There are essentially three types of conservatives, IMHO.
The first usually belongs to the rich conservatives. As long as they get their way in creating more wealth for themselves, it really doesn't matte what else goes on. They will encourage whatever religious and/or libertarian ideology (or portions thereof) that fits with their profit-motives.
The second and the third belongs to the rest of the conservative class. In here, the second is usually not present, unless as a troll. That leaves us with the third one: the libertarians.
The libertarians are deeply in infatuation with "the individual," and this is simply based upon their belief that this world is essentially "competitive" in nature: it is up to the person to protect himself (and his immediate loved ones) from the reality that is harsh and brutal. In this world of dog eats dog and everyone for himself, they value strength and independence the most, and distrust anything that smacks of "communal value."
I've once witnessed a father telling a young boy in a store that he [the son] must understand that he has to be strong and not show weakness, because if he shows weakness others would take advantage of it. A very libertarian value. This becomes their self-image.
This core belief about "everyone for himself/herself" leads them to swallow many other b.s. that the first class of conservatives feed them: 1) government regulation bad; 2) if you are poor it's your fault; 3) anything that creates communal value is communism, and therefore evil.
They are quick to criticize any worldview that promotes cooperation, trust, peace, organized or otherwise collective action, promotion of communal value above the individual values, as either being naive (pollyanna), weak (snow flake), or evil (socialism!).
What they do not realize is that their worldview is ultimately a self-fulfilling prophesy. This worldview is so ingrained in their self-image, no other facts or evidence would change their mind. In fact, for the libertarian male mindset, this changing of mind would constitute the demasculinization. This also promotes the fetish of the masculine.
What a horrible world they live in.
That's a VERY good analysis of Conservatives sir. If you wrote this yourself, I truly applaud your intellect. Your points are well thought out. Your classification schema is a precise summary.
I'd say that there is a fluidity between types 1 & 3 as I'd fall somewhere in those groups. I can't speak to the religious conservative definition. I think your comments right up to this being a "horrible" world are an accurate reflection of Conservatives. I find my world to be spectacular. As do my Conservative friends. We like it here.
Working class people who vote conservative should just pass the wealthy a pot of lube and ask them to be gentle.
Libertarians are just right wing anarchists, and they're just as deluded. They are completely unaware that it is the very structure they oppose that provides them with a safety net for their fantasies.
Ken, not all fiscal conservatives fit the description you gave...many who have been successful have used their wealth to donate to causes that would not get funded otherwise, such as art and music. Many volunteer or support charties in their own communities as well. While they might have profited from a more "republican" platform, they don't necessarily support the inequities and see the pitfalls of rampant greed...in which case, money to support other political platforms can be donated to support those beliefs...I think we have to be careful whenever using the implied "all" to describe people.. "many" or "most" might be a better description.
When I was a kid, I was fairly competitive. I played sports, some well, one very well, one lousy. I also was in other school activities like choir and theater. Those experiences were good for me because it taught me that competition was good, but it was not the only thing or be-all end-all. More importantly, these experiences taught me the importance of putting in the work to usually get a result or payoff later on. Also taught me the joy of working with others to produce something, like performing a work or winning a game, etc. The sad thing is that libertarians never get past that first part of competition, to the teamwork or group experience of competition. They remain stuck at competition for the individual being the only thing that matters and continue on seeing life as alone on an island.
Their extreme individualism would be not that big a deal if it was only their loss and affected only them. But the truth is it affects everyone because of the way they vote and even more, the way they act when they do get power either thru politics, wealth, or leadership of a company. Competition is fine as a part of childhood and youth when the stakes are low and it is more of a learning exercise. It does not work that well as an economic system or social policy for a country if the goal is to provide for the general welfare, which it should be, but not with their Social Darwinism.
Religious/Family Value conservative.
This is one I really have a problem with from the Atheist standpoint as well as the Christian overlords. The "values" Christians have is not their own. These things have been well documented by those who have mastered shredding the Christian talking points. If their values are not their own, then why are they dismissed so readily as Christian values.
Why are some of "their values" actually good things? They are lessons humanity has learned over tens thousands of years. The downfall of the values was being co-opted by a mechanism of control. Does that mean those values presented have no merit? I think not. It just implies one must seek answers on why the values were held important in the first place. Ignorance? Maybe. But maybe not. One shall never know if he/she does not even explore the concept.
"The libertarians are deeply in infatuation with "the individual," and this is simply based upon their belief that this world is essentially "competitive" in nature:"
The world is deeply competitive. Nature is competitive from single celled organisms to the big cats of Africa. Humans are an exception to nature? I think not. We have competition through history. From light hearted nature of sports/athletics. To cruel domineering of the Roman era and the games they had. To claim that humans have no ground( or to deny) in competition is foolish at best.
"they value strength and independence the most, and distrust anything that smacks of "communal value."
When communal value is not congruent with common sense. Communal value gets denied.
True, I'm not fond of any kind of conservative. I've had bad experiences with all of them. sometimes the Libertarians are worse than Evangelical Christians. Without exception, almost all conservatives/Libertarians are extremely pro-military and support a massive plethora of benefits for those serving in the armed forces. without exception, everybody else in a their country can go fuck themselves.
you sure have a fairy tail way of looking at the world. While some of that may be kind of true, for the most part it isn't really.
Your mostly going on about how everything is everyone else's fault. Then trying to put A lable on it. I use to be like that, then I started seeing the would for what it is. An unfair brutle world.
Libertarians want the same thingsfor others as they would want for themselves. More libertarians give to charity than any other affiliation.
It's more complicated than that. I'm some combo of 1 and 3 but an actual true traditional liberal (not the anti-speech leftist that is so prevalent today. Fact is these labels don't do well to cover actual thoughtful, intelligent informed people who look at each issue carefully on a case by case basis and can't be pigeonholed. The problem is LEMMINGS - partisan sheep who can't think for themselves and blindly follow due to tribalism instincts. And being anti-science, which very importantly INCLUDES social science. Both of the fake coalitions of lemmings in the neo-con-o-crat uni-party are anti-science to a large degree albeit the left tends to be more anti-social-science while the right is more anti-hard-science.
It's mostly just an issue of self respect and self reliance. I think I'm wise enough to make my own life decisions. I feel better about myself when I accomplish things. I feel embarrassed for people who live with their hand out. I like to choose the people I cooperate and commune with. The issue of masculinity never comes into .
I’m not crazy about fiscal conservative views and I don’t agree with Libertarians, but I can tolerate them better than social conservatives. I have friends and relatives who are social conservatives and I really have to bite my tongue around them.
I think Libertarians are maybe more rugged and feel they don’t need anything from anybody. If my understanding of Libertarianism is correct that is. The ones I know collect their own rainwater, own chickens, etc.
@KenChang Making generalizations usually winds up making an only a partially correct statement. I have considered myself a Libertarian for decades. I do feel the world is competitive in nature, and if you don't I'd love to hear why you don't. I do not believe is everyone for him or herself, as collective effort is needed for many things. I do believe the individual is responsible for him or herself. I believe some Gov Regulation is needed, some is not, the devil is in the details. Why you say Libertarians think any view promoting trust, peace or collective action is naive is really a mystery to me. Basically we want to be a free as possible. We realize freedom to do anything we want to do cannot exist along with any society.