US Conservatism vs UK

The Andy-Man · September 1, 2003, 17:19

I was curious wheather anybody thought there was any similarities/differences between US Style Conservatism and UK Style, or maybe they have nothing to do with each other save the fact that they used the same 'New Right' policy in the 80's.

Is there a common vain, or are they completley different things?

GePap · September 1, 2003, 17:25

The "private over public" style of governing, in which you seek to lessen the number of services that are public, and tyring to keep spending and taxes down are one common link.

Oerdin · September 1, 2003, 17:26

The common vain is that they both seem to want smaller government, lower taxes, and believe that privite industry can do things more efficiently then the state.

The Andy-Man · September 1, 2003, 17:26

but imo that is about the only one, apart from the new right, to me british conservatism is actually conservative.

But i would like to ehre more about wehat every one else thinks...

Sandman · September 1, 2003, 18:02

British conservatism is stuck in the wilderness, whilst US conservatism is firmly entrenched.

MrFun · September 2, 2003, 01:27

I believe the word is "vein" not "vain."

Sincerely,

Grammar Nazi

Rogan Josh · September 2, 2003, 04:18

Quote:

Originally posted by MrFun
I believe the word is "vein" not "vain."

Sincerely,

Grammar Nazi

Dear Mr. Grammar Nazi,

I feel an urge to pointlessly criticize your recent post complaining about Mr Oedin's 'Grammar'. First of all, it was not Mr. Oerdin's Grammar whcih was at fault, but rather his spelling. This sort of mistake can easily arise from a simple typographic error. Secondly, in ending such a missive it is more correct to end the concluding phrase with a comma, followed by "yours sincerely," with no capital letters and then the author's name, as demonstrated below,

yours sincerely,

Mr. Rogan Josh.

FrustratedPoet · September 2, 2003, 04:52

And the bloody word is spelt "vain" anyway.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vain

Veins are those things under your skin with blood in them.

*End Is Forever* · September 2, 2003, 04:56

Quote:

apart from the new right, to me british conservatism is actually conservative

I disagree. UK Conservatism is inherently far less conservative and right-wing than conservatism in the USA. Organisations such as CPAC (http://www.cpac.org/) are very much part of the mainstream in the States - I believe Cheney addressed their conference this year - whereas their approximate equivalents over here have long since been chucked out of the Conservative Party for their unacceptable views. Right-wing members of Conservative Way Forward (the Thatcherite wing, for whom I have little time) have travelled to CPAC and other US conservative events and been appalled.

There is a very strong core of classical liberalism within the UK Conservative Party that seemingly barely exists within the Republicans. I'm a card-carrying Tory but I'd never vote Republican in the States.

MikeH · September 2, 2003, 05:00

Do you actually have a card?

*End Is Forever* · September 2, 2003, 05:12

Own goal...

Er, sort of... I'm not a member through a constituency association so I don't have a swish one though.

Drogue · September 2, 2003, 05:49

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
And the bloody word is spelt "vain" anyway.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vain

Veins are those things under your skin with blood in them.

Yes, and "a common vein" refers to being in the same line, being similar, both moving in the same direction. Vain is a word, but the wrong one in that case. Oerdin was not refering to to the vanity of the conservatives, but to the common direction between US and UK conservatives. Sorry, I'm in smartass mode today

FrustratedPoet · September 2, 2003, 06:19

Oh pants.

Solly · September 2, 2003, 10:20

Conservatism is alive and well in the UK, the problem is that there is no party to represent it.

Sava · September 2, 2003, 10:25

Quote:

Conservatism is alive and well in the UK, the problem is that there is no party to represent it.

One man's conservatism is another man's Nazism.

Solly · September 2, 2003, 10:29

Well I'd like to know what the Tories *really* plan to do about asylum seekers. Clear effective stragegies please.

Crime?

Sink estates (ghettoes to you yanks)?

Free trade?

The economy and taxation?

That someone somewhat politically aware as I am hasn't a clue what their policies are with regards to the above plainly shows that their policies are either being kept hushed up (why?) or inexistant.

Oerdin · September 2, 2003, 10:32

Quote:

Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
Own goal...

Wrong forum my friend.

*End Is Forever* · September 2, 2003, 10:32

Genuine asylum seekers should be allowed into the country. Illegal immigrants, however, will be treated as such.

Solly · September 2, 2003, 10:33

"Genuine asylum seekers should be allowed into the country. Illegal immigrants, however, will be treated as such."

Differentiation occurs where and how?

MikeH · September 2, 2003, 10:34

Asylum seekers are those who are in genuine danger in their own country, ie. Genuine refugees. Illegal immigrants are just economic refugees.

Oerdin · September 2, 2003, 10:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Boddington's
"Genuine asylum seekers should be allowed into the country. Illegal immigrants, however, will be treated as such."

Differentiation occurs where and how?

Whither someone fills out the correct paper work or not I believe.

Sava · September 2, 2003, 10:35

I can't speak about British problems, but I can offer some general solutions.

Quote:

Crime?

A symptom of poverty and lack of education. Offer job placement/training programs and free education.

Quote:

Sink estates (ghettoes to you yanks)?

Same as above...

Quote:

Free trade?

Treaties that include Western labor standards... bans on child/forced labor, standard work weeks, rights to unionize

Quote:

The economy and taxation?

Progressive... let the poor and middle classes create wealth... the rich have enough.

*End Is Forever* · September 2, 2003, 10:36

Fair point. Someone has to make a judgement somewhere as to whether asylum seekers are actually genuinely fleeing persecution. That's really a matter for the professionals on the ground though.

One area where dramatic improvement is needed and achievable is in ensuring that those who are turned away are actually deported rather than have the majority of them "disappear" as happens at present.

MikeH · September 2, 2003, 10:36

We do all that already although the French wouldn't let us cancel the CAP.

Oerdin · September 2, 2003, 10:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava

Quote:

Crime.

A symptom of poverty and lack of education. Offer job placement/training programs and free education.

For the most part I agree but there certainly are a few people who will simply be bad apples no matter what we do. Also there are a number of very well educated, very rich, and very intelligent criminals.

Sava · September 2, 2003, 10:39

Quote:

Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
Fair point. Someone has to make a judgement somewhere as to whether asylum seekers are actually genuinely fleeing persecution. That's really a matter for the professionals on the ground though.

Why does it matter? Free countries should be free to all... not just those lucky enough to be native born.

Quote:

One area where dramatic improvement is needed and achievable is in ensuring that those who are turned away are actually deported rather than have the majority of them "disappear" as happens at present.

Closed borders and deportation programs cost money... in fact, it is probably less of a burden on tax payers if immigrants are allowed in. Put people to work with government work programs, create programs to grant citizenship based upon government or military service, etc... the trick is, to create a system where immigrants are able to work for the government, rather than become a burden on it. If we can put a man on the moon and create weapons of mass destruction, surely we can put our minds to work and create a set of social programs that society profits from.

*End Is Forever* · September 2, 2003, 10:39

The solution to CAP is to make the issue non-negotiable. That's what we have a veto for. It's quite plainly absurd to everyone and only defended on a "dog in the manger" basis. If the French can use that threat over CAP then there is absolutely no reason for us not to retaliate.

Reform (preferably abolition) of the CAP in favour of genuine free trade has long been Tory policy.

Sava · September 2, 2003, 10:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin

For the most part I agree but there certainly are a few people who will simply be bad apples no matter what we do. Also there are a number of very well educated, very rich, and very intelligent criminals.

I agree, but they are fewer and far between. Decreasing poverty will decrease crime... that's a simple fact. Crime will always exist, but the goal of society should be to create a system that decreases crime. Decreased crime also decreases law enforcement costs.

MikeH · September 2, 2003, 10:44

It's Labour policy as well. *shrug*

Solly · September 2, 2003, 10:45

"Someone has to make a judgement somewhere as to whether asylum seekers are actually genuinely fleeing persecution. That's really a matter for the professionals on the ground though."

If it's a job for the professionals, how is their performance affected by the governing party?

Eradicating tuition fees is a very interesting Tory policy. You'd think it would help more poor people get to uni - in fact it serves to help the middle classes more.

What is wrong with suggesting a "needs blind" policy - during the selection and admissions process, income of student is hidden from universities. Those who can pay do, those who can't don't (of course on some sort of sliding scale etc).