Is Donald Trump a Conservative?

Leave a reply

a559425d1bfb41acc0812c901ea2da78Being a conservative is the easiest job in politics today. Ted Cruz is defined as a conservative. Has Donald Trump called himself a conservative? Basically, all Republicans adopt the brand. Rush Limbaugh is a conservative. So is Sean Hannity. Countless American citizens claim to be conservatives.

Candidates, broadcasters and citizens all have one thing in common. Not one is involved in a conservative initiative. None believe in free markets markets either.

It is much easier to be a conservative than a liberal. All it requires is an opinion. Conservative things are different. Conservative things would be repealing laws and closing government agencies.

Some voters believe Donald Trump is a liberal in conservative clothes. Does it really matter? After all there are no plans to do even one conservative thing. In all fairness to Trump, he did mention closing the Department of Education but has said nothing about it since. Enforcing laws is kind of a conservative thing. Trump does want to build a wall closing the Mexican border and that actually constitutes enforcing the emigration law that is already on the books.

Republicans should not frustrate themselves over the fine points of who is a conservative and who isn’t. Being a conservative is only important for being accepted by ones peers and maintaining self esteem. Since it is only make believe and there is no conservative agenda why get frustrated?

Why? Because conservative is only an identity thing. There are no conservative initiatives or even conservative agendas in the United States.

Useful Definitions

00_definitionsU

This entry was posted in Daily Comments on by .

About Fantasy Free Economics

James Quillian independent scholar,free market economist,and teacher of natural law. Who is James Quillian? Certainly I am nobody special, Just a tireless academic and deep thinker. Besides that, I have broken the code with respect to economics and political science. Credentials? Nothing you would be impressed with. I am not a household name. It is hard to become famous writing that virtually no one in the country is genuinely not in touch with reality. But, if I did not do that, there would be no point in my broking the broken the code. If you read the blog, it is easy to see that there are just a few charts, no math and no quantitative analysis. That is not by accident. Given what I know, those items are completely useless. I do turn out to be highly adept at applying natural law. Natural law has predominance over any principles the social science comes up. By virtue of understanding natural law, I can debunk, in just a few sentences , any theory that calls for intervention by a government. My taking the time to understand the ins and outs of Keynes General Theory is about like expecting a chemistry student to completely grasp all that the alchemists of the middle ages thought they understood in efforts to turn base metals into goal. Keynesian theory clearly calls for complete objectivity. Government can only make political decisions. Keynesian techniques call for economic decisions. So, why go any further with that? Fantasy Free Economics is in a sense a lot like technical analysis. Technical analysis began with the premise that it was impossible to gain enough information studying fundamentals to gain a trading advantage. Study the behavior of investors instead. Unlike technical analysis, I don't use technical charts. What I understand are the incentives of different people and entities active in the economics arena. For example, there is no such thing as an incentive to serve with life in the aggregate. In the aggregate, only self interest applies. It is routinely assumed otherwise. That is highly unappealing. But, I am sorry. That is the way it is. I can accept that because I am genuinely in touch with reality. Step one in using Fantasy Free Economics is for me to understand just how little I really know. A highly credentialed economist may know 100 times what I do based on the standard dogma. Compare the knowledge each of us has compared to all there is to know and we both look like we know nothing at all. There is always more than we don't know than what we do know. I am humble enough to present myself on that basis. Why? That is the way it is. I am not bad at math. I have taught math. What I understand is when to use it and when to rely on something else. Math is useless in natural law so I don't use it. While others look at numbers, I am busy understanding the forces in nature that makes their numbers what they are. That gives me a clear advantage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.