Ustwo

I’m both confused and amused by peoples, violent , reaction to labels here. I’m trying to figure out why they are so bad.

I view myself as a conservative, I know when you say ‘conservatives’ some of what you imply with that doesn’t apply to me, some of it does, and if you are a liberal some of it doesn’t apply to any conservative, but you have your own ideas on the subject.

In general you can state ‘conservative’ and at least have a reasonable idea on where they stand.

I am personally, an atheist, environmentalist (the non-wacky kind), small government, big defense, pro-capital punishment, pro-personal freedom type. I don’t care about abortion unless its late term, and if you want to get high, be my guest, the world needs ditch diggers too.

That being said I won’t get upset if someone were to say to me ‘you conservatives want to force prayer in schools’. Its not a totally wrong statement even if it doesn’t apply to my atheist self (I personally don’t care about prayer in schools one way or another). I might correct them in saying that I don’t care, but being called a conservative is not offensive.

That person didn’t lower the debate.

Now if he said ‘You conservative baby killer homophobes want to force your barbaric religion on my children’, you lowered the debate, but it wasn’t the ‘conservative’ label that did it.

Now I know that Reagan turned liberal into a dirty word. So much so that most liberals don’t want to be called liberal, and some have gone with the, progressive title, which now sounds SO much better, after all progress is good right? But that doesn’t change who you are, and why should you hide from it?

If you take liberal views, you are a liberal. Me calling you a liberal doesn’t diminish you, it just makes it easy to identify the crux of the argument.

So my question to you liberals, conservatives, undecideds, and others, why the hate of the label?

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Food Eater Lad

I am also perplexed. If your political views are liberal, why are you ashamed to be called a liberal.

BTW I am also another Atheist Conservative.

The_Dude

The majority of my views tend to be liberal, so I identify myself as a "liberal". I dont agree with some things that people tend to assosiate as being "liberal". If someone accuses me of supporting something like that, I would just tell 'em that I dont support it.

No, conservatives are usually pro-life, against "baby killing". Although the wording is harsh and is blanketing, a majority (NOT all) of conservatives are anti-gay rights and pro-prayer in school.

__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

maximusveritas

The only people who might be afraid to label themselves liberals are politicians. Most true liberals, including myself, are proud to be called liberals. The problem with using labels in a debate is that you sometimes begin to debate with the label rather than the actual person you're talking to. It's sometimes used as a way to escape from meaningful discourse by attacking the strawman in your mind rather than the person in front of you.

Here's a relevant excerpt from the speech John F. Kennedy gave when accepting the nomination of the NY Liberal Party on September 14, 1960.

matthew330

The "conservative" label doesn't bother me at all. Label's like "anti-gay rights", "anti-choice", "racist" (i.e - anti-affirmative action), those are the labels I find somewhat annoying.

eple

Maybe because not everyone here are American? I am Norwegian, and I am proud of that. There are no Conservative or Democratic party here. I am not liberal nor conservative.

Ustwo

Thats not really true. Being a liberal or conservative really has nothing to do with nationalities. I know nothing of Norways political parties, but I did once take a look at Swedens major parties. They went from middle-left to wacky-commie-left, but that doesn't mean there are no conservatives in Sweden, I know some.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Sparhawk

I think the problem many of us liberal types have is when folks are calling someone Liberal (or 'Lib', as the pill-popper likes to do), they are pidgeonholing that person into their narrowly preconceived stereotype, that usually goes along the lines of: We want to tax all of your money, kill your unborn babies, arrest you when you pray in school, let killers 'off the hook' by not killing them, give your hardearned money to crack addicts with 14 children, and forcefeed your children pornography.

The post with the Kennedy quote pretty clearly illustrates the different defintions Liberal has come to have, and why I like to hear folks' individual definitions for these terms so that we can come to an understanding- that maybe once we get past these preconceived notions we'll see that we actually share a lot of the same ideological ground.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

mb99usa

The problem I have with labels is that they are another way of grouping people. I have my own ideas and opinions about every issue I am presented with. Some will fall into one group while another may fall intothe opposite group. Consequently I do not want to be associated with either.

I prefer to think of myself as an individual who falls under no label. What stinks is that in America I am penalized for this. Because I do not declare a political party I am not allowed to vote in the primaries. This eliminates me from choosing who I think should be the finalists in any political race.

__________________
So, what's your point?

It's not an attitude, it's a way of life.

Ustwo

The Kennedy quote is a great quote, but its just that, a great quote. What the quote neglects to mention is methodology, and thats where conservatives/liberals seperate as much as policy.

As a conservative I worry about peoples welfare (no pun intended )

Also as a conservative I wouldn't give more money to an unwed mother because she had another child. I view this as counter productive.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

filtherton

The words are great in an abstract way, but when applied to an actual person they quickly become inaccurate and meaningless.
First of all, to a conservative, a moderate is a liberal and to a liberal a moderate is conservative. Is orrin hatch still conservative even though he supports stem cell research? Is arnold schwarz a conservative? I have views that could be considered conservative and i also have views that could be considered liberal- but labeling me either way would obviously be inaccurate.
Secondly, i think you might find resistance to your use of labeling because you don't use it well. You use the labels at innapropriate times when no one has even brought up the fact that they are liberal. I've have seen some of you label a self professed conservative a liberal just because they didn't agree with you.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...0&pagenumber=3
This is in reference to rush limbaugh. The use of the label "liberal" here is completely inappropriate because the liberal v. conservative conflict is irrelevant to this particular discussion. There are quite a few people on the board who dislike rush limbaugh. Notice how i said people and not liberals. That is because there are also conservatives who don't care for rush limbaugh. Whether they are conservative or liberal or moderate or whatever is irrelevant to that discussion unless maybe someone directly says, "I hate rush limbaugh because he is a conservative talk show host and i am a liberal."

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...threadid=31898
This comment has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion it is in. It is a underhanded stab at liberals made at a point in the discussion when making such idealogical distinctions is both unnecessary and probably completely way off base.


I don't think anyone has a problem with someone refering to them in the same way they identify themselves. No liberal with integrity is afraid to be called a liberal. Its just that some people use the word liberal as a catch all term for anyone who disagrees with them. i.e. "I'm a conservative, this guy disagrees with me, it must be because he is a liberal."

matthew330

I respectfully disagree, i have never met a person of the liberal persuasion (haha - huh??) who "didn't care for rush." Without fail there is an undying deep seated hatred for him, and it doesn't make sense to me.

eple

Hay dude I know nothing about the politic landscape of the US so I looked to the neighboring country of Mexico, and I really think you guys should do something to satisfy the Zapatista movement!

Just kidding. Now well, I know that Liberal and Conservative ideas are found in most political parties in most countries of the world, but you must understand that the definitions of the terms are entirely different from those in the US. I do not belong to any party in Norway, nor do I cling to one theory, I am only 18, and still have much to learn before I define myself within some rigid political or echonomical paradigm.

BTW: Sveden and Norway are social democracies. Not communists. It would be nice if Americans could some day learn the big fucking difference between the two (you must excuse the harsh tone, but us Norwegians are still sore after a visit from some American president which may or may not have been Reagan, who uttered the famous words: "Social Democracy you say? Well I dont' care what kind of commies you are!).

Ustwo

Hehe, we do know, but its fun to watch you get all mad about it

I do find it amusing that Norway is one of the worlds major oil producers, yet the people pay some of the highest prices at the pump, and that food prices are so high that some people drive to Sweden of all places to find cheaper prices, all in the name of Social Democracy.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Ustwo

But I do find it amusing that how much Liberals HATE these days, and how intolerant they are. There is a reason only 19% of the US identify themselves as liberal these days.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

eple

that is all just whiny Norvegians. We have the world's highest standards of living an everybody are generally pretty well off. Compared to wages, we have the thirds lowest gas prices in Europe, as well as pretty average prices on food. We are just whiny, cheap-assed people, so people generally make more fuzz about the "high" prices. We also get free health-care, schools and eldery care, as well as good social security and job safety. Students get loans free of interest to gain a good education. I am pretty happy with our social democracy and gladly pay my taxes and buy my "expensive" goods in Norway.

mb99usa

I may be a little dense here so could someone please explain the difference between conservatives and liberals. I have never been clear on what each stood for other than badmouthing the opposition.

I am really serious about this.

__________________
So, what's your point?

It's not an attitude, it's a way of life.

eple

After following the many interesting debates regarding this, I have learned this:
Liberal are crazy enviromental homosexuals who wants to give every black man a million dollars and kills babies. Conservatives are evil nazis who have opposed every reform that didn't involve taking money from poor, starving homosexual black children.

mb99usa

Thanks eple but I was looking for something a little less exagerated.

__________________
So, what's your point?

It's not an attitude, it's a way of life.

eple

liberal
adj 1: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad
political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a
liberal newspaper"; "tolerant of his opponent's
opinions" [syn: broad, tolerant]
2: having political or social views favoring reform and
progress
3: tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism,
orthodoxy, or tradition [ant: conservative]
4: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "the bounteous
goodness of God"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded
host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving
and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent
gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather" [syn: big,
bighearted, bounteous, bountiful, freehanded, handsome,
giving, openhanded]
5: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been
told"; "a free translation of the poem" [syn: free, loose]
n 1: a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and
reform and the protection of civil liberties [syn: progressive]
[ant: conservative]
2: a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and
self-regulating markets

Conservative \Con*serv"a*tive\, n.
1. One who, or that which, preserves from ruin, injury,
innovation, or radical change; a preserver; a conserver.
The Holy Spirit is the great conservative of the new
life. --Jer. Taylor.
2. One who desires to maintain existing institutions and
customs; also, one who holds moderate opinions in
politics; -- opposed to revolutionary or radical.
3. (Eng. Hist.) A member of the Conservative party.


There ya go

mb99usa

Cool. That will work. Thanks eple.

Looks like your first definition pretty much summed it up.

__________________
So, what's your point?

It's not an attitude, it's a way of life.

Sledge

It's not the label that bothers me. It's the way that you use the label to make blanket statements. For instance, here you're calling all people who identify themselves as liberals as hateful and intolerant. Gosh. Thanks, Ustwo.

filtherton hit the nail on the head. Shit, he about busted through the wood. Labels summarize an ideology, but they only approximate any specific individual's actual beliefs, and calling any group of people hateful and intolerant is just plain insulting, labels or no. Labels are not generally an effective way of presupposing your opponent's arguments; in the end you end up putting words in his mouth, and then they yell at you for a while, and then redravin comes in and tells us all to simmer down now. :P

Sixate does the same thing with the religious. Don't tell me you're surprised when people jump all over him.

BuDDaH

I think you people like the sound of your own voices, and think you all have valid points. I think you need to backtrack and read the topic, the thread and align your replies along the lines of the thread.

__________________
I'd hit that so hard whoever could pull me out would become King of England!

Ustwo

Sadly the dictionary is woefully lacking

Basically in US political speak a liberal is someone who thinks the government is the solution to societies problems, the rights of the individual are secondary to the rights of the state, and all property is subject to the government need. Then there are also hot button, one issue voter types on subjects like abortion, drug legalization, the environment etc.

Conservatives in US political speak are basically people who think that individual rights are more important then government control. Government functions should be limited to making the country run (defense, infrastructure, and the like). Property and wealth are not communal as making it so will discourage growth. Then there are hot button, one issue voters, on things like school prayer, abortion, gun control, etc.

Its important not to confuse liberal/conservatives with one issue voters. There are people who vote because of an issue like abortion, without regard to the rest of the parties stance. Likewise there are people who would say they are liberal or conservative, but not agree with the 'majority' of liberals/conservatives on some hot button issues.

An ideal liberal world is a society that works together, for the good of all, and takes care of the 'weaker' individuals in the society. Altruism is basically the driving force of the land.

An ideal conservative world, is a society where the individual is rewarded on his own efforts and is rewarded based on his merit. Society is held together by mutual benefits of trade. You need milk and I have a cow, I need lumber and you have an axe.

Both ideals fall apart when human nature takes over.

A liberal society can fail in that most people are naturally lazy. If you are rewarded for not working, more and more people will not work. Those that do work get larger and larger burdens put upon them to support those who don't. This creates resentment, and discourages people from trying. Since rewards are not tied directly to effort, very difficult fields of work suffer as people don't think its worth the effort to excel.

A conservative society can fail in that unscrupulous individuals can exploit others for their own gain. The mutual benefit of working together is replaced by a zero sum game.

This is why I am a conservative, who likes some government controls/programs. Any society that takes greater reward out of risk taking and harder work is doomed to mediocrity, but that doesn’t mean that some things can’t be done well by the government. Grants and loans for education are good, because it encourages a higher level of effort and allows those who do not come from wealth a greater chance to get it and contribute to society. Welfare to non-working individuals is bad because it simply enforces a lack of effort. Government oversight of finances and monopolies is good because it prevents exploitation and ensures competition. Government demanding who businesses can hire and fire is bad because it allows non-productive workers remain and creates resentment.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

eple

Saying that welfare to the unemployed is encouraging people not to work, is pretty harsh. I don't know how things are in the US; but here in Norway, you don't get a very good salary on welfare. Noone will want to stay unemployed. Work is also more than a way of earning money, it is a way of being useful. Most people define themselves to a certain extent through their job, and being unemployed leave most citizens with a feeling of uselessness. Not giving anything to the unemployed seems asinine, should people starve and die if they get fired? There are hundreds of examples of people losing their job without it being their fault, should these people be left without a safety net if they are thrown into unemployment?

mb99usa

I think we have to becareful not to jump to extremes in our discussion. I do not think Ustwo is sayin gunemployment is a bad idea. I think he means that we should not reward for not working. Temporary help is a good idea as long as it is temporary and hinges on demonstrated effort in gaining employment.

__________________
So, what's your point?

It's not an attitude, it's a way of life.

Ustwo

We have people in the US who have spent their entire life on welfare. They are born on it, raise their families on it, and die with it. I've worked in government clinics and met grandmothers in their 30's, who's grandchildren are 5th generation welfare babies. Most Europeans I know, have a very different view on welfare and as such don't see the problem we have with it in America. We are not talking about unemployment. I think in Europe you are only starting to see this problem, with the crime, and breakdown of the family that come with it. Since it tends to be tied in with recent immigrants its not as big an issue, but violent crimes and crime in general in Europe is skyrocketing, along with the resentment that follows.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

eple

As I said, I do not know of the situation in the US, thus I won't really argue too much on the subject. You are right that we must have different views, in this country, it's pretty unpopular to be unemployed, and noone would dream of living their life on welfare,it would be a horrible shame. When it comes to immigration, we experience that most immigrants work harder and better than ethnic Norwegians.

mml

As someone who grew up in Arizona, the home of Barry Goldwater and Democrats that make most Republicans seem like Democrats, I am a self-confessed Liberal. This has led to endless harassment from friends and associates that usually is good natured, but occationally turns nasty. The process that began with President Reagan that "liberals" were misguided, unpatriotic and immoral has snowballed over the years. Many use the word as a pejorative and in that context it can be offensive. The word mother normally has a wonderful, important meaning, but used pejoratively it is offensive.

I also believe that many liberals think too much. When you use a wide brush to paint all liberals one way, they get upset, because there is such a wide disparity within liberalism. Conservatives seem to see things in a simpler more black and white context. Liberals often thrive on the grey areas. Just my opinion.

__________________
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
-Douglas Adams