Author Topic: What is it with this 'Liberal' thing? (Read 7149 times)

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #15 on:** November 15, 2003, 05:46:05 AM »

Here is a primer Nilsen...

The prevailing thought is:

Liberal = Democrat, Conservative = Republican although there are shades of gray throughout the political theory and each issue is different for each individual. There are conservative, liberals, and moderates in each party.

Two parties dominate, Demos and Repubs, but the Green, Libertarian, Reform, and a myriad of other parties exist. We even have a Communist party.

One basic theory of what differentiates liberal thought from conservative is the role of government.

Generally, as far as the primary drivers of the social structure, the liberal view has a larger role for government than the conservatives like and the conservatives have a larger role for private enterprise than the liberals favor.

The conservatives tend to favor a greater role for church and tradition as restrictions on behavior of citizenry, where the liberals tend to favor a more lassie-faire approach to personal behavior and responsibility.

ravells · « **Reply #16 on:** November 15, 2003, 05:56:07 AM »

It confused me too, Nielson which is why I posted the question. When the Americans use the term 'liberal' they mean 'democrat' (as in political party).

Again, what I understand from this board is that the Republicans use the term 'liberal' as a derogatory term for democrats because they believe that the democrats wish to limit public freedoms and because the democrats only espouse liberal views when it suits them.

hope that clears up the confusion.

Ravs

Nilsen · « **Reply #17 on:** November 15, 2003, 05:58:14 AM »

Made more sence Holden.

That would mean, as i thought that the liberals would be considered leftist on our system.
The conservatives would be somewhere in the middle when it comes to the role of church and traditions.
However on the right side in our system conservatives would fit in because of they feel that private enterprise should play a bigger part and that the goverment should stay away from anything that has to do with the $$$.

Hmm.. Here in norway that would make me a "Republican", but I would have shared the "liberals" views on the war in Iraq (for the most part anyway), and on the religion bits.... Guess i would be somewhere in the middle when i think about it.

Are there alot of american Republicans that are against the war , or are they "all" liberals?

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #18 on:** November 15, 2003, 06:14:32 AM »

What really makes it intresting is you can run as a conservative, get into office and then grow the government and opt liberal issues, or,

run as a liberal, get into office, balance the budget, and opt conservative issues.

You can even say stuff like "I'm fiscally a conservative, but on social issues, I'm a radical marxist!"

Makes it fun.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #19 on:** November 15, 2003, 06:23:47 AM »

It would be a safe guess that the mix is a larger percentage of Republicans favor the Republican president's policy than the percentage of Demos, but the specifics are very tough to gauge.

This running up on an election year, most politicos tell you what they think you want to hear than what is in their heart.

I think the voter mix is like 34% Demo, 32% Rep and the rest the 'Independants" It a pretty even split last I read.

I would guess that Republicans are at least 3 to 1 in favor, and Demos might be 60% against. GWB is right now about 50% on his approval rating.

beet1e · « **Reply #20 on:** November 15, 2003, 06:50:53 AM »

Something is lost in the transatlantic translation. I am very much a southern England leafy retreat Tory supporter...

...and yet someone like Ripsnort calls me a "Liberal".

aztec · « **Reply #21 on:** November 15, 2003, 09:11:26 AM »

Well golly gee whiz beetle, if Ripsnort says you're a liberal then it MUST be true.

midnight Target · « **Reply #22 on:** November 15, 2003, 09:37:31 AM »

The entire tone of the political rhetoric in this Country was set during the 8 year Republican attack on Bill Clinton. In essence they were incredibly pissed that he had the gall to use their own fiscally conservative ideas and combine them with a moderately liberal social agenda.

Drove them nuts to the point they would spend 40 million dollars to discover that oral sex actually happened in the White House.

lazs2 · « **Reply #23 on:** November 15, 2003, 09:44:55 AM »

ravel... maybe we do look at "liberal" as a political party. What liberal means to us is large, all intrusive government.

Liberal means socialism in this country and liberal means large government taking everyones wealth and redistributing it. Liberal means women and womenly men voting to to take away freedom in the name of security. In this instance the "home security act" is a liberal act.

"Progressive" often means.... throwing out the constitution. I do not want this brand of progressive. "protecting civil liberties" means taking away the right of a person to defend himself from criminals and governments. It also means giving one group rights that are above anothers simply because of their race or gender or sexual preference. I don't want that. Progressive means having the most ineffiecient and wasteful entity, government, run most of the things that they should stay out of.

Liberals want more and more government.. they feel that govenment can solve all problems. They are more than willng to make me pay for their scemes.

In short... I rarely see anything that U.S. liberals want that I want.

If any of those things are things that british liberals do then I don't see any difference.

lazs

Nilsen · « **Reply #24 on:** November 15, 2003, 09:47:46 AM »

For me as someone from the "outside", i think Bill Clinton was a better president than bush is. So what if he had som "fun" with the staff...that was a problem for him and his wife imo.

Hooligan · « **Reply #25 on:** November 15, 2003, 10:40:42 AM »

Unfortunately political "liberals" in the US do not match the dictionary definition of "liberal" that you provided. They would be better described as having an optimistic view of authoritarian power.

Hooligan

ravells · « **Reply #26 on:** November 15, 2003, 12:58:12 PM »

Thanks Lazs and Hooligan.

I am getting a much better feel about the associations that the word 'liberal' has now.

cheers

Ravs

Nilsen · « **Reply #27 on:** November 15, 2003, 01:11:10 PM »

yeah, I think so to ravells.

Now i know who to bash.

DAMN you stupid gd idiot liberals and democrats...

GO you...you.... inbetweeners !!!!!

midnight Target · « **Reply #28 on:** November 15, 2003, 01:14:34 PM »

In my most humble unbiased opinion...

Conservatives want to deregulate business and regulate your personal life.

Liberals want to deregulate your personal life and regulate business.

AKcurly · « **Reply #29 on:** November 15, 2003, 01:16:17 PM »

Ah, but you guys are omitting the biggest connundrum of all!

When you appoint someone to a judicial bench, especially the supreme court, you never know what can of worms will be opened.

For example, California used to have an extremely conservative Republican governor who became a supreme court member. Remember him? Earl Warren? You do remember the supreme court judge who ushered in the biggest era of reformed politics in the US, right? And judges aren't political, are they?

Ravells, here's a much simpler explanation of the differences in the US. Liberals in the US have a wide range of political views and agendas. Conservatives are ex-liberals who were mugged in the past.

In the US, they're political labels (obviously) and anyone who says otherwise is smarting from a previous mugging.

curly