When did liberals become synonymous with restriction of rights? Didn't they used to want to liberate the people? Aren't liberals the ones who fought for black and women's suffrage? Aren't conservatives the ones who are supposed to be oppressing the people?
Was it the progressive movement? Did liberals run out of things to fight for and now need to abolish rights they don't think are working out? Why do they need bigger government to control everything they can think of? Shouldn't they shrink government to LIBERATE the people from its control?
I need to discuss this. I have been watching too much Fox News since Obama took office.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-03 1:50
Conservatives want things to stay as they are, or move backwards. Liberals want to move things forward. Conservatives believe that the things that we have known for a long time are the most important things, because they are what make us what we are, so they endeavor to preserve them. Liberals believe that the new things we have learned are the most important, because it is often a failure to understand these things that causes most of the direct suffering, so they endeavor to implement them.
But there are many bad old ideas that conservatives cling to. And there are many bad new ideas that liberals cleave to.
Each wishes only to prevent suffering.
Liberals are more willing to sacrifice certain behaviors in the interests of cooperation and progress.
Conservatives believe that the sacrifice of some of these behaviors is a bad idea that will change us for the worse. Sometimes they are correct.
The liberals are the people to thank for progress. But they're also the ones to blame when fundamentals are abandoned and chaos ensues. The liberals are the brain, and the courage. The conservatives are the backbone, and the spirit.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-03 5:43
>>1 >>2
You both talk as though you believe liberals, and conservatives, act as they claim.
Liberals say they are progressive and moving forwards, but they have a deluded idiotic outlook on the world and even though they may believe they know what's best, they don't.
Conservatives are no better, instead of defending the values and traditions they set out to they make a mockery of them and only serve to embaress those who have a legitimate intellectual understanding of them.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-03 10:56
>>2
Good summary, although >>3 has a point in saying both are equally shit.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-03 12:12
One must look past their ideology. Know that either ideology is trapped in fantasy, believing one is good and the other is evil. Know that people generally want good, believe their own actions are good, and do not consider themselves evil, but methods in achieving good are often wrong due to a limited viewpoint. Hopeful plans have unintended consequences.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-03 14:50
I hate the term 'progressive'. Progression to what? There hasn't been a new political idea in 100 years.
American liberal are only liberal with government spending.
Modern mainstream "conservatives" are both backwards and hypocrites, and only like to conserve their own power over the wills of other people.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-03 17:42
I was thinking today that the parties both swap what they believe. For example, liberals are always bitching about equal treatment of, say, men and women. So then when the liberals butthurt fail, conservatives are quick to bring up how fail the liberals were, even if they really don't care. They might believe that men are more likely to be pedophiles which is true, so treatment should be different. But if liberals make a law that discriminates against men in that regard, conservatives will complain about how it's not equal. Then they suddenly become supporters of equality when originally they meant to point out how hypocritical the liberals were.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-03 18:16
I don't like the place libtards want to "progress" to.
I mean America has changed from 89% white to barely 60% in a few decades. Will they stop only when all whites are wiped out? I don't see many libtards calling for an end to third wolrd immigration and the sending home of illegal aliens.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-03 18:23
Read the classical definition of liberalism. "Conservatism" is a false ideology created by the ruling class to divide liberalism, which will always oppose authoritarianism. Conservatives are liberals who have been fooled into thinking that liberals are their enemy because they accept people who are different than them.
Remember the 80's when Reagan was keeping America strong and supporting corporations and Hollywood liberals painted this horrible dystopian future where corporations ruled the country? Before that, we had fears of government control as in the classics 1984 and Brave New World. During the Obama Whitehouse, they are bringing us closer to total government control and socialism than we have ever been before. Where are the 1984s and Brave New Worlds? Where are even stupid things like That's My Bush or Lil Bush? The liberal media and Hollywood won't even touch Obama.
>>15
So you enjoy paying tax dollars to bail out companies which can't compete in the real world only for it to go straight into the pockets of executives?
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-04 16:54
>>16
Of course. What else should my tax dollars be used for? The military?
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-04 16:58
>>17
You could treat yourself to another frappuchino, or if slavery were legalised you could purchase a house nigger.
When did people start hiding behind labels that make no difference about anything, and then slinging mud and insults at people who hide behind the opposing label?
'Liberal' used to mean an advocate of Classical Liberalism (ie maximising individual rights) after FDR 'Liberal' became synonymous with those who supported the New Deal policies, it that sense it became associated with advocates of Social Liberalism (ie Social Democracy) henceforth.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-14 10:51
>>28
There are 56 niggers in post >>24 but you only corrected the first one. I take it you're a racist.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-14 10:52
>>29
So what were advocates of classical liberalism called before the libertarian party was founded?
Outside of America, in the rest of the world, Liberal is somethign on the right side on the scale, not left. They want a free market, less taxes, less government control en less government socialized services such as health care.
>>34
Well yes. That's the old liberalism. Or "classical liberalism" as it's commonly called. It has nothing to do with the modern day liberalism that wishes big government and protection of civil liberties at the same time, something of an oxymoron. Neoconservatism does not fundamentally derive much from this philosophy either.
Britfag here, liberal means the same thing here as it does in America. A leftist douche.
Name:
Anonymous2009-08-07 18:16
stop talking about "left and right" there's more to it than that. Would anarchists be considered "right wing"? They have more in common with libertarians ideologically than they do liberals.
Both liberals and conservatives in the modern usage want more government for their causes, whether it be supporting big business or supporting big business.
>>39
Anarchism is basically about as extreme far-right as you can get. In such a "system", Government has 0% power. Likewise, in a extreme far-left spectrum, Government has 100% power and would be considered a totalitarian Government.
A U.S. Constitution limited Government would be moderate, big enough to protect the rights of people, but not so big as to be totalitarian. I'd say at this point in time we're somewhere in between totalitarian and Constitution limited Government heading more towards left-wing (especially with the current administration).