Message from @A. Spader
Discord ID: 620780719937028126
now if only we can get rid of this commie pope
It is still odd to me that secular conservatism is a thing, though. I think that secularist conservatism is often just a more classical liberalism.
not wrong in that
I'm still hope people give that old liberatarian thing a try
At least I find there's an acknowledgement among those circles that Judeo-Christian civilization brought that about
and all of its wonders
its because george will and charles krauthammer took the place in intellectual conservatism that buckley once held
secular conservatism has been the governing philosophy of republican policy makers for the last 20 years or so
Maybe longer
despite media perception and what religious 'leaders' might tell you
principles without an anchor
Essentially. For what will we conserve believing that there is only death that awaits us?
^^^^^^
We will conserve...nothing. I guess.
Wait, so you only conserve for the promise of a big payout in the afterlife?
Nope
The main fault I find in libertarianism is that it focuses too much on the individual
Society doesn't exist without families
You conserve your life eternally through Christ.
you can be secular for something to leave behind for _someone_
so far, the only real way to focus that is to have children of your own
It's not a payout in the monetary sense, or something.
Families have to come from the social realm. Libertarianism focuses on the individual in a political sense
It's still external rewards
@vngxl what if you conserve all your life, but never heard of Christ?
but that's the thing, where does libertarianism come in with a, I guess, cure, in the societal realm?
Where does Capitalism?
You have to clarify your question a bit.
You mean like uncontacted tribes?
What does Christianity say about running a successful business
So they're two legs to a table; what would be the third and fourth?
what I'm saying is that libertarianism seeks to limit the state completely, while failing to understand without a morally virtuous populace, all libertarianism will produce is a decade of anarchy followed by a century of tyranny
What do you mean by limit the state "completely"?
to prevent it from being capable of tyranny
If anything, libertarianism opens the door for social conservatives to shine, no?
You can't do that
right, that's what I'm saying
You can limit tyrannical capacity, but you can never eliminate it
Libertarianism is based on that principle
So long as you're still allowing a government you are creating an easy target for power accumulation and centralization, which is why vigilance must be a focus