Author Topic: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?  (Read 3695 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Material Defender

  • Food Scientist in Space
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
  • Gender: Male
  • Pilot of the Pyro-GX
Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« on: December 28, 2012, 04:46:42 pm »
A reactionary is one who wishes to bring back the past, either imagined golden age or simply they feel the past is better than the present. Thus past policies are better than today's. A conservative fights for the status quo.

With the religious Right wanting to strip the 1st amendment out of the constitution, the tea party seeking to turn back the clock on labor relations and business efforts, civil war apologetics, turn over Roe, and the like. do we think the Republican party in America is more reactionary than it is conservative? Or does it still have enough status quo fights on its belt to still be considered conservative?

I'm more curious other's opinions on this because I'm not entirely sure. Though I feel that a party that is more reactionary than anything else is less appealing to voters.
The material needs a defender more than the spiritual. If there is a higher power, it can defend itself from the material. Thus denotes 'higher power'.

"Not to know is bad. Not to want to know is worse. Not to hope is unthinkable. Not to care is unforgivable." -Nigerian Saying

Offline Auggziliary

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Gender: Female
  • Queen of the birdies
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2012, 12:54:14 am »
A lot of conservatives are older though, so they are trying to conserve the period that they grew up in I guess.
BITCHES! YOU BITCHES! Killing me won't bring back your God damn honey!

Offline Undecided

  • The boring one.
  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
  • Gender: Male
  • Amateur Obfuscator
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2012, 05:05:50 am »
No, the GOP is not reactionary. The American people are rather evenly split on gun control, same-sex marriage, abortion, support of labor, the recent healthcare reforms, and the choice between the deficit and the recovery, and the major parties reflect these differences. On the other hand, the contemporary role of the federal government—protecting people and the environment through regulation; promoting free trade; supplying welfare in the form of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other services; maintaining a worldwide military presence; providing funding for agriculture, science, and culture; and levying the taxes to pay for it all—isn't a subject of serious dispute between the major parties, in spite of the quibbling over the details of the taxes and spending that would seem to suggest the contrary. When put in a sufficiently general context, American politics is actually fairly uniform.

To encounter reactionary politics in the United States, you really have to go to the Constitution Party, which (if it had the chance) would abolish federal taxation (and by implication most of the federal government), establish protectionist policies, repeal the various civil rights acts of the 1960s, and reinstate sodomy laws—in essence, bring back government as it was prior to the Great Depression.

You mad, you lose.

People do not like to think. If one thinks, one must reach conclusions. Conclusions are not always pleasant.
Helen Keller
Le doute n'est pas une condition agréable, mais la certitude est absurde.
Voltaire

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2012, 09:00:19 am »
You think the Republicans honestly support the existence of Medicaid?
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline SpaceProg

  • What you read is what you get.
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 5507
  • Nocturnal
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2012, 09:29:49 am »
^When THEY need it.  Sure.  ;)

Offline nickiknack

  • I Find Your Lack of Ponies... Disturbing
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 6037
  • Gender: Female
  • HAS A KINK FOR SPACE NAZIS
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2012, 11:39:06 am »
To encounter reactionary politics in the United States, you really have to go to the Constitution Party, which (if it had the chance) would abolish federal taxation (and by implication most of the federal government), establish protectionist policies, repeal the various civil rights acts of the 1960s, and reinstate sodomy laws—in essence, bring back government as it was prior to the Great Depression.

You know the funniest thing about  the Constitution Party is that it more or less made up of fundies, and want the Bible to be a governing doctrine, along with the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. But apparently never read the 1st Amendment.
Quote
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.
 
Learn how to read folks, I guess the whole using The Bible as a governing doctrine, conflicts a bit with the Bill of Rights, eh??
« Last Edit: December 29, 2012, 11:44:36 am by Empress Nicki »

Offline R. U. Sirius

  • He Who Must Be Smooched By Cute FSTDT Forumgirls
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2896
  • Gender: Male
  • Just look at me. Who could distrust this face?
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #6 on: December 29, 2012, 08:18:27 pm »
I've met people who sincerely believe that the First Amendment means you can choose which sect of Christianity to belong to, and that's it. Some make an exception for Jews, but not all.
http://www.gofundme.com/kw5o78
My GoFundMe campaign. Donations are greatly appreciated.

http://imgur.com/user/RUSirius1/submitted
My Imgur account. Upvotes always appreciated

If you look at it logically, cannibalism has great potential to simultaneously solve our overpopulation and food shortage problems.

Offline kefkaownsall

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3253
  • Gender: Male
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #7 on: December 29, 2012, 09:19:36 pm »
some dont make exceptions for Catholics ie Ol Bro Randy

Offline Cataclysm

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2458
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2012, 05:54:23 am »
I'd say a lot of them aren't even reactionaries, but revolutionaries, and not in a good way. They want to return to "the good old days" but have no idea what it is like so they make up crap. They want to defund education and infrastructure, when these have been publicly funded from before the Civil war. They also support free trade, when America has traditionally had trade restriction.

Quote
To encounter reactionary politics in the United States, you really have to go to the Constitution Party, which (if it had the chance) would abolish federal taxation (and by implication most of the federal government), establish protectionist policies, repeal the various civil rights acts of the 1960s, and reinstate sodomy laws—in essence, bring back government as it was prior to the Great Depression.

One good thing I can say is that they support tariffs. Also, I'm not a fan of the 17th amendment either.
I'd be more sympathetic if people here didn't act like they knew what they were saying when they were saying something very much wrong.

Quote
Commenter Brendan Rizzo is an American (still living there) who really, really hates America. He used to make posts defending his country from anti-American attacks but got fed up with it all.

Offline Material Defender

  • Food Scientist in Space
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
  • Gender: Male
  • Pilot of the Pyro-GX
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #9 on: December 30, 2012, 01:21:44 pm »
Thanks for the information, guys.

We need a nice socialist party, me thinks.
The material needs a defender more than the spiritual. If there is a higher power, it can defend itself from the material. Thus denotes 'higher power'.

"Not to know is bad. Not to want to know is worse. Not to hope is unthinkable. Not to care is unforgivable." -Nigerian Saying

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #10 on: December 30, 2012, 07:46:59 pm »
I don't think there's much call for socialism. As far as I'm concerned, Scandinavian liberalism is basically right. If the socialists are right they'll win sometime anyway, why not try to do something else that might work beforehand?
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline largeham

  • Dirty Pinko
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1326
  • Gender: Male
  • The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2012, 08:50:44 pm »
Depends on your definition of socialism. But I agree anyway.

My Little Comrade
My Little Comrade
Ah ah ah aaaaah!
(My Little Comrade)
I used to wonder what socialism could be!
(My Little Comrade)
Until you all shared its materialist dialectic with me!

Offline Material Defender

  • Food Scientist in Space
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
  • Gender: Male
  • Pilot of the Pyro-GX
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #12 on: December 31, 2012, 09:57:14 am »
I don't think there's much call for socialism. As far as I'm concerned, Scandinavian liberalism is basically right. If the socialists are right they'll win sometime anyway, why not try to do something else that might work beforehand?

I kind of feel the like a good balance between democratic socialism and capitalism is ideal. Need to have a good social safety net, but doesn't need to be so strong or restrictive that people don't feel the urge to get out there and do things. Plus, some services are simply delivered best when the profit motive is the driving factor. I just feel the USA needs a reasonably strong socialist party to push for some socialist reforms since we're far too capitalist at the moment.

I'm not calling for the country to become 100% socialist. Just for it to go a little more left.
The material needs a defender more than the spiritual. If there is a higher power, it can defend itself from the material. Thus denotes 'higher power'.

"Not to know is bad. Not to want to know is worse. Not to hope is unthinkable. Not to care is unforgivable." -Nigerian Saying

Offline Sylvana

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1016
  • Gender: Female
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #13 on: January 03, 2013, 01:21:44 am »
Republicans are not reactionaries, they are conservatives. They strongly support the status quo. That is why after 8 years of Bush being in power Roe V Wade was not overturned. They may campaign on simplistic reactionary issues, but when in power they make sure that things stay exactly the same so they can campaign on those issues again in 4 years.

Offline nickiknack

  • I Find Your Lack of Ponies... Disturbing
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 6037
  • Gender: Female
  • HAS A KINK FOR SPACE NAZIS
Re: Republicans: Reactionaries, Not Conservatives?
« Reply #14 on: January 03, 2013, 10:32:47 am »
Republicans are not reactionaries, they are conservatives. They strongly support the status quo. That is why after 8 years of Bush being in power Roe V Wade was not overturned. They may campaign on simplistic reactionary issues, but when in power they make sure that things stay exactly the same so they can campaign on those issues again in 4 years.

Then why do they do their darnest to gut our social safety net?? Even old school republicans were for some kind of social safety net. To the current crop of Republicans, a social safety net is the most evil, socialist thing ever.