooled by politicians claiming to be independent or 3rd party, if they ever were Republican or Democrat they are not true independent or 3rd party. Take America Back, make the government pay their TAB.
>>739038757 besides fucking up catastrophically in your erroneous assumption that "production" can only be "manufacturing," you are also fucking up catastrophically in that American manufacturing is as strong as it has every been.
>>739038712 Yeah...I was raised in a Los Angeles suburb...multiculturalism was/is unavoidable, so it's not in my nature to be that myopic like a bill o'reilly/hannity viewer. But that's my issue....the banners of the organization say "free speech matters" but then I can't even criticize some of the representatives in "the right" not the organization itself-though it's definitely a money laundering operation like most political nonprofits I can't hate all leftists, just the far left who drink salon.com kool aid... and you have to work or talk to them daily if you live in an urban city.
>>739039039 stalin wasn't a socialist as we understand socialism today. a little bit more socialism would mean things like social security and healthcare. how is healthcare gonna lead to Stalin? i didn't know he had good healthcare and social security.
>>739038023 >"militia" only means the military lol wut? Militias were a separate thing from the Army. We don't really have state militias anymore because they were supplanted by the National Guard. But since you're trying to imply that my understanding of the First Amendment means I'm anti-gun, let me reassure you that banning guns is completely pointless and only affects law-abiding citizens. No gangbanger is ever going to pass up his banned full-auto AK-47 for a legal bolt-action .22LR when he's going to do a drive-by. People who are already planning to commit murder don't give a fuck if their weapon is legal or not. Also the world record-holder for spree killing used a delivery van. Even if you gather all seven dragonballs and wish every gun on the earth would disappear, people will still find ways of killing each other. Banning drugs didn't do anything but make drug dealers rich.
>>739038795 you probably feel really proud of yourself that you could drop coughlin's name.
except, you can't name a single relevant, well-known conservative who shares coughlin's views.
nearly all modern conservatives are libertarian in leaning (unlike coughlin), stand in opposition to anything like the New Deal (which coughlin supported), generally tend to be hawkish (unlike coughlin), and are extremely anti-statist (unlike coughlin who was a big fan of Hitler).
Hitler was a socialist, did you know that? fascism is just a flavor of socialism.
>>739038404 >Giving the government more control just exacerbates the problem And giving the capitalists/industrialists/oligarchs more control throws away any chance we have of control by the people. Like it or not government is our only chance at controlling our own destiny...reducing its power just drives us further from democracy.
A big problem is cynicism; >government's massive inefficiencies and failures. Unfortunately this is what most people have come to accept, but when you look at it on an individual basis 95% of what government does it does pretty well. At least as well as any civilian company I've ever worked for. The problems stem from the systems being overworked and underfunded. You want to live in the most powerful nation on Earth you have to have a large support infrastructure to keep it running. The country works best when we do that. This fantasy of 'minimal government' just serves to put more power into the hands of those few who are bleeding us all dry.
>>739039385 Yeah I'm still not a lefty---but not a neocon shill like the donors want us to become....Oliver north gave a speech on the second to last night-not a single word regretting Afghanistan, Central America, or Iraq....it was a 40 minute speech of rounding up young men to fight and die for old men in air conditioned rooms in D.C.
And to your point about gays---they only back it up based on faith, but I don't care the fact of the matter is it's states right to decides whose marriage holds-but not the federal government even made it okay, I'm not saying trannies are normal, but gay dudes/beautiful lesbians/bull dykes are okay in my book
>>739039614 >And giving the capitalists/industrialists/oligarchs more control throws away any chance we have of control by the people. Like it or not government is our only chance at controlling our own destiny...reducing its power just drives us further from democracy. Nonsense. Who created the oligarchs?
The government did. Because only the government can pass and enforce laws, not private businesses. While businesses certainly colluded to get laws written in their favor, who's primarily to blame when that happens?
The government, because they write and enforce the laws. Businesses literally have no power, unless the government allows it.
All the problems you're complaining about are rooted in the government. Which needs to do what it's supposed to do, a capitalist economy -- set the rules, enforce the contracts, and stop playing favorites and accepting bribes from lobbyists.
>>739039625 If the left called it murder I really wonder how triggered conservatives would get---they'd go ballistic to the point where they would stop calling it murder It's sad that two wrongs don't make a right
>>739039614 >95% of what government does it does pretty well. No.
It does a few things acceptably, because there are no other options. But when it tries to compete with private enterprise, it fails miserably every time. It's sclerotic, ungainly, incredibly slow to react, and poorly accountable.
>>739039625 >>739039678 You the two of just show how completely ridiculous the argument over abortion has gotten.
Nobody except a few extremists give a shit about sperm. It's not a baby.
But everybody except a few extremists are horrified by partial birth abortions, which literally involve sticking weapons up a woman's vag to kill the baby, before pulling out its corpse, because if they pulled it out first, it would be murder.
It's not a binary fucking decision. Yes, women should have control over their own bodies. But at some point the fetus becomes a baby, which has rights as well. We need to figure out where to draw that line. It's not a YES ALWAYS or NO NEVER question.
>>739040136 hey, I know you must be a big shot at jerkwater community college (the satellite campus after hours, anyway), but for all other educated people, we recognize that "manufacturing" goes together with "industrial production" (not "growth," you ADHD reading comprehension challenged dunce).
Let's list your fuckups, shall we?
First you say that America "we don't really produce anything" (and that we are the "most dependent on other nations" - another whopper which I've not paddled your toddler ass with).
I embarrass you by pointing out that production does not only mean "manufacturing." This is kindergarten shit, and any high-functioning retard would have gone radio silent after this.
but, you are a low-functioning retard so you keep going, even after I show you that American manufacturing has gone gangbusters. After a 3 second look at the pictures of the site I linked to, not having read any of those big-boy words (too challenging), you then go deeper into the shit mess you've already made for yourself by assuming that the chart on that site must be lower than previous historical point which you assume was much higher. This, of course, is based on nothing but your marxist fantasizing.
So, I next show you a chart of industrial production which absolutely punishes you with the facts, falsifying your earlier claims. Again, Hindenburg-like failure here.
Then, unable to stop yourself from yet another embarrassment, you confound "production" and "growth" and think you've made a point, while just highlighting for everyone here what a typical fuckup moron libturds are.
thank you for being such an excellent poster child today.
>>739040266 >All the problems you're complaining about are rooted in the government. Which needs to do what it's supposed to do, a capitalist economy -- set the rules, enforce the contracts, and stop playing favorites and accepting bribes from lobbyists. Yes, I agree with that. And who is paying those bribes? The capitalists with the money to shell out huge bribes. Government has been hijacked by the people with the money to hijack it. Until we can put a leash on unrestrained capitalism it's going to keep happening.
>>739040744 The birth control/abortion debate has NEVER been about babies or fetuses or zygotes. It's all about controlling sexual behavior and it always has been.
If the anti-abortion crowd was serious about reducing abortions they would get on board with real sex education in schools and easily available contraception. Those are the only things that actually work to reduce unwanted pregnancy and by extension, abortion.
But that's not what it's about. It's about a portion of the population that is butthurt about others having sex out of wedlock. The churches are a big driver behind this because without the need for marriage their influence and social power is reduced.
I am a lecturer at a university, I pay for my own health care (non-Obummer care), I get no welfare of any kind. I vote republican because I have read volumes of philosophical works and have come to a very reasoned conclusion that freedom and justice are both opposed by left-leaning parties and systems.
you can't meme or strawman your way out of that, can you?
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.