No seriously. This is like insect repellant for republicans. Have you ever, in a million years, seen a conservitive on AG? You know, like a die hard, Arizona, John McCain type Conservative?
The definition has changed. We call those people libertarians now.
Why though? Libertarians are practically anarchists. It does not fit the definition.
However, liberals want to have more economic restrictions that make the government big when it comes to economic affairs, which I do not support.
Be that as it may, liberals in the true sense of the term do not want this at all. Classical liberalism is a 'help others to help themselves' ideology, and is only really different from the type of conservatism you describe in that it believes in negative freedom in both the social and economic sphere, instead of just the economic sphere.
Really we are just going round in circles here arguing definitions, however be aware that all over the world, the American definition of conservative, and certainly liberal does not hold much water.
Really we are just going round in circles here arguing definitions, however be aware that all over the world, the American definition of conservative, and certainly liberal does not hold much water.
Thank you, Firefly. Could we start discussing real, tangible stuff at some point? All this social, economic liberal/conservative is all very adolescent to me.
Therefore, utopia is not freedom.
I'm of the view that when it comes to freedom, less is more.
Believe it or not, the people of North Korea really do love their Beloved Leader. And I don't think it really matters whether it's Kim Jong Ill or his son.
i don't think they would if they knew how he was compared to other countries. but i am no expert.
Only the rare few who successfully defect know. Most of them are well trained to believe that their Beloved Leader knows best and the West is evil. I, for one, am not about to attempt to dissuade them of that notion, because that would actually require establishing contact with North Korea in the first place, which is pretty much impossible.
whats strange is that i think i have actually seen a profile from north Korea on AG.
I'd love to track down the IP of that account to see where it pings... but a negative result wouldn't distinguish from a liar and somebody who genuinely lives in N.Korea and somehow managed to source themselves a proxy not tapped by the regime xD
Next thing we know, an office in California gets nuked...
...okay I might possibly get into trouble for making that comment <_< If you don't see me posting on the forums anymore, I was fired by Dan/ kidnapped by a North Korean spy.
Thank you, Firefly. Could we start discussing real, tangible stuff at some point? All this social, economic liberal/conservative is all very adolescent to me.
I don't think adolescent is the right word, maybye abstract better fits the bill.
I'm of the view that when it comes to freedom, less is more.
That depends. I think there has to be a balance between too much freedom and not enough. Take an analogy of a man pushing a boulder up a hill. Too few rights and the boulder will roll back on top of him and 'oppress him'. If he reaches the summit and keeps pushing for too many rights the boulder will roll down the other side uncontrollably and cause chaos below.
That's the way I like to think of it anyway. I mean, sure in an ideal world, people would be responsible enough to decide what is best for themselves, however that's simply not the case. That's why I have very little time for primarily American neo cons/libertarians waving their flabby hands about fat taxes and limiting sugar content in foods. Get over your outdated principles of freedom and reach for a healthy dose of common sense instead of a hamburger for a change.
I don't think adolescent is the right word, maybye abstract better fits the bill.
I say adolescent because this whole conversation smacks of identity politics, and which group would be more concerned about establishing identity than...
It's interesting you should say that, as this reminded me of a Chris Rock clip, which for the life of me I can't find on youtube. He comments on the 'gang mentality' which is prevalent in America. Everyone wants to belong to a group and define themselves by it and by clashing with opposition instead of taking each issue as it comes.
The more I think about this, the more this makes sense given America's historical context. I mean, since they have so little history to speak of, they don't really have a national identity. Therefore people choose to define themselves in political terms instead of economic or social ones.
Am I onto something, or am I just typing out loud? Not sure. Certainly though, American politics seems to be very polarised. I don't often hear Europeans say 'I am an X' or a Y, at least not any that I have encountered. From these forums, Americans have much more of a fetish for labeling themselves. Ironic for a country that prides itself on the tenets of individualism.
In the end, no matter the form of government, whether it be democracy or not, the government will always move toward a state of beaurocratic control and from there to despotism. It is human nature to control and to be controlled. The older our government becomes the further it moves from the people, the length of time merely depends on the type of government.
Why though? Libertarians are practically anarchists. It does not fit the definition.
If today's libertarians are practically anarchists, then the old definition of liberal also borders anarchy.
Really we are just going round in circles here arguing definitions, however be aware that all over the world, the American definition of conservative, and certainly liberal does not hold much water.
The same goes for the rest of the world's definition in America.
Thank you, Firefly. Could we start discussing real, tangible stuff at some point? All this social, economic liberal/conservative is all very adolescent to me.
I wouldn't really say we are debating the meaning of these words as much as we are merely clearing them up. I think it's good that we got some of these confusions out of the way.
That's why I have very little time for primarily American neo cons/libertarians waving their flabby hands about fat taxes and limiting sugar content in foods. Get over your outdated principles of freedom and reach for a healthy dose of common sense instead of a hamburger for a change.
Outdated principles of freedom? Are you suggesting that we should have fat taxes? If not, then disregard the next paragraph.
Forcing people to live healthy is not cool. It's like the government putting timers in our video games that only allows us to play 2 hours a day. I'm sorry, but the whole authoritarian thing is terribly outdated.
