Put into proper context - there is less resemblance between this and Hitler's glorifying a specific ethnic "race" and basing his entire ideology on the "superiority" of that race. The only similarity is a lot of dead people.
Since the right's ideal government has existed, tell me which race it glorified and proclaimed superior. Correct me if I am wrong, but the philosophy of the right in theory, and practice, is that all of us are created equal.
Every bloody dictator and dictator wannabe says the same thing. If it's not for the good of the country then it's for the good of the children.
For the good of the children. The slogan of the modern left.
Name a couple of governments that were both large and intrusive and conservative.
What you are doing is taking one trait of the rightwing philosophy and isolating it. If I were to do the same it would look like this: the primary emphasis of the left;s philosophy is egalitarian (affirming, promoting, or characterized by belief in equal political, economic, social, and civil rights for all people). Therefore no authoritarian government could ever rightly be called left.
Not just one trait, the primary trait. If it isn't small and unobtrusive, it isn't conservative, and if it isn't conservative, it isn't right. I am only looking at the primary trait of modern liberalism as well. The ultimate goal is equality and any government with equality as its goal must be authoritarian in nature. The primary goal of conservativism is freedom and any government with freedom as its goal must be small and unobtrusive.
The problem with your analysis is that it ignores the fact of egalitarianism. One only need look at what happens to religious and social conservatives in a modern liberal society to see the reality of egalitarianism. Since inforcing equality in a society requires control of the society, modern liberal government must, by definition, be authoritarian.
You have to look at the stated goal of a philosophy in order to see which way it must go. Liberal philosophy doesn't strive to become authoritarian, that isn't part of the plan, but in order to achieve the goal, it must become authoritarian because very few actually want to live the way that modern liberalism demands. The stated goal of conservativism is freedom from government. Large and obtrusive government isn't required to achieve such a goal.
The big issue is: is it the result of leftist policy or a bloodthirsty tyrant? I say the latter. The ideology was simply the means by which he executed his plans and the ideology is defined by the particular dictator's principles.
Of course you do. Because you don't want to admit to yourself that the goal of equality is not compatible with freedom which is the stated goal of conservativism.
The left has no church. Most of the left belong to the mainstream churches. Athiests are a distinct minority. The general stance of most leftists in regard to religion is live and let live.
We aren't talking individuals here, we are talking political philosophy put into practice. Since religion is trancendent in nature and holds to an ultimate good, it is not compatible with the religion of the left. Secularism is a religion as surely as Christianity is.
Other examples can be found in the Constitutions of some of the states:
Your list of religious requirements doesn't damn conservativism, it highlights why it is better. If you did not agree with the laws in those places, you were free to move either to a different community or state that more closely suits your personal preference. Conservativism emphasizes local control, federalism, and minimal bureaucracy and as a result people are allowed to live as they want to live as opposed to a modern liberal society that that demands egalitarian social justice and therefore must establish a universal homogeneous social order which, in effect, prevents people from living as they want and instead must tell them how to live.
In a modern liberal state, if one does not agree with a set of laws, or social norms, there is nowhere to go and all too often, one isn't even allowed to leave the country because decent can not be tolerated.
I don't think history supports your claim.
Of course it does. It supports my claim in spades. Secularism is the religion of the modern left. Even so tolerant a person as 9 sublime, on another thread, stated explicitly that religion belongs no place but church and home. I asked to what lengths he might go legislatively to see his desire become reality but he didn't answer. Of course, one need only look at modern liberal societies that have evolved further than ours to see to what lengths they will go.
The only ideological similarity between fascism and socialism was some of the economic policies. The rest was the result of an authoritarian dictatorship that can be the end result of any number of ideologies. You guys just don't want to admit that the right extremes can be just as rotten as the left extremes.
You actually believe that don't you? Clearly, you haven't researched fascism beyond what someone with a liberal agenda was willing to tell you. Do you know what germany and italy were like under fascist governments if you weren't a jew? Here are some examples:
In italy, mussolini undertook an enormous expansion of public works and extensive social insurance measures. He set up the Dopolavro (after work) department to give workers cheap entertainment of all sorts. He also set up a very large public health works. These departments combined with large amounts of money spent on public education infrastructure made Italy the most advanced welfare state in the world at that time.
hitler centralized all social programs and education as a means of gaining control over the lives of German citizens. In 1941, he extended health insurance to retirees at the expense of those who were working. The following year, he expanded healthcare and maternity leave programs. He built tens of thousands of government subsidized new houses for working class people.
He established the "Strength through Joy" program that allowed workers to take luxurious vacations to the mountains and the beach each year. Cruise ships were built, and special trains brought vacationers to their destinations and because of the state subsidies, cost to the workers were so insignifigant, that even the lowest worker could afford to take his family.
He introduced a wide-ranging program of physical and cultural education for young workers, with the world's best system of technical training. His social security and workers' health insurance system was at the time, most far ranging in the entire world. He introduced the 40 hour work week to europe and he was the first to establish, by law that overtime be compensated. He gave workers 2 hours of break time per day. He removed an employers right to dismiss an employee at his own discretion. hitler made it law that an employer had to give four weeks notice before firing and employee, who then had up to two months to appeal the dismissal and in most cases, won the appeal.
If you weren't a jew or a gypsy, life under a fascist government was a modern liberal's heaven and considering the feelings of some liberals like mare for instance, is hitler's treatment of the jews that much different than her remedy for christians? The fact is that hitler came far closer to estabilshing the ideal modern liberal state than any of the other leftist despots.
