The alleged relations between Liberalism, Market Economy, Conservatism, Nationalism

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by OlafurThors

I´m a conservative true to the ideals of Edmund Burke the father of conservatism.

Nationalism and national pride are fundamental in conservatism. But I feel I am far from Fascism.

For a second I thought that you meant a Social-Conservative. But on some other post it appears that you are fond of market economy. Liberal-Conservative?

Market economy and Nationalism are two concepts that don't mix well. Perhaps your idea of nationalism is Patriotism?

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

For a second I thought that you meant a Social-Conservative. But on some other post it appears that you are fond of market economy. Liberal-Conservative?

Market economy and Nationalism are two concepts that don't mix well. Perhaps your idea of nationalism is Patriotism?

In English these two terms have become confused. Here are the definitions from my Oxford Dictionary:

patriot: a person who strongly supports his country and is prepared to defend it.

nationalism: 1. patriotic feeling often to an excessive degree 2. belief in political independence for a particular country.

I know their meanings are far more clear in French. Is it the same in Spanish?

[OlafurThors]

I do not likethat word liberal-conservative... There are three things that define classical conservatism:

1. Ownership
2. the Family
3. the Church

Market economy is just a natural consequence of property rights or ownership. Ergo market economy is good and it has provided well for my nation. Providing for the nation and making it prosperous is essential to preserve its identity, culture, language and history.

Nationalism works perfectly with market economy, just as the capitalist police state works in China.

Patriotism is fine but it does not cover the direct duty one has to preserve what ones ancestors legacy.

[Menydh]

I don't think that they are clear in any language. definitely not if you go by the dictionary, and surely not in political parlance because they have been much abused ever since 19th century Romanticism.

This is how the Spanish Royal Academy defines nationalism..

1. m. Apego de los naturales de una nación a ella y a cuanto le pertenece.

2. m. Ideología que atribuye entidad propia y diferenciada a un territorio y a sus ciudadanos, y en la que se fundan aspiraciones políticas muy diversas.

3. m. Aspiración o tendencia de un pueblo o raza a tener una cierta independencia en sus órganos rectores.

which translates to:
1. Attachment (or devotion) of the naturals (the natives) of a nation to the nation and to all that pertains to the nation.

2. Ideology that attributes an own and differenciated entity to a territory and to its citizens, and upon which much diverse political aspirations are founded.

3. Aspiration or tendency of a people or a race to have a certain independence of its ruling organs.


As for the definition of patriotism by the RAE..

1. m. Amor a la patria.

2. m. Sentimiento y conducta propios del patriota.

1. Love for the Fatherland (Motherland)

2. A feeling or conduct of the patriot.

Clearly vague in the case of patriotism, unless you look at the definition of Patria, which is more open to interpretation than the definition of Nación.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by OlafurThors

I do not likethat word liberal-conservative... There are three things that define classical conservatism:

1. Ownership
2. the Family
3. the Church

Market economy is just a natural consequence of property rights or ownership. Ergo market economy is good and it has provided well for my nation. Providing for the nation and making it prosperous is essential to preserve its identity, culture, language and history.

I don't have anything to object to those three lines that mark Conservatism. So long as they are just general lines, they don't clash with the notion of nationalism per se.

However, market economy is a system of Liberalism and it does clash with Nationalism. I would even argue that it clashes with Conservatism. Which is why many so-called Conservatives today are in fact Liberals or Neo-Conservatives.

Patriotism is fine but it does not cover the direct duty one has to preserve what ones ancestors legacy.

Patriotism and Nationalism do not forcibly have to exclude one another.

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Patriotism and Nationalism do not forcibly have to exclude one another.

True. I would say that Nationalism is the political expression and continuity of Patriotism.

Stirpes Definition of "Nationalism"

[OlafurThors]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

However, market economy is a system of Liberalism and it does clash with Nationalism. I would even argue that it clashes with Conservatism. Which is why many so-called Conservatives today are in fact Liberals or Neo-Conservatives.

Market economy is a result of ownership, not a liberal tool. Liberalism or rather libertarianism is a misunderstanding of conservatism.

Adam smith is often called the father of the market economy and liberalism, however this is not true. Adam Smith was in fact conservative. He only recorded actual facts such as supply and demand, in his book "Wealth of Nations".
What Libertarians forget is to read Adam Smith book called "The Theory of Moral Sentiments". Here Smith argues that although the free market is a good thing there need to be laws and regulations, he even suggests public funding of schools.
Market economy is not necesarily the same thing as the unregulated market.

Freedom wihout regulation is anarchy! People don't desire freedom, they desire security.

By the way neo-cons aren't conservatives, they are radicals and can therefore not be portrayed as conservatives. (How can someone be a radical-conservative?)

[Menydh]

Market Economy is a corruption of the principle of property/ownership. In a Market Economy, speculation and usure are lousely regulated (if at all) as it is the needs of the market and not those of the individual or the group that set the rules. The principle of property is to protect the rights of the individual and of the group, not the needs of the market forces.

Under such scenario, a market economy becomes opposed to the principle of property.

It is also an opposite to the spirit of the nation.

Adam smith is often called the father of the market economy and liberalism, however this is not true. Adam Smith was in fact conservative. He only recorded actual facts such as supply and demand, in his book "Wealth of Nations".
What Libertarians forget is to read Adam Smith book called "The Theory of Moral Sentiments". Here Smith argues that although the free market is a good thing there need to be laws and regulations, he even suggests public funding of schools.
Market economy is not necesarily the same thing as the unregulated market.

That's a false positive.

In a market economy it is the market that regulates itself according to the laws of the demand and the supply. Self-regulation is far from providing a regulated market for the needs of a nation. Much on the contrary, it's a biased regulation for the goal of profits maximization.

Freedom wihout regulation is anarchy! People don't desire freedom, they desire security.

I'm not a Libertarian. Far from it.

By the way neo-cons aren't conservatives, they are radicals and can therefore not be portrayed as conservatives. (How can someone be a radical-conservative?)

Fair enough.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by OlafurThors

(How can someone be a radical-conservative?)

On second thoughts, I missed one detail..

Pronunciation: 'ra-di-k&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin radicalis, from Latin radic-, radix root
1 : of, relating to, or proceeding from a root: as a (1) : of or growing from the root of a plant <radical tubers> (2) : growing from the base of a stem, from a rootlike stem, or from a stem that does not rise above the ground <radical leaves> b : of, relating to, or constituting a linguistic root c : of or relating to a mathematical root d : designed to remove the root of a disease or all diseased and potentially diseased tissue <radical surgery> <radical mastectomy>
2 : of or relating to the origin : FUNDAMENTAL
3 a : marked by a considerable departure from the usual or traditional : EXTREME b : tending or disposed to make extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions c : of, relating to, or constituting a political group associated with views, practices, and policies of extreme change d : advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs <the radical right>
4 slang : EXCELLENT, COOL

Under definition (1) and (2) it seems possible. Under definition (3) it is out of question, except perhaps under definition (3d).

[Errigal]

Yukio Mishima was a radical conservative I would say.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Errigal

Yukio Mishima was a radical conservative I would say.

Or how about the Conservative Revolutionary movement of Jung?

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Or how about the Conservative Revolutionary movement of Jung?

I hadn't heard of Edgar Julius Jung before. Interesting to read about him.

[OlafurThors]

Revolutionary Conservativism is called reactionism.

Jung was not a conservative, because he followed "conservative socialism". Socialism does not protect ownership, wich is one of th three before mentioned foundations of conservatism.

We must not confuse reactionism with conservatism. Allthough some call themselves conservatives, socialists or fascists doesn't automaticaly mean that they are.

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by OlafurThors

Revolutionary Conservativism is called reactionism.

Jung was not a conservative, because he followed "conservative socialism". Socialism does not protect ownership, wich is one of th three before mentioned foundations of conservatism.

We must not confuse reactionism with conservatism. Allthough some call themselves conservatives, socialists or fascists doesn't automaticaly mean that they are.

Supporting property rights and supporting free market liberalism are two different things. The co-operative movement, credit unions and the ownership of a company by its workers are all strongly conservative and healthy for a nation in my opinion. The Co-Op movement is the best example:

ICOS.ie - Home

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Errigal

Supporting property rights and supporting free market liberalism are two different things. The co-operative movement, credit unions and the ownership of a company by its workers are all strongly conservative and healthy for a nation in my opinion. The Co-Op movement is the best example: