When conservatives acquired power in 1980, they flipped social values in a major way. At first, it was a shift in majority views. But as evidence of previous values drift farther into oblivion, they became less and less of an alternative. The conservative values are now the permanent operating standard throughout society.

Liberalism is now redefined by conservatives to indicate aberrant moral or personal standards rather than a political standard. Liberal politicians dare not call themselves liberals anymore, because it no longer means what they intend it to mean.

Before 1980, when liberal politicians could speak for themselves, they described liberalism as "promoting equal opportunity," which was done by enhancing education, health, housing, welfare and infrastructure. Everyone benefited equally. The pretense of enhancing education and health nowdays is nothing but a cover for decadence. Enhancing infrastructure is attacked as pork, as if it were a conspiracy against the country.

The most visible manifestation of conservativism (correct spelling) is fake slogans related to lowering taxes and creating small government. This is the endless rhetoric of conservatives at the political level, particularly during campaigns. Conservatives are supposedly the protectors of society from higher taxes.

But reduced spending does not go with the supposed lowering of taxes. There is no price too high to pay to have conservatives protecting society from the demons in their own heads, while squandering, waste, fraud and abuse are as standard as decorations on a cake.

This means that while fake tax reductions are claimed, net taxes are increased due to increased spending and interest on the borrowed money which is needed. Since the tax reductions go to the wealthiest persons, the increased tax burden goes to everyone else.

In fact, a flat tax, called employment tax, was created for the lower half of society; and it was doubled from 7% to 15%. It took what used to be called social security and converted it into a tax for general government purposes. It does not apply to persons who make more than $80,000 per year, because its original purpose of providing social security is not relevant to the rich. After it became a flat tax, it wasn't extended to the rich.

So conservatives increase taxes for the lower and middle classes due to a downward shift in taxation combined with wanton spending. When Reagan was campaigning in 1980, one of his major themes was that he wasn't going to saddle his grandchildren with government debt. At that time, it was about $800 billion. When he left office, it was around $8 trillion. He increased it by a factor of ten. Only tax payers pay that debt.

At the same time, conservatives multiplied social burdens throughout society by discontinuing government functions or shifting them to state and local levels. Property taxes soared as a result. This consequence was an increase in taxation resulting from conservativism. Yet conservatives keep claiming to be lowering taxes.

The philosophy of liberals was to create a gradient of tax burdens, so those who have more, pay more. Why not "easy come, easy go"? That philosophy has been reversed by conservatives claiming that the rich know more about spending money, and they should get more, because they might solve society's problems with it. And they supposedly own it to start with, which means allowing it to fall into the hands of lesser persons would be an unjust redistribution of wealth. Slave labor is how you prevent an unjust redistribution of wealth, in their philosophy.

On this basis, the recent tax breaks gave about $2 trillion to the rich, particularly wall street investors. They couldn't find anything to do with it; so they invested it in real estate. When too much real estate was constructed, the investors pulled out and created an economic disaster. The Federal Reserve and related central banks around the world poured another trillion dollars into the fiasco to prevent it from taking down the rest of the economy.

Do you think conservatives have trouble getting their act together? Conservativism never moves in any other direction than making the rich richer, and the poor poorer. Deficit spending and bankruptcies are not just collateral damage, they are the methodology. The rich get richer off deficit spending and bankruptcies. Every time the money changes hands, they get ten or twenty percent or more. Every time the victims commit a crime, the rich get money in their coffers for litigating, containing and evaluating the problem.

This standard is a shift in philosophy from solving problems for the good of all to creating problems for the benefit of the few. The philosophy shifts from social justice to exploitation, elitism, bigotry and nihilism.

Justice is not an arbitrary set of values, let alone its basis in truth, which is nowdays portrayed as arbitrary. Each individual act of injustice has its immediate consequences, and the combination of injustices lead to an endless hell for everyone.

At the immediate level, every injustice is a threat to everyone; and as such it creates a response. The threat creates the objectivity of what an injustice is. No threat, no injustice. The threat of injustice applies to everyone; not just the immediate victims. To allow one person to be victimized is to allow anyone and everyone to be victimized. This is why criminal codes exist. It matters what unknown persons do to unknown persons. If not, it can and will happen to others.

The threat of injustice defines it as an injustice and creates a reaction. People respond to threat by attempting to protect themselves from it. If not, call it lollipops. Threat and response to threat define the subject of justice.

The responses to threat are as varied as individuals and their character. Some persons respond with force and violence, which creates additional threat (defined as injustice). But the result will be shaped by truth.

Truth is the size of the universe, because it is linked to all other realities in the universe. It always increases through interactions of realities, because consistent relationships reinforce each other, while inconsistent relationships contradict each other. The consistent relationships define truth.

No one can arbitrate truth. All people can do is contribute to its evolution by making relationships between realities, which is rationality.

Because of the evolution of truth through all interactions of realities, whenever an injustice is perpetrated, a counter-force of justice builds up against it until the source of injustice is destroyed. This universal truism is never defied, certainly not by the brain-dead perpetrators of injustice.

This is why the Nazis could never have succeeded in overtaking the world. The more successful they were, the more threat they created, and the more opposing force there was as a result. Yet corrupters will keep trying to succeed at defying justice, until they destroy the world, as the apocalypse is described in "The Book of Revelation."