American Liberalism

[skywalker]

Originally posted by MagiK: Read the Constitution some time Mark, National Defense is in there..welfare programs are not not. Edit: Neither is income tax.

Hmmm...You insinuate I am clueless. It is the size and amount spent on defense that I was referring to. I do believe we need some form of armed forces.

Mark

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Yorick: [QBA CONSERVATIVE is one who won't change the status quo, and so is directly related to what the political situation is. A Monarchist committed to a reigning monarch would be conservative. The opposite of conservatism is radicalism. Not Liberalism.[/QB]

Conservatives are not nessarily for the status quo. There are a LOT of things that we would like to change. Minimalising the welfare state and the present tax structure, notably.

Originally posted by skywalker: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Read the Constitution some time Mark, National Defense is in there..welfare programs are not not. Edit: Neither is income tax.

Hmmm...You insinuate I am clueless. It is the size and amount spent on defense that I was referring to. I do believe we need some form of armed forces.

Mark[/QUOTE]I never said a word about being clueless, just ignorant of the constitutional role of the federal government is all. There is no shame in ignorance. As for defense, let me know when it is ok with you to be the second best at defending yourself. Seems to me, that given the choices, I prefer to be the uncontested heavy weight champion.

[Cloudbringer]

Originally posted by skywalker: Yes Yorick, it was uncalled for (I winced when I read it), but not entirely unexpected. From reading many of Gregster's posts, around a number of forums, I believe this just his style. No offense taken, though Greg. I guess it's because I do lean toward the liberal side in the classic sense, but not fully because I believe in fiscal responsiblity that I could be inadvertantly labeled "LIBERAL". I'd rather be Left than Right, though. Besides, this thread is not about me personally. I just wanted to find out what other people thought about the subject! One more thing...I wonder if people are confusing Liberal and Democrat? Mark (BTW Thanx Yorick!)

Just a point that needs making here: Just because it's someone's 'style' elsewhere does not make 'uncalled for' remarks ok.

Mark, this is a good thread and you're right, no need to get personal in such a topic. [img]smile.gif[/img]

And Gregster, thanks for the polite response to the posts calling that comment out. Keep in mind that no matter what we MEAN to say, it's HOW we say it that others note first.

This is a very interesting thread and I'm impressed at the smooth flow of the dialogue.

[Draten-Master of Fire and Ice]

Originally posted by skywalker: Can someone tell me when being a liberal in the USA became such stigma. It seems like it is a slanderous title that no one should ever admit to being. The political community in the USA seems to look down on it. It does appear to be better to be a moderate or conservative, but never liberal. Hmmmm.... Mark

Mayhaps we can dispense with the cloaks and simply say: democrat or republican? These are, after all, the avatars of liberalism and conservativism in America, are they not? It seems to me that if someone wishes to be a conservative democrat, would they not better serve their cause as a republican? But I stray, that is not my intended point. And now for my point: I believe, as has been previously pointed-out, that the negative connotation surrounding the term "liberal" is rooted in the Red Scare and associated political silliness following WWII. For those who may not know this involved an intense fear of anything remotely associated with communism. But can we equate democrats with communists? I think not. Communism, it is my understanding, is an extreme version of socialism: a widely accepted and very successful form of government (see my post on the other liberal thread). I would certainly say that democrats lean toward a socialist form of government and that is not a bad thing, it is simply not what I feel America is about. Keep Church and State separate, I say, and let the Church do Her job: feed the hungry masses, etc...you know, all of the things that democrats think the government should be doing. Strong military...you bet, but beyond that let's resrict government power because government is composed of people and people, if given too much power, are quick to stray to evil. Better to let the little people like you and me make the decisions ie-"Government by the people, for the people, and of the people". The founding fathers thought it best to have a very small federal government whose primary purpose was to be maintaining a strong military NOT putting my money in the pocket of some useless bum who refuses to work and spends the money on drugs, booze, cigarettes, etc.

--"The end is very near...for good or evil"--

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Attalus: Conservatives are not nessarily for the status quo. There are a LOT of things that we would like to change. Minimalising the welfare state and the present tax structure, notably.

Well that isn't by definition a conservative view unless the welfare state is already minimal. That would be the view of a Conservative with liberal leanings. Well well. [img]smile.gif[/img]

But don't take my word for it. This is the dictionary:

con·ser·va·tism
Pronunciation: k&n-'s&r-v&-"ti-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1835
capitalized a : the principles and policies of a Conservative party b : the Conservative party
2 a : disposition in politics to preserve what is established
b : a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change
3 : the tendency to prefer an existing or traditional situation to change

------------
lib·er·al·ism
Pronunciation: 'li-b(&-)r&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1819
1 : the quality or state of being liberal
2 a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity
b : a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard
c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties
d capitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal party
- lib·er·al·ist /-b(&-)r&-list/ noun or adjective
- lib·er·al·is·tic /"li-b(&-)r&-'lis-tik/ adjective

[ 12-22-2002, 05:19 AM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

[Draten-Master of Fire and Ice]

[quote]Originally posted by Yorick:

Originally posted by Attalus: [qb]Conservatives are not nessarily for the status quo. There are a LOT of things that we would like to change. Minimalising the welfare state and the present tax structure, notably.

Well that isn't by definition a conservative view unless the welfare state is already minimal. That would be the view of a Conservative with liberal leanings. Well well. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Goodday Yorick, I am not trying to stir but I must agree with Attalus. I don't think the political big-wigs give a rodent's posterior about what the dictionary says regarding liberal or conservative, but aside from that in order for the conservatives to advocate the status quo, they must advocate the removal of the many changes that have been put in place by liberals and others which have placed America into a state that is unacceptable to their philosophy. The aforementioned, of course, seems to be a paradox; but it is not. To assume that being conservative means to advocate things as they are and nothing more is silly to my way of thinking. That would mean that conservatives never do anything and nothing could be further from the truth. If it weren't for liberals, conservatives would be just as you describe. But, alas, there are liberals so in order to be conservative you must be liberal about your conservative issues and advocate the changes that you advocate. Err...I'm going to stop now...I'm confusing myself.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Draten-Master of Fire and Ice: quote: Originally posted by Yorick: Originally posted by Attalus: [qb]Conservatives are not nessarily for the status quo. There are a LOT of things that we would like to change. Minimalising the welfare state and the present tax structure, notably. Well that isn't by definition a conservative view unless the welfare state is already minimal. That would be the view of a Conservative with liberal leanings. Well well. [img]smile.gif[/img] Goodday Yorick, I am not trying to stir but I must agree with Attalus. I don't think the political big-wigs give a rodent's posterior about what the dictionary says regarding liberal or conservative, but aside from that in order for the conservatives to advocate the status quo, they must advocate the removal of the many changes that have been put in place by liberals and others which have placed America into a state that is unacceptable to their philosophy. The aforementioned, of course, seems to be a paradox; but it is not. To assume that being conservative means to advocate things as they are and nothing more is silly to my way of thinking. That would mean that conservatives never do anything and nothing could be further from the truth. If it weren't for liberals, conservatives would be just as you describe. But, alas, there are liberals so in order to be conservative you must be liberal about your conservative issues and advocate the changes that you advocate. Err...I'm going to stop now...I'm confusing myself.

See this is the problem with labels and generalisations. You're attempting to change the English languages definition and in the process define and limit a humans ideas to fit into a collective.

Conservatism is bigger than a single party. It is a state of being. As I said, a communist can be conservative. A fascist can be conservative. A liberal or environmentalist can be a conservative - depending on the existing state of the situation.

Conservatism is RELATIVE.

A humans political leanings can be myriad and complex.

Expand the number of definitions to describe a human, don't attempt to limit and box the human.

Attalus is not preclusively conservative. Neither are you. You are both self proclaimed democratic conservatives with liberal leanings towards the right, supporting an oligarchial representative democracy.

Why is the word 'liberal' or 'democratic' in there not to be applied to you? If it's offensive then that's exactly what Skywalkers post is about. Get rid of stupid things like bias such as this.

If your views lean to the left, then be comfortable with the word socialist. It's a word. It doesn't limit you or mean you can't believe in democratic capitalism.

If your views lean to the economic right, be comfortable with 'economic liberalism'. Agreeing with laisseze faire capitalism doesn't mean you can't have care for the oppressed.

You and Attalus by your own words show liberal leanings. So incorporate that word into the definition of who you are instead of trying to warp and stretch a single word to encompass manifest ideologies.

[ 12-22-2002, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Draten-Master of Fire and Ice: Goodday Yorick,

G'day to you too. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Attalus]

LOL, I am not at all offended by what you posted, Yorick, for, by the dictionary definitions you are correct. In fact, I am more liberal than some of my friends, who regard me as soft on Gun Control and Abortions. So, I am "more liberal" than they are. However, I regard myself as part of the Conservative Movement, so that I am a "Capital letter" Conservative, though I am not conservative in all my views. I will not bore you with the distinctions that Conservatives draw among themselves, such as Neoconservatives, Paleoconservatives, and Evangelical Christian Conservatives. I am, even more than this, a Republican.