re: Milton Friedman, neoliberalism & modern conservatives

quote:

---

The Catholic view of that laid out in Ethics and the National Economy (or solidarism if you just want to read about the concept itself) lays out a few principles I personally gravitate toward a bit, but most notably is that while we have a moral obligation to address issues it is also not solely on any one entity, and the farther down the escalatory chain of governance we can go to address an issue the better.

---

I agree with this. I just don't see much action from people who speak on behalf of Conservatives that align with this concept.

quote:

---

The government should address issues, but it also can't be the only one doing the lifting. The goal is to create systems where intervention is no longer needed, not where intervention is a leg of the stool the impacted sit on.

---

I guess I'm just not aware of conversations among Conservatives about addressing societal ills like destruction of our environment.

quote:

---

I would say most conservatives are very pro-environment. They just need you to actually make a case for how a policy is going to help.

---

What alternatives do Conservatives express or advocate for? I'm not familiar with any concern about the environment from Conservatives. We get "drill baby drill" instead.

quote:

---

You would gravitate to the minimally, uselessly educated masses doctrine...

---

Me and Ronald Reagan.

quote:

---

You mean like Elon Musk is doing?

---

He wants to protect the Earth by... colonizing space?

quote:

---

NOLA and Jackson can no longer reliably provide clean drinking water.

---

New Orleans can't provide clean drinking water?

quote:

---

California made it illegal to investigate government corruption.

---

Weird. So did Governor Landry.

quote:

---

Okay, now you are bringing up contentious issues. Yes, many of us think those issues are greatly exaggerated. We don’t want as much government action because we disagree with the threat level. That is very different from not thinking government should play a role in pollution prevention when there is an agreed upon threat.

---

What alternatives to government have Conservatives proposed to protect the environment?

quote:

---

Weird. So did Governor Landry.

---

You’re agreeing with his point.

quote:

---

I'm not familiar

---

We know.

quote:

---

with any concern about the environment that i'm specificially concerned about, from Conservatives.

---

fify

quote:

---

Reagan is considered THE neoliberal President. Yet:

---

Yes. He was awful. I don't understand how or why he was canonized by the American Right

quote:

---

So when/where and why did this shift occur? How did "markets generally allocate resources better than governments" become "virtually any government involvement in a market is inherently communist"? When did skepticism about government's ability to solve a problem become skepticism that we have any collective responsibility to address the problem at all? I'm thinking about environmental destruction, homelessness and mental illness with the last question.

---

It didn't, unless you're taking about libertarians or anarchists.

Which is what? A mid-single digit portion of the population?

quote:

---

I'm not familiar with any concern about the environment from Conservatives

---

Look up Ducks Unlimited. Conservationism is huge in conservative circles. Sportsmen who want to preserve nature and sustainable practices so that future generations will be able to hunt, fish, camp, and hike in the same wild places their parents did. Progressives wanted to ban hunting to preserve endangered species. Conservatives instead pushed for regulated hunting with tags where the costs of the tags went towards protecting the species. This made each animal valuable to both the hunter (who wants the ability to continue hunting) and the government (which gets revenue from selling the tags). Tag hunting as been so successful that many species (including the American alligator) has been brought back from the brink of extinction. Meanwhile, outright bans lead to population declines because there’s no self-funding resources to stop illegal poaching.

Conservatives are pro conservation when the regulation is something tangible, and they are actually given environmental and economic pros and cons to consider. So much of the environmental movement isn’t about the environment at all, but rather government controlling where commerce can and cannot happen, and taxing businesses and real estate developers extra for the privilege of doing so.

Some regulations are essential for protecting air quality and the habitability of our waterways. However, some are crafted literally by foreign companies to shutter domestic industries so that said foreign firms can dominate the market. Much of what is done in the name of environmentalism is actually industrial sabotage and regulatory capture, and often done to artificially inflate the costs of electricity to make certain alternatives (over which certain companies have a monopoly) more viable.

quote:

---

I'm wondering what movements have been associated with Conservatives to protect the environment.

---

Look up.