Hello Dear Reader
The General Need For Conservatism
Let me begin by saying I am sorry for the situation you are in, dear reader. I believe you are a victim. I know this even without knowing your specific situation you are in. But let me explain why I believe this, because the victim label has been carelessly applied to too many people for the wrong reasons. After we clarify what makes you a victim I would like to offer you some help. Given some insight into what happens to people like you, may help you avoid making the same error you made and so many others make.
Of course I have no idea who you are. But the fact that you are in this world tells me a lot about you. For example, I know that at some point early on in your life, you took a chance. It was probably a small one, a chance made because an opportunity presented itself. Regardless early on you gambled on an outcome, and it worked out ok for you, so you gambled some more and took even more chances. But the risks got greater as you got older. Probably things worked out for you, at least for a while. Perhaps you took one chance too many and your life never recovered. Possibly you took an extreme risk, and it paid, but for most of us we take too many that did not work out, and we end up with the rest of the struggling masses.
The world calls what we do, that puts us in with the vast majority, ‘bad choices’ but since everyone makes them to call these choices, ‘bad’ seems rather odd. We all tend to make the same choices. Some few become millionaires and many more become convicts, and the rest of us just work ourselves into an early grave.
Life in this sense, is something like a casino. You bet small you win small and most people get tired of winning small and decide to take a bigger gamble. For some it pays off. For others, they end up doing 5-10 in jail or 9-5 for an ungrateful boss.
Life is not fair, it is a gamble, but it does not have to be. It is the system we are in that creates the risk that causes us to gamble.
One cannot gamble if there is not someone giving us odds.
There are to paths available to us. There is the broad way of this world that everyone sees and follows. But there is another option even if it is not as easy to find or walk along.
The vast majority of people think they have unlimited choices. Life for them is akin to the breakfast cereal aisle in a supermarket, full of options to choose from. Though most are not that different from the others.
This is not altogether wrong. The options are there, they do exist at least in potentiality, but this is a fool’s game and part of the gamble too many enter into. We gamble on what we can make work. But we become the standard of our success.
What was the first insane act? Someone took what did not belong to them because of how it looked and because they figured they might get an unearned benefit from it. They probably also figured they could make up the harm they did somehow, that what they did would be forgiven. This comment refers to the events that occurred in the Garden of Eden.
A tree symbolizes a system. fruit is the results or what is produced by the tree. or system.
The tree or system referred to, represented a way of thinking that is physically based or phenomenological. Good and evil in this system is based on what looks good and what seems good to a man.
It was the system called liberalism. But liberalism has two forms, the hard and soft versions.
Soft liberalism is communism and socialism. Hard liberalism is tyranny. Most thinkers would put conservatism in there, possibly at the center, but this is better reserved for traditional liberalism.
Conservatism is not politics; it is the alternative to liberalism. When we talk about conservatism we talk about remaining in the grace of God.
If we could imagine going back to the simplest reality possible, a reality that is coherent and rational, it would be entirely consistent with Scripture, it would be scientifically verifiable and logically deductible from first principles. If we can imagine that we would arrive at the social condition, we refer to as conservatism.
Everything we do comes down to the way we think. Reformers work on changing the system, but they do not try and radically alter the way we think. Apriorian Conservatism is an alteration in the way we think.
People are inundated with ideas on how to change or reform this or that element of their liberal system. What is not given them is information on how to change the way they think. But why would that be odd when the writers and reformers have no interest in altering the way they think.
But there are two systems backed up by the two ways we think. The world taught us all to think one way. Yet does it take any imagination to realize we are not thinking the right way and that perhaps, there is an ulterior reason for why we are taught to think the way we have been instructed?
Thought is not an instinct. Conservatism teaches us another far more effective way to think, so you no longer get caught up in the liberal’s gambit.
The Liberals Gambit:
A gambit is according to Oxford Dictionary; “a device, action, or opening remark, typically one entailing a degree of risk, that is calculated to gain an advantage.
“his resignation was a tactical gambit”
(in chess) an opening in which a player makes a sacrifice, typically of a pawn, for the sake of some compensating advantage.
In simple terms a gambit is a gamble.
A gambit always represents a risk; some thing is ventured to gain an advantage. In gambling one wagers small and wins small, but the larger the risk, the bigger the potential payout.
Eden depicts a liberal gambit. Adam and Eve knew the risk but wagered they would gain more than they lost. No doubt the devil made the same sort of gamble.
But one cannot gamble unless someone is willing to cover the bet. One needs something akin to a casino if one wishes to gamble. The ‘casino’ in this system of things is liberalism. It makes a lot of sense to look at the left and right of liberalism as two kinds of houses. The left bets on the poor and the right bets on the rich.
The left wants the rich to work to benefit them and the rich wants the poor to work to benefit them. They both gamble that if this is done, the whole will be benefited, but of course their only concern is that they are benefited.
Despite all of the seeming chaos and all of the different conflicts, there are only two classes of options. It is simple logic as such it cannot be refuted. We pay our own way, we sustain ourselves, or we remain dependents of others. Those are the options.
It comes down to simple economics. Too many people do not understand economics. This system is built on lies and the lies make people think in ways that are unlikely to reflect true reality.
Many people do not even understand there is actually an uncontestable truth in existence, they are used to everything being someone’s opinion and being in a position where they need to abide by another person’s truth.
The implications of the liberal gambit are rarely understood by those who fall victim to it. Once one has accepted the Liberal Gambit, truth is lost because truth rests on ownership. If you own nothing you have no truth. If there is no sense of ownership nothing is left but power. In a gamble everything rests on power or what is sometimes referred to as the law of the jungle. The law of the jungle is expressed in the simple adage that might makes right and the end justifies the means.
The liberal’s gambit even goes back to trial by combat, the idea that if one wins a contest of strength, then one’s cause must be just. This is based on the strategy of the Liberals Gambit. If one can extract wealth from others, one must be doing something that is preferable to being the one being oppressed.
If one can enlist others in the cause and enrich them, then this is even more evidence that you are going the right things. Even now, the nation that can perpetuate a war and win through logistics, is proven the more worthy nation.
The Liberal Gambit translates into steep administrative gradients. The man who is the most able to enrich his followers gains the most power. Power given to a less able leader represents risk for his followers. Poor leaders give us democracy. Powerful leaders push the system towards what is called tyranny. But tyranny is little more than the recognition that what is right for the ruler is generally right for the follower.
To summarize the Liberal Gambit; it is the proposition that if we throw everything into the mix and let competition determine who wins, the strongest and most ruthless, will acquire the greatest power along with all those who support him.
The downside is the perpetual state of competition we are in and the fact that we are mortal creatures. Even the most powerful leader falls to death, eventually. Which means there is always risk in the system, there is always the threat of loss. Every move we make is ultimately a gamble. The one choice we have within liberalism, is whether we gamble small or we gamble big.
Conservatism
Conservatism is considered to be a manifestation of commitment to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation. What this usually means in practice is an antipathy to liberalism. But without a clear understanding of liberalism, conservatism often appears to be a reaction to progress, which is nonsense because most true progress is created by conservatives. The problem has been that conservatives have permitted liberals to define them. Mostly it is the soft liberals or the left-leaning liberals, that have created the labels.
Liberals are against murder. Liberals think people ought to obey the law. Liberals even think mothers are wonderful people and deserving of respect. These are traditional values. But liberals are not conservatives.
Conservatives do believe in the traditional family and the traditional roles of men and women, but not because they were the values of their parents. Conservatives do not think women ought to be captured in warfare or disagreements settled by might makes right conflicts, though these are traditional ideas that changed over time.
It is not that conservatives are against change, we are against change that conflicts with the mind of God. We are not conservatives about the flesh, we are conservatives when it comes to the things of God, the things of the spirit and the Truths of God.
Jesus did not preach Christianity, he preached conservatism. He preached against the inroads of liberalism.
The line between conservative and liberal is our attitude to jobs. The liberal seeks the high-status job, the one which can be done without labour. The clothes and the demeanour of a liberal are such to indicate they do nothing useful.
The fundamentals are that there is the creation of God called the world and we have dominion over it. That is the right to use it but it does not include the right to own it, to possess it as something that is ours. We have a right of transformation but that does not give us the right to destroy what we were given.
The situation we are in, requires we add value to the earth, to make it more habitable for our kind.
God did not design us to be scavengers. He told us to go forth and replenish the earth. This has two elements. We are all born from a man and a woman who are our parents. They devoted a lot of time and resources to our upbringing. It is our responsibility to repay the past by replicating this sacrifice, so it was not in vain.
It is not only that we have to pay back what we consumed by helping others to become self-reliant, we have to make the lives of those who come after us, better than our own. This was something people took for granted at one time. Now people are more focused on consuming everything they produce and more besides.
We have the choice of liberalism or conservatism, but if we choose conservatism, we must choose perfection which is the absence of waste. This is relative in the sense that the effectiveness of our use is relative to the technology available to us. This is why we need to develop economically. We need to make it possible for each generation to be more conservative than the last.