But I do not think that he is focusing on that ~part~. Both are equaly valid points using the same story for analogy. It is perfectly fine to have both be valid.
If you take from the discussion that ~conservatism~ is not at all what modern Republicans are practicing, then it is a very insitefull and refreshing read. If instead you take from the discussion that a "look-backwards mentality" is good, then, well, maybe that was never the point. Is it not possible to be "conservative" and yet not to have a look- backwards mentality? The Republican party of today, if placed in the situation of the civil war, would fall more on the side of the South than on the North. ...They claim to be conservative, but in reality are not, the democrats may claim to be Libral, but in reality are not. Both are two sides of the same coin, and both with extremists mutating the parties. The Republicans came to power on the idea of shrinking governemnt, but now are doing the opposit, what they have actualy done is shift what the money is spent on. The real issue here is that the terms do not apply. I would say that a conservative would be in favor of a maximum work day, a legal limit to the amount of time that one can spend working in one day. If everyone is limmited to an 8 hour day, then every compnay would have an equal playing felild. One could not request (or require) workers to work 16 hour days, just to get some particular project done in time to meet some arbitrary date. It would create a society which focused on the quality of life of the individual. But no Republican would ever be in favor of such a plan, and most democrats would scauf at it. It all depends on what part of conservative you are talking about. I would also say that a libral would be in favor of a requirment for each person to have employment. There are plenty of things that need to get done that are going undone. Streets need to be repaired, sidewalks cleaned, public buildings re-painted, homes built for the homeless, planets explored... but would any Democrat actualy go for this? Republican? After all it sounds a lot like the old, new deal. And Rosevelt was a "conservative" was he not? I don't think he missed the point, I just think he was makening a differnt one. --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Davd Brin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Heh. > > Of course I think he misses the point. It is not so > much conservatism as it is romanticism... though > certainly the two have a major amount of psychological > overlap in their grouchy, look0backwards mentality. > > If you care to, drop back at that guy's blog and refer > folks to > http://www.davidbrin.com/tolkienarticle1.html > > It's still the most visited page at my site! > > Thanks & good luck. > > db > > ===== > . > . > * Please note. My email address of many years is changing FROM [EMAIL PROTECTED] TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... (Or else use [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > _______________________________________________ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
