The Instigator
JasonMc
Pro (for)
Winning
25 Points
The Contender
dairygirl4u2c
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points

Ron Paul's claim that neocons are leftist liberals, and not the conservatives that they claim to be

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/10/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 978 times Debate No: 1647
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (9)

 

JasonMc

Pro

I have spoken to several people who claim that George Bush and the other GOP candidates are conservative in their efforts to promote the war in Iraq, the notion to go to war with Iran, the massive increases in government spending during Bush's terms in office, and the unconstitutional reallocation of power to the executive branch. Conservatives advocate small government and give balance to liberal spending and policies. The principles stated above are anything but conservative, therefore, they are liberal. If you think this is a false statement, debate how and why it is false. Please, do not waste my time by replying with a personal attack against Ron Paul. If you want to have a debate about Ron Paul, then let's have a separate debate about Ron Paul. Also, please put your emotions aside and do not reply with anything but concrete refutation to this topic. I'm simply looking for a rational debate in which I can challenge my own beliefs, as well as yours. Maybe I'm right, or maybe you are. Maybe we can both learn a thing or two from one another. Either way, keep it RATIONAL.
dairygirl4u2c

Con

you need to accept that there are variations of conservative. liberals, as everyone knows, as a rule do not believe in the iraq war for example.
your definition of conservative is simply using you as a definition, or fundamental historical libertarian conservatism as a defintion. either way, it's not proper to say that if it's not that, then it's liberal, with the example i gave as proof.
conservatives then are known for being war mongers, as a variation. not liberals.
i'd argue conservatives were for slavery and resisting women's rights, given things like resisting gays and insisting on women's subordination by the bible etc and how liberals are known for civil rights etc. i suppose you could argue liberal, in a way. it's an open question perhaps. but you can't peg things as nebulous as political affiliations as you are doing.
Debate Round No. 1
JasonMc

Pro

If you look the word conservative up on wikipedia, it says: "Conservatism is a term used to describe political philosophies that favor tradition and gradual change, where tradition refers to religious, cultural, or nationally defined beliefs and customs. The term is derived from the Latin, com servare, to preserve; "to protect from loss or harm".

Granted that wikipedia isn't the most credible of sources, they've covered the basic philosophy of conservatism which that is that conservatives favor gradual change, and that the term conservative is derived from the Latin for preserved. Clearly, this is not simply my definition of conservatism, and thus your claim that my "definition of conservative is simply using myself as a definition, or fundamental historical libertarian conservatism as a defintion." is false.

There is nothing gradual or preserved about the massive increases in government spending and the unconstitutional reallocation of power to the executive branch brought about by neocon republicans. Just because they say that they are conservative, doesn't mean that they are.

If you search wikipedia for paleoliberalism and neoconservatives, it says: "According to Michael Lind, in the late 1960s and early 1970s many "anti-Soviet liberals and social democrats in the tradition of Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Humphrey and Henry ("Scoop") Jackson… preferred to call themselves 'paleoliberals'". According to Lind, this group of people influenced or later became neoconservatives. - Lind."

I am not claiming that just because neocons aren't conservative that they are liberal, I'm claiming they are liberal because they ARE liberals under a conservative guise. If one party should ideally give balance to the other, neocon republicans are wolves in sheep's clothing. If the liberal opposition is liberal itself, then the scales tip to one side, and there is no balance to the system. There's nothing democratic about a system without balance.

As far as your claim that "conservatives were for slavery and resisting women's rights, given things like resisting gays and insisting on women's subordination by the bible etc", you're correct to a point. That is not to say, however, that all conservatives subscribed to these principles or that liberals are themselves without fault.
dairygirl4u2c

Con

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
JasonMc

Pro

If you accidentally missed your turn, I'll give you a do-over. If not, hopefully I gave you some food for thought.

Thanks
dairygirl4u2c

Con

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Richard89 9 years ago
Richard89
Ron Paul is bad news for this country. He needs to get his head out of the 18th century and into the 21st. Isolationism won't pacify terrorists and would leave this country highly vulnerable. Not to mention his ludicrous stand on drugs.(no wonder that teenagers seem to love him.lol) These are just a couple of the many issues that make this man unelectable. He even ran against his own party in 1988.
Posted by lindsay 9 years ago
lindsay
I completely agree. Only if it were a math equation it would look like this:

Neocon = Leftist Liberal - Humanitarian Effort
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by dairygirl4u2c 9 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by YummyYummCupcake 9 years ago
YummyYummCupcake
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by TheGreatDebate 9 years ago
TheGreatDebate
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by hellstorm 9 years ago
hellstorm
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by jwebb893 9 years ago
jwebb893
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Kreuzian 9 years ago
Kreuzian
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
JasonMcdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30