You were talking about American politics. You didn’t know that the Republican party was formed before the Democrat party. And trying to say you were actually talking about some non-American esoteric political philosophy is not believable, but whatever.
The American left “in it’s [sic] budding consciousness” was oppressive and racist. American slavery originated with and was embraced by the political left in America. The Republican party was actually formed as an abolitionist (i.e., anti-slavery) party. We had an entire war about it. Ordinarily, I would give someone who doesn’t know American history the benefit of the doubt. But not you. Lol
And you clearly don’t understand conservativism and liberalism in America. Actual conservativism is a solid political philosophy, particularly economic conservatism. The problem in America is we don’t have many true conservatives. Republicans run as conservatives and govern as liberals. And liberalism is a proven failure. As I’ve said many times on the board, the Democrat party is intellectually bankrupt and has been for many years, and the only reason they survive is because the Republican party sucks. A bunch of dishonest politicians.
People who actually follow American politics know that the left doesn’t run on policy. They run on emotion. They demonize an opponent, try and get people angry or afraid of something, and rely on low voter turnout from the other side. Or they rely on the courts, because they cannot get many of their policies through the normal legislative process.
So your statement that “Conservatism will always fail as progress and evolution are a rule” is not only nonsensical, but is absolutely false as it relates to the greatest country on earth.
I said it followed after the right in HISTORY, I was referencing the left as in the global movement in history.
I am talking about the ideas related to leftism. The left historically is associated with equality, namely during things like the french revolution. The US is a very recent phenomenon. I am not sure why you decided to rebut an argument I didn't make.
I stand by what I said, it's factual, accepted by historians and is a clear picture of how the left and right play as a dialectical throughout history.
The last sentence is factually as well. They require each other, you are missing the point of my post. Your demonizing of one side of this dialectic indicates you don't understand what I am saying. I am not sure you are even trying to understand, are you or are you just outright dismissing what I am saying prior to processing it. For conservatism to win it would have to be moving history in a vector, conservatism is more scalar, it's stationary in terms of it's ideas. No new god is coming for christianity, the values laid out will always be the same etc. they are not moving in any new direction. The only direction would be more of the same. It conserves, retains, keeps steady and delimits--- hence the name.
The left, being progressive produces new ideas (I don't mean only in political practice, solutions to problems can be creative on both sides), I mean as ideologies. The right can have solutions to things like immigration etc, these can be new ideas in iterations. The left produce mutations, many of which are bad. The right anchors the left and without it you would now have your dick cut off. Obviously nothing exists as pure conservative or leftist though, so we get amalgams and chimeras which don't neatly fit the above dichotomy. I am speaking in ideality, in actuality its much more messy.
It has no base per se, it's moving conservatism slowly away from itself, IE progressing it. It cannot hold as humans evolve, things change and what we are seeing now is attempts to increase humanities overall fitness. Inclusion as they call it.
