Condemning black-and-white thinking in the preamble and then producing eight paragraphs of it, closing off with a remote psychiatric diagnosis of a stranger - this self-description does the refutation on its own. The interesting part is the labels you apply. None of what you mentioned is conservative. Trust in the state, faith in state-funded media, redistributive taxation, welfare Christianity, distaste for American capitalism, deference to “established science” and “traditional alliances” — this is a fairly standard European Christian-democrat position. The word “conservative” is doing rhetorical work it hasn’t earned: it attempts to install you as the neutral default and Djunior as the radical. That’s a framing move, not an argument. “State-financed, not forced to make money but to inform the public” is a dead giveaway. Removing the commercial incentive doesn’t remove the incentive. It substitutes appointment boards and licence-fee politics for advertisers. You can prefer that trade — but calling it motive-free is the exact unexamined faith you’re assigning to everyone else here.
Great response if you are looking for an unbalanced and questionable interpretation of djuniors post and my response to it.
I acknowledge you really tried to shift the semantics of the term conservative into a hard right libertarian direction.
I like to preserve. Preserve democracy and not go for your interpretation of 'freedom' and abandoning what I've mentioned above.
So, yes. This is conservatism. Reform UK? That is populism and demagoguism. Restore Britain? That is an even more extreme version of it.
So no pal, just because you like to set the center somewhere in the far right corner doesn't make it conservatism.
And yes, I should have stayed away from labeling djunior miserable.
We all know he is just doing his (kremlin) job
This post was edited by Sankturio on Jun 29 2026 08:36am