I don't feel like anyone on here is a real conservative who wants actual small government

I don't feel like anyone on here is a real conservative who wants actual small government.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism_in_the_United_States
aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReview201516/Gov
conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/11/populism-nationalism-and-americanism
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>wants small government
>increases military budget

This TBQH Senpai. Everyone here just wants a fascist leader.

I'm for small government economically but people are too dumb to fend for themselves, that's why we need law and order.

Did you try googling r/conservative?
faggot

We killed fascists to keep our freedom and these idiots always post that they want them back. Have fun kiddies when you're locked up for making a meme about the "Dear Leader"

>jew
>nazi

Does not compute. Really though, we fucking killed the facists, they are dead and the ideology doesn't work, it's just like commuism. Fascism if it was so good would've beat capitalism, but it didn't, get over it.

I think we need more of a readjustment of federalism than an actual slashing of government.

The principle of subsidiarity is that smaller governmental units should be permitted to govern themselves freely except in areas that are so critical to the overall society that you can't tolerate any derogation. For instance, first and second amendment rights should be nonderogable at all levels of government.

No, you beat the fascists and your ideology doesn't work. Secular capitalism has brought only social illness and the destruction of the genetic fabric of the west.
Your ideology is failing, not fascism.
Fascism failed only when you put it down by the sword, and it will rise again because your shitty greed based political ideology has destroyed the west.

>no true Conservative fallacy

>you literally don't fall under the definition of conservative

>"t-that's a f-fallacy!!!!"

I remember my gov teacher in high school said that we have 50 little experiments in democracy and what we like we take from each one.

Funny how the definition of conservative does not include anything about a small government.

What other ideology has improved the world so much as capitalism? Even Marx said capitalism was great. He was wrong about it being flawed though. And we put it down by the sword because it needed to be put into the ash heap of history.

There are a few. Most Sup Forumstards are too contrarian to have any political integrity.

I'd be a libertarian if the population was moral, Christian and white.

Conservatism is about traditional values. Think 1776.

^

What does this have to do with a smaller government?

Capitalism has improved the world only materialistically, while the true strength of a nation comes from it's social and genetic fabric.
Additionally, Capitalism has devolved into corporatism., and the main Capitalistic argument is that it's not true capitalism which is pretty ironic.

Yes it does.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism_in_the_United_States

It isn't true capitalism today, it's cronyism, which is why we need smaller government, these regulations and high taxes only hurt smaller businesses. As for morality, that's not for the government to legislate, that's for people to decide on their own.

Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense.

How do you prevent monopolies and govt-corp corruption with a small govt?
How do you stop the small govt from growing through unofficial channels with the help of corps?
And morals are for the govt to regulate, which is why things like pedophilia and theft are considered a crime to be punished by the govt. Or do you want a govt with no justice system?
How about cultural and/or racial quality, do you not care what morals will be the standard in America in 50 years?

This is the true failure of the Republicans.

Going populist has an inherent risk to it.

If the Democrats go populist themselves, they'll win that game by virtue of sheer numbers building for them each election.

The GOP has sacrificed its own distinct ideology for a single victory.

>Hamilton
>Lincoln
>TR
>Eisenhower
>Nixon

conservatism in the usa has been protectionist, nativist, and big government; stop humping Reagan's dead corpse you faggots

So you're saying conservatives believe in a wide range of things?

I'll say it again: No true conservative fallacy. Just because some don't believe in absolutely every aspect of it doesn't mean they aren't conservative.

Yeah, and I don't recall the Republican Party having a pro-white focus back then either.

Justice Brandeis articulated that idea quite beautifully in New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, calling the states "laboratories of democracy."

Limited government isn't conservatism, it's classical liberalism.

Vote with your dollar and make a better product. It's literally that simple, let the market decide who succeeds and who doesn't, if a monopoly happens then they must be making a damn good product. Moral wise, majority rule, if the majority of the population think it's ok, then that's what it is. I don't need Washington politicians telling me what is right and wrong.

Nope. The authoritarian left has corrupted the populace so much they cannot govern themselves well enough for now. The only solution is an Authoritarian Traditionalist right.

So like North Korea?

I want to see just how strong those principled conservatives are willing to fight for their beliefs, even if their own party leader doesn't believe in any of them.

More like 1933-1939

The smaller the better.
Note the flag.
They were concerned about never winning again, and one populist president hasnt changed the party identity yet. Lets wait and see if that's a good thing or not

1. Trump is easily the most progressive republican candidate in history, shut the fuck up already. God.

2. Shitty at history, I take it? Lincoln, just for example, is what would be by far considered a white supremacist by modern standards.

Oh so the great depression, yeah real great.

I'm a real conservative who wants small government in an all-white nation. I want our government to work as it was intended, with a representative democracy among the people worthy of holding voting power: white property-owning men.

>Limited government isn't conservatism

It is when you're trying to conserve a constitution with a very limited federal government.

In other words, conservatives screwed up so thoroughly they betrayed their own cause to become big-gvoernment tyrants.

How ironic.

I'm tempted to form an organization of Small-Government Democrats now, lol.

>I don't feel
Fuck off tumblr

I do, go fuck yourself. I think state government is plenty.

Western Conservatism is Classical Liberalism.

They are trying to preserve the way of their forefathers. And who were they? Oh, Classical Libertarians.

People need to stop assuming that American and Euro politics/identities are the same. Its Euros who love big government whether they are right or left. They've done nothing but big government for thousands of years. Americans are the ones who decided to try something different. Conservative Americans are different from Conservative Euros.

Republican my ass. He's the least conservative candidate the GOP has ever had.

Let's see if conservative principles extend to fighting an enemy of the party's own making, within its own ranks.

You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything.

Nice, so mob rule based on the hedonistic urges that were implanted into the masses brains through advertisement until a corp has a good enough product to take over the nation completely?
No thanks

Retard detected

You can't control white demographic replacement with limited government. If you're going to be an isolationist, you're going to need people to enforce your policies. The government should be doing its job by breaking up monopolies with anti-trust laws and rolling back the number of work VISAs. Also, birthright citizenship was a mistake. Every poo and their loo is shitting out kids the minute they get on US soil just so they can stay here permanently. Before we can limit government we need to stop the States from turning into the 3rd world. Principled "conservatism" won't help you conserve jack shit.

Then advocate it in this era of Big Government from both parties.

Seconded.

>but people are too dumb to fend for themselves,
Are you one of those people?

I do

>vote with your dollar
By that logic, the Saudis have more votes and say when it comes to our society than we do.

You could have converted minorities to conservatism plenty of times. But you opted for scaring white men, every time.

You played into the Democrats' hands and you know it.

Were here user.

Libertarians will always own Sup Forums we just value freedom so much that we let the little fascists play NatSoc.

This is essentially the leftist agenda in slightly edgier terms. That government in practice should be done by trained specialists rather than elected officials. The legislature gives intelligible standards to the administrative agency, which implements policy according to those standards. Some agencies, usually the older ones, are independent commissions (SEC, FEC, FCC) with fixed terms, and others are just politically headed (everything else; DOJ, FBI, NSA, FRA).

It's not a terrible idea in principle, but it's a fucking mess as it's been practiced. On one hand, you have the threat of what's called "agency capture" (where the agencies operate to empower the industry they're supposed to be independently regulating). On other hand, you have the problem of excessive delegation of legislative authority.

If you don't like it don't buy it simple as that, corporations with anti consumer practices won't last very long, and there would be no bailouts this time. And if someone tries to fuck with you, not like you wouldn't have the right to bear arms.

That's... not how it works. Communism we know doesn't work because the Soviet Union collapsed economically; the only reason Communist China is still a thing is because it embraced capitalist values.

Fascism was working until Addie Hitler thought he would split his army in half and fucking invade the Russians.

Your idelogy wasn't superior, your army was.

I do think we shouldn't let other countries have so much influence in our affairs, that isn't healthy.

...

Might makes right, and history is written by the winners.

Have you considered libertarianism? There's threads on here for it every once in a while that now get memed to death by AnCap balls

user's response would probably have been better phrased as "vote with your feet." If something is bad locally, and can't be changed through the democratic process, people should exercise their right to go someplace else.

Yeah don't give businesses you don't like your money.

That's why you are such close "allies". They just don't have that control publicly.

What we see today proves you wrong. Advertisers have found very efficient ways to influence, and even brainwash large portions of the population. Not everyone is mentally strong as you or I might be, and not everybody has influences on him other than the media(which is corp controlled unless the govt prevents it).
Basing your political ideology on economics rather than culture is unhealthy, and in the end of the day the corporations end up controlling the nation.
I do agree on the bearing arms thing, but only in a racially and culturally hegemonic.

Listen you fuck, if you're basically a natsoc you're not conservative at all.

That's why we need better education, teach them to be suspicious of the powers that be and to always question authority. Always ask "is this the best possible option"

>If you disagree with ANY part of my philosophy then you're not a REAL conservative

Keep digging that hole deeper, faggot.

Well, see, that's where the federal responsibility to intervene can come in. When corporations are exercising influence in such a way as to prevent individuals from exercising free choice, then the federal system starts to fall apart.

It's the same problem as with administrative agencies now, though.

>wants small government
>wants borders
pick one and only one
Small government is doing nothing at all. Perfect example of small government: Merkel. She just sits and everything is openly free.

There are many people on here that support Ron Paul's ideas, so you're wrong.

Local equvalent of "silent majority" here are libertarians who just dont see a point in arguing with "EVERYTHING IS DEGENERACY BAN EVERYTHING" sub-humans.

No, "we" killed fascists because they fought back against imperialism.

Until the academia is influenced.
Corps are not doing anything wrong, technically, they have just created a system where the mains of whoever goes outside is constantly polluted. You cannot do something wrong and get off scot free due to a technicality in a fascist nation.

That's not small government, that's no government. A government's first and second jobs are to protect and represent its people.

It's much harder to tell someone on foodstamps to vote for less government than doing the same for a white home owner. Either way, pre Trump right wing politics were abysmal. You can't have small government when you have big, international multicorps merging and expanding and, at the same time, have a bullshit war going on. Bush was the final nail in the neocon coffin. After 8 years of the democrats sucking off the same special interests they pretended to hate, people have gotten much more fed up with our government. Hopefully, if Trump is legit, it's going to be much easier to sell black and hispanics on protectionist tariffs and corporate exit taxes than it would be to have them vote in favor of the estate tax.

>Goes on a shitposting anime meme website
>I don't feel like anyone on here is a real conservative

>You cannot do something wrong and get off scot free due to a technicality in a fascist nation.

That's a little idealistic. The problem with fascism is that, just as in our current system, people start gaming the system to their personal benefit, and to the great disadvantage many people. Because rule of law takes a backseat to an individual government agent's interpretation of what's right or wrong, there is a much greater danger of an unfair outcome once you take gamesmanship and corruption into account.

This. Facism is pretty much what China is, yes they do legislate morality. And look how immoral they actually are, and how corrupt that country is.

Nah, the perfect government/economic structure for technological advancement and general prosperity is a fascist government with a limited free market (i.e benevolent authoritarism).

The single biggest issue with capitalism is that it doesn't reward you directly on skills or talents but rather on your value in the eyes of the market and how much capital you're able to use. You could be the most gifted engineer in the world but as an employee, it's the owners of the company (investors) that will reap the benefits of your endeavors. These investors don't produce jack shit, they simply employ their capital smartly to see it grow exponentially while all the wagecucks get fucked. Wage increases haven't increased at the same rate as labor productivity has - meaning these companies are making higher profits but not "trickling it down" cause there's an oversaturation of labor on the market. Income disparity will only increase as human labor becomes less and less relevant. There's also the tendency for oligopolies to form since larger firms can simply buyout smaller ones rather than compete, solidifying their market share and decreasing the elasticity of their prices (at the loss of the consumer). Any government interventions can be handled by lobbying. You also have a lot of celebrities who don't produce anything of consequence to society but are extremely wealthy.


Under a fascist government, the government can employ the capital in a utilitarian manner of maximum efficiency. Rather than waste it on stupid celebrities and business owners, it can spend 60% of their budget on scientific research and engineering - making engineers, scientists, mathematicians, and medical professionals the most coveted careers - as it should be since they're the ones directly enhancing the quality of life.

Which is why racial and cultural hegemony is required. Because then the ideas that the govt regulates stem out of the culture, and not the opposite. Couple that with the right to bear arms and a good anti corruption system (hint:executions) a govt will not dare to fuck over the citizens in any significant way.
Additionally you have no business talking about idealism, the way you describe capitalism and human nature.

you've got to be your own man, not a puppet on a string.

What about roads?

Checkmate Leppotarians

Australia has a small government. EU has a small government, they literally cut all inspectors of countries and concentrated them to EU inspectors. Small government = centralized bank of EU, while back in Socialistic times we had central bank per country. Small government = concentration of power unto global elite aka small number of people control it all. Small government = moving production to main cities = destruction of production in small cities. Yes indeed jobs are dying in small cities, everything moves to main cities. USA has bigger government in past and federal reserve wasn't controlled by Jew elites.
aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReview201516/Gov
Small government = big migration aka elites replace you with cheaper alternative because nobody controls them.
Germany: 10 million foreign born, population 81 million = 12% foreign born
Australia: 7 million foreign born, population 24 million = 30% foreign born
Switzerland: 2 million foreign born, population 8 million = 25% foreign born
Sweden: 1.5 million foreign born, population 10 million = 15% foreign born
You see Australia has very small government.

The fact that their culture is corrupt is unrelated to their political system - which is not fascist for the record.

if 100% of your labor, land, and capital isn't being used for technological progress, you're a flawed and inefficient system. It's really that simple.

They are not communist if that is what you are implying. Their name says they are, but they're not.

Because they are not. They are big government nationalists. Their ideology has been tried with:

-Theodore Roosevelt.
-Howard Taft.
-Woodrow Wilson.
-Herbert Hoover.
-Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
-Lyndon Baines Johnson.
-Richard Millhouse Nixon.
-George W. Bush.
And, lastly, but not least,
-Barack Hussein Obama.

Tariffs, price and wage controls, government intervention in the economy through "infrastructure spending", trade embargos, and bailouts, have all been tried by the above men. How is Trump going to turn out any different?

conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/11/populism-nationalism-and-americanism

>Small government = concentration of power unto global elite aka small number of people control it all
No, you've got it backwards. Small government = minimal power afforded to elite, let the people sort the rest out.

Yes, I was not implying that they are. You were implying that they are fascist though, or that fascism always ends up like china's state, which is not true.

Then what would you say they are, like what political system are they using?

Who's going to control elite? Only government can. Best government is largest government possible. When you have government people everywhere, like one in every 10 person, there's literally no chance of elites ever existing, they are dead in their tracks, they can't hide money, they can't steal money, they can't exist, which is why Jews hate Socialism, they can't invest.

So direct democracy?

>Which is why racial and cultural hegemony is required.
I think you have a point, that a racially and culturally homogenous society would not have such severe problems. But because the international now prohibits forced population transfers, apartheid, and excessive inhibition of movement, homogeneity is going to gradually become more and more of a historical oddity than an aspirational goal.

> Couple that with the right to bear arms and a good anti corruption system (hint:executions) a govt will not dare to fuck over the citizens in any significant way.
Interesting thought. I'm not sure how exactly those two would balance out in practice. I will say that it seems unlikely for a fascist society to tolerate the dissension that the right to bear arms is intended to protect.

>Additionally you have no business talking about idealism, the way you describe capitalism and human nature.
Tu quoque.

>your civilian life is affected by militiray budget

>having property taken to fund something doesn't affect civilian life
Really?

Or bureaucracy. I don't think it's a likely system to function at least so long as human labor is required.

Military is the only government program that I approve of.

>How is Trump going to turn out any different?
thats what we still don't know
we're hoping for small government
he did promise just that, and says he's sticking to that plan
we're going to have to wait and see