Yeah, I'm fully with you on the individualist vs collectivist delineation. But I thought it's worth mentioning that at least East Asia is actually quite far to the right when it comes to economic policy.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 16 2021 03:41pm

One of the big contradictions on the right is that they are always selective about how the hierarchy should work out. It's never about an objective test to determine the best hierarchy, the hierarchy is decided beforehand and then reinforced. So in Fascism the favored race is assumed favored from the outset. In monarchy it's always your family that should be the rightful rulers. In markets it's always those who are rich are there because they're the best even though the billionaires of today tend to have had family members who could afford to lose hundreds of thousands on their business startup. Nobody actually wants to look for the rightful hierarchy.

Confucianism is both meritocratic and traditional, and it goes a long way towards explaining how East Asian states feel on related issues. They are also collectivist, because they have a millennia long history of state control and the very process of rice cultivation requires communal effort.

Our political foundations are rooted simultaneously in the Classics, reinterpreted through the Enlightenment, as well as the Enlightenment tradition itself and Anglo-Germanic traditions.

because if they looked for the rightful hierarchy that would be meritocracy, which requires a decent amount of collectivism to achieve. If you really want to see who rises to the top you need everybody to have good schools, low financial stress, etc. You basically end up with communism until you're 18 and capitalism after.

Favoring a social system or order which oneself is positioned in the upper echelons of society is part of human nature. Leftists do it all the time too.

When all those self-proclaimed Western "socialists" or "communists" talk about their utopia, how many of them envision themselves being a big philosopher or political leader who crafts doctrine or writes textbooks; and how many of them envision themselves as a sweaty, soot-covered worker hammering away at a piece of metal in a steamy furnace before driving home in crowded public transport to their three-room apartment in an ugly high-rise building?

In addition, conservatives are resistant to change so they'd naturally support any system that benefits them.

lol, how to admit that your image of "socialism" is literally 1950's red scare propaganda:



meanwhile in reality, the most unapologetically capitalist country in the world leads the west in terms of poverty and shitty working conditions...

Their inertia causes conservatives to even stick with ideologies which hurt them for far too long, for example Koch-style libertarianism (which is bad for the bottom 95% of society).

Name me a single socialist or communist country in which the living conditions for the median citizen (at the 50% quantile of the pecking order) are better than in capitalist North America, capitalist Europe or capitalist Australia/South Korea/Japan.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 16 2021 05:57pm

that user will cite several countries with near-zero diversity, massive non-renewable natural resources, and population sizes rivaled by just one city in America or capitalist Europe

This post was edited by excellence on Sep 16 2021 05:51pm