I try not to think about this, but you give me no choice!

@curvycom, my apologies sir.

"Truly conservative Americans are on their own and must calculate their own way to exist in this hostile political environment."

I've read and heard many different (and often opposite) definitions for "Truly conservative Americans," so it is not possible to attach a meaning to that message without the author of the message offering the intended meaning. I could pick one from the hat.

Conservative:
Intolerance concerning religious belief.

Example: Puritans in Colonial Massachusetts.

@Josf-Kelley

It's interesting that the first word you chose to describe conservatism was "intolerance". I would describe true conservatism as "minding one's own business and demanding that others mind theirs as well".

I'm only intolerant of those who work to disrupt my preferred way of life and to destroy what I value.

@Triumph

Thanks, and I don't know what interests you about "the first word" I chose.

The definition of conservatism is the first one I know about, in chronological order, so that explains the choice I made.

Example:

2.1 Use of the term “conservative”
Burke’s French disciples first coined the word “conservative” (French, “ conservateur ” ) ; Burke himself used “conserve”. To reiterate 1.2 above, conservatism and revolutionary Jacobinism are inter-dependent concepts that arose together; the concept predates its label. The English Revolution of the 17th century adumbrates the polarity, in the conflict between Cavaliers and Roundheads. The Cavaliers were, crudely, the precursors of the Tories who later became known as Conservatives. The term “Tory” dates from the Exclusion Crisis 1679-81, during the reign of Charles II. The parliamentary faction that wanted to exclude Charles’ Catholic brother James from the succession were known as Whigs, and those who supported his right to the throne were Tories. “Tory” is derived from the Irish Gaelic word tóraidhe, meaning a dispossessed Irish outlaw. “Tory” was also used during the American War of Independence, referring to colonists loyal to the British monarchy; in Canada, the term is still use to describe centre-right Conservatives.
[plato.stanford.edu]

"minding one's own business and demanding that others mind theirs as well"

That describes a liberal, libertarian, individualist anarchist.

Conservatives in Massachusetts: (From Conceived in Liberty, by Murray Rothbard, 1979)

20
The Puritans “Purify”:
Theocracy in Massachusetts

"The Puritans also proceeded to the final destruction of Thomas Morton’s ill-starred Merrymount colony. For Morton, in 1629, had indeed reestablished his colony of the interracial frolic, the Anglican maypole, and brisk and efficient trade in Indian furs that competed with Massachusetts Bay. Massachusetts offered to share the Bay Company’s fur trading monopoly with Morton, but the highly efficient Morton refused to do so, judging that he could easily outcompete the Massachusetts monopoly. This he did, far outstripping Massachusetts in the fur trade by over six to one. This the colony could not tolerate, and Captain Littleworth was sent to Merrymount with an armed troop. Littleworth cut down the maypole, burned Morton’s house and confiscated his property, and proceeded to destroy the settlement. Morton was charged by the authorities with “alienating” the Indians – the reverse of the fact – and was again deported to England.
Page 164, 165

"To enforce purity of doctrine upon society, the Puritans needed a network of schools throughout the colony to indoctrinate the younger generation."

"Vital to the system, therefore, was a law compelling every child in the colony to be educated. This was put through in 1642 – the first compulsory education law in America – and was in contrast to the system of voluntary education then prevailing in England and in the Southern colonies. Parents ignoring the law were fined, and whenever government officials judged the parents or guardians to be unfit to have the children educated properly, the government was empowered to seize the children and apprentice them out to others."
Page 167

Here, in the same book, are the liberal, libertarian, individualist anarchists, attempting to "mind one's own business and demanding (not enslaving or assaulting) that others mind theirs as well":

19
The Founding of Massachusetts
Page 155

"In successive Parliaments the representatives of the people demanded freedom in economic and political affairs and the termination of the government’s restrictions, monopolies, and taxes that had brought about the depression engulfing the country. The government responded characteristically by imprisoning the opposition leaders, such as Sir Edwin Sandys and Lord Saye and Sele, for advocating free trade, radicalism, and interference with tax collection. The Parliament of 1624 presented a list of grievances in protest against the moratoria issued to debtors against their creditors, against the increases in government officials and expenses, against extraordinary tariffs and taxes, against the government’s use of informers and enforcement of regulations and controls, and against the monopoly trading companies, which were popularly regarded simply as gangs of thieves, from the East India Company to the Council for New England. The Parliament concluded by passing the Act Against Monopolies, by which all monopolies were outlawed and all proclamations furthering them prohibited. Unlike the depression of 1550s, which had led to the unquestioned creation of monumental government controls over the economy, the depression of the 1620s witnessed an attempt toward liberalization by removing the regulations that has caused the crisis. The movement for the abolition of the government’s monopolies and regulations became a major part of the seventeenth-century constitutional struggle in England, and had significant influence in the American colonists, whose migration was a fruit of the government’s controls."
Page 157

In that context, the liberals were attempting to liberate themselves from the conservatives who were attempting to conserve their monopoly power.

So, with that in mind, and moving ahead in time, how about adding similar labels to the Federalists, who were the ones behind the move from the Articles of Confederation, moving from that Federation of Independent States (under the common law), and the ones behind the move to the current Nation-State under the 1789 (edit: was wrongly 1798 ) Constitution?

Were the "Federalist" Party members conservative or not?

@Josf-Kelley

I'm not very interested in Libertarian dissertations. Libertarian ideology is insufficient to resolve the problems in 2020 America. I considered it an interesting mental exercise back in 2008. But anarcho-capitalism or lack of it isn't even the question. So it can't be the answer.

The question today is how to prevent blacks and communists from destroying the country once they've established themselves and started the process.

Did Rothbard ever address that?

@Josf-Kelley Wow, dude; tl;dr much? : ) Do you get paid to post these research papers? Just sayin'.......

@Triumph

"Did Rothbard ever address that?"

No, actually Rothbard libeled Lysander Spooner in his book titled Egalitarianism and The Revolt Against Nature. Spooner offers a means to the end you (I, and many others may) share, and that means is the common law. These people, such as these fake media, and fake governors, guilty of inciting riots (actually paying for it perhaps) are a few (common law) steps away from a court date where they are defending themselves before the trial jurors. If it is an actual Court of Law (common law), then anyone tampering with the jury (such as a "judge" ) is also a few steps away from their own court date.

And to the question about being paid (curvycorn): No, these are not research papers, these are sound bites cut down to a size that average dumbed-down people may actually comprehend.

@Josf-Kelley Just friendly ribbing, man. I'm actually impressed with your thoroughness. i.e. it wasn't too long, and I did read.

@curvycom

It isn't just a hobby to learn. Failure to learn can get someone backed into a corner with only 2 options remaining and neither option is any good.

I agree with you that being a Leftist has the primary requirement of being completely vacant in strength of character.

Lets get more specific. The Republican platform states their intention to protect and defend the Constitution. Their record proves that. The Democrat platform promises everything to everyone, and delivers none of it. But Democrats have a solid record of shredding the Constitution. Even though all pledge to protect and defend the Constitution, most Democrats are on record as immediately violating that promise. As one of the two parties, they are illegitimate, because they are disloyal to the Constitution. A more legitimate party would be the Libertarians. They are loyal to the Constitution, and still oppose many Republican policies.

“The move is part of a broader boycott of Facebook and Instagram organized by the Anti-Defamation League, the NAACP, and other organizations called the “Stop Hate For Profit” campaign. “ [google.com]

Lol... That would have been a lot easier to answer!

@coalburned Too easy.

@Tycho @coalburned I gotta learn to make more catchy polls, this one was a bust as far as total votes. And really the discussion is straying WAY off topic up there. Which is fine, but... well... just sayin' : )

@curvycom Naw, it's a good topic. I notice boycotting was brought up on another thread about Ramzpaul and Starbucks coffee.

@curvycom See what you started? Troublemaker.

Seriously, if it generates good discussion, that's cool, even if it wandered a bit. I'd have the same result, no doubt. Glad you made it here to Slug/IDW.

@coalburned I am enjoying it a great deal.