CosmoEcological Civlizations - PostCapitalistic
Economies & Politics, Part 1a

by R.E. Slater

September 5, 2020

I hope to cover the basics of political/economic ideologies simply using relevant videos and standard Wikipedia articles to help frame out a futuristic look at where a Christian-based political economic might go. Generally I will use the idea of an ecological society for this near-term futuristic vision. I find it attainable, and if done right, reflective of human and environmental justice and equality. This then would also lead us into a some kind of mutually beneficial post-capitalistic paradigm again, reflective of Christian teachings related to God's Love, Jesus' practices and teachings, and the new kingdom ethic summarized on the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5 (see NASB text here)

[The] Sermon on the Mount [is] a biblical collection of religious teachings and ethical sayings of Jesus of Nazareth, as found in Matthew, chapters 5–7. The sermon was addressed to disciples and a large crowd of listeners to guide them in a life of discipline based on a new law of love, even to enemies, as opposed to the old law of retribution. In the Sermon on the Mount are found many of the most familiar Christian homilies and sayings, including the Beatitudes and the Lord’s Prayer (qq.v.). - Encyc Britannica

Part 1 will cover the basics of political economies. Initially I thought to ex-clude "libertarianism" for the simple reason that complex governments are here to stay and will require complex governmental solutions for poly-plural multi-ethnic societies. Libertarianism proposes small governments with less footprint which I find impractical, if not pure fantasy. However, locality (and meta-localities) will drive ecological societies and for this reason, along with the fact that libertarianism is a popular ideology I will lead off with it first after a general introductory video.

Part 2 will cover the basics of cultural philosophies such as modernism et al and where these cultural movements might be taking us. Having spent a large amount of time earlier this year speaking to the fundamentals of the universe using process philosophy the principles therewith will be used to help guide us toward a process-based futurism.

And finally, in Part 3, I will attempt to describe what future ecological civilizations may look like under a whole new kind of political-economic schema.

Soooo, here we go....

Topics to be Covered

Part 1

Libertarianism
(Classic, Enlightenment) Liberalism
(Americanized) Modern Liberalism
Social Liberalism
Neo-Conservatism
Conservatism
Neo-Liberalism
Summary 1 - Post-Capitalist Protestant View
Summary 2 - Post-Capitalist Catholic View

Part 2

Modernism
Postmodernism
Post-Postmodernism
Hypermodernism
Transmodernism
Metamodernism

Part 3

Post-Capitalism Economies
CcosmoEcological Civilizations

* * * * * * * * *

Political Ideology: Crash Course Government and Politics #35

Oct 16, 2015

So today Craig is going to look at political ideology in America. We're going to focus on liberals and conservatives and talk about the influencers of both of these viewpoints. Now, it's important to remember that political ideologies don't always perfectly correspond with political parties, and this correspondence becomes less and less likely over time. So, sure we can say that Democrats tend to be liberal and Republicans tend to be conservative, but we're not going to be talking about political parties in this episode. It's also important to note, that there are going to be a lot of generalizations here, as most peoples' ideologies fall on a spectrum, but we're going to try our best *crosses fingers* to summarize the most commonly held viewpoints for each of these positions as they are used pretty frequently in discussions of American politics.

Capitalism will eat democracy -- unless we speak up | Yanis Varoufakis

Feb 15, 2016

Have you wondered why politicians aren't what they used to be, why governments seem unable to solve real problems? Economist Yanis Varoufakis, the former Minister of Finance for Greece, says that it's because you can be in politics today but not be in power — because real power now belongs to those who control the economy. He believes that the mega-rich and corporations are cannibalizing the political sphere, causing financial crisis. In this talk, hear his dream for a world in which capital and labor no longer struggle against each other, "one that is simultaneously libertarian, Marxist and Keynesian."

* * * * * * * * *

LIBERTARIANISM

What is a Libertarian?

Nov 13, 2014

Hip Hughes - Nailing down the basics on the

political ideology known as Libertarianism.

Libertarianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Libertarianism (from Latin: libertas, meaning "freedom"; from French: libertaire, meaning "libertarian") is a political philosophy and movement that upholds liberty as a core principle.[1] Libertarians seek to maximize political freedom and autonomy, emphasizing individualism, freedom of choice and voluntary association.[2] Libertarians share a skepticism of authority and state power, but they diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing economic and political systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power, often calling for the restriction or dissolution of coercive social institutions. Different categorizations have been used to distinguish various forms of libertarianism.[3][4] This is done to distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.[5]

Libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists,[6] especially social anarchists,[7] but more generally libertarian communists/Marxists and libertarian socialists.[8][9] Those libertarians seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects to usufruct property norms, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty.[10][11][12][13]

Left-libertarian[14][15][16][17][18] ideologies include anarchist schools of thought, alongside many other anti-paternalist, New Left schools of thought centered around economic egalitarianism as well as geolibertarianism, green politics, market-oriented left-libertarianism and the Steiner–Vallentyne school.[14][17][19][20][21] In the mid-20th century, right-libertarian[15][18][22][23] ideologies such as anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted[8][24] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.[25] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States,[23] where it advocates civil liberties,[26] natural law,[27] free-market capitalism[28][29] and a major reversal of the modern welfare state.[30]

* * * * * * * * *

LIBERALISM

What is a Liberal? Ideology Explained

Nov 16, 2014

Hip Hughes - A summary of social liberalism through

the lens of political ideology. Measure your own political

compass here http://www.politicalcompass.org/test.

Liberalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before the law.[1][2][3] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but they generally support free markets, free trade, limited government, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), capitalism, democracy, secularism, gender equality, racial equality, internationalism, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion.[4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Yellow is the political colour most commonly associated with liberalism.[11][12][13]

Liberalism became a distinct movement in the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among Western philosophers and economists. Liberalism sought to replace the norms of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, the divine right of kings and traditional conservatism with representative democracy and the rule of law. Liberals also ended mercantilist policies, royal monopolies and other barriers to trade, instead promoting free trade and free markets.[14] Philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a distinct tradition, based on the social contract, arguing that each man has a natural right to life, liberty and property and governments must not violate these rights.[15] While the British liberal tradition has emphasized expanding democracy, French liberalism has emphasized rejecting authoritarianism and is linked to nation-building.[16]

Leaders in the Glorious Revolution of 1688,[17] the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789 used liberal philosophy to justify the armed overthrow of royal tyranny. Liberalism started to spread rapidly especially after the French Revolution. The 19th century saw liberal governments established in nations across Europe and South America, whereas it was well-established alongside republicanism in the United States.[18] In Victorian Britain, it was used to critique the political establishment, appealing to science and reason on behalf of the people.[19] During 19th and early 20th century, liberalism in the Ottoman Empire and Middle East influenced periods of reform such as the Tanzimat and Al-Nahda as well as the rise of constitutionalism, nationalism and secularism. These changes, along with other factors, helped to create a sense of crisis within Islam, which continues to this day, leading to Islamic revivalism. Before 1920, the main ideological opponents of liberalism were communism, conservatism and socialism,[20] but liberalism then faced major ideological challenges from fascism and Marxism–Leninism as new opponents. During the 20th century, liberal ideas spread even further, especially in Western Europe, as liberal democracies found themselves on the winning side in both world wars.[21]

In Europe and North America, the establishment of social liberalism (often called simply liberalism in the United States) became a key component in the expansion of the welfare state.[22] Today, liberal parties continue to wield power and influence throughout the world. The fundamental elements of contemporary society have liberal roots. The early waves of liberalism popularised economic individualism while expanding constitutional government and parliamentary authority.[14] Liberals sought and established a constitutional order that prized important individual freedoms, such as freedom of speech and freedom of association; an independent judiciary and public trial by jury; and the abolition of aristocratic privileges.[14] Later waves of modern liberal thought and struggle were strongly influenced by the need to expand civil rights.[23] Liberals have advocated gender and racial equality in their drive to promote civil rights and a global civil rights movement in the 20th century achieved several objectives towards both goals. Other goals often accepted by liberals include universal suffrage and universal access to education.

* * * * * * * * *

MODERN LIBERALISM

What is Modern Liberalism and how is it different from Classic Liberalism? Unsurprisingly, the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 60s upended classic American liberalism moving it out of both parties and into the democratic party as republicanism resisted the party's constitutional support of the meaning, "freedom and liberty for all".... By any other name it is known as systemic racism. It has plagued America for years. - re slater

Modern Liberalism in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia - Overview

The modern liberal philosophy strongly endorses public spending on programs such as education, health care and welfare. Important social issues during the first part of the 21st century include economic inequality (wealth and income),[5] voting rights for minorities,[6] affirmative action,[7] reproductive and other women's rights,[8] support for LGBT rights[9][10] and immigration reform.[11][12]

Wikipedia - Introduction

This article is about the ideology normally identified in the United States today as liberalism. For the origin and worldwide development of the liberal movement, see Liberalism. For the origin, history and development of American liberalism, including its various forms, see Liberalism in the United States.

Modern liberalism in the United States is the dominant version of liberalism in the United States. It combines ideas of civil liberty and equality with support for social justice and a mixed economy. According to Ian Adams, all American parties are "liberal and always have been. They reportedly espouse classical liberalism, that is a form of democratized Whig constitutionalism plus the free market. The point of difference comes with the influence of social liberalism".[1]

Economically, modern liberalism opposes cuts to the social safety net and supports a role for government in reducing inequality, providing education, ensuring access to healthcare, regulating economic activity and protecting the natural environment.[2] This form of liberalism took shape in the 20th century United States as the franchise and other civil rights were extended to a larger class of citizens. Major examples include Theodore Roosevelt's Square Deal and New Nationalism, Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, Harry S. Truman's Fair Deal, John F. Kennedy's New Frontier and Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society.

In the first half of the 20th century, both major American parties had a conservative and a liberal wing. The conservative Northern Republicans and Southern Democrats formed the conservative coalition which dominated the Congress in the pre-Civil Rights era. As the Democrats under President Johnson began to support civil rights, the formerly Solid South, meaning solidly Democratic, became solidly Republican, except in districts with a large number of African-American voters. Since the 1960s, the Democratic Party has been considered liberal and the Republican Party has been considered conservative. As a group, liberals are referred to as the left and conservatives as the right. Starting in the 21st century, there has also been a sharp division between liberals who tend to live in denser, more heterogeneous communities and conservatives who tend to live in less dense, more homogeneous communities.[3][4]

* * * * * * * * *

SOCIAL LIBERALISM

Social Liberalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Social liberalism, also known as left liberalism in Germany,[1][2][3] modern liberalism in the United States[4] and new liberalism in the United Kingdom,[5][6] is a political ideology and variety of liberalism that endorses a regulated market economy and the expansion of civil and political rights. Under social liberalism, the common good is viewed as harmonious with the freedom of the individual.[7]

Social liberal policies have been widely adopted in much of the world.[8] Social liberal ideas and parties tend to be considered centrist or centre-left.[6][9][10][11][12] A social liberal government is expected to address economic and social issues such as poverty, health care, education and the climate using government intervention whilst also emphasising the rights and autonomy of the individual.[13][14][15]

In the United States, social liberalism describes progressive moral and social values or stances on socio-cultural issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage as opposed to social conservatism. Because cultural liberalism expresses the social dimension of liberalism, it is often referred to as social liberalism, although it is not the same as the broader political ideology known as social liberalism. A social liberal in this sense may hold either more conservative or liberal views on fiscal policy.[16]

* * * * * * * * *

NEO-CONSERVATISM

What is a Neoconservative?
Nov 7, 2016

Step Back History - A few weeks ago, we talked about political correctness, and several of you zeroed in on one particular part. A lot of you asked for me to answer this question, and sooner rather than later. So today, let's tell the story of the counter-counter-culture, the Neo-conservatives.

Neoconservatism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Neoconservatism is a political movement born in the United States during the 1960s among liberal hawks who became disenchanted with the increasingly pacifist foreign policy of the Democratic Party and with the growing New Left and counterculture of the 1960s, particularly the Vietnam protests. Some also began to question their liberal beliefs regarding domestic policies such as the Great Society.

Neoconservatives typically advocate the promotion of democracy and interventionism in international affairs, including peace through strength (by means of military force) and are known for espousing disdain for communism and political radicalism.[1][2] Critics of neoconservatism have used the term to describe foreign policy and war hawks who support aggressive militarism or neo-imperialism.

Many of its adherents became politically influential during the Republican presidential administrations of the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, peaking in influence during the administration of George W. Bush, when they played a major role in promoting and planning the 2003 invasion of Iraq.[3] Prominent neoconservatives in the George W. Bush administration included Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle, and Paul Bremer. While not identifying as neoconservatives, senior officials Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld listened closely to neoconservative advisers regarding foreign policy, especially the defense of Israel and the promotion of American influence in the Middle East.

Historically speaking, the term neoconservative refers to those who made the ideological journey from the anti-Stalinist left to the camp of American conservatism during the 1960s and 1970s.[4] The movement had its intellectual roots in the magazine Commentary, edited by Norman Podhoretz.[5] They spoke out against the New Left and in that way helped define the movement.[6][7]

* * * * * * * * *

CONSERVATISM

https://www.fastcompany.com/1664565/infographic-of-the-day-liberals-and-conservatives-raise-kids-differently

What is conservatism? Why is conservatism so popular among none urban populations and traditional society members?

Having solidly grown up in the hoary traditions of my pioneering family and working the land through our generations for over 130 years (5 generations in total; mine being the sixth and last homesteading members) our families filled the definition better than many generationalists today.

If you love the land, and your family traditions, and the way things were, and should always be, you would be considered a conservative. However, history is never so kind. Eventually change requires adaptation and change always comes with a change in land, its dispossession, or in the people who come into the land to re settle it, or live on it in some other "non-traditional" way. This we ourselves had done as newly arrived Europeans claiming Native American lands held since the Ice Ages and even longer by aboriginal populations.

As our cities grew our industries prospered. We were free to think, and live, and believe, as we were wont. Our traditions and legacies defined us even as they once did the Native Americans whom we ill-considered and displaced.

This was also done to African tribes whose generations knew only their lands, way of living, hoary histories, and family culture. Once destroyed by capture and enslavement by Europeans to work American lands their black conservative cultures were also ill-treated and forced to be abandoned to the point of no longer remembering their generational history.

"Colonial Modernism" was the culprit which brought on by the surprising mindset of European Christian superiority as told over Europe's long history of religious and civil wars with one - another including foreign adversaries to the east and south of Western Europe. After the world wars this condition became known as "Postcolonial Modernism." The driving mechanism? European and by now, American, industry.

This secular mindset of conquer and dissipation became deeply ingrained in Christianity. At first Catholic, then later Protestantism. Christianity either isn't bothered by it or, owns it by creating doctrines of "Just Warfare" causation. (Btw, if you steal resources from foreigners, or enslave their populations in pursuit of wealth, "justifying" a war when they rise up to respond really isn't a "just war." It is provoking war without regard to the other and duly deserved.)

One of the tenets of conservatism is it's need to have a large military to protect itself against all foes. This is made necessary for many reasons, such as industrialized rape and pillage, but is never the natural right of man to be used against his fellow man when justifying unloving attitudes and actions. In the OT of the bible Israel wanted a king and an army. They justified its use and its enlargement. In the end Israel fell and became yet another nation serving a stronger nation whose faith cultures also necessitated war, rape, and enslavement.

Conservatism is about protecting what we have - whether goods, family, community, traditions, cultures, or land. We don't like change and consider change as evil. Yet change is inevitable. It always has been and always will be. A godly faith learns to love, teach love, and share goodwill and wellbeing with each other. Including the destitute and foreigner we never seem to be able to see past our lusts and greed.

Wkipedia - "Conservatism is a political and social philosophy promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. The central tenets of conservatism include tradition, organic society, hierarchy, authority, and property rights. Conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as religion, parliamentary government, and property rights, with the aim of emphasizing social stability and continuity. The more traditional elements—reactionaries—oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were". - re slater

The Rise of Conservatism: Crash Course US History #41

Dec 13, 2013

Crash Course World History - In which John Green teaches you about the rise of the conservative movement in United States politics. So, the sixties are often remembered for the liberal changes that the decade brought to America, but lest you forget, Richard Nixon was elected to the presidency during the sixties. The conservative movement didn't start with Nixon though. Modern conservatism really entered mainstream consciousness during the 1964 presidential contest between incumbent president and Kennedy torch-bearer Lyndon B Johnson, and Republican senator Barry Goldwater. While Goldwater never had a shot in the election, he used the campaign to talk about all kinds of conservative ideas. At the same time, several varying groups, including libertarian conservatives and moral conservatives, began to work together. Goldwater's trailblazing and coalition building would pay off in 1968 when Richard Nixon was elected to the White House, and politics changed forever when Nixon resigned over the Watergate scandal. You'll also learn about the ERA, , EPA, OSHA, the NTSB, and several other acronyms and initialisms.

What is a Conservative?

Nov 17, 2014

Hip Hughes - A summary of the Conservative ideology with an

emphasis on the difference between social & economic views.

The dirty secret of capitalism -- and a new way forward

TED Talk by Nick Hanauer, Oct 18, 2019

TED - Rising inequality and growing political instability are the direct result of decades of bad economic theory, says entrepreneur Nick Hanauer. In a visionary talk, he dismantles the mantra that "greed is good" -- an idea he describes as not only morally corrosive, but also scientifically wrong -- and lays out a new theory of economics powered by reciprocity and cooperation.

Conservatism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Conservatism is a political and social philosophy promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. The central tenets of conservatism include tradition, organic society, hierarchy, authority, and property rights.[1] Conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as religion, parliamentary government, and property rights, with the aim of emphasizing social stability and continuity.[2] The more traditional elements—reactionaries—oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were".[3][4]

The first established use of the term in a political context originated in 1818 with François-René de Chateaubriand [5] during the period of Bourbon Restoration that sought to roll back the policies of the French Revolution. Historically associated with right-wing politics, the term has since been used to describe a wide range of views. There is no single set of policies regarded as conservative because the meaning of conservatism depends on what is considered traditional in a given place and time. Thus conservatives from different parts of the world—each upholding their respective traditions—may disagree on a wide range of issues. Edmund Burke, an 18th-century politician who opposed the French Revolution, but supported the American Revolution, is credited as one of the main theorists of conservatism in Great Britain in the 1790s.[6]

According to Quintin Hogg, the chairman of the British Conservative Party in 1959: "Conservatism is not so much a philosophy as an attitude, a constant force, performing a timeless function in the development of a free society, and corresponding to a deep and permanent requirement of human nature itself".[7]

Forms

Liberal conservatism

Main article: Liberal conservatism

Liberal conservatism incorporates the classical liberal view of minimal government intervention in the economy. Individuals should be free to participate in the market and generate wealth without government interference.[8] However, individuals cannot be thoroughly depended on to act responsibly in other spheres of life, therefore liberal conservatives believe that a strong state is necessary to ensure law and order and social institutions are needed to nurture a sense of duty and responsibility to the nation.[8] Liberal conservatism is a variant of conservatism that is strongly influenced by liberal stances.[9]

As these latter two terms have had different meanings over time and across countries, liberal conservatism also has a wide variety of meanings. Historically, the term often referred to the combination of economic liberalism, which champions laissez-faire markets, with the classical conservatism concern for established tradition, respect for authority and religious values. It contrasted itself with classical liberalism, which supported freedom for the individual in both the economic and social spheres.

Over time, the general conservative ideology in many countries adopted economic liberal arguments and the term liberal conservatism was replaced with conservatism. This is also the case in countries where liberal economic ideas have been the tradition such as the United States and are thus considered conservative. In other countries where liberal conservative movements have entered the political mainstream, such as Italy and Spain, the terms liberal and conservative may be synonymous. The liberal conservative tradition in the United States combines the economic individualism of the classical liberals with a Burkean form of conservatism (which has also become part of the American conservative tradition, such as in the writings of Russell Kirk).

A secondary meaning for the term liberal conservatism that has developed in Europe is a combination of more modern conservative (less traditionalist) views with those of social liberalism. This has developed as an opposition to the more collectivist views of socialism. Often this involves stressing what are now conservative views of free market economics and belief in individual responsibility, with social liberal views on defence of civil rights, environmentalism and support for a limited welfare state. In continental Europe, this is sometimes also translated into English as social conservatism.

Conservative liberalism

Main article: Conservative liberalism

Conservative liberalism is a variant of liberalism that combines liberal values and policies with conservative stances.[10][11][12] The roots of conservative liberalism are found at the beginning of the history of liberalism. Until the two World Wars, in most European countries the political class was formed by conservative liberals, from Germany to Italy. Events after World War I brought the more radical version of classical liberalism to a more conservative (i.e. more moderate) type of liberalism.[13]

Libertarian conservatism

Main article: Libertarian conservatism

Libertarian conservatism describes certain political ideologies most prominently within the United States which combine libertarian economic issues with aspects of conservatism. Its four main branches are constitutionalism, paleolibertarianism, small government conservatism and Christian libertarianism. They generally differ from paleoconservatives, in that they favor more personal and economic freedom.

Agorists such as Samuel Edward Konkin III labeled libertarian conservatism right-libertarianism.[14][15]

In contrast to paleoconservatives, libertarian conservatives support strict laissez-faire policies such as free trade, opposition to any national bank and opposition to business regulations. They are vehemently opposed to environmental regulations, corporate welfare, subsidies and other areas of economic intervention.

Many conservatives, especially in the United States, believe that the government should not play a major role in regulating business and managing the economy. They typically oppose efforts to charge high tax rates and to redistribute income to assist the poor. Such efforts, they argue, do not properly reward people who have earned their money through hard work.

Fiscal conservatism

Main article: Fiscal conservatism

2009 Taxpayer March on Washington as conservative protesters walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D. C

Fiscal conservatism is the economic philosophy of prudence in government spending and debt.[16] In his Reflections on the Revolution in France, Edmund Burke argued that a government does not have the right to run up large debts and then throw the burden on the taxpayer:

[I]t is to the property of the citizen, and not to the demands of the creditor of the state, that the first and original faith of civil society is pledged. The claim of the citizen is prior in time, paramount in title, superior in equity. The fortunes of individuals, whether possessed by acquisition or by descent or in virtue of a participation in the goods of some community, were no part of the creditor's security, expressed or implied...[T]he public, whether represented by a monarch or by a senate, can pledge nothing but the public estate; and it can have no public estate except in what it derives from a just and proportioned imposition upon the citizens at large.

National and traditional conservatism

Gianfranco Fini, former President
of Italian Chamber of Deputies,
in 2004

Main articles: National conservatism and Traditional conservatism

National conservatism is a political term used primarily in Europe to describe a variant of conservatism which concentrates more on national interests than standard conservatism as well as upholding cultural and ethnic identity,[17] while not being outspokenly nationalist or supporting a far-right approach.[18][19] In Europe, national conservatives are usually eurosceptics.[20][21]

National conservatism is heavily oriented towards the traditional family and social stability as well as in favour of limiting immigration. As such, national conservatives can be distinguished from economic conservatives, for whom free market economic policies, deregulation and fiscal conservatism are the main priorities. Some commentators have identified a growing gap between national and economic conservatism: "[M]ost parties of the Right [today] are run by economic conservatives who, in varying degrees, have marginalized social, cultural, and national conservatives".[22] National conservatism is also related to traditionalist conservatism.

Traditionalist conservatism is a political philosophy emphasizing the need for the principles of natural law and transcendent moral order, tradition, hierarchy and organic unity, agrarianism, classicism and high culture as well as the intersecting spheres of loyalty.[23] Some traditionalists have embraced the labels "reactionary" and "counterrevolutionary", defying the stigma that has attached to these terms since the Enlightenment. Having a hierarchical view of society, many traditionalist conservatives, including a few Americans, defend the monarchical political structure as the most natural and beneficial social arrangement.

Cultural and social conservatism

Main articles: Cultural conservatism and Social conservatism

Cultural conservatives support the preservation of the heritage of one nation, or of a shared culture that is not defined by national boundaries.[24] The shared culture may be as divergent as Western culture or Chinese culture. In the United States, the term "cultural conservative" may imply a conservative position in the culture war. Cultural conservatives hold fast to traditional ways of thinking even in the face of monumental change. They believe strongly in traditional values and traditional politics and often have an urgent sense of nationalism.

Social conservatism is distinct from cultural conservatism, although there are some overlaps. Social conservatives may believe that society is built upon a fragile network of relationships which need to be upheld through duty, traditional values and established institutions;[25] and that the government has a role in encouraging or enforcing traditional values or behaviours. A social conservative wants to preserve traditional morality and social mores, often by opposing what they consider radical policies or social engineering. Social change is generally regarded as suspect.

A second meaning of the term social conservatism developed in the Nordic countries and continental Europe, where it refers to liberal conservatives supporting modern European welfare states.

Social conservatives (in the first meaning of the phrase) in many countries generally favour the anti-abortion position in the abortion controversy and oppose human embryonic stem cell research (particularly if publicly funded); oppose both eugenics and human enhancement (transhumanism) while supporting bioconservatism;[26] support a traditional definition of marriage as being one man and one woman; view the nuclear family model as society's foundational unit; oppose expansion of civil marriage and child adoption to couples in same-sex relationships; promote public morality and traditional family values; oppose atheism,[27] especially militant atheism, secularism and the separation of church and state;[28][29][30] support the prohibition of drugs, prostitution and euthanasia; and support the censorship of pornography and what they consider to be obscenity or indecency. Most conservatives in the United States support the death penalty.

Defending inequality

In contrast to the tradition-based definition of conservatism, some political theorists such as Corey Robin define conservatism primarily in terms of a general defense of social and economic inequality. From this perspective, conservatism is less an attempt to uphold traditional institutions and more "a meditation on—and theoretical rendition of—the felt experience of having power, seeing it threatened, and trying to win it back".[31] Conversely, some conservatives may argue that they are seeking less to protect their own power than they are seeking to protect "inalienable rights" and promote norms and rules that they believe should stand timeless and eternal, applying to each citizen.[32][33]

Religious conservatism

2012 March for Life in Paris, France

Religious conservatism principally apply the teachings of particular religions to politics, sometimes by merely proclaiming the value of those teachings, at other times by having those teachings influence laws.[34]

In most democracies, political conservatism seeks to uphold traditional family structures and social values. Religious conservatives typically oppose abortion, LGBT behavior (or, in certain cases, identity), drug use,[35] and sexual activity outside of marriage. In some cases, conservative values are grounded in religious beliefs, and conservatives seek to increase the role of religion in public life.[36]

Paternalistic conservatism

Main article: Paternalistic conservatism

Paternalistic conservatism is a strand in conservatism which reflects the belief that societies exist and develop organically and that members within them have obligations towards each other.[37] There is particular emphasis on the paternalistic obligation of those who are privileged and wealthy to the poorer parts of society. Since it is consistent with principles such as organicism, hierarchy and duty, it can be seen as an outgrowth of traditional conservatism. Paternal conservatives support neither the individual nor the state in principle, but are instead prepared to support either or recommend a balance between the two depending on what is most practical.[38]

It stresses the importance of a social safety net to deal with poverty, support of limited redistribution of wealth along with government regulation of markets in the interests of both consumers and producers.[39] Paternalistic conservatism first arose as a distinct ideology in the United Kingdom under Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli's "One Nation" Toryism.[39][40] There have been a variety of one nation conservative governments. In the United Kingdom, the Prime Ministers Disraeli, Stanley Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain, Winston Churchill, Harold Macmillan [41] and Boris Johnson were or are one nation conservatives.

In Germany, during the 19th-century German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck adopted policies of state-organized compulsory insurance for workers against sickness, accident, incapacity and old age. Chancellor Leo von Caprivi promoted a conservative agenda called the "New Course".[42]

In the United States, the administration of President William Howard Taft was a progressive conservative and he described himself as "a believer in progressive conservatism"[43] and President Dwight D. Eisenhower declared himself an advocate of "progressive conservatism".[44]

In Canada, a variety of conservative governments have been part of the Red tory tradition, with Canada's former major conservative party being named the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada from 1942 to 2003.[45] In Canada, the Prime Ministers Arthur Meighen, R. B. Bennett, John Diefenbaker, Joe Clark, Brian Mulroney, and Kim Campbell led Red tory federal governments.[45]

Authoritarian conservatism

Main article: Far-right politics

Authoritarian conservatism or reactionary conservatism[46][47][48] refers to autocratic regimes that center their ideology around conservative nationalism, rather than ethnic nationalism, though certain racial components such as antisemitism may exist.[49] Authoritarian conservative movements show strong devotion towards religion, tradition and culture while also expressing fervent nationalism akin to other far-right nationalist movements. Examples of authoritarian conservative leaders include António de Oliveira Salazar [50] and Engelbert Dollfuss.[51] Authoritarian conservative movements were prominent in the same era as fascism, with which it sometimes clashed. Although both ideologies shared core values such as nationalism and had common enemies such as communism and materialism, there was nonetheless a contrast between the traditionalist nature of authoritarian conservatism and the revolutionary, palingenetic and populist nature of fascism—thus it was common for authoritarian conservative regimes to suppress rising fascist and National Socialist movements.[52] The hostility between the two ideologies is highlighted by the struggle for power for the National Socialists in Austria, which was marked by the assassination of Engelbert Dollfuss.

Sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset has examined the class basis of right-wing extremist politics in the 1920–1960 era. He reports:

Conservative or rightist extremist movements have arisen at different periods in modern history, ranging from the Horthyites in Hungary, the Christian Social Party of Dollfuss in Austria, Der Stahlhelm and other nationalists in pre-Hitler Germany, and Salazar in Portugal, to the pre-1966 Gaullist movements and the monarchists in contemporary France and Italy. The right extremists are conservative, not revolutionary. They seek to change political institutions in order to preserve or restore cultural and economic ones, while extremists of the centre and left seek to use political means for cultural and social revolution. The ideal of the right extremist is not a totalitarian ruler, but a monarch, or a traditionalist who acts like one. Many such movements in Spain, Austria, Hungary, Germany, and Italy-have been explicitly monarchist... The supporters of these movements differ from those of the centrists, tending to be wealthier, and more religious, which is more important in terms of a potential for mass support.[53]

* * * * * * * * *

NEO-LIBERALISM

Generally, the America public seems confused as to how to use the term neoliberal not realizing that it generally is describing the authoritative direction the United States has been moving the past twenty to forty years since President Reagan. President Trump is neoliberalism's latest version of removing rights from the individual and giving it to the corporation. In return, the individual is promised a strong military and the right to keep their religion as they deem it right and good. Many of whom in conservative Christianity refusing to recognize border families, non-white minorities, unwanted foreigners, or the oppressed and dispossessed except as they wish to on their own racial ministerial terms. - re slater

Pros and cons of neoliberalism

Jul 16, 2018

HarvardX - Does an unrestrained free market

promote peace and prosperity, or does it exacerbate

economic and social inequalities?

Is The Problem With Capitalism Or Neoliberalism?
Oct 22, 2017

Are the excesses of capitalism the problem or is capitalism itself to blame?

Cenk Uygur, the host of The Young Turks, discusses with author Naomi Klein.

Naomi Klein on Global Neoliberalism | Big Think
Apr 23, 2012

What Is Neoliberalism?

Jan 9, 2019

What is neoliberalism answered. The distilled fundamentals of

neoliberalism and how such an ideology manifests itself in policy.

- Dedicated to Preserving Capitalism

- Pro Deregulation

- Privatization of Everything

- Pro Police & Military

- No taxation to Social Programs

- Wage Slavery, Anti-Union

- No Revenue Sharing to Workers

Economic Schools of Thought: Crash Course Economics #14

Nov 6, 2015

We talk a lot about Keynesian economics on this show, pretty much because the real world currently runs on Keynesian principles. That said, there are some other economic ideas out there, and today we're going to talk about a few of them: Capitalism, Marxism, Keynes, Freidman, Socialism, Neoliberalism..

Neoliberalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Neoliberalism or neo-liberalism[1] is the 20th-century resurgence of 19th-century ideas associated with economic liberalism and free-market capitalism.[2]:7[3] It is generally associated with policies of economic liberalization, including privatization, deregulation, globalization, free trade, austerity, and reductions in government spending in order to increase the role of the private sector in the economy and society;[4][12] however, the defining features of neoliberalism in both thought and practice have been the subject of substantial scholarly debate.[13][14] Neoliberalism constituted a paradigm shift away from the post-war Keynesian consensus which had lasted from 1945 to 1980.[15][16]

English-speakers have used the term neoliberalism since the start of the 20th century with different meanings,[17] but it became more prevalent in its current meaning in the 1970s and 1980s, used by scholars in a wide variety of social sciences [18][19] as well as by critics.[20][21] The term is rarely used by proponents of free-market policies.[22] Some scholars have described the term as meaning different things to different people as neoliberalism has "mutated" into geopolitically distinct hybrids as it travelled around the world.[23][24][5] Neoliberalism shares many attributes with other concepts that have contested meanings, including representative democracy.[25]

The definition and usage of the term have changed over time.[6] As an economic philosophy, neoliberalism emerged among European liberal scholars in the 1930s as they attempted to revive and renew central ideas from classical liberalism as they saw these ideas diminish in popularity, overtaken by recognition of the need to control markets, following the Great Depression and manifested in policies designed to counter the volatility of free markets, and mitigate their negative social consequences.[26]:14–15 One impetus for the formulation of policies to mitigate free-market volatility was a desire to avoid repeating the economic failures of the early 1930s, failures sometimes attributed principally to the economic policy of classical liberalism.

When the term entered into common use in the 1980s[citation needed] in connection with Augusto Pinochet's economic reforms in Chile, it quickly took on negative connotations and was employed principally by critics of market reform and laissez-faire capitalism. Scholars tended to associate it with the theories of Mont Pelerin Society economists Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, and James M. Buchanan, along with politicians and policy-makers such as Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan.[6][27] Once the new meaning of neoliberalism became established as a common usage among Spanish-speaking scholars, it diffused into the English-language study of political economy.[6] By 1994, with the passage of NAFTA and with the Zapatistas' reaction to this development in Chiapas, the term entered global circulation.[5] Scholarship on the phenomenon of neoliberalism has grown over the last few decades.[19][28]