>>1032
>I actually was meaning how any intellectual or politician who is under those labels is shrilled against as establishment and that the only thing that guilds them is money and power. Come on, Illuminatti? I would join whoever their rivals were, if not try be a free actor.
Everyone wants money and power but it shouldn't be described as just that. It's pretty easy to simplify into that but I consider more important the interests behind or purposes. And I said the Illuminatti because they are rich and famous so I put them as the elite everyone wants to reach.... but they are not my cup of tea,too much secretism and desire for evil(I like darkness but not a dense senseless psychopath) They are never happy and always look for more and their style doesn't do much for me. Their rivals are the church and secret organizations from Malta or figures likes Orban if you want to look somewhere else.

>I especially see this type of good logic with more classic liberals who have a touch of right wing.
Classic liberals were at the time considered progressive.
>Though Conservatives do have idea for reform and what not, many time our actions are more focused on rollback and containment without much planning what for what next. For example destroying Obamacare without much of a plan forward on replacement. Or just stabbing at a regulatory agency without ever having any ideas on how to fix the problem ourselves. The reason it exist is because any new regulation/entitlement made tends to have a power structure around it, made up of both the lobbyist and people who may depend on it. And that simply reforming something still leaves it there for it to be tampered with later. But I think more pragmatic action is needed to stem the tide. Not saying my side is free of lobbyist either
Well the situation is easy,conspire or replace the lobbyists or make them financially run of resources,draining its power onto it,meaning that the long term impact could be prevented for future backlash or counter lobbyist movements. If it's completely corrupted and it doesn't look good,take the usual actions then.
The ideas from other party shouldn't be considered as something "the enemy" or the rival has done. It's just as easy as putting it under a different name or copy the project and keep on going if it actually serves. I see that with the health system. Obamacare was a step on something Democrats wanted,why not copying ideas from it or keeping the idea? I mean, you take it as they have invented it but you can show and even overlook that fact when you make it work under your command by saying you are a hero for making it possible and caring about health more than democrats. It can even serve as a counter argument for future debates.