(Old)Conservative/Liberal ~ (New)_________

Liberal and NEO-conservative....

The original question is quite interesting; thanks BONEDIGGER! The dictionary definitions of these words are perhaps somewhat illustrative. (from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2004 edition)

Conservative: adj, Disposed to maintaining existing views, conditions, or institutions.

Liberal: adj, Generous, Bountiful, Not narrow in opinion or judgement, Tolerant

That's what the dictionary tells us... but we have become used to a connotation of these labels which has become laden with the baggage of accumulated (and often erroneous) meaning .

True conservatism is a steady hand and a resistance to quick change; it tends to preserve that which is good and true and keep it intact for the next generation. It is a cautious approach, an unwillingness to step out too far beyond the known. The downside is that conservatism can sometimes be unable to cope with rapid change.

True liberalism is the social conscience, the sense within ourselves that we ought to try to do what is right. Liberalism can see the wrongs in society and works to correct them. It is a courageous approach, an unwillingness to continue the perpetration of wrongs. The downside is that liberalism can sometimes seek to reach too far, beyond what is possible

Hopefully we can all see that the wisest course will always be a delicate balancing act between these two forces, both of which are good and true and contain great power. Neither can truly function well without the other, they are the yin and the yang of politics if you will.

But currently in the United States of America the forces of true conservatism have been hijacked by vandals bearing the banner of Neo-Conservatism... neocons for short. They've attempted to take over the entire political system and are trying to smear both true conservatives and liberals alike with epithets and slander. Now here on this board we've got this person who goes by the handle MIDAS (... interesting this ... styling oneself after a mythical king who was so greedy that he detroyed everything he loved for gold...) who is perpetrating this neocon agenda by trying to put us all into neat little boxes based on his skewed questionaire. Well... anybody can make a questionaire. so Midas, why don't you try this one on for size. (Yes = Neo-Conservative No = Liberal)

1. I believe in "My Country Right or Wrong" because to be patriotic is to be supportive of the president, no matter what. If my president has to lie to the people to get them to follow his lead, then I applaud his courage and skill to tell a bald-faced lie and get away with it. Go Prez!

2. I beleive that any person who says publicly that our government has perpetrated atrocities or that our elected officials have lied to the public is a traitor and should be tried for treason, regardless of whether or not the allegations happen to be true. People who say they wish to make America a better place by fighting wrongs are the worst kind of traitors because they hide their hatred of America behind a cloak of respectability. Those kind of traitors should be tortured before being hanged.

3. I believe that "Might Makes Right" and that the fact that we have the world's most powerful military gives us the right to do as we please anywhere in the world. It is simply Manifest Destiny that global empire shall belong to us. Anybody who doesn't go along can have a neutron bomb with their breakfast. Just let us know.

4. I believe that the concept of "sovereign nations" is a joke that we go along with to humor foreign dignitaries... but that really there is only one sovereign nation, and it is US. I could hardly care less about the opinion of other countries about what we're doing, they simply don't matter.

5. I believe that the rights of the wealthy outweigh the rights of the poor, that wealth is an indication of divine approval, and that the wealthy have the right to exploit the poor without government intervention.

6. I believe that the so-called rights of workers to collective bargaining and unionization is fundamentally wrong, and that the only proper economic function of government is to allow the unfettered freedom of Adam Smith's "invisible hand". If a worker accepts a job that pays so little that he can't even feed his family, that's his problem not ours.

7. I believe that is was a mistake to ever give blacks or women the right to vote, we should have stuck with the tried-and-true traditions of the founding fathers in this regard.

8. I believe that government by and for the largest corporations that provide campaign funding is the best and proper way to show respect where it is due.

9. I believe that "liberty" is meant only for the wealthy, and that the wealthy can restrict the liberty of any and all less fortunates as they see fit in order to increase their personal wealth and power. Fairness and equality are simply words that have no meaning in the modern world.

10. I believe that all taxes are wrong if I have to pay them, yet I wish to have good roads, good schools, a proud military, and to squander 90% of the world's resources for my own benefit and comfort without regard for the needs or aspirations of others. In other words, I want everything, yet I am willing to pay for nothing.

11. I believe that Al Gore is a big fat idiot and that Global Warming is a conspiracy created in liberal colleges and designed to destroy the ecopnomic dominnce of America. There is no such thing as "Global Warming" and his film AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH was bought and paid for by commie sympathizers who just want to gain power through fear.

12. I believe that John Kerry is just a sore loser, and that the undoubtable fact that there was massive election fraud on the part of republican election workers which gave the 2004 election to my old frat buddy George H.W. Bush is just the price we pay in a republic for good governance. Sometimes you gotta bend the rules a little to get what you want you know?

13. I believe that the Almighty Dollar is more important than any silly concepts of right or wrong, and that if we must invade Iran, or Syria, or China, or any other place in the world to support the power of the dollar and protect the interests of corporate America, then it is not only our right but our solemn duty to do so.

14. Liberty is not for subhumans. I believe that homosexuals, liberals, women, blacks, hippies, muslims, buddhists, hispanics, and any other weirdos that think they can change the world are all subhuman animals and therefore have no rights, They should all be rounded up and placed in concentration camps to be lobotomized and re-educated before being shipped overseas and chained to machines in sweat-shops to make my favourite brand of golf shirt.

15. I believe that the theory of evolution is a damned lie and that it has been created by the devil to lure the faithful away from God's plan for them. The only real a nd absolutely literal truth is that written in the Holy Bible and it is up to scientists to quit messing around and see the truth. But don't get too literal about the words of Jesus when he says stuff like "Love your enemy", or "Do good unto those who smite you", or Do unto others as you would be done by", because he was just speaking metaphorically and we can't ACTUALLY be expected to live that way.

16. And finally, I believe that I am right and you are wrong and that God is on my side because the whole bunch of you are all going to burn in hell for all eternity while I am going to sit by the right hand of God and have a good long laugh at your expense.

 

I know I've found my moving buddy. ~Bo Peep

Thanks Tom

 

Well, I'm glad to see this topic returning to its original thoughts. Thanks for that, Tom... BUT... your test is flawed. Your initial synopsis of conservative and liberal was good, but then you essentially rescinded it with your test.

Good stuff up there, Tom.

The test, however, only makes room for Neo-Con or Liberal. If I take your test, then I must say that I am a liberal, but I know that my feelings on government, and I'm sure others here would attest put me in the Conservative end of the spectrum. I could, if I were so inclined, quite easily make a reverse version of your test stating all of the extreme liberal viewpoints providing only for the options of Radical or Conservative, and most every liberal minded person who takes the test would end up with results that must mean they are really Conservatives. Both sides have their extremes that are objectionable to the masses. You cannot fairly expose the extremes of one side and state that if you object to those extremes then you must be in the moderate opinion of the other side. Midas did the same thing in his test. It's all propoganda and just like damned stupid campaign ads, nobody wants to say "this is what I stand for and why it's right" instead of "this is everything that's wrong with the other guy"

In a nut shell, myself, Conservative, fine with that label. Why? I believe in smaller government. I don't believe the government should have as much power as it does. I do not believe that our founding fathers would approve of what has become of the government today. It has become an inefficient monster that is reaching into so many directions at one time. It does not believe in the precept that America can take care of herself. There has become this idea that the government needs to take a role in all aspects of American life. I blame both sides for this, but while I consider both sides guilty, I consider myself Conservative because I want to see a return to smaller, less intrusive government.

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. - Thomas Jefferson

 

Lets just call the parties what the politicians do... the rights and the wrongs, y'all can battle it out to see who is who.
but really I would use the labels... the ones who love their country and want low taxes, brutalized criminals, no abortions, loaded guns, the patriot act, fiscal responsibility for themselves, etc.... and the ones who love their country and want more social programs, no death penalty, enviornmentally friendly everything, abortions on demand, no handguns, sit-ins, treehugs for all, and etc. Not that either is better or worse, just that we make our choices and join a party that closely resembles our beliefs then attack other Americans for not being right. We need to remember we are all still Americans

 

Quick and short:
either, unprogressive / unsparing
or, die hard / easy come, easy go

I''m glad that we have you back in the hills of South Dakota Bones. Welcome home!:hug:

 

Just remember CHECK-M-All, if you believe in smaller government, less taxes, and/or fiscal responsibility, many will consider you "extreme".

Like you, I have no issue admitting that I lean right and I am conservative...especially on fiscal issues, tax policy, and national defense. As for social issues like abortion and other private matters...many will find that I am not a "bible thumper" or anything near that.

When I think about it...I believe in many of the core values of the Libertian Party except for their views on national defense and fighting islamic terrorism.

As far as I see...it is people on the "left" side that try to dance around what they believe and they try to convince us that their beliefs are all "middle of the road"...when it is no way near the middle. Hence the problem and the political debate at hand.

 

these are, in NO WAY why I see you as extreme...but you are extreme in countless other ways...but some people pride themselves on their extremist ways..like ann coulter whom your some what antagonist, black or white, one way or the other, factional, no middle ground rhetoric reminds me of.

 

Thanks Hoss, it was a bit dicey on the trip back. How about (Conservative --Traditionalist) and (Liberal -- Negotialist)?

Take Care,
Ben

Here is a picture of me (tie) and a couple of buddies I went to school with and came to the little wake after the funeral.

 

Conserberal?

Sorry... I should have apologized in advance. Yes of course my questionaire was deeply flawed and was jokingly offered merely as a ridicule and lampoon of Midas' questionaire. I stand by the initial synopsis, (thanks for your comment!) but reject the very concept of labels because, as you noted, all labels are flawed and no label can hope to encompass the breadth of feeling and opinion on disparate matters. For myself, I would be considered deeply conservative on some things, while liberally progressive on others. There may even be certain points on which I agree with Midas, though I reject utterly both his demeanor and conclusions. I do believe there are many values from the past which have served well and must be "conserved" in order to "form a more perfect union" and to keep America strong and intact and a leader in the world. But I also believe that in many ways we have lost our way... we have become complacent about large scale problems, too ready to restrict the rights of those with whom we disagree, and we have become so self-indulgently infantile that we now expect every creature comfort to be handed to us as our due. "Bread and Circuses" I think it was called shortly before Rome fell. Whever happened to the vaunted American Spirit of facing adversity with a smile? Now we demand our leaders tell us lies because the truth is simply too difficult to bear. It did not used to be that way!

There is no label that encompasses the feelings and beliefs that I hold, and I do not choose to try to create one. I feel that most Americans probably are in a similar situation in that they do not quite fit into the little labeled boxes to fit the preconceptions of pundits.

Liberty is about thinking for yourself. By letting others think for you, you give up that cherished liberty that many thousands have fought and died to protect.

 

I suppose the words "clueless" and "naive" come to mind.

 

Tom,

Thank you and Mr. Webster for these definitions. You guys reminded me exactly why I am proud to be Liberal and also why I can't stomach the thought of ever being a Conservative. These definitions where the ones that I was weened on from birth and made me what I am today.

I am a natural born helper when I see a need. I give generously to those less fortunate than I because I know that it makes me a better person for doing so. I look at the broad picture when considering a situation and reserve judgement until I am faced with overwhelming evidence in one direction or the other. But my greatest strength is my ability to be tolerant. How could I be anything other than Liberal?

When I think of Conservatives, I think the phrase "disposed to maintaining existing views" and personal wealth and the conditions and institutions that keep them wealthy even if their wealth was generated through slavery, exploitation of the poor, or unfair labor and corrupt business practices. Keeping the gold seems to be a justification for any course of action. Keeping the status quo might benefit those people that want to maintain their wealthy life-style, and who wouldn't want to, but what price is this minority of privilaged elites willing to exact on society to maintain it's dominance? The earth's environment? The freedom of the press? The stability of other nations? When has the chase for the almighty dollar gone too far?

I would make a pretty poor Conservative to be sure if these definitions actually defined the mindset of the Right. Like any label though, they are incapable of encompassing the entire group. I have very wealthy friends that are more Liberal than myself and friends with considerably less financial means that are rock-solid Conservatives. Conservatives are more than a narrow strip of wealthy individuals and Liberals are much more than socially conscious do-gooders. I may have been raised with a set of definitions that did or didn't have real meaning but I thank God I was open minded enough to see beyond the stereotypes and look at people for who they really are instead of the label they have been given.

 

People with great wealth have a moral obligation to help those less fortunate. Liberals want to make it a legal obligation as well, easing their conscience for the act by presuming that they must be ill-gotten gains for there is no other way wealth could have been amassed. I would make a pretty poor liberal because I'm very uncomfortable using the power of the state to force others to dispose of their property in what I would consider a socially conscious manner. What's the old saying? -- "Two wrongs don't make a right."

 

Easy. Conservatives (particularly of the Evangelical Christian variety) give, in absolute dollars and per capita, more to charity than any other group in America. Conservatives, if we accept that general aversion to quick change - but not to change per se - is a valid definition of conservatism, would reserve judgment until the need for change is proven. As for tolerance, well, it depends on your definition of it. I'm reasonably sure yours and mine would be different. Better be careful Moen, or you might find you'll have to pull the red lever (er, ... push the red button on the touch screen) at the next election.

 

Hey bones, you had better keep your eye on the guy in the middle. Looks like he is trying to lift your wallet!

 

You're kind of all over the board here KLJ. I hope that you are not implying that Conservative Evangelical Christians are, dare I say it,:yawn: Tolerant.

In a very broad sense I think of Conservatives as either wealthy elites or fundamentalist bible thumping hicks, you know the NASCAR variety. I know this is a broad generaization and encompasses less than all those that call themselves true Conservatives but I'm happy to with the net I've cast.

I also don't believe that there are alternative definitions of tolerance. You either are or you aren't. It's not like you get to exclude certain categories and then call yourself tolerant. This reminds me of Clinton's attempt to redefine the meaning of "is" or Scooter Libby not actually lying, just "misremembering".

You forget, I'm from Illinois, there is only one person that anyone should bother voting for in '08. My decision is going to be easy and blue in years counting up to two. Oops! Got a little Seuss-likel there.

 

You really had me going, with this one. For some reason it just don't add up when viewed in total.

Other than a very high oppinion of yourself, do you have any other endearing traits, that we should be made aware of at this time?
Actually I'm not trying to start any fight, but only pointing out the seeming hypocrisy in your statements. Feel free to feel want ever way you want, but don't tell us about it this way. PLease.:bow:

 

It is not nearly as hypocritic if you actually use the entire sentence instead of just the last half of it-"I may have been raised with a set of definitions that did or didn't have real meaning but..."

Anything cut in half and taken out of context is going to lose most if not all of it's originial meaning...don't ya think?

 

Aside from the well publicized contributions from the Hollywood set, many of the wealthy people in this country make large contributions to disaster victims & the poor. Some of the most outstanding efforts I've seen in the past few years have come from our sports stars. We often complain about their astronomical salaries, but many have been very generous with both their time & money. It isn't just the wealthy either. In my community our churches & civic groups seem very aware of the people around us and again, are generous with their time & money. I believe mandatory redistribution will stifle these efforts by both the wealthy & middle class.