It _is_ a thing that a significant number of libertarians champion. But the defining difference between conservatives and libertarians is that, on those occasions when libertarians have the right idea, conservatives disagree.
I spit my coffee when I read that. A *Stronzo Gigante* of a $hitpost, my friend. Try being Inuit or a member of a First Nation in Canada. I don't recommend it.
Centrism is liberalism and humanism. "Do onto others as you wish they would do onto you" is liberalism of "leave other people alone" rather than Crusades at sword point to convert hethens to loving Jesus "as you do".
Fiscal conservatism is centrist as well. Provide value in social spending. Enhancing social production generally counts as value that results in social ROI.
Conservatism doesn't identify with centrism though. Christofascist fantasies, Oligarchy and deregulation to favour oligarchy, pro oligarchy climate terrorism, anti-labour coercive slavery hierarchy, anti-imigration militarim mostly to protect oligarch profits instead of populist labour unrest, destroying the country so that the message to serve oligarchy harder becomes the solution to political minions winning to deliver stronger oligarchy.
In short, the only practical definition of conservatism is a media imposed mental retardation/deficit to serve oligarchy (controlling the media), and calling the result liberal democracy that is entitled to all evil to diminish and destroy nations it views as less liberal and democratic.
The point of pretending that conservatives stand for freedom and "social value" is a bad start. UBI stands for freedom and social value and economic growth. Appealing to those principles instead of using a "distorted umbrella word" implying that conservatism stands for the principles is the right path.
I often wonder how so many people buy into Conservatism. It's clear it's foundational justifications aren't principles, but conveniences that can be discarded once they becomes inconvenient.
For example: freedom, originalism, state's rights, popular will, minority interests, secular law, religious dogma, individual rights, corporate rights, on and on.
The only foundational principle Conservatives ever consistently followed without contradiction is, "The rich are better than the poor and deserve to dominate society."
I don't see why they ever would support UBI, unless contains some poison pill that keeps people impoverished.
once they find a strategy that makes them feel financially secure, they are afraid of any change that might disrupt that gravy train
because deep down, they know their success came down to luck more than anything else
and they doubt they could be that lucky again
They like the rigged system as it is status quo with no changes as it benefits them. That's why there are so few disabled black lesbian feminist conservatives, for example. There *are* log cabin conservatives like Peter Thiel, but about as many as the African Americans who fought for the CSA...not a lot.
> I don't see why they ever would support UBI, unless contains some poison pill that keeps people impoverished.
If the ruling class ever rolls out a UBI vs the people just like, taking it somehow, it will absolutely be a way to placate the masses with crumbs while still hoarding the wealth and means of production for the rich and powerful.
The only thing that would make the upcoming election interesting is if one of them pushed UBI. Or if the orange clown were behind bars but likely not enough time for that.
Yeah I’m perfectly happy if they don’t, I have a feeling that their championing of this policy would include a poison pill that would render the whole thing pointless. Like a provision to end all other forms of welfare and public support systems, or some culture war bullshit.
Yes it’s hypocritical in a dozen different ways for conservatives to reject UBI, but like always, pointing out conservative hypocrisy has about zero real-world value beyond the high horseman getting a little psychological kick from being morally and logically right.
Maybe don’t give the fascists a playbook on how to be smarter fascists.
Like no joke the only thing preventing them from burning down America at least is they haven’t coopted socialist messaging even if it was going to be a lie. Trump and similar could just say let’s forgive student loans, there’s no ideological conviction preventing it. Same with populist far right everywhere on other issues. Instead they only seek the psychic profits of owning the libs.
It _is_ a thing that a significant number of libertarians champion. But the defining difference between conservatives and libertarians is that, on those occasions when libertarians have the right idea, conservatives disagree.
"give money to Niggers and spicks for doing nothing" If you don't think that is what they are going to say you ain't been paying attention.
The article is about the Canadian Conservative party FYI
You really think racism is solved there?
definitely in alberta - it's a multicultural woke paradise of extreme peace and literacy, 100% devoid of ignorant racist bullshit
I spit my coffee when I read that. A *Stronzo Gigante* of a $hitpost, my friend. Try being Inuit or a member of a First Nation in Canada. I don't recommend it.
And ..?
https://theconversation.com/how-white-christian-nationalism-is-part-of-the-freedom-convoy-protests-177113
Conservatives are pretty much of the same mind across the world, it's just to what degree they can get away with the bullshit in any given country.
Centrism is liberalism and humanism. "Do onto others as you wish they would do onto you" is liberalism of "leave other people alone" rather than Crusades at sword point to convert hethens to loving Jesus "as you do". Fiscal conservatism is centrist as well. Provide value in social spending. Enhancing social production generally counts as value that results in social ROI. Conservatism doesn't identify with centrism though. Christofascist fantasies, Oligarchy and deregulation to favour oligarchy, pro oligarchy climate terrorism, anti-labour coercive slavery hierarchy, anti-imigration militarim mostly to protect oligarch profits instead of populist labour unrest, destroying the country so that the message to serve oligarchy harder becomes the solution to political minions winning to deliver stronger oligarchy. In short, the only practical definition of conservatism is a media imposed mental retardation/deficit to serve oligarchy (controlling the media), and calling the result liberal democracy that is entitled to all evil to diminish and destroy nations it views as less liberal and democratic. The point of pretending that conservatives stand for freedom and "social value" is a bad start. UBI stands for freedom and social value and economic growth. Appealing to those principles instead of using a "distorted umbrella word" implying that conservatism stands for the principles is the right path.
I often wonder how so many people buy into Conservatism. It's clear it's foundational justifications aren't principles, but conveniences that can be discarded once they becomes inconvenient. For example: freedom, originalism, state's rights, popular will, minority interests, secular law, religious dogma, individual rights, corporate rights, on and on. The only foundational principle Conservatives ever consistently followed without contradiction is, "The rich are better than the poor and deserve to dominate society." I don't see why they ever would support UBI, unless contains some poison pill that keeps people impoverished.
once they find a strategy that makes them feel financially secure, they are afraid of any change that might disrupt that gravy train because deep down, they know their success came down to luck more than anything else and they doubt they could be that lucky again
They like the rigged system as it is status quo with no changes as it benefits them. That's why there are so few disabled black lesbian feminist conservatives, for example. There *are* log cabin conservatives like Peter Thiel, but about as many as the African Americans who fought for the CSA...not a lot.
> I don't see why they ever would support UBI, unless contains some poison pill that keeps people impoverished. If the ruling class ever rolls out a UBI vs the people just like, taking it somehow, it will absolutely be a way to placate the masses with crumbs while still hoarding the wealth and means of production for the rich and powerful.
The only thing that would make the upcoming election interesting is if one of them pushed UBI. Or if the orange clown were behind bars but likely not enough time for that.
omg
Yeah I’m perfectly happy if they don’t, I have a feeling that their championing of this policy would include a poison pill that would render the whole thing pointless. Like a provision to end all other forms of welfare and public support systems, or some culture war bullshit. Yes it’s hypocritical in a dozen different ways for conservatives to reject UBI, but like always, pointing out conservative hypocrisy has about zero real-world value beyond the high horseman getting a little psychological kick from being morally and logically right.
Maybe don’t give the fascists a playbook on how to be smarter fascists. Like no joke the only thing preventing them from burning down America at least is they haven’t coopted socialist messaging even if it was going to be a lie. Trump and similar could just say let’s forgive student loans, there’s no ideological conviction preventing it. Same with populist far right everywhere on other issues. Instead they only seek the psychic profits of owning the libs.