From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



No religious figure in collage

The collage has three supreme court justices who served concurrently but no one who specifically represents the religious facet of conservatism, e.g. Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Francis Spellman.

For that matter no women either, e.g. Phyllis Schlafly, Jeane Kirkpatrick. 73.71.251.64 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 02:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC) reply

The introduction should represent the article as a whole

This is a lengthy, thorough and well-sourced article. The introduction ought to be as concise as possible—and represent the article as a whole. Right now a fifth of the introduction is devoted to the topic of some conservatives' opposition to some sciences, for example climate science which is a heavily ideologized—and thus controversial—topic. In the article this topic is presented under a minor section under a subheading called "Other topics". It is not representative for the article as a whole. We should scratch it from the introduction and incorporate it into the already existing minor section, where it belongs. That sort of negative highlighting of controversial information also comes off as very provocative, biased, and unprofessional. Trakking ( talk) 14:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I think the lead is too short to do a good job of summarizing the article, and major parts of the article (e.g. History, Race and culture) are given no summary. In an appropriately sized lead, I think a short mention of the data on conservative views on science is due. I would support shortening it but not cutting it entirely. How about "21st-century American conservatives question epidemiology, climate science, and evolution more frequently than moderates or liberals." Takes us from 31 words to 16. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 19:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Agreed, the lead should be elaborated extensively, which would justify including this little piece of information.
Please shorten it down to the suggested sentence and don't forget to add a "tend": conservatives tend to question climate science etc.… because it is not like the statement is true of all conservatives all the time. Trakking ( talk) 20:51, 31 January 2023 (UTC) reply
I'm fine with adding "tend to". I'd prefer to leave this up for a bit to see if anyone else weighs in. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 21:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Trump's Influence on Modern American Conservatism

As I've observed throughout time (I'm on the left so this is my perspective or I'm just saying the facts), the presidency of Donald Trump has had a visible influence on modern American conservatism; for example, Donald Trump was a self-proclaimed protectionist. As a result, I see conservatives lean towards protectionism alongside him.

Another example of this is conservatism's frequent questioning of epidemiology and safety of vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic; synonymous to Trump's negation of the threat the virus posed to humanity, even subscribing to the racism he produced scapegoating China. We've also witnessed the ideology's commitment to defending capital even in the face of its evil. This leads me to conclude that the impact of Donald Trump's presidency is something worth documenting on this page. Western Progressivist ( talk) 15:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Something expanding the part about trade would probably be worthwhile (and interesting). Although I am at a loss to recommend a good resource. Conservatives have (overall) favored free trade....but there have been exceptions. ( Pat Buchanan comes to mind, among others.) Reagan typically used free trade rhetoric, but he did (for example) subject the Japanese to trade restrictions and so on. Rja13ww33 ( talk) 17:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC) reply
Pat Buchanan is a representative of Paleoconservatism. Palaeconservatives in general support protectionism and economic nationalism. Per the main article on the ideology: "Paleoconservatism differs from neoconservatism in opposing free trade and promoting republicanism. Paleoconservatives see neoconservatives as imperialists and themselves as defenders of the republic." As for Ronald Reagan, the man nearly started a trade war with Japan out of fear that American industry was under threat. Per the Foreign policy of the Ronald Reagan administration: "Trade issues with Japan dominated relationships, especially the threat that American automobile and high tech industries would be overwhelmed. After 1945, the U.S. produced about 75 percent of world's auto production. In 1980, the U.S. was overtaken by Japan and then became world's leader again in 1994. In 2006, Japan narrowly passed the U.S. in production and held this rank until 2009, when China took the top spot with 13.8 million units. Japan's economic miracle emerged from a systematic program of subsidized investment in strategic industries—steel, machinery, electronics, chemicals, autos, shipbuilding, and aircraft. During Reagan's first term, Japanese government and private investors owned a third of the debt sold by the US Treasury, providing Americans with hard currency used to buy Japanese goods. In March 1985 the Senate voted 92–0 in favor of a Republican resolution that condemned Japan's trade practices as "unfair" and called on President Reagan to curb Japanese imports." Dimadick ( talk) 22:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC) reply
You would have to find sources that say this. All U.S. presidents from Reagan to Biden have been protectionist to a degree. TFD ( talk) 19:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Deleted subsection on psychology

My subsection on Pychology was deleted by Trakking here with the summary

(Undid revision 1169827941 by Louis P. Boog (talk) - removal of newly added information which has nothing to do with the specific topic at hand, namely AMERICAN conservatism; in fact, American conservatives, with their strong belief in personal responsibility, score higher on Openness to Experience than traditional conservatives in many other countries; also—Oakeshott was British).

Here is the offending text:

Psychology
The main predictor of conservatism for subjects of a "Big Five” personality test is a low score on “openness to new experiences”.<ref name= Eumenes-NC-2021>Eumenes of Cardia (2021). "Against Barstool Conservatism". New Conservatives. Retrieved 11 August 2023.. Where liberals/leftists want to tear down structures and overturn normalcy with exciting new utopian concepts, conservatism is the "defense of the normal”. [1]
Michael Oakeshott coined the term “conservative disposition” in the 20th Century, to describe conservatism as a way of reacting to the world. To him, to be conservative meant “to prefer the familiar to the unknown, the tried to the untried, fact to mystery, the actual to the possible (…) present laughter to utopian bliss”. [1]

In my defense

  • much of the content from my deleted text is from an American conservative outfit called New Conservatives; and
  • I'm not sure what devotion to Personal Responsibility has to do with high scores on Openness to Experience,
  • and even if it is true that "American conservatives, ... score higher on Openness to Experience than traditional conservatives in many other countries", do they score than moderates or liberals? -- Louis P. Boog ( talk) 01:21, 12 August 2023 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure why it should be included in this article as opposed to the Conservatism article which already has a Psychology section. The only thing connecting this to conservatism in the U.S. is the fact that an American conservative outlet published it in an opinion article on their blog, but I've never heard of them, they don't have a wiki page, and they haven't published anything for a year and a half. – CWenger ( ^ • @) 01:59, 12 August 2023 (UTC) reply
I agree it does not belong here because it is not specific to U.S. conservatism. It's also questionable whether U.S. conservatism necessarily is motivated by support of the status quo rather than the specific tenets of individualism, private property, etc. TFD ( talk) 11:44, 14 August 2023 (UTC) reply

References

  1. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Eumenes-NC-2021 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Conservatism_in_the_United_States&oldid=1211877084"