Total Posts:194|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Conservatism vs liberalism

comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:35:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I am conservative= less government and back to constitutional justice.

Many are liberal= more government and no real conviction as whether or not to consider the constitution.

So why do you liberals believe in expanding government?

Why do you view conservatives as "bad" for try to follow the set of rules laid out at the start of this country?

Why be a liberal?

Why do you insist on promoting unconstitutional run programs that just grow and are bankrupting America?
Things like: social welfare programs, education, public power, agriculture, public housing, urban renewal and all the other activities that can be better performed by lower levels of government or private institutions or by individuals.

"The root evil is that the government is engaged in activities in which it has no legitimate business. As long as the federal government acknowledges responsibility in a given social or economic field, its spending in that field cannot be substantially reduced... the only way to curtail spending substantially, is to eliminate the programs on which excess spending is consumed."
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:40:48 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
This is such a disgustingly dumb topic that I won't even address it, but I'd also like to point out that conservatives in the United States also believe in such positions as teaching intelligent design on the same level as evolution, or that all gay people are aberrant and sinful, that a novel (the Bible) has some place in decision making above logic or reason, and many others.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:43:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Let's all strawman each other.
The conservatives ditch the constitution when they feel like it. Some of them hold that Roe v. Wade wasn't decided right. Most conservatives support the unconstiutional banning of marijuana.
The liberals do the same with economic regulations and institutions.

Neither is really for or against "big government", though they might claim to be. When Clinton won (after 8 years of Reagan and 4 of Bush), he said that "The era of big government is over"...
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
johngriswald
Posts: 1,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:45:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:35:42 PM, comoncents wrote:
Lets put everyone in a conservative or liberal box

Lol
Having problems with the fans site? Suggestions? Can't log in? Forgot your password? Want to be an editor and write opinion pieces? PM Me and I'll get it sorted out.

ddofans.com
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:49:01 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:40:48 PM, LeafRod wrote:
This is such a disgustingly dumb topic that I won't even address it, but I'd also like to point out that conservatives in the United States also believe in such positions as teaching intelligent design on the same level as evolution, or that all gay people are aberrant and sinful, that a novel (the Bible) has some place in decision making above logic or reason, and many others.

That is not true.
And with the mention of not addressing the topic, you actually are.

I understand if you do not have the answers to the questions i pose, some people follow the crowd b/c it is the cool thing to do.
I that is the case for you than have a nice day.

If that is not the case than you should address the topic in further detail, than just calling it dumb. It just makes you look unintelligent.

Sorry, but true.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:50:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:35:42 PM, comoncents wrote:
I am conservative= less government and back to constitutional justice.

Incorrect; a 'conservative' is nothing but someone who wishes to continue with the status quo, or is a reactionary. It is not a real ideology, per se.

What you are is probably a classical liberal, which is what the Republican Party was originally conceived as, and the ideology the Founding Fathers built the US on.

Many are liberal= more government and no real conviction as whether or not to consider the constitution.

Incorrect, again. A liberal in the context that you mean is usually for proportional government, and for a 'living constitution', though will by all means uphold the tenets of the constitution, just as you would. The difference is interpretation.

So why do you liberals believe in expanding government?

Why do you 'conservatives' believe in bankrupting and neutering the government?

Why do you view conservatives as "bad" for try to follow the set of rules laid out at the start of this country?

Why do you view liberals as "bad" for trying to follow what they believe would make the country more akin to the rules laid out in its founding documents?

Why be a liberal?

Why be a 'conservative'?

Why do you insist on promoting unconstitutional run programs that just grow and are bankrupting America?

Why do 'conservatives' insist on promoting unconstitutional programs that just grow and bankrupt America? Like, you know, Iraq.

Things like: social welfare programs, education, public power, agriculture, public housing, urban renewal and all the other activities that can be better performed by lower levels of government or private institutions or by individuals.

Why do you believe such things, most of which you're really stretching it with, are better done by lower levels of government, private institutions, or by individuals?

Fact is, you can only justify what you believe because you believe it. Everything else to you is pointless and wrong, so why should anyone bother explaining to you what they believe when you simply won't accept it, and deride it as wrong? Give me one good reason.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:51:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:45:55 PM, johngriswald wrote:
At 12/27/2009 8:35:42 PM, comoncents wrote:
Lets put everyone in a conservative or liberal box

Lol

What?

Sometimes i just do not get you.
It could be a good thing.

And i get that writing "a quote" that no one said is your thing, but it is extremely old and childish.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:53:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Volkov, I knew this topic would draw you in.
I am always glad to hear from a logically true liberal.

(Please, don't take offense to me calling you a liberal, i really do not mean anything negative.)
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:55:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:43:51 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Let's all strawman each other.
The conservatives ditch the constitution when they feel like it. Some of them hold that Roe v. Wade wasn't decided right. Most conservatives support the unconstiutional banning of marijuana.
The liberals do the same with economic regulations and institutions.

Neither is really for or against "big government", though they might claim to be. When Clinton won (after 8 years of Reagan and 4 of Bush), he said that "The era of big government is over"...

I understand what you are saying but i feel that you are not describing true conservatism.
Just what the media describes it as.
johngriswald
Posts: 1,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 8:58:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:51:25 PM, comoncents wrote:
but it is extremely old and childish.

I spy a contradiction

LULZ

Furthermore there is always a point to what I say. If you couldn't understand it let me simplify it for you: If you want to discuss bigger vs smaller government then do so. If you have a problem with an issue of liberalism then discuss it. Not everyone is a conservative or a liberal. Also debating liberalism vs conservatism is useless as it is extremely broad and can mean many different things. Next time you decide to make a thread make it about a topic. If you're problem is expanding government use an example of it(National Healthcare, bailing out AIG and GM, etc.) and explain why you are against it.
Having problems with the fans site? Suggestions? Can't log in? Forgot your password? Want to be an editor and write opinion pieces? PM Me and I'll get it sorted out.

ddofans.com
Harlan
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:03:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:35:42 PM, comoncents wrote:
I am conservative= less government and back to constitutional justice.

Many are liberal= more government and no real conviction as whether or not to consider the constitution.

As far as following the american constitution, I don't see how you're stereotype really applies at all. Both parties tend to have instances of disregarding the constitution, but if anything I'd say that the "right" has more of a tendency to do so, i.e. disregarding rights (except for the second amendment, for which its usually the other way around) and starting a war with no declaration from congress.

Why do you view conservatives as "bad" for try to follow the set of rules laid out at the start of this country?

What, this isn't about viewing eachother as bad. That's not really relevant at all. You just made that up.

And as far as rules set out at the "start of this country," as said previously, this is not particular to liberals.

And the constitution is not meant to be a static document. It's specifically set up to be changed. It has developed, though, that it takes a very long time for any such change to be pushed through. Everything takes forever in our politics. We focus on elections for an entire year every four years.

Why do you insist on promoting unconstitutional run programs that just grow and are bankrupting America?
Things like: social welfare programs, education, public power, agriculture, public housing, urban renewal and all the other activities that can be better performed by lower levels of government or private institutions or by individuals.

Can you explain how those are unconstitutional?

"The root evil is that the government is engaged in activities in which it has no legitimate business. As long as the federal government acknowledges responsibility in a given social or economic field, its spending in that field cannot be substantially reduced... the only way to curtail spending substantially, is to eliminate the programs on which excess spending is consumed."

You're talking about things like education and welfare, for god's sake. How are those the "root evil?"
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:08:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:55:18 PM, comoncents wrote:
I understand what you are saying but i feel that you are not describing true conservatism.
Just what the media describes it as.

Comon, 'conservatism' isn't actually what you think it is. It isn't "small government" and "constitutional objectivity." If anything is as the media describes it, that is it.

What conservatism is, is simply preservation of the status quo - of what is. The idea behind conservatism can essentially be, "if it ain't broken, don't fix it."

In reality, its not "conservative vs. liberal." These two terms don't really go together in a truly official manner. Conservative is in contrast to progressive, while liberal is in contrast to authoritarian.

In essence, when you say "I believe in conservatism," you are saying that you believe in the older ways of doing things. In the US, the older way of doing things, usually exemplified by the Republicans, was classical liberalism. When you expound on "liberals," you're expounding on progressives, or more often, social liberalism.

But, when you say, "facking liberals," you're in reality actually attacking yourself, because what you believe is actually a brand of liberalism. It just isn't the same liberalism as, say, Democrats mostly believe.

Does this make sense? Do you get the difference?
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:14:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:50:54 PM, Volkov wrote:
Incorrect; a 'conservative' is nothing but someone who wishes to continue with the status quo, or is a reactionary. It is not a real ideology, per se.

I disagree. A conservative is some one who ,"Thus, for the American Conservative, there is no difficulty in identifying the day's overriding political challenge: it is to preserve and extend freedom. As he surveys the various attitudes and institutions and laws that currently prevail in America, many questions will occur to him, but the Conservative's first concern will always be: Are we maximizing freedom?"
-Barry Goldwater

What you are is probably a classical liberal, which is what the Republican Party was originally conceived as, and the ideology the Founding Fathers built the US on.


Than educate me on what a liberal truly is.

Incorrect, again. A liberal in the context that you mean is usually for proportional government, and for a 'living constitution', though will by all means uphold the tenets of the constitution, just as you would. The difference is interpretation.


Than why do "liberals keep expanding government.
Obama is a liberal and he is just spending to expand on programs that are unconstitutional.

You say that "The difference is interpretation" but when written it was simple. Not up for all of this interpretation. Just plan english.
The constitution is an instrument for limiting the functions of the government!

Why do you 'conservatives' believe in bankrupting and neutering the government?


They do not.
"neutering the government"
B/c when ever government gets involved, things get out of hand.
The spending increases, the taxes increase.
Things break, things get neglected.

I am not for no government, just limited government.
And a true conservative would be the same way.


Why do you view liberals as "bad" for trying to follow what they believe would make the country more akin to the rules laid out in its founding documents?


Some liberals are not bad. The ones that follow the constitution and still bring progressive ideas to the table with out involving a governmental way to pay for it.

Why be a 'conservative'?

B/c it makes the most sense.
America has tried it your way and failed.
Time to redirect, don't you think.

Why do 'conservatives' insist on promoting unconstitutional programs that just grow and bankrupt America? Like, you know, Iraq.


They do not.
A true conservative would not promote such a thing.


Why do you believe such things, most of which you're really stretching it with, are better done by lower levels of government, private institutions, or by individuals?

B/c they grow, and require more money. With more money comes more taxes and is stopping me from enjoying my life. For failed programs? When things are brought to a federal level everything seems to get to big. We need money for this and that. When things get huge things start to break and get over looked to the point where we pour money into something that does not work anymore.

Fact is, you can only justify what you believe because you believe it. Everything else to you is pointless and wrong, so why should anyone bother explaining to you what they believe when you simply won't accept it, and deride it as wrong? Give me one good reason.

No, the fact is that you and i hold different views of the others ideology.
I seem to think liberals are crazy people and you seem to think that conservatives are crazy people.

I think we need to learn about the true ideologies of both before we begin to understand each other.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:17:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:50:54 PM, Volkov wrote:
is probably a classical liberal, which is what the Republican Party was originally conceived as

Very wrong. The Republican Party was founded on Social Liberalism, mostly to promote tariffs (not classical liberalism) and to free the slaves.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:17:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:58:54 PM, johngriswald wrote:
At 12/27/2009 8:51:25 PM, comoncents wrote:
but it is extremely old and childish.

I spy a contradiction

LULZ

That is funny

Furthermore there is always a point to what I say. If you couldn't understand it let me simplify it for you: If you want to discuss bigger vs smaller government then do so. If you have a problem with an issue of liberalism then discuss it. Not everyone is a conservative or a liberal. Also debating liberalism vs conservatism is useless as it is extremely broad and can mean many different things. Next time you decide to make a thread make it about a topic. If you're problem is expanding government use an example of it(National Healthcare, bailing out AIG and GM, etc.) and explain why you are against it.

I think i get it from talking with V that it is to broad.

I understand but felt that if i were to specify the topics there would be 100 of them.
I just have to pick like one a week, if this does not work.
But than i run the risk of looking like that kelly guy, "kelly224/ http://www.debate.org...;
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:20:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:55:18 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 12/27/2009 8:43:51 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Let's all strawman each other.
The conservatives ditch the constitution when they feel like it. Some of them hold that Roe v. Wade wasn't decided right. Most conservatives support the unconstiutional banning of marijuana.
The liberals do the same with economic regulations and institutions.

Neither is really for or against "big government", though they might claim to be. When Clinton won (after 8 years of Reagan and 4 of Bush), he said that "The era of big government is over"...

I understand what you are saying but i feel that you are not describing true conservatism.
Just what the media describes it as.

You're funny. Jonathan Krohn (spell check) believes that conservatism is entirely about small government. Faux News believes that conservatism is all about small government. Talk radio believes that conservatism is all about small government. I don't know what kind of media you listen to.
The truth is exactly what I stated: that, when it comes to social issues, American conservatives are PRO big government police state. See: Drug Criminalization, Prostitution Criminalization, etc.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:25:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:20:31 PM, wjmelements wrote:
The truth is exactly what I stated: that, when it comes to social issues, American conservatives are PRO big government police state. See: Drug Criminalization, Prostitution Criminalization, etc.

I view American Conservatives as what they essentially are - social authoritarians. In some ways, they're even economic authoritarians. It's a blend of Republican classical liberalism with the religious right, which swooped in and took over and instituted this more authoritarian social policy.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:25:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:03:44 PM, Harlan wrote:
As far as following the american constitution, I don't see how you're stereotype really applies at all. Both parties tend to have instances of disregarding the constitution, but if anything I'd say that the "right" has more of a tendency to do so, i.e. disregarding rights (except for the second amendment, for which its usually the other way around) and starting a war with no declaration from congress.


But that is why i am trying to tackle ideology as the "parties" are both out of touch with these two terms.

And the constitution is not meant to be a static document. It's specifically set up to be changed. It has developed, though, that it takes a very long time for any such change to be pushed through. Everything takes forever in our politics. We focus on elections for an entire year every four years.

Than we should change it instead of not even considering it.

Can you explain how those are unconstitutional?


The constitution is an instrument for limiting the functions of the government, therefore expanding government to a federal limit would be against the constitution.


You're talking about things like education and welfare, for god's sake. How are those the "root evil?"

No the federal government getting involved is the root evil.
We spend so much more on education than ever before, yet our children seem to walk away less educated.
Since expanding the education dept. we seem to be wasting money on a bad investment.
We should allow the parents to be able to take control back and bring it to a state level.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:26:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:50:54 PM, Volkov wrote:
What you are is probably a classical liberal, which is what the Republican Party was originally conceived as

Nope. It was founded on protectionism.

"The Republican Party was founded on big government and economic intervention with roots in the economic platforms of Federalist icon Alexander Hamilton and Whig leader Henry Clay. Indeed, the term "New Deal" was coined in 1865 to characterize Lincoln and his Republican Party economic platform. Republicans became the "mercantile" party of big business, big government, external protection, centralized monetary control, strong restrictions on immigration, and aggressive foreign policy."[1]

[1] http://mises.org...
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:26:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I just think it's funny how Volkov is always trying to convince people that they're "classical Liberals" lol. Even if they are, that ideology is so far from modern liberalism that it's really irrelevant (and for a lot of people here, it isn't even true). Anyway, I agree with Leafrod on this one. Comoncents -- I don't even think you know what you are and you just recycle conservative jargon that you hear other people say. I also don't like when people say, "We have to stick to the constitution..."

The constitution was written by human beings (not gods) thus just because a "founding father" thought something to be best doesn't necessarily mean that it IS best (or relevant to today's times). Just because we have the Constitution doesn't mean that we should follow it blindly or accept it as some kind of sanctimonious doctrine. The Constitution can be amended for a reason and just as governments and ideologies have drastically changed in other countries over the years (i.e. from monarchies to democracies) so can we.

That being said, I am not in favor of implementing a lot of liberal policies. I believe that the government has no say in dictating anyone's personal life -- and that fact is abundantly clear to me so I am definitely socially liberal. As far as taxes go, I think they need to be severely decreased (there is A LOT of pork and unnecessary spending including on a lot of social programs). I do, however, believe in some government programs such as the FDA. I also favor a progressive tax system though because I think it's best for the economy (though it needs to be fixed as to alleviate pressure on the middle class).

While I don't believe in strict government regulation, I don't think that the market can "regulate itself" in some cases. That being said, I think "the government" should be A LOT more interactive; I think people neglect their duties as citizens by not participating enough as we should (which is what we fought for in the first place).
President of DDO
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:28:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:26:07 PM, Reasoning wrote:
"The Republican Party was founded on big government and economic intervention with roots in the economic platforms of Federalist icon Alexander Hamilton and Whig leader Henry Clay. Indeed, the term "New Deal" was coined in 1865 to characterize Lincoln and his Republican Party economic platform. Republicans became the "mercantile" party of big business, big government, external protection, centralized monetary control, strong restrictions on immigration, and aggressive foreign policy."[1]

[1] http://mises.org...

Good point, I didn't know that. However, the GOP is seen as more 'classically liberal' in most parts of its ideology, I believe anyways. I could be wrong, which wouldn't surprise me - my knowledge of the American party history is probably limited compared to other's.
johngriswald
Posts: 1,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:29:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:17:42 PM, comoncents wrote:
I understand but felt that if i were to specify the topics there would be 100 of them.
I just have to pick like one a week, if this does not work.

How about you pick one a day.

But than i run the risk of looking like that kelly guy

As long as you don't claim that the white man is getting trampled on by all the black men in power then I think you'll be fine.
Having problems with the fans site? Suggestions? Can't log in? Forgot your password? Want to be an editor and write opinion pieces? PM Me and I'll get it sorted out.

ddofans.com
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:30:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:08:39 PM, Volkov wrote:
But, when you say, "facking liberals," you're in reality actually attacking yourself, because what you believe is actually a brand of liberalism. It just isn't the same liberalism as, say, Democrats mostly believe.

Does this make sense? Do you get the difference?

I understand what you are saying and it does make sense.
But i am in support of the liberal movements from the past so in turn it seems to revert back to being a true conservative.

I believe in what our founders believed in and i would like to get back to that.
I also realize that at the time out founders were considered liberal, but in this day and age i do not think they are.

To believe in freedom and liberty was to be liberal in 1776, but in 2010 i would consider it conservative.
johngriswald
Posts: 1,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:30:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:26:47 PM, theLwerd wrote:
I just think it's funny how Volkov is always trying to convince people that they're "classical Liberals" lol.

2nded. Conservatism doesn't exist, we're just different types of liberals.
Having problems with the fans site? Suggestions? Can't log in? Forgot your password? Want to be an editor and write opinion pieces? PM Me and I'll get it sorted out.

ddofans.com
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:31:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:26:47 PM, theLwerd wrote:
I just think it's funny how Volkov is always trying to convince people that they're "classical Liberals" lol. Even if they are, that ideology is so far from modern liberalism that it's really irrelevant (and for a lot of people here, it isn't even true).

Hey, if everyone sees they're already taking in parts of liberalism, they're more inclined to listen. >.> Makes my job easier, heh heh heh.

And it is true, you know. Even though there is a pretty big gap between classical and modern liberalism, Western society is built upon liberalism as a whole. Liberal democracies, economic liberalism, liberal international relations theories, liberal individualist policies, liberal cultural, etc.

Vive la liberaux!
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:33:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:26:47 PM, theLwerd wrote:
I just think it's funny how Volkov is always trying to convince people that they're "classical Liberals" lol.

If only he himself was.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:34:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 9:20:31 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 12/27/2009 8:55:18 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 12/27/2009 8:43:51 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Let's all strawman each other.
The conservatives ditch the constitution when they feel like it. Some of them hold that Roe v. Wade wasn't decided right. Most conservatives support the unconstiutional banning of marijuana.
The liberals do the same with economic regulations and institutions.

Neither is really for or against "big government", though they might claim to be. When Clinton won (after 8 years of Reagan and 4 of Bush), he said that "The era of big government is over"...

I understand what you are saying but i feel that you are not describing true conservatism.
Just what the media describes it as.

You're funny. Jonathan Krohn (spell check) believes that conservatism is entirely about small government. Faux News believes that conservatism is all about small government. Talk radio believes that conservatism is all about small government. I don't know what kind of media you listen to.
I was referring to CNN, new york times, abc news.

The truth is exactly what I stated: that, when it comes to social issues, American conservatives are PRO big government police state. See: Drug Criminalization, Prostitution Criminalization, etc.

But i am not for that and neither were our founding fathers, who now i consider them to be conservatives.
Barry Goldwater, Ron Paul, both seem to be extremely conservative, yet believe differently.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:34:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I've noticed something about myself that's both humorous and ironic.

Whenever I heard a liberal talking on the radio or the television, I'd say something along the lines of: "Those d@mn liberals." Now, I do the same thing when I hear more conservatives discussing their policies. I feel as I've made a major switch in my political views on this site, and I'd like to especially thank Volkov (turning me more moderate) and Cody_Franklin (turning me more authoritarian). It's quite appreciated.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2009 9:35:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/27/2009 8:35:42 PM, comoncents wrote:
I am conservative= less government and back to constitutional justice.

Many are liberal= more government and no real conviction as whether or not to consider the constitution.


This seems like a false description of the two camps, many liberals would be for smaller Government and many conservatives would be for expanding it.

So why do you liberals believe in expanding government?


Certain liberals, some on the 'left wing', do rely on Government to solve certain issues... probably because logically only the Government can deal with certain concerns.

Why do you view conservatives as "bad" for try to follow the set of rules laid out at the start of this country?

Because liberals are often otherwise known as 'progressives', as in they support progress or rather change for the better. Of course what change constitutes an improvement is subjective but I don't think many liberals would render respect to the constitution purely because it's old, neither would many conservatives.


Why be a liberal?


Because it's nice to live in a society where you can apply for various jobs and be judged primarily on such factors as education or experience, it's nice that your gay son won't be forced to commit sucide. It's nice that you have the choice to go to a mosque on friday, or a synagouge on saturday or a church on sunday. It's nice to be allowed to pretend your a thetan, or declare that God is dead without being lynched, it nice to be able to read newspapers not printed by the Government. It's nice to be free... it's in your constitution, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Why do you insist on promoting unconstitutional run programs that just grow and are bankrupting America?
Things like: social welfare programs, education, public power, agriculture, public housing, urban renewal and all the other activities that can be better performed by lower levels of government or private institutions or by individuals.

Where do these lower levels of government get their money from? What are these private insitutuions providing social welfare programs that are superior to the states? If such things can be taken of the states hands by someone more competent I am sure that liberals would be delighted, but they wont be.


"The root evil is that the government is engaged in activities in which it has no legitimate business. As long as the federal government acknowledges responsibility in a given social or economic field, its spending in that field cannot be substantially reduced... the only way to curtail spending substantially, is to eliminate the programs on which excess spending is consumed."

The end result being social darwinism, which most liberals probably oppose!
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.