posted 01-23-2003 04:42 PM               

I didn't say that Liberals were Conservatives and vice versa. I'm saying that most people in the US who choose to call themselves conservatives are either lying or they don't know what the word means.

Here again is the polutical definition of the word liberal.

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.

Are you saying that Mother Theresa did don't believe in these things? She didn't believe in progress? THe goodness of the human race? the autonomy of the individual? Are you saying she was against the protection of political and civil liberties.

Are you saying you are against these things?
Are you resistant to change and very traditional
I know that you are not. I've read your opinions.

I bet you never thought you'd read this, but there it is in writing.

posted 01-23-2003 04:50 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arch Monkey:
Steve

I didn't say that Liberals were Conservatives and vice versa.
I bet you never thought you'd read this, but there it is in writing.

STEVE you are a liberal!!!

---

Right up there with Woody and Pete
You ole'Coon Dawg you
who'd a thought........

posted 01-23-2003 05:52 PM               

I'd put that last post of yours up against any analysis by any social critic in mainstream media. Sometimes we got to admit the truth about ourselves.

What continues to astound is the willingness to strike out in the absence of just cause. Because he's a bad man. Because of "links", rumors or "reports", however vague or discredited. And zero forethought for the consequences. Now that is mindless.

Arch,

posted 01-23-2003 07:29 PM               

By the way, since we are getting out our Webster's....the definition of conservative is "one who adheres to traditional methods or views" and the adjective is "disposed of to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions...moderate, cautious".

In my mind, the key word is tradition in one's disposition. Now, close minded has nothing to do with it. Nor does it mean "keeping the status quo". Believe me, there is much about the status quo that is not "traditional". (ie: the difference between the traditional or "classic" vs. the so-called "modern" Hippocratic oath regarding the topic of "life".) To me, it comes down to whether you are predisposed to trust "traditions" which have been learned through experience. That is my predisposition, though it does not mean one doesn't change. I certainly look to "experience" and "tradition" more than the some belief that people are "inherently good". No way. Human beings are inherently flawed and need direction. If you don't believe me: find a kid who hasn't had his "inherently good" nature corrected from time to time.

posted 01-23-2003 08:10 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by samchar:

Therefore, I'm a conservative, and accordingly, a moderate! Meaningless labels I realize, but point of clarification.

---

In Webster's "moderate" is not a noun. I don't know where you have been getting your political jargon, but it has not been from literate people. GW Bush perhaps? Dan Quayle?

I'm just having some fun here. I don't want to offend.

posted 01-23-2003 08:36 PM               

Maybe why you and I would wind up at different places on the political spectrum is that we have more than one tradition in the U.S. With regard to civil liberties, we've always had some folks who took a relatively uncompromising view. They thought that the moment we started balancing constitutional rights against other interests favored by majorities, those rights were not long for the world. I think Jefferson was pretty much in that camp. We have also long had people who took what might be regarded as a more pragmatic and flexible approach to protecting civil liberties. Adams for sure and Lincoln maybe might be put there.

I'm firmly in the former tradition. People who opt for the latter view can also call themselves traditionalists. I get called a liberal with regard to civil liberties because my hidebound, centuries-old approach isn't consistent with the mainstream of what is now called conservative thought. But my rancher grandfather had almost exactly the same view as mine (i.e., "the government oughta stay outta people's personal lives") and no one could possibly have called him a liberal.

Despite the dictionary definition, it is conservatives in modern parlance who tend to view free market forces as the best solution to most problems. That could justifiably be called a traditional view. I come from the southern agrarian tradition. Though many modern southerners aren't aware of it, their tradition was fundamentally suspicious of free-market capitalism. Eventually the populist threads of that tradition came to view government as a defense for ordinary people against the excesses of capitalism.

That's my tradition. I see the unfettered free market as having produced child labor, slavery, strip mines, burning rivers and numerous other social ills, each of which was cured by governmental intervention. So I adhere to a venerable tradition that sees frequent governmental intervention with market forces as essential to having a tolerable society. That would also make me unwelcome in "conservative" circles today. My views wouldn't have seemed odd to my crusty farmer and rancher ancestors a hundred and fifty years ago. They knew what it was like to get shafted by a bank.

Someone's basic attitude towards tradition does matter, but it doesn't tell you which tradition they'll be drawn to.

posted 01-23-2003 09:07 PM               

And a lot of conservatives aren't much better. They just want to dictate and regulate a person's life in more morality-oriented ways. (And yet they theorize that big business will play nice if we just leave it alone completely. I never quite figured that one out)...

posted 01-24-2003 03:19 AM               

I always wanted to be a liberal, they throw much better parties . SteveO would qualify as a liberal's liberal...man knows how to throw a PARTY!

posted 01-24-2003 06:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by SouthernFried:

Change is something liberals today abhor. Try changing our Education system, SS, Welfare, Tax code...LIBERALS today will fight you tooth and nail.

SF

[This message has been edited by SouthernFried (edited 01-23-2003).]

---

posted 01-24-2003 07:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by LoopySanchez:
regulating every aspect of the lives of these supposedly "inherently good people" is either a) utterly pointless, or b) all about the power, baby.

---

posted 01-24-2003 08:29 AM            

-Compassionate Conservative

-Tough-minded Liberal

-Progressive Conservative

-Populist

-Fiscal Conservative/Social Liberal

-Pragmatic Moderate Progressive

And so, on, like the newest brand of toothpaste.

Recently, I was talking with a politician whose father had been elected to office as a liberal Democrat forty years ago. He and his sister have been elected to office as conservative Republicans.

I asked him, "What will your family do if the liberals and the Democrats return to power?"

His answer was: "My family will do what successful politicians ALWAYS do. We will be on the winning side".

If I understood him correctly, the sad conclusion can be reached that most successful American politicians would have happily joined the Nazi Party, OR the Communist Party, if that was the price of winning and holding power.

Al