Conservative values have no place in a progressing world.

I thank CON for their response. It gives me much to consider for my rebuttals, which I shall save for Round 3. I expected my opponent to offer an unbiased definition of “conservatism”; this is not what has occurred. P. E. Agre states “Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.” Not only does this straw-man the conservative position, it leaves us with a serious problem. Under this definition, all governments (other than a direct democracy, with voluntaryist [ characteristics) are conservative, and even “modern liberals” become conservatives by supporting the rule of a few people (relatively speaking) over a statistically larger group, or, in other words, supporting the existence of government is a conservative value, and you must necessarily become an anarchist in order to not be conservative. If we accept this definition, my opponent must then argue that we have zero need for government, and I would be arguing that we do have need for government. My opponent defends liberalism, and I do not believe this is meant to be classical liberalism, as I stated I would be arguing for libertarianism, which is derived from classical liberalism; though perhaps my opponent is unaware of this. As such, I shall provide definitions such that my opponent’s arguments remain viable and compatible with them. I shall keep my explanations of each brief and broad, with a citation to the appropriate webpage when making statements that are not derived from the initial explanation. “Conservatism is a preference for the historically inherited, rather than the abstract and ideal. This preference has traditionally rested on an organic conception of society- that is, on the belief that society is not merely a loose collection of individuals, but a living organism comprising closely connected, interdependent members. Conservatives thus favor institutions and practices that have evolved gradually and are manifestations of continuity and stability. Government’s responsibility is to be the servant…of the existing ways of life, and politicians must therefore resist the urge to transform society and politics.” [1] “Liberalism [is] a political doctrine that takes the protecting and enhancing of freedom of the individual to be the central problem of politics. Liberals typically believe that government is necessary to protect individuals from being harmed by others; but they also recognize that government itself can pose a threat to liberty… Thomas Paine expressed it in Common Sense (1776), government is at best “a necessary evil.” Laws, judges, and police are needed to secure the individual’s life and liberty, but their coercive power may also be turned against him. The problem, then, is to be devise a system that gives government the power necessary to protect individual liberty but also prevents those who govern from abusing it.” [3] The paragraphs above are descriptions of the Classical forms of Conservatism and Liberalism. The Modern forms are different expressions of the same ideas. “[Liberals] believe the role of government should to be guarantee no one is in need. “[Conservatives] believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals.” [2] If we accept the expression provided by the Encyclopedia Britannica website (as this is the least biased webpage I could find), we must begin to make the connections between Classical Conservatism and Modern Conservatism. After this, I will begin to make the connections to Libertarianism. If we reject the premise set by Agre, and supported by PRO (due to its inherent bias of definition), we can begin to parse through some of the Conservative values that have a place in society. The conservative holds to tradition, with the justification that that which is stable, actual, and continuous is more valuable than the theoretical, ideal, and uncertain. To ask a conservative to trust in theories, emotional and moral appeals, and uncertainty is to ask them to go against their innate nature. The conservative does not argue against change, but rather is apt to view immediate change as inherently problematic; by these, I mean that a conservative views planning as a necessary part of life, especially when actions have an effect on others. The conservative (Henceforth James) would argue that practical application automatically outweighs theory, and the most practical application of all is the continuity of various institutions. While there are Conservatives who have, in the past, justified immoral acts, it is made obvious that this is out of following solid foundations previously established. However, after being presented with reasons to denounce those practices, James would be willing to do so. Pragmatism is the mark of a conservative. He supports the existence of an objective moral order, which exists independent of the wishes of humans. While this leads to modern Conservative impositions of personal values (prostitution, homosexuality, gay marriage, and drug use are all wrong), James will support those things that can be shown to have positive practical use. This is due to the customs of the time, and as times change (in the necessary increments the conservative is comfortable with) James will apply his organic view of society (as a culmination of individuals). Tradition, custom, and convention are necessary pieces of society, and do not exist outside of society. James clings to these things, and is only persuaded when he is presented with a practical application of the changes hoped for. [1] [5] James is not against sexism, racism, ableism, transgenderism, and other such prejudices and biases, because these things are personal beliefs. He disagrees with any attempts to force people to change these, but supports the protection of those who experience violence on these grounds, as all violence is still violence. He believes that the role of government is to ensure that peoples’ rights are protected, and only certain things would count as rights. With these rights comes responsibility, which is to be taught by schools, family, and friends, though not necessarily limited to these things. These institutional teach discipline, and those who are incapable of using their rights responsibly deserve to be punished; as it is the role of government to protect the rights of people, it thus follows that government must ensure that everyone is protected from James, should he failed to be responsible. Now, whether there are certain things that we must protect James from, when he himself chooses to do them (i.e. accept sex for money, take drugs, etc.) will change as society changes, regardless of what we consider to be objectively right or wrong. Does modern Conservatism do this? No, Modern Conservatism tries to legislate morality, with the justification that these things are dangerous. [1] [5] Prudence, responsibility, self-ownership, tradition, support of choice, understanding the place of the individual in society, and promoting personal freedoms are the hallmarks of James’ thought process. Now, Modern Conservatism may be problematic, but this is the political expressions of the ideology, rather than the ideology itself. The values that are supported are critically important to society, but there are problems. There are some things which cannot be explained through practical application. Do these things have a place in modern society? Very much so. Are there conservative values that don’t have a place in modern society? Very much so. However, this does not mean we can reject the entirety of conservative values. [1] [5] [1] http://www.britannica.com... [2] http://www.studentnewsdaily.com... [3] http://www.britannica.com... [4] http://voluntaryist.com... [5] http://www.heritage.org...