Thread has been deleted
Last comment
conservatism utopian
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
conservatism aims to maintain society as it is conservatism therefore proposes we already live in the best of all worlds, so nothing can be changed for the better, which is obviously not true meaning conservatism is in itself inconclusive and utopian
2019-02-15 23:09
no one cares 😎😎😎
2019-02-15 23:09
sounds great to me
2019-02-15 23:10
#3
 | 
Brazil bandicoot 
there such a a thing as holding on to what you have left. Things could get worse
2019-02-15 23:11
#5
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
there are equally things that could become better
2019-02-15 23:14
#9
 | 
Brazil bandicoot 
sure. just playing devil's advocate
2019-02-15 23:15
You can change the things that got worse most of the time, or learn from them.
2019-02-15 23:17
>german >politics Pick one. First you try to conquer europe 2 times now you replace western europe with muslims
2019-02-15 23:13
#6
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
XD
2019-02-15 23:14
+1
2019-02-15 23:27
#27
allu | 
North America hesh 
+1 rekt
2019-02-16 03:29
All your reply stands on the "obviously" as a definitive proof. If you want to be credible you need to elaborate that part.
2019-02-15 23:15
#10
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
so you assume most people are not aware that we have problems that can be fixed? thats strange
2019-02-15 23:16
Take the global warming problem. Fixing it has a cost : it would change many people way of living even their quality of life probably. Question is, to solve a problem, "Is the solution better than the problem"? And for that very exemple, many people would probably answer no if they are told how big needed changes are. Boom you got realistic conservatives
2019-02-15 23:20
#25
 | 
United Kingdom xTheDeadPixel 
So...moral of the story is...even though it's worth it, why waste the effort? Aren't conservatives supposed to be the ones that constantly tell you to work hard?
2019-02-16 02:28
#28
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
lets do something against global warming yeah, we could do something against global warming now, but if we realize 50 years later, that we would have to put so much effort into it, then we wouldve completely taken care of that you can once again breave the air in cities, rivers are no longer toxic, cars no longer stink and we arent dependent on dictators and their oil reserves anymore, for nothing except our own contribution.. damn, then we'd be pretty upset
2019-02-16 03:38
See #23 for more explanation. My point is not to talk about anything ideological, or even to take a side in the global warming I used as exemple. But just to contradict OP saying conservatism is always utopian
2019-02-16 13:06
#26
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
fixing global warming would change many peoples quality of life to the better, namely the ones most affected by it oh yeah us poor westeners would have to slightly reduce our superflous consum habits and the cooperations would have to renounce a fraction of their profit to reduce environmental harm, which would make the owner and shareholders sooo much poorer, put them on an existential crisis perhaps mate get real there are so many one-sided problems that only require a reform and do not cause additional problems
2019-02-16 03:22
I don't want to highjack this discussion with the global warming. It was just an exemple to illustrate conservatism is not utopian. As I already made 1000+ words long post on this very website debunking anti global warming critic, explaining most of mechanism in motion, etc.. You can't really put me in the anti global warmin conservatives. hltv.org/forums/threads/1972717/polar-vo.. hltv.org/forums/threads/1971816/climate-.. etc.. Again, it is just an exemple to explain how anyone can become conservatist based on logic (opposed to feelings) and so not utopians.
2019-02-16 13:19
#35
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
i wasnt trying to put you into an anti-global warming position, if you felt like that i apologize however, i think my thesis still stands, as i was talking about the ideology itself, while you defined your political "realistic conservatism" to be mostly conservative but with progessive elements too it if neccessary
2019-02-17 03:45
french_guy_tries_to_use_brain_and_horriby_fails
2019-02-15 23:18
According to Occam's razor, if you don't understand a french, it is most likely because you are not intelligent enough.
2019-02-15 23:22
Every nation except france thinks they are braindead and most frenchies are unable to understand anyone who doesnt speak french.
2019-02-15 23:25
Other nations can think what they want about themselves. And as I just proven, you should write your sentences better before criticizing other's understanding of foreign language.
2019-02-15 23:32
Ok mr. I post in broken English but edit every post 5 times to get everything correct
2019-02-15 23:34
That's the best argument you were able to come up with? EDITED for your pleasure
2019-02-16 00:00
#16
 | 
Japan hirohito 
conservatism wants to go back to the better times, forgetting the products of insane men like genderterror, political correction, d*mocracy and eurokolkhoz
2019-02-15 23:23
Going back is reactionary not conservatism.
2019-02-15 23:25
#21
 | 
Japan hirohito 
not really. actually, reactionism is conservatism and even some dictionaries match them as synonymes. also, you pretty much aren't a conservatist if you want to just keep things as they are, because most of the ideas of conservatism don't exist in the 'western' countries, such as authority, hierarchy or monarchy, also the tradition and religion are being raped constantly. if you want to keep things as they are nowadays, you should be considered a progressivist.
2019-02-15 23:34
I beg to disagree as progressivism is coming from the word "progress". A progress induce a change. I believe you are judging these ideologies from your own point of view. Explaining why you can compare countries between those that can or cannot be conservative. Meanwhile definitions are supposed to be absolute. Also, you are probably referring to the figurative definition of conservatism, progressivism (where conservatism is right winged and progressivism left winged for exemple). While I'm talking about the literal definition : conservatism wants to make things stay the same, progressivism wants a change. I don't like today's definition drift, as they are made mostly for political communication : according to them progress is always good, conservatism always bad. I believe we can both find arguments of this being not true. So I rather speak about the real definitions, the literal ones, of these words and use them as it. conservatism from latin "conservatio" meaning "keep" progressivism from latin "progredior" meaning "moving forward" To keep you life can be good, to move forward a danger can be bad.
2019-02-16 00:01
#30
 | 
United States gtmaniacmda 
What you’ll find in practice is conservatives are willing to make changes, just not as readily as someone who is liberal. Especially because, despite what people want to believe, politics isn’t as black and white as ‘left’ or ‘right,’ and it is possible to be conservative on some issues and liberal on others.
2019-02-16 03:51
#36
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
well that just fortifys the thesis, doesnt it?
2019-02-17 18:05
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.