Posted on 12/08/2016 7:21:17 AM PST by pinochet
A conservative is one who rejects, not only Marxism, but also the socialist and Jacobin ideologies which existed before the Marxist ideology came into existence. Marxism, socialism and Jacobinism, are the product of radical egalitarianism.
20th century American conservatives have exaggerated the differences between European conservatives and America's the founding fathers in the 1700s. European conservatism was about defending Monarchy and Aristocracy. America's founding fathers opposed King George III, but that does not mean they were hostile to all Kings.
Jefferson was a great admirer of the ancient Persian King, Cyrus the Great, and got some of his ideas on religious freedom from the religious tolerance that Cyrus promoted in ancient Persia. Jefferson also opposed the Jacobins of France, and was opposed to the removal of King Louis XVI, whom he thought should remain as a constitutional monarch
https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/french-revolution
Jefferson was also a believer in a "natural aristocracy" among men. In a letter to John Adams, Jefferson said:
"For I agree with you that there is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents....There is also an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents; for with these it would belong to the first class. The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and government of society."
America's founding fathers were not hostile to monarchy and aristocracy. They just opposed King George III.
Christianity has historically taught that all souls are equal, in the sense that they have equal chance in acquiring salvation. But for most of its existence, Christianity has supported monarchy and aristocracy, as the natural way of governing human societies. That means, Christianity taught that human beings were unequal, despite having equal souls.
We must see human inequality as a way in which God distributes different talents to different people. Conservatives instinctively understand, that everyone cannot be as good in physics as Albert Einstein, even if everyone got the best physics teacher to teach him.
Equality does not mean equal results.
“The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and government of society.” - Thomas Jefferson
Let me guess, Tom...you just happen you’re part of it, don’t you.
Equality only exists in academics minds. In the real world there is no such thing.
This is neither news nor activism. Should be in chat
Equality of opportunity not outcome
Based on Jefferson’s accomplishments, I do believe he qualifies as a natural.
This is incorrect, Christianity never taught that humans were unequal, instead it RECOGNIZED that humans had different social status'. However, we were commanded to treat each other as brothers and sisters despite our caste, or what social status we held.
There is equality in our being Children Of God. He gave us life and He loves us dearly.
That said, human nature is inherently unequal. Some people are better and some are worse. Some are good and some are evil.
I would not like to live in world of saints. We are meant to be imperfect and our humanity is the best part of us. A man is not a drone or a machine.
Every one deserves to be the person they were born to be. A society without real differences is not a society in which I would like to live.
For a long time I have said that Communism is nothing but a bastardization of the Christian principle of equality.
The fundamental difference between the political Left and Right is that Leftists believe in the Romantic notion that humans are all basically equal, that all inequality is due to unjust social institutions, and that through social engineering we can do away with inequality. In contrast, the Right believes that humans are fundamentally unequal, and that in a truly meritocratic society, you expect there to be a hierarchy among individuals and among groups.
A belief in vs. a rejection of natural human hierarchy is why you can have both left and right-wing anarchism/minarchism and both left and right-wing authoritarianism/totalitarianism. The underlying assumptions that we make about human nature rather than specific economic or political institutions are what separate Left from Right.
Someone is confusing equality of opportunity with equality of outcome.
Anyone who rejects equality of opportunity is NOT a true conservative.
Much depends on the cause of the inequality. Some inequality can be caused by things that need, or historically needed, to be fixed, i.e., slavery, medieval feudalism, racial prejudice, government barriers to advancement. In modern America, much inequality results from people being their own worst enemy.
The only equality I’m concerned about is equality of opportunity. Outcomes are based on God given talent and ability and a willingness to work hard for what you want.
No
Equality of outcomes, yes.
Conservatives try to conform their beliefs to the reality of nature. The left is trying to make people reject the realities of nature.
No one really believes in equality.
You can’t engineer equality of outcome without taking away freedom.
Making every one equal that way isn’t the answer.
Or equal abilities.
This:
“For I agree with you that there is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents....There is also an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth...”
Completely disagrees with this:
“America’s founding fathers were not hostile to monarchy and aristocracy. They just opposed King George III.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.