|
bumblie
May 21, 2003, 8:12 PM
Post #1 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629
|
In reply to: sorry to get serious in this thread but I have an important question which could at the same time boosts this thread... what is liberalism, in politics and in economy, why is it good or bad? Answers from everyone from left to right are welcome.
Here's the deal. Let's see if we can discuss this concept without a bunch of distracting trash talk. I know that's about as likely as everyone having sunny weather this weekend, but who knows.
|
|
|
|
|
w6jxm
May 21, 2003, 8:26 PM
Post #2 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2002
Posts: 792
|
It what conservatives think everyone else is, and what the liberals think everyone should be.
It is a point on the political, economic, social, and religious spectrum that some people swing past on their way to extreamism, and the place that others reside at while considering the benefits of conservatism as a politically outlandish viewpoint.
In short, it is the sum of all things that conservativs loath, and everyone else embraces.
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
May 21, 2003, 8:30 PM
Post #3 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
...........yawnn....
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
May 21, 2003, 8:34 PM
Post #4 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
Mabey someone can answer this question for me. People have tried before, but no one has responded to my satisfaction yet.
This is speculation, so correct me if I'm wrong, but...
It seems that Liberals take the side with civil disobedience, and support lesser government involvement in everyday aspects of life...(i.e. Seatbelt Laws, national conflicts)
But at the same time, they support government intervention in other areas such as Gun Control, Health Care, Wellfare, and Conservation.
There is a paradox here. This is a major plank of the platform, and it is split. To use an extreme example-You can't tell the Government to stay out of your life, but then step in help you when you're sick, and haven't been paying insurance.
Anyone else see what I am trying to say?
Got any answers?
Travis
|
|
|
|
|
howitzer
May 21, 2003, 8:34 PM
Post #5 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 5, 2002
Posts: 2511
|
I'll do my best :)
Seriously if you look it up in the Thesaurus, here is what you will find for liberal: ...generous, abundant, lavish, broadminded, tolerant, enlightened, charitable among others.
here's what you find for conservative: ...stingy, miserly, reactionary, regressive, bigoted, prejudiced, biased, narrow-minded and more.
But all joking aside, politically they don't quite mean those words. More or less (summarized, this is a huge generalization) a liberal is one relating to or having social and political views that favour progress and reform. AKA relating to or having policies or views advocating individual freedom. One who advocates greater freedom in political institutions, and more especially their greater popularization.
That's not my view (so don't go attacking me eh?), that's out of the English Definition in a few encyclopedias and dictionaries.
I found this that I think is rather humorous though:
In reply to: If you've been out bashing "Liberals", you're probably all of these things, as this would perfectly describe someone who would go out "liberal bashing" (Freedom bashing), which is also known as "Liberticide" - The Destruction of Civil Liberties. (Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1893)
I'm one of those people who has lost a lot of faith in how our government works and operates and think we need a total gutting of the entire thing. :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
w6jxm
May 21, 2003, 8:35 PM
Post #6 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2002
Posts: 792
|
Now that was even too much for me. I think i'll bow out of this one.
|
|
|
|
|
jackflash
May 21, 2003, 9:26 PM
Post #7 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 5, 2002
Posts: 483
|
In reply to: There is a paradox here. This is a major plank of the platform, and it is split.
Wouldn't the same be true of Conservatism as well, especially if they just take the opposing side to the liberals in the cases that you mentioned? Other examples would include Conservatives who desire more governmental regulation where drugs are concerned, but less regulation in the domain of big business.
Still, it is an interesting question why either group finds itself splitting and whether this split is a genuine contradiction.
|
|
|
|
|
winter
May 21, 2003, 10:37 PM
Post #8 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2003
Posts: 2961
|
Remember the thread on the political compass? It basically said that one's beleifs cannot be catogorised into just left-right views on economics but rather on an economic AND a social scale. So whilst one may be a conservative in that they promote business, lower taxes ect...they may be a libertarian on the social scale ie: support freedom for the individual, slacker drug laws, whatever the case may be.
I agree that it isn't as simple as saying I believe in freedoms AND huge social prorams and thus am neither liberal or conservative. To define one or the other within such narrow boundaries does not work with modern day politics. So, there really isn't a paradox if you accept that someone can be into social programs whilst at the same time be into the idea that the government should do less to interfere with the individual. You just aren't the same in your political spectrum as your social one. So often ( I think in most cases these days) people do not follow both the social and economic doctirnes in the same way, alot of people feel diferently about both.
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
May 21, 2003, 10:50 PM
Post #9 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
In reply to: So often ( I think in most cases these days) people do not follow both the social and economic doctirnes in the same way, alot of people feel diferently about both.
Which is exactly why I refuse to identify with either wing.
I hate these arguments that are based on, "you conservatives suck, people are getting blasted by guns every day"
"you liberals suck, you are sapping our economy and don't support the government that provides"
Whatever...
Travis
|
|
|
|
|
extrememountaineer
May 22, 2003, 12:06 AM
Post #10 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2003
Posts: 377
|
Travis wrote:In reply to: Anyone else see what I am trying to say? Got any answers?
The Libertarian Party
Harry Browne for President!
|
|
|
|
|
extrememountaineer
May 22, 2003, 12:15 AM
Post #11 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2003
Posts: 377
|
We have to be careful not to equate the Republican Party with conservatism, nor the Democratic Party with liberalism. Both parties have lost there ideological roots. However, I do think that the Democrats consist of far more liberals than the Republicans consist of conservatives.
I am not a member of the Republican Party because they are not consistent. They want less government by virtue of lower taxes, yet they want the government to intrude more by virtue of things like the "Patriot" Act. Their platfrom is pro-gun yet they always compromise when the gun issue comes up.
That being said, the Republican party far and away has more of this countries best interests in mind than the Democrats who are mostly ruled by liberals.
I call them Republicrats-most of them are all the same once they get to Washington, their main difference is that they just disagree on what to waste our money on.
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
May 22, 2003, 12:21 AM
Post #12 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
In reply to: I call them Republicrats-most of them are all the same once they get to Washington, their main difference is that they just disagree on what to waste our money on.
I agree that they are all the same on capitol hill. The whole party system seems to have lots more to do with the electorial process, and less with the actual government.
How common is it becoming for politicians to switch party affiliation once elected, I mean jeez.
It just seems more like a big game to me all the time.
Travis
|
|
|
|
|
bumblie
May 22, 2003, 12:49 PM
Post #13 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629
|
Thomas SoftCheese started this inquiry. Reading these responses, I don't know if someone living in France (home of the coneheads) would get a clear picture of Liberalism in America.
My analysis may be wrong. Feel free to chime in. Liberals place a high value on individual rights/freedoms and a fairly low value on individual responsibility. Instead of individual responsibility, they favor government responsibility of individuals. Conservatives believe in individual responsibility, which is more or less guided by Judeo-Christian principles of morality. Conservatives are opposed to concepts/activities that lower the morality of society as a whole. Compare society today vs. 50 years ago. Our morals/values have dropped considerably, but individual freedoms have risen dramatically.
Liberals believe it is the responsibility of society to bring everyone up to a certain standard of living and that the wealthy bear the majority of the cost. Conservatives believe America is the land of opportunity and everyone(who can) should be responsible for themselves.
Liberals believe government programs can help society as a whole. Conservatives believe less is better - bureaucracies are inefficient money holes that do more harm than good. Liberals believe big businesses are the big, impersonal, money grabbing machines. Conservatives believe BBs create jobs, provide produces and services, and contribute to the general wealth of society. Conservatives believe big businesses should be allowed to do as they please within the laws, to maximize profitability. Unfortunately, we now have a corporate welfare mindset in government, where companies get an unfair advantage or industries get laws for the common good (i.e. clear air act) tossed out so they can make more money.
|
|
|
|
|
calfcramp
May 22, 2003, 1:41 PM
Post #14 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2003
Posts: 391
|
In reply to: Unfortunately, we now have a corporate welfare mindset in government, where companies get an unfair advantage or industries get laws for the common good (i.e. clear air act) tossed out so they can make more money.
Is it that they can make more money? That's pretty cynical. Or is it that it will put people out of work? Which is also pretty cynical when you think about it. There would just be a shift in the types of jobs available I suppose... Gotta have a plan ease into something like the clean air act, there's some massive inertia there.
I dunno, back to work.
|
|
|
|
|
bumblie
May 22, 2003, 1:57 PM
Post #15 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629
|
The number one cause of air pollution (on the East Coast) are the power company smoke stacks. Back in 1970, the EPA told the power companies that they had to do away w/ their high pollutant smokestacks for their coal burning power plants. The power companies said "that would cost too much and those costs would be passed onto consumers". "Anyway these smokestacks are old and will be replaced with newer cleaner smockstacks in the near future." The government agreed with the understanding that the smokestacks would be replaced. Then the power companies just kept maintaining the outdated smokestacks. Then 25 years later, the EPA said "you guys pulled a fast one, you have to replace your old smoke stacks." The power companies said ""that would cost too much and those costs would be passed onto consumers.....
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
May 22, 2003, 11:32 PM
Post #16 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
In reply to: We have to be careful not to equate the Republican Party with conservatism, nor the Democratic Party with liberalism. Both parties have lost there ideological roots.
In reply to: That being said, the Republican party far and away has more of this countries best interests in mind than the Democrats who are mostly ruled by liberals.
On the question of big government vs. small government, and the contradictions in the ideologies of both sides, here's what I think. Conservative or liberal, people want the government to do for them (or for or to others) that which they think should be done and that they cannot do for themselves (or others). Generally, conservatives tend to be more financially secure, so they need less help and want fewer social assistance programs. But look at how many conservatives clamored for big government involvement after 9-11, because there was a need (security) that they could not provide for themselves. I think big vs. small is less a function of idealogy and more a function of need.
Bumblie,
I disagree with your characterization of liberals. I am quite liberal, yet have a strong belief in individual responsibility. I also find many conservative positions to be rather immoral (according to my moral beliefs as well as Judeo-Christian morals). Some conservative positions seem to me to be primarily founded on greed, bigotry, indifference to the poor, or just plain survival of the fittest mentality (total free-market economics). I don't see much morality in those motivations.
|
|
|
|
|
phillycheese
May 25, 2003, 4:56 AM
Post #17 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2002
Posts: 584
|
liberals are everyone to the left of me.
conservatives are everyone to the right of me.
|
|
|
|
|
djmclimber
May 26, 2003, 1:15 PM
Post #18 of 18
(855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 149
|
In reply to: We have to be careful not to equate the Republican Party with conservatism, nor the Democratic Party with liberalism. Both parties have lost there ideological roots. However, I do think that the Democrats consist of far more liberals than the Republicans consist of conservatives. I am not a member of the Republican Party because they are not consistent. They want less government by virtue of lower taxes, yet they want the government to intrude more by virtue of things like the "Patriot" Act. Their platform is pro-gun yet they always compromise when the gun issue comes up. That being said, the Republican party far and away has more of this countries best interests in mind than the Democrats who are mostly ruled by liberals. I call them Republicrats-most of them are all the same once they get to Washington, their main difference is that they just disagree on what to waste our money on.
I agree with you Jody. Both parties spew out their party's platform rhetoric when it is election time. The democrats want you to believe that they are for your individual freedoms and liberties but their actions speak otherwise, they actually want to limit your freedoms and liberties - especially in the name of equality for all - you cannot make anyone equal. While the republicans want you to believe that they are against big government and for small business but they allow large corporations relocate their headquarters to the Bahamas to avoid paying taxes.
We have to remember that they are lifelong politicians and will do anything to keep their jobs, so both parties promise their constituents that they are keeping to their parties ideology no matter how far off their party has strayed from it's original ideology. I think this is what people want to hear when it is time for election. No one remembers or follows what our elected officials do once they get in office. If things go wrong it is too easy to blame the other party.
However, I think that the republicans do have this countries best interest in mind than the democrats. Just my 2-cents if anyone cares.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
