PDA

View Full Version : Liberal or Conservative?



ablarc
March 2nd, 2010, 05:50 PM
LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE? Which are you?

Since they got rid of purgatory -–a man-made concept— Catholics have been stuck with just heaven and hell; no middle ground.

It’s supposed that among the omnipotent things He can do, God can arrange all human souls on a continuum from most damned (say, Hitler or Gengis Kahn) to most beatified (say, Paul of Tarsus or Raoul Wallenberg).

Since reality is dynamic and people die every minute, the list rearranges itself constantly as freshly-dead souls are added. But one thing never moves: the tiny gap at the precise point between saved and damned. No one is ever shifted from one side of this line of demarcation to the other, and the line is not necessarily at the continuum’s midpoint.

So, some continuums can be subdivided by a dotted line: male or female, you’re one or the other at birth or lacking surgery. You can call yourself the person in the middle; but Reality knows there is no middle.

Which side, for example, is Joe Lieberman really on? I don’t know; Joe Lieberman may not know; but God knows.

So, on a scale of two, which better describes you and/or the majority on this forum: liberal or conservative? I bet there are plenty of folks on both sides.

Fabrizio
March 2nd, 2010, 05:54 PM
I would call myself a European conservative. Let's say center right.

ablarc
March 2nd, 2010, 06:02 PM
^ All that means is you're not a crackpot.

Right?

But what are you really? You're not allowed to occupy the tiny gap between the two.

It's the rules of the game.

Fabrizio
March 2nd, 2010, 06:27 PM
Yes, I'd say you are correct, it basically means (or is supposed to mean) that one is not a crackpot.

But they're just broad terms.

I'm a Capricorn also, if that means anything.

Ninjahedge
March 3rd, 2010, 08:13 AM
It means you are horny.


Anywho.... I think the important thing to realize is what has been said in many texts throughout the years. Hell is other people. And Hell is also what you make of it.

Supposedly you pay for your sins in Hell, but does killing off a schoolbus of Nuns, Orphans and Puppies count the same as public urination?

Well, maybe in Hoboken this coming weekend, but what about the rest of the world?



The other thing to discuss or realize is that Liberal and Conservative are not useful as collective descriptors. I, myself, am uncomfortable with change, but at the same time, I welcome different ideas and love getting to the root of things (problem solving).

So what does that make me if I am willing to change for the good, but am still more comfortable with the status quo? A liberal minded conservative maybe?


Heaven and Hell, Liberal and Conservative only work in story books, churches and the Media. Choose your own fiction! ;)

ablarc
March 4th, 2010, 10:50 AM
The other thing to discuss or realize is that Liberal and Conservative are not useful as collective descriptors. I, myself, am uncomfortable with change, but at the same time, I welcome different ideas and love getting to the root of things (problem solving).
You managed to contradict yourself in a single sentence. Ambivalence.

Rule is, however, you have to choose one or the other. (And I think everyone's aware that sometimes it's one and sometimes it's the other.) Despite an occasional lapse from orthodox conservative thinking, no one would classify William Buckley as a liberal. (Or --in the closet-- was he?)

Ninjahedge
March 4th, 2010, 11:18 AM
You managed to contradict yourself in a single sentence. Ambivalence.

That was the point, expressing the existance or a co-existant dichotomy.

And that is why the labels for each do not apply. The fact that I am not comfortable with changes to my personal routine does not mean I do not believe in Global Warming.....


Rule is, however, you have to choose one or the other. (And I think everyone's aware that sometimes it's one and sometimes it's the other.)

I never signed up for teh game that had those rules. And, unlike any other game, the field you are playing in often determines what side you are on. In NYC and SF, I would be considered conservative. Here at my new job, I am downright Liberal.

I ain't "both". I am neither.

ZippyTheChimp
March 4th, 2010, 11:38 AM
Rule is, however, you have to choose one or the other.Or not vote.

lofter1
March 4th, 2010, 12:27 PM
Conserberal.

Librative.

Don't Fence Me In. :D

('Cuz you'll only use it against me.)

lofter1
March 4th, 2010, 12:29 PM
... no one would classify William Buckley as a liberal.


That was back when the world was more clearly defined.

Alonzo-ny
March 4th, 2010, 12:44 PM
The poll is too clear cut. I'm liberal on some things but conservative on others.

ablarc
March 5th, 2010, 02:33 PM
That was back when the world was more clearly defined.
So the world back then was more clearly defined?

How do you explain these days' 60-40 senatorial standoffs? Zero Republicans on one side of an issue and zero Democrats on the other.

IIRC, votes used to cross party lines back then.

Are you developing a faulty memory, lofter? Or was that just a glib thing to say?

Merry
March 5th, 2010, 08:29 PM
Politically, Liberal in Oz = conservative.

My parents are conservative and vote for Liberal.

The Labour Party has become much more conservative in recent times.

I vote for neither.

I despise conservatism (and politics).

I'm all for progress and reform (much more than the pols of any persuasion) and embrace other aspects of the definition of liberal.

"God" should play no part in any of it, but it's (still) in the constitution.

It's all very confusing and contradictory. Perhaps it's just the terminology.

lofter1
March 5th, 2010, 09:29 PM
So the world back then was more clearly defined?


Back then it was, at its core, an intellectual definition. William F. Buckley would clear the clock of most of today's right wingers. He wouldn't let 90% of them into the club.




How do you explain these days' 60-40 senatorial standoffs?


Today? Stubborness, for the most part. Stupidity, too. And Self-Centeredness.

195Broadway
March 5th, 2010, 11:10 PM
Politically, Liberal in Oz = conservative.

My parents are conservative and vote for Liberal.

The Labour Party has become much more conservative in recent times.

I vote for neither.

I despise conservatism (and politics).

I'm all for progress and reform (much more than the pols of any persuasion) and embrace other aspects of the definition of liberal.

"God" should play no part in any of it, but it's (still) in the constitution.

It's all very confusing and contradictory. Perhaps it's just the terminology.

Perhaps capitalist and socialist are more internationally uniform, and would be more useful terms to describe an aspect of one's perspective.

ablarc
March 6th, 2010, 08:27 AM
Perhaps capitalist and socialist are more internationally uniform, and would be more useful terms to describe an aspect of one's perspective.
Where would you put China?

Or France, for that matter?

MidtownGuy
March 6th, 2010, 01:21 PM
I'm a progressive, far left, pinko, radical, liberal, socialist and PROUD.
Eat the rich and distribute all their children's toys.:p

ablarc
March 6th, 2010, 05:02 PM
^ I think you scared away all the conservatives.

MidtownGuy
March 6th, 2010, 06:57 PM
Everyone was being so delicate, so middle of the road. I figured I'd go ahead and leave no doubt whatsoever. Own it.;)

ForestHillsGardens
March 6th, 2010, 11:31 PM
I am a neither conservative nor liberal but a Republican, but I am more capitalist. While, I do believe and support the statement the rich makes jobs for the poor, it is kinda how the human money eco-system works.

BrooklynRider
March 7th, 2010, 12:55 AM
I don't know what the f*ck is going on in this world, but I'm pretty sure that those "Conservatives" and "Liberals" in Congress arer responsible and the jack-offs who insist that everyone choose one or the other of their lame-ass labels are jut making it worse. I'm abstaining from this trolling poll.

Fabrizio
March 7th, 2010, 05:08 AM
LOL.... ol' ablarc srikes again? Ablarc just think: all that education, years of fine work.... and you wind up being nothing more than... a troll.

I think "troll" is the new "dirty old man"

Merry
March 7th, 2010, 06:11 AM
Crikey, called a troll twice (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=317571&postcount=428) in the space of just over a week :eek:.

Although I responded to this thread, I now feel out of place, being from the Antipodes 'n' all...

...but...labels (and nothing more) -- indeed.

Really, why did you ask, Ablarc?

ablarc
March 7th, 2010, 08:32 AM
To find out.


Midtown Guy responded forthrightly because he feels no obligation to mince words. Everyone else seems duty bound to proclaim their centrism, their ambivalence or their "moderation." Truth is, this poll may have uncovered that these days most folks don't really believe in anything.

Let's hear it for Nihilism, the political philosophy du jour.

You can only find Nihilists in the middle, where it's "OK" to not know or care what you believe; at the ends, you have to take a position.

.

Alonzo-ny
March 7th, 2010, 08:37 AM
Still, to be called a troll is ridiculous. Over 9,000 posts and many of them very articulate and insightful. Where is the venom coming from?

Fabrizio
March 7th, 2010, 08:59 AM
You can only find Nihilists in the middle, where it's "OK" to not know or care what you believe; at the ends, you have to take a position.

Nah. A hard-line leads to all sorts of disaster. It is the stuff of a by-gone era. Communists, Capitalists, Socialists. The right path is in the mix.

ablarc
March 7th, 2010, 09:05 AM
Like Joe Lieberman?

Fabrizio
March 7th, 2010, 09:15 AM
The problem here is that the audience is global. Note Merry's post about the labels in Australia and how it's all turned on it's head. Here in Italy there is too another set of definitions. Confusing for Americans. It is especially difficult for us to respond in way that adhere to US concepts.

ablarc
March 7th, 2010, 09:48 AM
I think it's often just confusion emanating from the parties' choice of names. So in Australia, a Liberal is really a conservative. You can capitalize the words and get one meaning, or leave them lower case and get a generic or true meaning.

Remember the National Socialist Workers' Party? Not Socialist, not a workers' party. That sly fox, Goebbels.

BrooklynRider
March 7th, 2010, 10:19 AM
I don'tt hink Ablarc is a troll. I think the poll is, at its heart, trolling. It is asking who defined themselves by terminology advocated by the extreme left.

We have seen the posts on WNY that involve the word "Liberal" and it is always devisive, inflammatory, angry, and, often, incoherent.

I enjoy forum members making provocative posts, challenging the status quo, and offering new perspectives. For me , this poll asks each of us to put a narrow label on ourselves that simply doesn't apply.

What of the socially progressive, fiscal conservative? What of the conservative business man that sees a need for increased government intervention via regulation of out-of-control industries , e.g. insurance and financial.

It is a very narrow poll. I think the numbers would be greatly altered and much more telling had their been an option of "other".

The poll is polarizing and maybe Ablarc wanted to demonstrate how useless polls can be. I don't know. I think it is worthless and will be fun only to those that love to take online polls.

ZippyTheChimp
March 7th, 2010, 11:48 AM
So in Australia, a Liberal is really a conservative. You can capitalize the words and get one meaning, or leave them lower case and get a generic or true meaning.I don't think there's much confusion globally. Liberalism as used in the US, now refers to Social Liberalism. In the past, it meant Classical Liberalism, an entirely different thing.

The poll is running as I expected.


I think the poll is, at its heart, trolling. It is asking who defined themselves by terminology advocated by the extreme left.

1. You don't have to vote.

2. You can vote in secret.

3. You can explain your choice.

Nothing "trolling" about it.


We have seen the posts on WNY that involve the word "Liberal" and it is always devisive, inflammatory, angry, and, often, incoherent.Usually by visitors who label people without knowing anything about them other than from a few posts.

lofter1
March 7th, 2010, 12:08 PM
Still, to be called a troll is ridiculous.

And both times by those highlighted in orange :eek:

Is there a hidden definition in the Mod Dictionary?

Fabrizio
March 7th, 2010, 12:31 PM
My picture is in the Mod Dictionary under "groovy".

Merry
March 8th, 2010, 04:56 AM
And both times by those highlighted in orange :eek:

Yes, disturbing.



I think it's often just confusion emanating from the parties' choice of names. So in Australia, a Liberal is really a conservative. You can capitalize the words and get one meaning, or leave them lower case and get a generic or true meaning.

This poll was posted under News and Politics, so I assumed that the poll was seeking a response from a political point of view (it's neither, considering that the relevance of certain threads here has come into question recently, but I digress).

I mentioned in my post that I wholeheartedly embrace the non-political definitions of the word liberal. Can't say the same for the pols here, of any persuasion. Don Chipp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Chipp) (Democrats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Democrats)) (interview (http://www.abc.net.au/talkingheads/txt/s1357605.htm)) espoused a reasonable starting point, but it all went to hell pretty quickly, as was to be expected. Representational democracy just isn't the same as the real thing (whatever that is).

Ninjahedge
March 8th, 2010, 08:13 AM
My picture is in the Mod Dictionary under "groovy".

Lots of wrinkles don't count as grooves Fab.......

ablarc
March 8th, 2010, 09:37 AM
I don't know what the f*ck is going on in this world, but I'm pretty sure that those "Conservatives" and "Liberals" in Congress are responsible and the jack-offs who insist that everyone choose one or the other of their lame-ass labels are jut making it worse. I'm abstaining from this trolling poll.


Idon't think Ablarc is a troll.
Thanks for the benefit of the doubt, BR. Not positive that’s a good thing.

When things are bad, it’s good to have “subversives”; they’re tomorrow’s straight arrows. History has been driven mostly by folks whom at least some people regarded as trolls, because they asked questions that challenged cherished beliefs --Jesus Christ, Socrates, Oscar Wilde, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Mahatma Gandhi-- and they got people so mad that folks didn’t rest till they had made every one of them dead.


I think the poll is, at its heart, trolling. It is asking who defined themselves by terminology advocated by the extreme left.
No idea what you mean here; the conclusion precedes the observation, and the observation is highly suspect. This sounds like something Sarah Palin would say. The truth about her and her followers, however, is that they define themselves in no uncertain terms; and then they define everyone else.


We have seen the posts on WNY that involve the word "Liberal" and it is always divisive, inflammatory, angry, and, often, incoherent.
Examples?


I enjoy forum members making provocative posts, challenging the status quo, and offering new perspectives.
Well, I don’t know about challenging the status quo or offering new perspectives, but the post certainly seems provocative to you, so you must be enjoying it.

But really, what’s provocative about it? It’s a question Gallup asks a thousand people a day.


For me , this poll asks each of us to put a narrow label on ourselves that simply doesn't apply.
You better leave MidtownGuy out of the “each”; he doesn’t mind so much putting a narrow label on himself; knows where he stands, I guess.


The poll is too clear cut. I'm liberal on some things but conservative on others.
At least you’re not angry.


What of the socially progressive, fiscal conservative?
He can decide whether his allegiance is greater to gay marriage or a cap on the minimum wage.


What of the conservative business man that sees a need for increased government intervention via regulation of out-of-control industries, e.g. insurance and financial?
This person is fictional, because oxymoronic. You could, however, refer to him as a somewhat liberal businessman. ;)


It is a very narrow poll. I think the numbers would be greatly altered and much more telling had their been an option of "other".
That’s right; almost everyone except MidtownGuy would have been “other.” What would we have learned from that? That most people have allegiance to some views of both liberals and conservatives? Pshaw, most of us already knew that.


The poll is polarizing and maybe Ablarc wanted to demonstrate how useless polls can be. I don't know.

Getting close.

The introduction makes it clear the pollster (the trollster) thinks that most folks think it won't apply.

What I really am finding out is the surprising capacity of “moderates” and “centrists” to be madder than wet hens. I thought that was reserved for extremists at each end. Seems like it turns out there are extremists of the Center. That’s something I didn’t know. Did you? :p

But why is the poll polarizing? Surely because its rules don’t allow us to proclaim what many of us Americans think is the only virtue: Centrism. Look what harm the President is doing to his ability to get something done for us by applying the presently-naive ideology of Centrist bipartisanship. Turns out, in the Congress there's no one in the Center. No one to compromise with.


I would call myself a European conservative. Let's say center right.
In Europe, you can say exactly where you stand without getting offended that someone asked you to label yourself.

Also Australia:


I despise conservatism (and politics).

I'm all for progress and reform (much more than the pols of any persuasion) and embrace other aspects of the definition of liberal.

It's all very confusing and contradictory. Perhaps it's just the terminology.
You can’t do without words for things; it’s the only way you can talk.


Perhaps capitalist and socialist are more internationally uniform, and would be more useful terms to describe an aspect of one's perspective.
Problem is, these days even the self-styled Socialists are really Capitalists –like the ones in China; and the self-styled Capitalists (like Fabrizio) believe in certain Socialist virtues –like government health insurance. Eh, Fabrizio?


I am a neither conservative nor liberal Republican, but I am more capitalist. While I do belive the rich makes jobs for the poor, it is kinda how the human money eco-system works.
You could say the rich make jobs for the poor, and the poor make wealth for the rich. To get really rich, it helps to have those minimum-wagers.


Don't Fence Me In. :D

('Cuz you'll only use it against me.)
Mildly paranoid, you say? ;)

195Broadway
March 8th, 2010, 10:25 AM
Where would you put China?

Or France, for that matter?

At this point, I'm not sure what to make of China's structure. If anyone here feels they have that sorted out, please comment.

I perceive France to be well into the socialist realm due to their nationalization of many major industries.

195Broadway
March 8th, 2010, 10:29 AM
I'm a progressive, far left, pinko, radical, liberal, socialist and PROUD.
Eat the rich and distribute all their children's toys.:p

Fair enough. I have not met many who will come out and make a statement like that.

Ebryan
March 8th, 2010, 10:38 AM
I fear Obama is turning me into a moderate.

ablarc
March 8th, 2010, 10:50 AM
^ From what? And how is he doing it?

Ebryan
March 8th, 2010, 11:45 AM
It is admittedly emotional and difficult to quantify. Give me some time; I'll develop a more thoughtful response than I could at this very moment.

Ninjahedge
March 8th, 2010, 10:30 PM
Careful. When a stance is formulated from an emotional base, it is rarely logically validatated.

Try and track down what your feeling is, and where it might really be coming from. look for common threads. the whole idea that somehow Obama is this radical liberal is so staged it is not funny.

If he has one major fault, it is trying to make everyone happy. OTOH, it is nice to have someone in office that is not concerned with ramming things through with a majority.


The only problem with that is you have a tendency to end up with a cup of vanilla ice cream with 47 different toppings. (which sounds fine until you get to the capers).

Merry
March 9th, 2010, 04:40 AM
You can’t do without words for things; it’s the only way you can talk.

What :confused:. I wasn't suggesting otherwise :rolleyes:.

ablarc
March 9th, 2010, 06:57 AM
Sorry, I was referring to what you had called "terminology."

I can see I was unclear; bad terminology.

Merry
March 9th, 2010, 07:01 AM
Yes, sarcasm aside, my point :rolleyes:.

ForestHillsGardens
March 9th, 2010, 04:57 PM
You could say the rich make jobs for the poor, and the poor make wealth for the rich. To get really rich, it helps to have those minimum-wagers.


Well, obviously minimum-wagers are important but some people need to control their spending too, :p...

NYatKNIGHT
March 9th, 2010, 05:09 PM
Fox News is Conservative, so I'm going with Liberal.

That wasn't so hard.

infoshare
March 9th, 2010, 05:44 PM
Modern Liberalism = Communism/Socialism
Conservatism/Right-Wing = Fascism

Both roads lead to an increase in the power/size of Government and a decrease in Personal Freedom/Liberty. A catch-22, A dilemma: fortunately there is a better way to go.

The poll is a false dichotomy (http://info-pollution.com/false.htm) so I will abstain from voting: but much can be learned by the responses it generates.

ablarc
March 9th, 2010, 06:11 PM
Fox News is Conservative, so I'm going with Liberal.

That wasn't so hard.
You mean you didn't have to agonize? ;)


... fortunately there is a better way to go.
Well, let's hear it.


... much can be learned by the responses it generates.
I agree ... but I wish I'd learned more from yours. :)

Fabrizio
March 9th, 2010, 06:12 PM
Conservatism/Right-Wing = Fascism

^ historically incorrect.

Ninjahedge
March 10th, 2010, 07:51 AM
Fab, while that is true, what does it stand for now?

Conservative now does not mean the same as it did before Reagan. Somehow he started the whole Right Wing Spenders Club..... Or at least appreciably increased their influence and actual tug on the pursestrings.....

ZippyTheChimp
March 10th, 2010, 08:10 AM
Conservatism has never meant Facism (or even moving in that direction). Facism is a distinct political philosophy.

The way the word is thrown around today, it should be an adjunct to Godwin's Law.

Ninjahedge
March 10th, 2010, 09:19 AM
Damn Nazis.....

ablarc
March 23rd, 2010, 01:19 PM
Fascism, pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/, is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists seek to organize a nation on corporatist perspectives; values; and systems such as the political system and the economy. Scholars generally consider fascism to be on the far right of the conventional left-right political spectrum, although some scholars claim that fascism has been influenced by both the left and the right.

Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong. Fascists identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.

Fascists claim that culture is created by collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus rejects individualism. In viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, fascists claim that pluralism is a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.


Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state. Fascist governments forbid and suppress openness and opposition to the fascist state and the fascist movement. Fascism rejects and resists autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate or are unable to be assimilated. Fascists consider attempts to create such autonomy as an affront and threat to the nation.

Fascists support a "Third Way" in economic policy, which they believed superior to both the rampant individualism of laissez-faire capitalism and the severe control of state socialism. Fascism presents itself as an economically trans-class movement that promotes ending economic class conflict to secure national solidarity. They blame capitalism and liberal democracies for creating class conflict, and accuse communists of exploiting the concept.

Fascists accuse liberalism, as a bourgeois movement, and Marxism, as a proletarian movement, for both having created anarchy through support of democracy, Freemasonry, materialism, plutocracy, positivism, and rationalism. Fascists believe that economic classes are not capable of properly running a nation, and that a merit-based aristocracy of experienced military persons must rule through regimenting a nation's forces of production and securing the nation's independence.

Following the defeat of the Axis powers in World War II and the publicity surrounding the atrocities committed during the period of fascist governments, the term fascist has been used as a pejorative word, often referring to widely varying movements across the political spectrum.
Does much of this sound familiar?

Have you seen Inglourious Basterds? Did you notice that –with the exception of the rat, Colonel Landa— mostly the German combatants acquitted themselves personally with honor? The sergeant, facing death, who respectfully declines to betray his comrades by pointing out their position; the soldier in the basement tavern who decides to honor his deal --even Landa, who’s scandalized by Aldo Raine’s off-hand shooting of his driver.

But –and this is the larger point— the ideology these otherwise commendable individuals were supporting was so evil that it dwarfed the cruelty and ethical lapses of the Basterds.

OldStudent
March 25th, 2010, 01:07 AM
I'm a conservative who wishes he could peaceably roll a joint once in a while, is bummed on some of the women I never played with (repression isn't always bad) and loves creative people -I've always wanted to be one. Once upon a time I might have been creative. I hate war. I love old practices like learning trades from master craftsmen. Somewhere in me a little Calvinist roams and insist that individuals would be better off if our destinies were predetermined by being born into a trade. I think most would have more money and independence and I think that makes one a happier person.

ablarc
March 25th, 2010, 08:44 AM
These days, the trades come and go.

I think I might have enjoyed being a barrel maker.

OldStudent
March 25th, 2010, 08:50 PM
One can build a high tech workshop for a small amount of cash.

"A lot of people are pretty disappointed with an image of a career in finance and they're looking for a career that's real."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125798004542744219.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_RIGHTInDepth Carousel (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125798004542744219.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_RIGHTInDepth Carousel)

MidtownGuy
March 25th, 2010, 09:03 PM
These days, the trades come and go.

I think I might have enjoyed being a barrel maker.

In junior high we carved a Renaissance Fair out of the forest behind the school, and everyone was divided into guilds. It was such a great experience. The members of each guild had to study their craft and represent things at their booths, to be attended by all the other classes in the school.
I was a bread baker.

ablarc
March 27th, 2010, 09:33 AM
^ Well at least that trade's still around.