Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe that the words “liberal” and “conservative” are becoming meaningless.
I’ll give an example:
Both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump spoke of the plight of ordinary working people; yet Sanders is considered “liberal” and trump is considered “conservative.” On economic issues, both Sanders and Trump had similar rhetoric.
In my opinion, the most important issue facing the country right now is the growing gap between the rich and poor, particularly the plight of the working poor. Does that make me a “liberal” or a “conservative?”
It seems that the “liberal” party (the Democrats) has abandoned ordinary working people (their traditional base since FDR and the New Deal) and have focused mainly on things like protecting the polar bears and pushing for transgender bathrooms. It seems that today’s “liberals” care only about fringe issues and have abandoned economic issues. The most liberal states, NY and CA, actually have some of the greatest inequality in the country: a tiny elite living in the major city (or two), and a vast population of dirt-poor living in rural areas with no opportunity, permanently priced out of the urban areas.
Republicans, of course, practically abandoned ordinary Americans the day after Lincoln was assassinated. They’ve always been the party of Big Business. But Trump’s rhetoric on economic issues sounded oddly progressive. I don’t think Trump is sincere, but it is nonetheless remarkable that so many “conservatives” would go for a guy that spoke about free trade deals screwing American workers.
This I think the the words “liberal” and “conservative” are no longer meaningful. They simply confuse and divide people into camps for no good reason.
The two terms are only meaningful as insults in today's political arena. More appropriate are the terms "progressive" and "regressive" - progressives trying to chart a path forward into a secure future for society, regressives trying to preserve the status quo.
That is why I use the term leftist with the idea that to the left is more government. I consider to the right less government.
Conservatives like to use a lot of government and delude themselves that they do not. They are just another kind of leftest to me.
Ok. Unfortunately, that is probably going to confuse a lot of people. Most people aren’t going to think that the Religious Right is “leftist” since it wants a more powerful government that enforces evangelical Christian values.
Trump and Bernie are pretty similar when it comes to trade and foreign policy. Trump and many younger conservatives are for ending the drug wars, are pro gay marriage and are generally pretty liberal on social issues.
Of course you wouldn’t know that by reading this forum lol
I used to consider myself as a conservative. Fiscally, I am. Socially, I'm not. But in today's world it is the social part that seems to define people. If I am pro SSM, pro environment, pro choice, pro realistic gun control or pro equality, those that hijacked the conservative side of the spectrum call me a liberal, ******* or "****".
If I express concerns of antifa, political correctness gone wild, hijacking of what feminism used to mean or whatever the cause d'jour is, liberals call me an alt-right.
I'm a common sense person, who will debate issues and policies, but steps away from the name calling. Let's leave that to people like the President.
Liberal has meant something which is timeless. Just because "conservatives" have spent billions trying to redefine it does not mean it has changed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
"Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty and equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but they generally support civil rights, democracy, secularism, gender and race equality, internationalism and the freedoms of speech, the press, religion and markets"
Also, by definition, Liberals learn and change:
“The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.” ―*Bertrand Russell
The problem with "conservatism" is that it never meant anything fixed. The first use of the word I find in my reading is those in the "middle states" who supported the continuation of slavery in the South. These states were often non-slave states, but "conservatives" thought the status quo was best.....
Fast Forward and "conservatism" became a mish-mash that constantly contradicted itself. Goldwater was considered the modern Hero of the new conservatism.....but this is a guy who spoke out 100% against all the fundamentalist religious types getting involved in politics. "Goldwater became a vocal opponent of the Christian right and its influence on the Republican Party on issues such as abortion, gay rights, and the role of religion in public life."
So, I think we can conclude that Goldwater Conservatives never existed in our time!
After Barry, it somewhat warped into "my country, right or wrong" - in the sense of that they would support the Vietnam War through Nixon.....and then, it went into the toilet when Nixon resigned.
About this time the heavy influence of the religious right, financed by Texas billionaires (John Birch society, hunt brothers and many more) came into play. They created, through publications, etc - a more modern Frankenstein that hung it's hat on the "lack of change". This would mean a supposed "moral majority" which never existed....they were neither moral nor the majority, but rather racist and selfish (one and the same in many cases).....when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Bill, he turned the South Republican.....and they somehow also took the mantle of being "conservative".....
As all their issues fell by the wayside, they finally adapted "fiscal conservatism" as their main selling point. Of course, any study of history and current events shows nothing of the sort. They just cheered when borrowing 1.5 Trillion to give free money to corporations and the wealthiest among us. No talk of a balanced budget any more...
The problem is that they have no "way" to lose. There never was a way....except for power and money. We could say they believe in more fossil fuels and resource extraction, but that's not much of a definition!
Summary: Liberal has always meant something...and will always. You can get a "liberal" education and it meets the quotes above - that is, you will learn how to learn and adapt your mind as you gain experiences and knowledge.
Conservative never meant anything in a true political sense. There are bits and pieces that the Right (a better definition) has tried to grab onto, but for a bit of money or power they will drop them all instantly. Or, todays conservatives are "authoritarian" to the point of giving over much of their decision making to what they perceive as the "strong leader". This is a Putin/Trump/Duerte sort of thing.
Note - one could speak of a few "crazy lefties" who are not liberals. If they have closed minds they are, by definition, not liberals. So let's not get mixed up with political parties or tendencies as opposed to "open" or "closed" world views.
The two terms are only meaningful as insults in today's political arena. More appropriate are the terms "progressive" and "regressive" - progressives trying to chart a path forward into a secure future for society, regressives trying to preserve the status quo.
I think you’re onto something.
I would actually invent a third category to make a distinction between “those who want to preserve the status quo” and outright “regressives.”
The people who want to bring back things like white supremacy, segregation, and Medieval Christendom would be the “regressives.” (Much of today’s Republican Party would fall into that category.) The Big Business types and upper middle class professionals who want to preserve their money and power would be the “status quo-ites.” (The mainstream Democrats and Republicans would fall into that category.). Progressives would be the people who want to make our society more like that of Northern Europe, with a strong social safety net and more economic equality. (The Bernie supporters would fall into that category.)
Trump and Bernie are pretty similar when it comes to trade and foreign policy. Trump and many younger conservatives are for ending the drug wars, are pro gay marriage and are generally pretty liberal on social issues.
Of course you wouldn’t know that by reading this forum lol
So is Trump lying when he says - multiple times - that Death for Drug dealers is something he would stand behind?
Talk is cheap and I think that is what people have to understand about Trump. Bernie has spent his entire life working for the issues he promotes. Trump has spent ZERO time working for them....he was too busy bedding the masses in NYC and working frauds.
To equate someone who DOES THINGS for 50 years to someone who spouts everything....this today, and the opposite tomorrow, seems ridiculous. It's like you talking about how you like electric cars...and then, next week I note that thom and Elon Musk are both the same, but you wouldn't know it!
Would Bernie have pardoned the Sheriff? No way.
:-)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
