No difference—they’re both “neocons”...;^)
Conservative applies if a conservative is talking, right-wing applies when a liberal whack-job moonbat is talking.
I loved that book. I’m checked out his “The Last Days” at the library on Wednesday. Will start it later this weekend.
"conservative" is a philosophical position based on the rights of the individual.
I don’t think there is much difference in right wing and conservative but there is a big difference in Republican and conservative.
The word conservative is a noun, while “right-wing” is a pejorative adjective.
It is used almost always by leftist cockroaches—see `Main Stream Media’—in preceding the noun in order to achieve an abusive ad hominem effect, or to “poison the well” before the conservative even gets a word in edgewise.
Why do they do this? Because roaches hate sunlight.
(Other adjectives, see: “staunch”, “ultra”, “far-right”, “Frankensteinish”, “coulteresque”, “rabid”, “Nazi”, “eater-of-the-children”, et cetera.)
The terms “conservative”, “liberal”, “right wing”, “left wing”, “moderate” and so forth seem to me to be used very loosely without precision and are of limited use.
In specific answer to your question, there appears to be a difference between “right wing” and “conservative”. “Conservative” is a subset of “right wing”. A conservative would be on the right wing but there could be a right wing radical also. There might also be a right of center moderate who is thereby on th right wing but is certainly not a conservative or radical.
Self proclaimed Conservatives can’t necessarily agree on what a conservative is.
All of the above is my opinion and observation of course.
Right wing is just a term for a hard core conservative, someone that is againt just about every thing that liberals stand for including their morals.
This is why one can have a "right-wing" Democrat or a "left-wing" Republican.
I just want to know: Where did all the right-wing Democrats go?
First, think about where that term "right wing" came from. It came from the left-wing, liberal, communist-leaning, main stream media.
I have always refuted the term "right wing" because if you stop to think about what it means to be conservative, you find that conservativsm automatically means nowhere near a wing of any type. Conservativsm is just plain old conservative, that's all, and nothing else even makes sense.
The reason the MSM invented the term is to try to convince the stupid people that there must be therefore a "middle" where people are "reasonable" and know how to compromise with communists.
Way too many people have bought into the idea that there is a left, right, and a middle.
Re-drawing the political landscape in graphical form, you see more of a horse-shoe shaped line. Graph political ideology against rule of law, and you will see that Constitutional conservatives are located at the top of the curve, right in the middle.
Not on a "wing".
I would say that a conservative is a rightwinger. A libertarian would also be a rightwinger possibly even further to the right. Capitalism is rightwing. Classical liberalism is rightwing. The Founders were rightwing.
It is funny I had written something on this very subject last night and was going to post here on FreeRepublic to get input on it (it is on my computer at home) maybe I will post it tonight.
"In Europe, especially, the connotations [of 'Left' and 'Right'] were extensive and very rich. The 'man of the Left' liked a plain suit of clothes, and the farther left the plainer and simpler until you reached the soft collar and cap and loose flowing tie of the Bohemian rebel. The man of the Right liked titles and ceremonies; he addressed people with careful regard for the distance between them. He revered personages and looked down on mere human beings. The man of the Left shook hands and said hello to everybody, and why not? The man of the Right was for law and order as good in themselves. The man of the Left was for law primarily as a defense of the rights of hthe citizen and his liberties. The man of the Right was conventional and inclined to respect accepted opinions. The man of hte Left was ready to kick over the conventions, and go in for independent inquiry on any subject. All these traits enriched the connotation of left and right, but most of all, and at the bottom of all, the attitude toward the constituted authorities, to the state: 'the individual on one side, the state on the other, that is the underlying substance of this contrast,' says J. Pera in an engaging essay on this subject [Etudes Materialistes, No. 14, September, 1947].
"Now it is clear that not only in their underlying substance, but in all their essential implications, these words left and right have exactly changed places. In America, and I think in all Western countries, a 'leftist' is a man unhorrified by the Soviet tyranny and acquiescent in the gigantic overgrowth of hte state at home. The restauration in Russia of epaulettes, salutes, emblems, and attitudes of rank, the transformation of 'comrade Stalin' first into 'Marshal' and then 'Generalissimo'--even the adoption of the goosestep in the Red Army--did not disturb his feelings. The reverence for a personage passing almost into obeisance before a god was not revolting to him. He accepted, of found excuses for, a system of law which, instead of defending men's liberties, was focused upon suppressing them, and where it failed of that could be replaced by administrative decrees, or mere decisions of the state police. Conventions made rigid, opinions handed down by infallible authorities, value judgments made obligatory in every field of endeavor, a fixed hierarchy of caste and imposed status in civil and industial as well as military and political life--all these things were meekly swallowed down. In short, every judgment and choice, every trait and mode of behavior, that once had given meaning tot he word 'right' is now supported or condoned by those whom all agree in calling 'left' or 'leftist."
--Max Eastman, Reflections on the Failure of Socialism, (New York: Devin Adair, 1955), pp. 70-71.
In Europe the Nazi Party and other fascist parties like Benito Mussolini’s party were considered on the “right” even though they were advocates of big government socialism. The acronym Nazi, after all, has the word Socialist in it.
Here is a little Poli Sci 101:
1) Nationalist Socialists are Nazis.
2) Internationalist Socialists are Communists.
3) American Socialists are Democrats.
Right wing or “extreme” right-wing is what the leftists in the media and acedemia call anyone who disgrees with them.
You're right-wing if you're against the left-wing or liberals.
"Right-wing" and "left-wing" talk is pretty passe.
Essentially the media calls extremist groups "right-wing" and then applies the same label to conservatives in order to demonize them.
I'd keep "liberal" and "conservative" for what's more or less the mainstream, and "extremist" -- no "right-wing" or "left-wing" just "extremist" -- for the radical fringe groups which have more in common with each other than with those closer to the middle.
Then if you really, really want to call yourself "right-wing" you may eventually be able to do so without people thinking you're a Nazi.