Australia Votes Conservative In Stunning Results
- Thread starter IowaHawkeyeFBnBB4Life
- Start date
If Austrlian conservatives were here OP would call them "socialists". OP isn't aware that in Europe and Canada/Australia/New Zealand the conservative party supports universal healthcare.
I get your Third Reich reference, but Europe has already fallen to the progressives.
I was wondering this. Anybody know main positions of Thorpe conservative government? I don’t care near enough to google.
I'm not sure but generally conservative governments in Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand are roughly where I am politically. They tend to be conservative on social issues and on other issues they would essentially be a moderate democrat on. They are usually in opposition to the Social Democrats who are their Center-left who are basically the Bernie Sanders types. There are also socialists (real socialists) who want to institute control of the means of production.
The Southern part of Italy has an unemployment rate of near 30%. Sicily and Sardinia as well. This will not end well. They need control of their own currency in order to do what Italy has always done. When unemployment was high, they would devalue it and make tourism to Italy a bargain, exports would soar as well. They lost that ability when they became part of the EU and took on the Euro.
Machiavelli said that you should never have a country larger than you can ride across on a horse in three days, lest you lose contact with your people, and cannot rule them wisely.
This is the EU's crime, they are not listening to their people in the blind pursuit of their progressive agenda.
This. "Conservative" and "Liberal" doesn't mean the same thing there as it does here. Issues don't split the same. I'm not looking up this party's platform either, but I'm certain we would classify many positions as liberal, and some conservative by our standards.
Well they do in a sense that conservative is more towards free markets and social conservative views and liberal is more government intervention and more socially liberal views. The thing is that their center . . . what they are used to is much further to the left of what we are used to here. For them a conservative party who says they are going to get rid of universal healthcare would be about the same as if the Republicans started ending public schooling and insisting that all schools be made private.
So a conservative there is essentially what would be a moderate dem here and their left is like Bernie Sanders.
I hear you, but quoting Machiavelli probably doesn't carry much weight. Though, I'm sure he has some fans on this board.
Yeah, well just because he advocated some assasinations and stuff, it does not mean he did not have some good points. Everything is not Black and White.I hear you, but quoting Machiavelli probably doesn't carry much weight. Though, I'm sure he has some fans on this board.
I love that you offer us Machiavelli as the champion of the people.
Last edited:
This election had been dubbed the climate change election, with the winner advocating the status quo and the loser advocating significant "green new deal" type changes.
yeah and Australians don't care for totalitarian governments going around collecting their guns door to door like they did, when was that... 30 yrs ago? after a while that crap gets old. everyone know the climate change thing is one huge hoax.
Really? Cite for me those areas you find so objectionable?
I will leave you with this...
https://www.bu.edu/today/2013/machiavelli-the-prince-still-relevant-after-all-these-years/
And this....
https://theweek.com/articles/460489/11-surprisingly-apt-lessons-from-machiavellis-prince
In this context it would be his allegiance to authoritarian rule. Which makes him a curious banner waver for someone trying to make the argument that the problem is not listening to the people.
yes and we probably should have our libertarians and right of center republicans be called "liberals", because it means liberally spreading around liberty, instead it means liberally spreading around totalitarianism and taxing authority. and gun grabbing. in America.
Your statement is ridiculous. You have to look at it in the context of the time it was written. The divine right of kings was still the dominant theory of how man should be ruled (It was written in 1513). So he was playing to the Catholic Church. Additionally, many scholars do not believe that he was writing with the lords in mind, but rather the common man, trying to garner their support behind an emerging power that could unite all of the German City States.
I find it odd that he's complaining about apparently the size of the EU. What about the US? Land area of the EU is 1.728 Million Square Miles. . . Land area of the US is 3.797 Million square miles.
How about the most obvious counter to quoting him in the first place? We now travel and communicate faster than on horseback. He’d have a very different opinion than the one you tried to make, if he were here today.
Without a doubt, the three-day thing is somewhat irrelevant,
Which begs, how big is too big. Republics are good at protecting the rights of man. As has been the electoral college. But then, there are some idiots on here that want to abolish them.
That doesn’t change the problem that the values he advances and the values you advanced are at odds. Machiavelli was an authoritarian statist. You proposed that democratic ideals should take priority. It’s a foolish move to offer us Machiavelli as a champion for those ideals. Find better sources.
I’m sure he would tell you that’s why he believes in federalism while ignoring that very condition exists within the EU.
The EU is more of a confederation but confederation is even weaker in terms of central power than federalism.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,061
- 190,279
- 113
Pretty intelligent take in 1500 A.D.
Not so much after the advent of steam power. Or radio. Or television. Or jets. Or the internet.
Not surprising that pro-conservatives would endorse a medieval mindset, though.
Torbee, I am not being medieval in my mindset, I am being Pragmatic. But whatever, if you cannot find value between the lines of what he wrote, then that is your problem, not mine.
I also believe that a benevolent dictatorship is the most efficient form of government, period. That is what scares me about Putin. However, I also believe that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Last edited:
Do you desire efficient government or does that scare you? If you do recognize the positives in dictating a policy, why do you claim the problem with the EU is they ignore the will of the people? Your position has me confused.
Likewise your claim that the electoral college protects the right’s of the people when it objectively marginalized those rights in favor of stability and geography. Your political philosophy seems a mess which given my limited understanding of you thus far I can only attribute to poor sources.
Yeah, no......I took wayyyy too many History courses in college
I do desire efficient government. Which is why I against big government and prefer to be ruled at the State level. (For instance, I do not believe that the Federal Government has any business being involved in education or even determining the drinking age). I am concerned about the authoritarian states that come to power in China and Russia that are well positioned to hurt us on the world stage. One of our strengths is the limited life of our executive office (it keeps ideas fresh, and kicks out the bad), one of our weaknesses is the limited life of our executive office. When you get tough with China and Russia, they just outlast you.
There is no doubt that the electoral college marginalizes many people. However, it also protects entire regions from being marginalized by the masses. That is why we live in a Republic instead of a Democracy. If we were to lose the Electoral College, or the Senate, then I would have to re-think my support for the Federal Government and the USA as it is currently constituted. It would be just too big to serve the people. These institutions allow the voice of the minority to be heard.
Last edited:
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,061
- 190,279
- 113
I am a fan of Machiavelli as a way of understanding politics at its rawest forms.
I am also a regular proponent of local control and opposed to "one-sized-fits-all" legislation for the most part and believe the federal government should only intervene in extreme cases (i.e. sending in the National Guard to enforce the Civil Rights Act, etc.)
But you must admit that the quote in question is beyond obsolete.
There are a lot of generalities posted about the conservatives in Australia really being like US liberals, and so on.
I did a little research and that's not quite the way they portray themselves.
https://www.conservatives.org.au/our_vision
The Liberal Party of Australia has most often been representative of the conservative movement. 'Liberal' has a different meaning though.
https://www.liberal.org.au/
If you use health care as the sole or major judgement of what we call liberal, you will be disappointed. One policy isn't an indicator of the rest of their policies.
I did a little research and that's not quite the way they portray themselves.
https://www.conservatives.org.au/our_vision
The Liberal Party of Australia has most often been representative of the conservative movement. 'Liberal' has a different meaning though.
https://www.liberal.org.au/
If you use health care as the sole or major judgement of what we call liberal, you will be disappointed. One policy isn't an indicator of the rest of their policies.
This is important. If the EU can't come up with a better solution, then Italy goes the way of Greece.
But if you remember, when Greece threatened to pull away from the euro, nations like Germany basically said they would destroy Greece (through economic isolation, sanctions, etc.).
Italy is a much bigger economy than Greece, so maybe that threat won't work.
Thanks for this reply. I appreciate your take on term limits. I’m opposed to them. I think the people should be trusted to vote for or against whom they like without artificial limit imposed by the government.
The electoral college does more than just protect a minority voice, it protects minority rule. I’m against that which is why I’m also against the filibuster.
We are a democratic republic. A republic alone just protects the powerful. If you value the will of the people as you indicated you did in your point about the EU, you need to extol the essential democratic aspects of our nation
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Players file lawsuit against state for privacy rights violations
- Latest: WaterlooChazz