Towards a Formulation of Conservatism

Communists would have us believe that it is a simple reaction to the awakening of the human spirit which threatens the material wealth and continuing material provisions of the upper classes. This has created a false dichotomy between those who care only about material things and owning them, and those who care about intangible human wellfare. Of course, if this were true, all wealthy people would always organize in arms to destroy leftists at any cost and not accept compromise. A more general leftism would see the upper and lower classes disappear altogether to give way to a middle class. It is a refinement of the dicatatorship of the proletariat.

What conservatists hold is that there can only be wellfare in the upper and lower classes, that a middle class is only alienation and suffering. A man that truly cares for the lower classes, who are as much anchored in real things and the dirt of life as the upper classes, would have an intelligent and competent upper class that can offer them stability and the things that please the lower classes. The only middle class should be those who seek through hard fucking work to rise in or into the upper classes. The entrepreneur class. For, of course, wealthy families inevitably lose their fortunes and poor families inevitably produce childeren that want to ascend. This is why a modern conservatism is based on a robust capitalism that allows for a strong entreprenurial class, through which upper and lower classes can find their joy. Minimum wage would be a disgusting concept for any person with dignity, who values the products of hard work, their own or their employees.

Conservatism holds that, far from being humane, governance that allows for a guaranteed middle class destroys all the things in the human spirit that are beautiful and representative of what our species is getting the universe for the cost it has paid and continues to pay for it.

A robust modern conservatism must also allow for a left that holds for the middle class or whatever it chooses in a space that it concedes exists within its blind spot yet must only be respected as the result of intelligent analysis.

the only realistic (workable) social democratic structure is a large middle class. it’s gotta be yuuuge.

i’m not convinced that communists understand this basic fact.

you can’t have a society of mostly noble poor proletariat workers. why? capitalism baby. yeah it eats the earth, so what? it also creates the solutions for that. i don’t even like having money but i hate being poor even more.

i’ll tackle the specific analysis you brought here when i have the chance. which means when i’m not pissed off and have some time, so tomorrow then.

not most ppl can be rich. but most ppl can be middle class. as far as i can tell that’s the only economic justification for a society’s continued existence. it’s also what naturally works. the natural world is one huge middle class with pockets of extreme poverty and extreme wealth. and i don’t argue with nature. not if i can help it

I don't see where nature proves this, or why man should submit to nature or anything.

Looking forward, as per my OP, to a response I can respect. I do respect it a priori, because I know you.

But let's see the goods.

Interestingly I had a very similar thought about poor and rich yesterday. That these are the ones that directly engage the will to power, where those in between can't afford to (will lose) nor need to (won't die) take it literally.

A middle class isnt benefited too much by knowing where it comes from, what the deal is they result from. This in turn causes heavy mutations of the mind, the invention of moralities - this is important - the conditions of whig are provided by the other two classes. This kills self valuing integrity; the very standards of judgment depends on factors that can't withstand these judgments.

It seems to me that this has always been the case in civilizations large enough to have "masses".

The advantages of a middle class are creative. This can easily justify it for a good part. A class that doesn't know it's roots or core standards will produce regular exceptionally gifted people that formulate artificial and beautiful standards through art.

I wonder if American storytelling isn't essentially middle class art. If Hollywood isn't the consecration of the middle class into its own proper realm.

This does fit in with the notion of middle class members that exist only to overcome their status and rise to the top, and yet it suggests a little more too; it suggests a possibility of a (somewhat) noble heart of the middle class -- or let me just say, a heart.

If I had to guess whaty Dostoyevski is, I'd guess middle class. Rusia is exceptional at middle class with heart.

And yet, I ask, as a possible conservatist, cannot there be an understanding between all three? Is the new wave of rap and trap not proof that a middle class can survive truth?

Pezer wrote:

I don't see where nature proves this, or why man should submit to nature or anything.

Looking forward, as per my OP, to a response I can respect. I do respect it a priori, because I know you.

But let's see the goods.

man submits to nature to the degree he has nature in him which still composes him more than he decomposes it. that’s still a large swath of “man”. but yeah we also surpass nature like it’s our bitch.

i look at nature and i see averagenees as value; flat to the middle, look at a field of grass or a herd of cattle. wealth is in the eagle in the sky, but even he is average to what it means to be eagle. and there are far less predators than prey. and far less prey than vegetation.

nature uses a small bit of will to power plus chaos to stir its own waters for benefit, but generally speaking nature is water running downhill and pooling in the lowest spot... a valuing of the predicted expected.

that’s basically what the middle class is. an attempt to moderate life and average it into expected predictability. whereas the poor and the rich actually take risks, experience chaos.

most ppl want predictability and normalcy. so you need an actually existing middle class to reflect this fact. too many poor peoole and they get angsty and revolt, looking for normalcy and a reprieve from the harsh extremes; too many rich peoole... well that’s never been a problem, actually.

when you value the poor and devalue the rich, which is exactly what communism is, you create more poor and less rich, which will destabilize society by denying it an outlet for that natural stabilizing tendency and law. and unstable societies tend to collapse, not flourish.

as fixed was i think saying, the middle class is just a weird extension of the poor. i’ll have to trace this out in more detail when i feel like it. but yeah the middle class wants above all else never to actually know itself— just like nature.

self knowledge erodes the foundation of being able to average yourself into a statistical spread of common-value.

I don't see that as posing any obstacle to this conservatism being formulated. A conservatist is by nature not an extremist.

well i’m not saying it’s an obstacle. but conservatives i’ve known are quite extreme on certain things. and not so on other things.

That's probably because they were on the defensive, and had never been able to formulate what they stood for, even to themselves.

maybe

The real conservatists anyway. We will need to shed a lot of garbage.

hence why zara had his mountain cave

Capable wrote:

as fixed was i think saying, the middle class is just a weird extension of the poor. i’ll have to trace this out in more detail when i feel like it. but yeah the middle class wants above all else never to actually know itself— just like nature.

Let's maybe try to list a number of truly middle class people as well as upper and power class, and analyse their lives, characteristics.

I like this about the middle middle-class being like nature on account of not knowing itself. Nature hid from herself. That definitely flies for the middle class, and explains theor reckless attitude vs excess.

We can compare lower, middle and upper class excesses.

Lower class excess: a 40 and a blunt at the street corner playin dice with a bitch on my knee

Middle class excess: A riske comedy where the morality of self-guarding against danger is supperficially challenged for a short moment, followed by a walk down the street at night in a large group of girls wearing bunny ears and giggling, 'fore midnight. A wiked smile at about 12:30 when she goes to sleep, he's just a little lost and uncomfortable at all the commotion.

Upper class excess: a 40 and a blunt at the street corner playin dice with a bitch on the knee. Followed by a helicopter ride to an art show that contains 10 different severely illegal and immoral elements. The helicopter is full of high grade drugs and classy bitches in dresses each worth over $10.000. He orders a drone attack that fires small missiles on his friend's house. A bottle of Petrus is being drank, and they are all eloquently comparing it to the artisanal wines they are accostumed too. The Petrus seems, probably, I guess, to pass the test.

Conservatist middle / Entrprenurial class excess: The watch a big budget picasso movie. They discuss it happily as they walk to a very fancy restaurant. They drink very good Chilean wine, not too expensive. But that's the beauty of Chilean wine: it can be very good without being so expensive. When they get home they make sweet love. The next morning they give it 30 extra mins before getting out of bed.

And there will always be wise men and women, who find nooks and crannies, and do what THEY want.

very nice analysis right there.

Spot on.

Quote :

Conservatist middle / Entrprenurial class excess: The watch a big budget picasso movie. They discuss it happily as they walk to a very fancy restaurant. They drink very good Chilean wine, not too expensive. But that's the beauty of Chilean wine: it can be very good without being so expensive. When they get home they make sweet love. The next morning they give it 30 extra mins before getting out of bed.

And there will always be wise men and women, who find nooks and crannies, and do what THEY want.

What Vienna out have become if I had stayed. Too much completeness - I need my pirate heart to get ahead, I knew I needed to cross the Atlantic, she knew it too. The cruelty of breaking it for the mercy on her future child did pay off, the kid she got little over a year after is strong, beautiful and truly the Austrian patrician that she is, indifferent to unhappiness, that far awayness of it.

I think the idea of the dutch originally is to be a poor man with lots of money and ships.

A poor man with lots of money and ships.

Well shit, that's like my fucking kinda people see?

My kinda people...

Yes you'd have done well in our "Golden Century" as its called.
Ah, more gold ahead.