On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:41:27 -0400, John H
wrote:
On 22 Jun 2004 14:39:14 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:
FASCINATING DEMONSTRATION
of conservbative logic.
1. Make an assumption
2. Declare you own assumption "true"
2. (a) Make additional assumptions that rely on the truth of the previous
assumption.
3. Decide your newly discovered truth is holy writ and become self righteous in
its promulgation.
Thanks for sharing!
Dave Hall wrote:
So, judging from your definition, a "new" conservative is someone who
used to be something else but is now conservative. Since the
ideological opposite of conservative is liberal, then following that
logic, the conclusion can be drawn that a "new" conservative is most
likely an "old" liberal. A former liberal who now, after having to
move out of their parent's house, getting a job of their own,
starting a family, and realizing how the world really works, has now
matured and come to the realization that liberal idealism is a joke,
which tries to force equality where it can't exist naturally.
Consequently, their viewpoint have changed to embrace what traditional
conservative values are.
So a "neo conservative" is a liberal convert. Seems to be a lot of
those lately. Liberalism is having a tough time holding on to people
over the age of 30. Unless, of course, they haven't yet achieved
anything, and still look to the government for "help"......
Dave
Maybe Dave just used a fairly standard and respected source for his definition,
Meriam-Webster's dictionary, which defines a neoconservative: a former liberal
espousing political conservatism.
It was even simpler than that. I just applied a chain of simple logic
based on the definitions previously provided. If "neo" is new, then if
someone is a "neo"conservative, that implies that they were
previously something else. The most common "other" ideology would be a
liberal. Therefore, a "new" conservative would most likely be an "old"
liberal.
Of course there is always a few exceptions to this (A disclaimer for
guys like Doug K, who like to construct strawman rebuttals to prove
those few exceptions, as if that invalidates the rule).
So, his initial assumption was pretty darn correct. However, since Webster's
does not put any time reference in its definition, the assumption that the
liberal who switched must be old is just that - an assumption.
The term "old" does not refer so much to a particular age, as it does
to a previous position.
There are both young and old neoconservatives.
It's never too late to wake up and smell the coffee ;-)
Many of us, during high school
and college, considered ourselves "liberal," but woke up and realized that the
rhetoric dealing with helping the poor was just that. The name of the game is
power, whether the clothing is sheep's or not.
Experience and cynicism will do that to a person. I was very
idealistic when I was in school. Life's hard lessons soon evaporated
that.
Dave