Why not actually respond to what they said? Conservatism is inherently about conserving power in the elite. It seems a bit immature to respond to an (admittedly snide and sarcastic) challenge to your beliefs with a personal insult. All they did was accurately break down what your comment represents.
I’m having a dozen conversations and 80% of the time when I click on the response in my inbox to go back to the context it takes me to another post all together.
I don’t even know what our conversation has been up to this point.
What did they say? And then how did I respond? I wish you could see my inbox with all of the personal attacks I’ve received not only today, but over the last two months over different accounts lol
So if someone is being an idiot to me, I don’t have a problem being an idiot back. If you’re respectful, I’ll have a respectful conversation with you.
That entire comment was just a dodge. Do your due diligence and click “show context” (it is the bare minimum effort), and stop avoiding the subject. Or just don’t respond if you don’t want to discuss.
If you want to know what they were talking about - I already summed it up in the comment you’re responding to. Precisely so you couldn’t excuse dodging the point a second time. And yet, here you are, doing exactly that.
Do you deny that conservatism is about conserving the power in the established elite? And if so - how?
Lol this is the kind of thing that shows up in my inbox over and over and over again
I just told you, I click on the reply and it takes me to some random part of the thread. When replies start getting nested and there’s a lot of comments I can’t find the posts. And I don’t really care that much to spend the time searching, when my inbox keeps filling up with messages like the one I linked.
Conservation of tradition is what conservatives usually aim to do. Nothing about established elite, but values, institutions, traditions, etc. that’s the context of ‘conserve’ in the name.
Conservation of tradition is what conservatives usually aim to do. Nothing about established elite, but values, institutions, traditions, etc. that’s the context of ‘conserve’ in the name.
This is “state’s rights” level of beating around the bush.
What traditions? What values? What institutions? I’ll tell you which ones.
The “tradition” of hierarchy and dominance, of the supremacy of capitalism and the Protestant work ethic, which have inevitably created an elite class.
The “values” of hyper individualism, competition and deference to authority, which have led to oligopolies forming and exerting control over society, to be defended by the state at all costs.
The institutions of the state and capital. Need I say more?
What you’re describing is really just western civilization, just in a really cynical way.
I get it, you and people like you hate western civilization. That’s why those of us who love it stamp out any communist bullshit when we see it. Because we know, we know what the point of the ‘revolution’ is, it’s to destroy the western countries.
It’s not something you’re likely to come out and admit, but when you say something like the ‘tradition of hierarchy’ well ya. What exactly is wrong with that? Dominance isn’t a well defined term, supremacy is a loaded word, I don’t know what a Protestant work ethic is in comparison to any other type of work ethic, but of course I value some kind of work ethic.
Yes there should be hierarchy. Of course.
‘Deference to authority’, is this some anarchy argument? That’s what it sounds like.
So if I break down all of what you’re saying, remove hierarchy, remove capitalism, remove competition and authority.
Okay, I take all that in and I think “hm. He wants to destroy everything that western civilization has built”.
This is why I’ll always oppose this kind of bullshit, because it’s disgusting. What you mean, if you got your way, would cause so much more death and suffering and you’re cowering behind this visage of saintly goodness. It’s gross, honestly.
And most people who argue for this I usually just assuming are misinformed dreamers hoping for a utopia that’ll never come. But then there are others, the ones who know what they’re asking for and willing to go the distance to achieve it.
Those ones are, I think, ones like you. Probably in here spreading anarchocommunist propaganda for your cause online to impressionable and well meaning kids.
People like that, know they’re trying to destroy the country and rebuild it in their own anarcho-communist image.
What you’re describing is really just western civilization, just in a really cynical way.
Do you think I’m unaware of this? Yes, that’s the prevailing ideology of neoliberalism; what modern conservatives are fighting to conserve.
I get it, you and people like you hate western civilization.
Incorrect and reductive to boot. There’s a great deal to love about western civilisation. I just don’t like neoliberal capitalism.
That’s why those of us who love it stamp out any communist bullshit when we see it. Because we know, we know what the point of the ‘revolution’ is, it’s to destroy the western countries.
That’s just paranoid red-scare propaganda. This isn’t a game of Civilization 5, and the goal of communism is not to “destroy” anything.
It’s not something you’re likely to come out and admit, but when you say something like the ‘tradition of hierarchy’ well ya. What exactly is wrong with that?
You seem to have gotten confused midway through this sentence. What do you want me to “admit”? As for what is wrong with hierarchy - I challenge you to explain what’s right about it. What is the value in placing people above and below each other?
Dominance isn’t a well defined term
Just an excuse to avoid discussing it. It’s quite well defined, studied and documented. Many forms of dominance have existed throughout history, and historians, sociologists and political scientists have long analysed its various appearances. At the very basic level, dominance is just having power over a person or group of people. It’s not hard to pin down.
supremacy is a loaded word
So what?
I don’t know what a Protestant work ethic is in comparison to any other type of work ethic, but of course I value some kind of work ethic.
Google is your friend:
“Protestant ethic, in sociological theory, the value attached to hard work, thrift, and efficiency in one’s worldly calling, which, especially in the Calvinist view, were deemed signs of an individual’s election, or eternal salvation.” Max Weber
“A view of life that promotes hard work and self-discipline as a means to material prosperity. It is called Protestant because some Protestant groups believe that such prosperity is a sign of God’s grace.” Dictionary.com
Put simply, if you’re rich, it means God loves you, and the money is a reward from God, because you must have worked really hard for it.
Yes there should be hierarchy. Of course.
Why? You can’t just say “of course”.
‘Deference to authority’, is this some anarchy argument? That’s what it sounds like.
It could be, or it could be a communist argument, or a socialist argument, or a Georgist argument, a mutualist argument, or any number of ideologies opposed to an automatic respect of people arbitrarily placed above them.
What of it?
So if I break down all of what you’re saying, remove hierarchy, remove capitalism, remove competition and authority.
Okay, I take all that in and I think “hm. He wants to destroy everything that western civilization has built”.
That’s all you think western civilisation is? What do you think we were doing before capitalism came around? What do you think people do with their lives when they’re not at work? Have you never heard of culture, art, philosophy? Have you never experienced community?
This is why I’ll always oppose this kind of bullshit, because it’s disgusting.
Explain how. And please avoid using such emotional language, it reeks of blatant manipulation.
What you mean, if you got your way
This isn’t “my way”. It’s not about me or what I want.
would cause so much more death and suffering
How?
and you’re cowering behind this visage of saintly goodness.
Here you go using emotional rhetoric again. I’m not projecting any visage. I haven’t pronounced my beliefs as saintly (I in fact haven’t stated my beliefs at all) and haven’t made any moral statements. This is just rhetoric at work.
It’s gross, honestly.
Once again, personal attacks and emotional appeals.
And most people who argue for this I usually just assuming are misinformed dreamers hoping for a utopia that’ll never come.
Why do you assume that? Do you have any idea what any of these people actually believe?
But then there are others, the ones who know what they’re asking for and willing to go the distance to achieve it.
And what are they asking for? You have no idea. You haven’t even bothered to ask. You just accept what Fox News tells you.
Those ones are, I think, ones like you. Probably in here spreading anarchocommunist propaganda for your cause online to impressionable and well meaning kids.
This is blatant emotional pandering. Stop the faux sympathy train and come back to reality.
People like that, know they’re trying to destroy the country and rebuild it in their own anarcho-communist image.
What, exactly, do you think anarcho-communism is? And what makes you think building it entails “destroying the country”? And why assume this is a personal crusade motivated by individual beliefs, and not a social movement built out of collective efforts?
What Lemmy client are you using? All the ones I’ve tried allow you to jump right to the comment thread to read the comment in context. Reading via inbox sounds really disjointed and painful.
Weird; I wonder if it’s a Memmy/instance interaction; I’m writing this via Memmy and am (mostly) getting threads to work. They were broken for a few versions though.
It’s super frustrating, I would like to know why someone said “good luck with your wish then” before I respond to them, but I can’t find the post in the thread lol
I’d feel bad just responding randomly, and sometimes I get it wrong and respond out of context to people, which must be super frustrating for them.
It doesn’t help that most things I comment get a ton of replies, I understand why they do (a lot of people here disagree with me and want to tell me how horrible and stupid I am)
Damn, man
It must be miserable being you
Why not actually respond to what they said? Conservatism is inherently about conserving power in the elite. It seems a bit immature to respond to an (admittedly snide and sarcastic) challenge to your beliefs with a personal insult. All they did was accurately break down what your comment represents.
I’m having a dozen conversations and 80% of the time when I click on the response in my inbox to go back to the context it takes me to another post all together.
I don’t even know what our conversation has been up to this point.
What did they say? And then how did I respond? I wish you could see my inbox with all of the personal attacks I’ve received not only today, but over the last two months over different accounts lol
So if someone is being an idiot to me, I don’t have a problem being an idiot back. If you’re respectful, I’ll have a respectful conversation with you.
That entire comment was just a dodge. Do your due diligence and click “show context” (it is the bare minimum effort), and stop avoiding the subject. Or just don’t respond if you don’t want to discuss.
If you want to know what they were talking about - I already summed it up in the comment you’re responding to. Precisely so you couldn’t excuse dodging the point a second time. And yet, here you are, doing exactly that.
Do you deny that conservatism is about conserving the power in the established elite? And if so - how?
https://lemmy.one/comment/2873366
Lol this is the kind of thing that shows up in my inbox over and over and over again
I just told you, I click on the reply and it takes me to some random part of the thread. When replies start getting nested and there’s a lot of comments I can’t find the posts. And I don’t really care that much to spend the time searching, when my inbox keeps filling up with messages like the one I linked.
Conservation of tradition is what conservatives usually aim to do. Nothing about established elite, but values, institutions, traditions, etc. that’s the context of ‘conserve’ in the name.
Of course there’s a lot more to it than that.
This is “state’s rights” level of beating around the bush.
What traditions? What values? What institutions? I’ll tell you which ones.
The “tradition” of hierarchy and dominance, of the supremacy of capitalism and the Protestant work ethic, which have inevitably created an elite class.
The “values” of hyper individualism, competition and deference to authority, which have led to oligopolies forming and exerting control over society, to be defended by the state at all costs.
The institutions of the state and capital. Need I say more?
What you’re describing is really just western civilization, just in a really cynical way.
I get it, you and people like you hate western civilization. That’s why those of us who love it stamp out any communist bullshit when we see it. Because we know, we know what the point of the ‘revolution’ is, it’s to destroy the western countries.
It’s not something you’re likely to come out and admit, but when you say something like the ‘tradition of hierarchy’ well ya. What exactly is wrong with that? Dominance isn’t a well defined term, supremacy is a loaded word, I don’t know what a Protestant work ethic is in comparison to any other type of work ethic, but of course I value some kind of work ethic.
Yes there should be hierarchy. Of course.
‘Deference to authority’, is this some anarchy argument? That’s what it sounds like.
So if I break down all of what you’re saying, remove hierarchy, remove capitalism, remove competition and authority.
Okay, I take all that in and I think “hm. He wants to destroy everything that western civilization has built”.
This is why I’ll always oppose this kind of bullshit, because it’s disgusting. What you mean, if you got your way, would cause so much more death and suffering and you’re cowering behind this visage of saintly goodness. It’s gross, honestly.
And most people who argue for this I usually just assuming are misinformed dreamers hoping for a utopia that’ll never come. But then there are others, the ones who know what they’re asking for and willing to go the distance to achieve it.
Those ones are, I think, ones like you. Probably in here spreading anarchocommunist propaganda for your cause online to impressionable and well meaning kids.
People like that, know they’re trying to destroy the country and rebuild it in their own anarcho-communist image.
Do you think I’m unaware of this? Yes, that’s the prevailing ideology of neoliberalism; what modern conservatives are fighting to conserve.
Incorrect and reductive to boot. There’s a great deal to love about western civilisation. I just don’t like neoliberal capitalism.
That’s just paranoid red-scare propaganda. This isn’t a game of Civilization 5, and the goal of communism is not to “destroy” anything.
You seem to have gotten confused midway through this sentence. What do you want me to “admit”? As for what is wrong with hierarchy - I challenge you to explain what’s right about it. What is the value in placing people above and below each other?
Just an excuse to avoid discussing it. It’s quite well defined, studied and documented. Many forms of dominance have existed throughout history, and historians, sociologists and political scientists have long analysed its various appearances. At the very basic level, dominance is just having power over a person or group of people. It’s not hard to pin down.
So what?
Google is your friend:
Put simply, if you’re rich, it means God loves you, and the money is a reward from God, because you must have worked really hard for it.
Why? You can’t just say “of course”.
It could be, or it could be a communist argument, or a socialist argument, or a Georgist argument, a mutualist argument, or any number of ideologies opposed to an automatic respect of people arbitrarily placed above them.
What of it?
That’s all you think western civilisation is? What do you think we were doing before capitalism came around? What do you think people do with their lives when they’re not at work? Have you never heard of culture, art, philosophy? Have you never experienced community?
Explain how. And please avoid using such emotional language, it reeks of blatant manipulation.
This isn’t “my way”. It’s not about me or what I want.
How?
Here you go using emotional rhetoric again. I’m not projecting any visage. I haven’t pronounced my beliefs as saintly (I in fact haven’t stated my beliefs at all) and haven’t made any moral statements. This is just rhetoric at work.
Once again, personal attacks and emotional appeals.
Why do you assume that? Do you have any idea what any of these people actually believe?
And what are they asking for? You have no idea. You haven’t even bothered to ask. You just accept what Fox News tells you.
This is blatant emotional pandering. Stop the faux sympathy train and come back to reality.
What, exactly, do you think anarcho-communism is? And what makes you think building it entails “destroying the country”? And why assume this is a personal crusade motivated by individual beliefs, and not a social movement built out of collective efforts?
What Lemmy client are you using? All the ones I’ve tried allow you to jump right to the comment thread to read the comment in context. Reading via inbox sounds really disjointed and painful.
It’s Memmy app. It’s absolutely not functioning properly
Weird; I wonder if it’s a Memmy/instance interaction; I’m writing this via Memmy and am (mostly) getting threads to work. They were broken for a few versions though.
It’s super frustrating, I would like to know why someone said “good luck with your wish then” before I respond to them, but I can’t find the post in the thread lol
I’d feel bad just responding randomly, and sometimes I get it wrong and respond out of context to people, which must be super frustrating for them.
It doesn’t help that most things I comment get a ton of replies, I understand why they do (a lot of people here disagree with me and want to tell me how horrible and stupid I am)
Yeah, that’s why they want change.