Talk:Essay:Best New Conservative Words

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ETrundel (Talk | contribs) at 16:56, March 16, 2009. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

Couple of points

  • Interventionalism is an ugly kludge. The word should be "interventionism".
  • Some of the terms are just not Conservative in any meaningful way. For example "design by committee" is used by both Liberals and Conservatives to describe the same problem.
  • A word to describe Conservative concept may be worth calling a "Conservative word", but the mere fact that Conservatives like or dislike something doesn't mean the word is Liberal or Conservative. "Grassroots" isn't a Conservative word-- it's a word for local community activism, regardless of political bent. Ditto phonics. "Condescention" isn't a Liberal word, and it was originally, considered to be the Christian virtue of treating one's social inferiors as equals.
  • I don't know anyone who denies the effectiveness of abstinence, Liberal, Conservative, or pink-and-green-striped.

Pepperlynn 17:48, 23 February 2009 (EST)

Your first point is good, and I just changed it. You could have changed it yourself.
Your second point is baseless. The conservative terms do reflect conservative insights. Sure, sometimes liberals use them. Sometimes atheists quote from the Bible too.
Your third point again is misguided. Liberals say "community organizing" or "community activism." Conservatives say "grassroots". The concepts are different, though similar. Think about it more.
Your fourth point shows you don't yet recognize the liberal viewpoint in its full deceit. Stick around here and you will. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 19:14, 23 February 2009 (EST)

Some suggestions

How about 'responsibility' (1737) and 'self-discipline' (1838)? MikeSalter 08:58, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Superb ideas!!! Fantastic. Please add them. I have some that will add also.--Andy Schlafly 09:19, 10 January 2009 (EST)

The list is good, but it doesn't say why they are conservative words. Perhaps something could be added related to this? Also, I have a suggestion: 'Rags to Riches'? *Hopeful* ETrundel 11:13, 10 January 2009 (EST)

What are the criteria for "conservative words" (as distinct from "liberal words"?) Reg32Idaho 14:10, 10 January 2009 (EST)

As per "radar", I suggest "sonar" and "laser" (also acronyms, from similar domain), and "radio".

(edit conflict) Words that express more precisely a conservative concept, or criticize more effectively a liberal characteristic. I'm going to insert Mike Salter's suggestions above, for example, and feel free to add your own.
The distribution of the words as a function of time (and perhaps what was happening at the time) will become illuminating.--Andy Schlafly 14:20, 10 January 2009 (EST)
P.S. I don't see sonar, laser and radio as adding any conservative insight.--Andy Schlafly 14:20, 10 January 2009 (EST)
Understood. But "radar" does? Reg32Idaho 14:27, 10 January 2009 (EST)
Yes, because it was the first and it has broader use than your other example.--Andy Schlafly 14:28, 10 January 2009 (EST)
I understand precedence going to the earliest word, but don't see how "radar" expresses more precisely a conservative concept, or criticizes more effectively a liberal characteristic. Reg32Idaho 14:33, 10 January 2009 (EST)
Your point is well-taken, and I agree this is borderline. However, I would still say that "radar" is a conservative concept/insight that is used effectively to convey a powerful conservative idea. Let's see what others think before deleting it.--Andy Schlafly 14:57, 10 January 2009 (EST)
Well, RADAR was created in Britain just before WW2 - indeed, it was one of the reasons why Britain defeated the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain. So I'm not really sure why it's on a list of American Conservative words when Britain is highly liberal by comparison to America. Also, I added one - 'self-determination'. ETrundel 15:13, 10 January 2009 (EST)


Frankly, I'm confused. I normally think of "radar" (in the non-scientific sense) as meaning perception. "In the public's radar" means "something the public notices." Is there a different conservative conception of the word? - Rod Weathers 15:14, 10 January 2009 (EST)
The inclusion of "radar" is debatable, but essentially it is a powerful self-defense mechanism conceptually analogous to the Reagan's concept of SDI and the Second Amendment, which liberals loathed.--Andy Schlafly 16:49, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Here's two:

  • pro-life (1976, though I'd prefer a better citation since the quote they have underneath is very anti-conservative.)
  • normalcy (1920 in the Conservative sense, although dated back to 1857 in a mathematical sense. In a rare glimmer of unbiased truth on a political subject, the WP article even states: "Furthermore, the concept apparently encapsulated what Americans wanted, since he was elected president over his Democratic opponent James Cox by the greatest margin since the popular vote was introduced.")

-Foxtrot 14:40, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Fantastic suggestions, both of them. Very insightful.--Andy Schlafly 14:57, 10 January 2009 (EST)

"elitism" (1947) - Seems to be used much more widely with this last election campaign. Reg32Idaho 15:26, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Conversely, "populism" and "grassroots," which have formed an important basis of conservative politics since 1980 (earlier?) - Rod Weathers 17:17, 10 January 2009 (EST)
"grassroots" is a good suggestion, and I just added it. "populism" is not a term used particularly by conservatives; nor does it yield any conservative insight that I am aware of.--Andy Schlafly 17:40, 10 January 2009 (EST)
Seriously? Populism is used continually to refer to Reagan, and more recently, George Bush and Sarah Palin, as they seek to speak for the "people" as opposed to "elites." Strikes me as deeply conservative. - Rod Weathers 17:44, 10 January 2009 (EST)
I don't doubt that liberals, the media, history books, and a diversity other people use the term. I doubt that any of the conservatives you mention, or any other conservatives, use the term much. It would be easy for you to prove me wrong, if I were wrong. I don't see anything conservative or insightful about the term. Majority rules? That's a mundane, almost meaningless concept at best. It begs the question of what the majority thinks at a particular time, which of course is very fickle.--Andy Schlafly 17:59, 10 January 2009 (EST)
Pat Buchanan calls himself a populist (though it notes Goldwater and Reagan would not use the term). [1] Rove calls Bush a populist on taxation [2]. I suppose there are two different concepts of the word: first, the classical "majority rules" idea which was rejected by the founding fathers in favor of checks and balances, and second, the modern term, conservative "populism," which refers to deriving your power from the people and relying on widely and deeply held conservative Christian values (example would be Palin's emphasis on the "real America" and blue collar workers) as opposed to deriving your power from intellectuals and media magnates. - Rod Weathers 18:21, 10 January 2009 (EST)
Phyllis Schlafly refers to the Goldwater ideology as populist, and she'd know! [3] - Rod Weathers 18:31, 10 January 2009 (EST)
The word populist has a far better tone than the word populism. Similarly, the word fundamentalist has a far better tone than fundamentalism. In political contexts, these are four completely different words. --RickD 18:32, 10 January 2009 (EST)
The problem comes when liberals attempt to use the terms as smears, and we stop using them as a result. I for one am proud to call myself a fundamentalist, and I know many other who feel the same way. - Rod Weathers 18:35, 10 January 2009 (EST)
Me too. I take pride in saying I believe in fundamentalism. All would agree that -ism added to almost any word gives it a negative tone, yes? For example, "science + t + ism = scientism" and scientism always refers to a bad set of science-related ideas. --RickD 18:42, 10 January 2009 (EST)

(Unindent) You have a point there. But now you have liberals calling muslim terrorists "fundamentalist muslims," to try to paint us with the same brush. - Rod Weathers 18:54, 10 January 2009 (EST)

The cites above are interesting but inconclusive. RickD's point in distinguishing "populist" from "populism" is superb. None of the above cites refer to "populism" in a conservative or even favorable light.--Andy Schlafly 19:00, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Some suggestions off the top of my head: Truth, Integrity those these are quite general I think they contrast well with the article on liberal deceit. JamesDW 21:16, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Pro-life

Andy, do you have a cite for the earlier attestation of "pro-life" than the one I provided? I think it's great that you've found a date that predates Roe v. Wade. -Foxtrot 18:38, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Atheism

It's not an English word; it's Greek. The claim is hardly "Silly," ASchlafly. But given your other claims on the page, IE that "quote mining" A: is a word and B: Was never invented, I guess I can forgive you for thinking that. RaymondS 00:04, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Use of the Adjective "New"

Is "new" the right word to be using for terms that originated in the 1600's and 1700's? `I'm not saying they should be removed from the list, but referring to them as "new" implies that they were originated with the modern conservative movement. Maybe these should be referred to as Powerful or Significant conservative words, which makes their date of origin irrelevant. --DinsdaleP 12:10, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Origins

I used the Oxford English Dictionary to correct the years of origin for some conservative words--Saxplayer 12:45, 11 January 2009 (EST)

You made a mess of the entry. For example, the date you inserted for "conservative" is not for the political sense used here. Now I have to clean up your mess ....--Andy Schlafly 13:13, 11 January 2009 (EST)
Then you should have made it clear you wished this to done in the current political context.--Saxplayer 13:20, 11 January 2009 (EST)
Be courteous, please. MikeSalter 13:22, 11 January 2009 (EST)
The atheism date may perhaps need changing too, in that case. In the 16th century it probably applied to matters in which there was no superficial need for God, or to people who had never been given a choice regarding the matter (for example, in the 16th century you could be burned for being a Protestant/Catholic or for witchcraft; imagine what they would do to a modern atheist!). Today, however, the term has been changed to mean one who has apparently voluntarily rejected God. I hope this helps; I also added racism to the list of Liberal words earlier. ETrundel 13:26, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Spiritualism

This may be a cultural/linguistic difference, but in the UK 'spiritualism' has a very specific meaning, of belief in communication with the dead. This was very popular in the early twentieth century, even Conan Doyle was a believer, but has since abated, though there are spiritualist 'churches' and mediums around. I would have said that 'spirituality' was the opposite of materialism, or 'religious feeling', 'religiosity', 'belief'. MikeSalter 13:10, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Not a cultural difference, but a plurality of definitions. Spirit-conjuring charlatans like to use the term, but in a philosophic context, ti's opposed to materialism. A similar opposite is "idealism," which also a number of unrelated non-philosophical definitions. - Rod Weathers 13:17, 11 January 2009 (EST)
I suggested dualism, which seems the best fit to me. Materialism can be phrased as the believe that everything boils down to matter, there is only one ontological world/realm and that's the realm of matter. I don't think there is an exact opposite of that (well, perhaps believing in no worlds at all, but that's just stupid), there are just alternatives like dualism and pluralism which believe in resp. two or more realms of existence and of these two dualism is the strongest held position.
Another kind of opposite would be idealism, the belief that there is only one ontological realm and that's the realm of the mind, but even this one is more of an alternative than an opposition and not a strong position either.
Anyways, asking for an opposite of materialism isn't very realistic, since it all depends on what you deem an opposite. What's the opposite of "one"? Is it zero, minus one, any number greater than one or "eno"? It all depends on the context, and in the context of ontological philosophy dualism is the strongest opposition to materialism. --TBrouwer 18:43, 11 January 2009 (EST)
The opposite would be a sensible equivalent of anti-materialism, or immaterialism.--Andy Schlafly 20:18, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Reversion

I had to revert many of Saxplayer's dates, and some minor edits were lost in the reversion. Feel free to reinstate if their quality is improved (e.g., spell "tyranny" correctly, or give a date of origin for "racism"). Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 13:33, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Conservapedia

Surely this must be one of the newest words that should earn a place! --JamesDW 23:09, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Definition / Categorisation

I'm reluctant to edit the page, as it may be reverted, but I have a suggestion for the opening. The term "conservative word" isn't defined, and could have many possible meanings, such as "a word coined by a conservative", or "a word for a conservative principle", or "a word commonly used by conservatives, but not by liberals or other groups". The list being produced includes examples of all these. Perhaps the page should therefore be split into accordingly different sections: "Words coined by conservatives to describe liberal principles", "Words which encapsulate conservative principles", "terms and concepts invented by conservatives", and so on.--Eoinc 10:53, 12 January 2009 (EST)

No, I disagree. The meaning is obvious enough and splintering into different categories would obscure rather than enlighten. Your three suggested "different" meanings in fact lack any significant differences.--Andy Schlafly 11:25, 12 January 2009 (EST)
I concur with ASchlafly. As well as obscuring the information, if I were to go onto a page and see in the contents box "Words coined by conservatives to describe liberal principles" or "Words which encapsulate conservative principles", I would quickly go and find another page. They hardly grab one's interest. ETrundel 11:42, 12 January 2009 (EST)

New word for 'liberal'?

Does anyone have any suggestions for a more descriptive word for 'liberal'? I find 'liberal' to be an unsatisfactory description for liberals in the present day, since they tend to support large government and curbs on freedom. Perhaps an alternative word would better sum up the set of views that liberals hold?--CPalmer 04:47, 3 February 2009 (EST)

Fellow traveller

Is this a conservative word? I think its from the early 1900s and originally described communist sympathizers who did not belong to a communist party. It also might be a good word for now to describe your "terrorist sympathizer" situation.

Other suggestions: design-by-committee and democide. AddisonDM 13:53, 8 February 2009 (EST)

All three are superb suggestions for this entry. Please add them with informative material, such as date of first use. Well done!--Andy Schlafly 20:00, 10 February 2009 (EST)

New article -> New liberal words?

I believe we discussed this prior to the server move where we lost a weeks worth of edits. I remember creating a new article on New liberal words, by removing that section from this article. --DeanStalk 14:24, 17 February 2009 (EST)

Words?

Many of these are phrases not words. How long can a phrase get? Can Reagan's acceptance speech be listed as a new word? We need guidance on what a word is. --Brendanw 10:41, 18 February 2009 (EST)

What are you talking about? The vast majority are words. If you're genuinely so confused, then I doubt we can help you.--Andy Schlafly 10:44, 18 February 2009 (EST)
"Terms" would probably be a more accurate description than "words". However I assume that most people will be able to work things out from the examples given. AndyJM 10:47, 18 February 2009 (EST)
"affirmative action" is two words, "Affirmative" and "Action", a full 43% of the listed "Words" are really phrases like this, not including the words with hyphens. --Brendanw 19:38, 18 February 2009 (EST)

Humanism

Since Humanists and Big Bang were originally pejorative terms should they be under the conservative list? --Brendanw 19:38, 18 February 2009 (EST)

No, because they are liberal terms now. And I doubt their origin was conservative, either. Fred Hoyle was not a conservative. He was a liberal who rejected the theory of evolution.--Andy Schlafly 17:27, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Wasn't Hoyle ridiculing the idea of the Big Bang? I'll go take a look at the Fred Hoyle article. --Ed Poor Talk 17:30, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Yes, he was ridiculing it. But liberals adopted the term and made it popular.--Andy Schlafly 17:59, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Evolution is a separate issue. they are only united by the fact that they both are in the standard naturalistic view of the origin of the universe. --Brendanw 11:59, 22 February 2009 (EST)

We should make a unifying convention or get rid of the divide

There are words that belong in both groups, that or we need a clear convention used through out. Communism is most often used by Conservatives, its a sore subject for liberals (you know, with the millions killed and mass poverty and all) and they rarely talk about it. I just want a better convention than "because Andy figures this way is best". --Brendanw 13:17, 23 February 2009 (EST)

A new word?

Andy - "self determination"? It started around colonial times, so it could well be from the 1700's. ETrundel 13:45, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Date is 1670, and I'm sure it's all that conservative. Sometimes it is a euphemism for something harmful, like communism in Cuba. But thanks for the suggestion!--Andy Schlafly 14:12, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
You're very welcome - I made the suggestion because I felt that it is one of the reasons that America freed Iraq (a move opposed by liberals and supported by conservatives); so that the people there could hold fair elections, rather than suffer under Hussein's despotism. At the end of the day though, you probably know more than me on this subject, so I'll defer to your wisdom! ETrundel 14:19, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
You raise interesting issues, but I think Saddam Hussein was also "self-determination" by Iraqis, right?--Andy Schlafly 14:20, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
(Edit conflict) Oh, and what about "survival of the fittest" for a liberal word? I noticed you mentioned it in your lecture. ETrundel 14:28, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
I think you're right about Saddam Hussein coming to power, but I also believe that towards the end of his reign many wanted him out, but were compelled to vote for him or else be punished (this is why I think the American system, with its two-term limit, is the best in the world). Mugabe is a good example of this; when he came to power, he was hailed as an African anti-oppression hero, and Zimbabwe was held up as an excellent example of post-colonialism. Now, however, his people want him out but are prevented from voting him out by the security forces (and when they did vote him out, it was declared illegal) and the world, including Africa, recognises him as a madman and a tyrant. In the meantime, the country is starving and in the grip of a cholera epidemic. ETrundel 14:28, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Reversion explained

"Natural selection" is a misleading euphemism, and the explanation discusses why. Also, it's improper to refer to creationists accepting a claim by evolutionists as though that somehow fully resolves the matter.--Andy Schlafly 15:32, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Affirmative Action is a conservative word?

Why is "affirmative action" considered a conservative word?

It was first used in JFK's Executive Order 10925 in 1961 (not 1965, as the essay states), and later "pushed" by LBJ.

Criticism of it is certainly a conservative concept, and it is now largely used critically by conservatives, but it hardly seems to qualify as a conservative "word" (or, more accurately, "term"). ArthurA 08:08, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

Good point and etymology. I'll move it to the "difficult to classify" section.--Andy Schlafly 08:26, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

Politically correct

I can't help but notice that this term appears in both the 'New Conservative Terms' and 'New Liberal Terms' section (along with two different dates and explanations). Obviously, it can't be both! While it would appear that it was indeed coined by liberals to help their cause, I would say that its meaning has flipped and it now has negative, oppressive connotations. Perhaps the 'Hard to Classify' section? However, I leave it up the the judgement of an admin to sort this conundrum out. ETrundel 12:13, 16 March 2009 (EDT) Oh, and 'survival of the fittest' to go with natural selection for a liberal term? (Before I forget!) ETrundel 12:15, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

Fixed it per your suggestion, figuring that "politically correct" is used more by conservatives now. I don't think either side uses "survival of the fittest" and I think the euphemism "natural selection" covers that concept. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 12:42, 16 March 2009 (EDT)
Can't say fairer than that. Thanks for the fix! ETrundel 12:56, 16 March 2009 (EDT)