MeDotOrg wrote:ldsfaqs wrote:Lincoln was a Conservative, because Classical Liberalism is and was always Conservatism.
We have finally evolved into Newspeak:
War is Peace!
Slavery is Freedom!
Classic Liberalism is and always was Conservatism!
When a liberal idea is bad, it is liberal, when it is good, it is
classic liberal, and therefore conservative! Brilliant!
Problem with your judgment is that it ignores the facts. It's not "newspeak" it's simply the history. Classical liberalism was all about freedom, same way conservatives are. Modern liberals are fascists, socialist, and communists, completely anathema to founding father ideals.
Conservatives aren't taking away your light bulbs, your big gulps, and on and on.
Never mind that this country was founded by radical revolutionaries steeped in the liberal thinking of the Enlightenment. John Locke is now a conservative!
Key word is "enlightenment"..... Modern liberalism is not "enlightenment", it's dark ages.
It was the LIBERAL Lester Maddux who kept ax handles in a barrel at the front of his chicken shack for his patrons to use on any Negro who tried to sit down. It was the LIBERAL Bull Conner who used high powered fire hoses and attack dogs to subdue the conservative protesters.
That's right, both Liberals, both Democrats.
As to "conservative protesters", I wouldn't say that, I would say they were all points of the spectrum, passionate youth, radicals, etc. Both "standard" Democrat's and Repub's stayed out of the "anarchy". For example, Martin Luther King was a conservative republican, but he did have a few liberal leanings, maybe a bit like Bush and JFK.
As I'm sure, 30 years from now, it will be the LIBERALS who opposed gay marriage, because Conservatives are for liberty!
Again, your fantasy straw-men don't make your point, even in the future.
Lincoln, in a letter to Col. William F. Elkins, 1864: "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
Tell me, ldsfaqs, are you more likely to hear those words at the 2012 Democratic or Republican Convention?
Thank you for quoting this, you prove my point....
1. It was a Letter. Private concerns
2. It was future concerns of some trends he was worried might occur.
3. While the first half seems to support your liberal agenda, the second half is a conservative one.
4. It's not "corporations" who prolong their reign by working on the "prejudices of the people" it liberals and liberalism (a.k.a. progressives), by demonizing, calling everyone not them racists, calling all corporations and the rich greedy and needing their money taken. Further, wealth has never been in more hands in a society than it now has. The only way his worry will come true is if liberals are allowed to rule. Because they take from the rich, making them low, so the only ones who have power is them and a few of their pet corporations, just like Hitlers Germany. Conservatives want everyone to be raised up, as many as possible rich, people in charge of their own money and generosity, power to the people, not government or corporations.
5. Even more, you can't cherry pick one concern of what future might happen in his thoughts with both reality AND with what all of his other views were..... He was considerably conservative.
6. Conservatives will demonize a corporation if they need to be demonized. Have we not demonized GM???
When there is wrong, we demonize justly and righteously.....
We are not you, making everyone with money the bad guys.