home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!BROWNVM.BITNET!PL436000
- Message-ID: <POLITICS%92122110435344@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
- Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 10:39:20 EST
- Sender: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET>
- From: Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
- Subject: Re: conservatism
- Lines: 34
-
- >From: Grzegorz Albinowski <caius@II.UJ.EDU.PL>
- >
- >Jamie wrote:
- >>Classically conservatives are those who are (1) in favor of the status quo,
- >
- >Not exactly.
- >
- >Conservatism is a set of values based on superiority of natural (or divine)
- >law over established law.
-
- That is not what English speakers mean by "Conservatism." Nor does
- it have much of anything to do with the history of the term.
-
- During the 17th century, most of the natural law advocates were
- not conservatives at all. Indeed, it's ALMOST the opposite. The
- naturalists criticized positive law by reference to natural law,
- while the conservatives denied either that natural law was a
- real thing or that it had any relevance to positive law.
-
- >Now, when this situation is no longer true, when free market economy
- >and the right to posses are publically challenged, when homosexuality
- >is widely considered normal, the conservatives have to fight to
- >re-establish the virtues, return to the values. It is no longer in favor
- >of status quo. It requires reforms. Reforms in the opposite direction
- >that the trends in the last years.
-
- Radical reform is the antithesis of conservatism.
-
- >Disclaimer: I am *NOT* an expert at conservatism. Please have it in mind
- >when flaming or associating MY views to other people.
-
- There was never any doubt about THAT, dear Caius.
-
- Jamie
-