On Anti-Intellectual Conservative "Reflexive" Thought

[Nolidor]

One of the primary values of conservatism is rugged individualism. That is conservatism recognizes the right to disrespect who individuals are on the inside that counts. Instead, it believes in abusing people and blaming the victim. It believes in enslaving people against their consent, and when they refuse to endure slavery, it believes in neglecting them because rectification of that abuse would be slavery in itself. That is victims in society would be demanding that others come to their rescue whether they like it or not. Sometimes, conservatives even have the audacity to claim that expecting conservatives to change their values is slavery itself since conservatives would be expected to change their values without consent despite how their own values don't respect consent to begin with. Instead, those who are powerful, in conservatism, are entitled to dictate their emotions by expecting everyone to conform to their traditional norms.

This is a rationalized equivocation between retributive and redistributive justice however.

Unless conservatives wish to become tyrants, despots, dictators, etc. where they believe in might makes right, they must recognize that rights depend on civilization which intrinsically acknowledges who people are on the inside that counts. The emotional self-objectification that conservatives engage in to reduce themselves down to the level of animals just in the name of their own simple-minded, short-term self-interest destroys the very foundation which their very paradigm depends on. That is conservatives have no longer appreciated the free willing skill that defines who people are, but rather they have converted towards a belief of fatalist luck.

The very notion of rights, therefore, in a conservative's paradigm, can no longer exist such that the very notion of disrespecting who individuals are on the inside that counts must automatically be recognized as wrong.

Therefore, is there any other reason for conservatives to behave the way they do other than intentional harassment where they get things wrong on purpose just to get on their victims' nerves? For example, do conservatives behave the way they do just to tell intellectuals in society, "Do our homework or else we're going to beat you up and take your lunch money?" and in the case that their victims call them stupid, do they want the right to claim victims provoked them as an excuse to abuse them anyway despite how victims were just standing up for themselves after conservatives broadcast stupidity into society, potentially in a sarcastic manner?

[The Dharma Bum]

As long you try to play the left/right game tyrants, despots, and dictators win
people need to learn how to live in a community together

[Nolidor]

That's what a conservative would tell you because a conservative doesn't respect individuality. They'd say individual creative thinkers need to stop being selfish and conform to the norms of the traditional community.

Communities can be nice, but they're not always. Peaceful coexistence requires a fundamental attitude of respecting your fellow people for who they are on the inside that counts. That is internal identity must come before external identity, not the other way around.

[The Dharma Bum]

I'm not detecting a "fundamental attitude of respect for fellow people" in your commentary, mainly because you are attempting to demonize them for political reasons.

Also you directly attack the notion of individual rights yourself when you ask people to be forced to conform to your own values and reject traditional ones. It always comes down to that with party ideologues because this is what both parties are really all about.

[Nolidor]

[Professor]

I reject your definition of conservatism.

The best definition* of conservatism is that one persons rights extend to where another's begins.

*Definition = overarching rule. There are exceptions, but this is true in a broad sense.

[Philly]

[Professor]

[Philly]

[Professor]