Might the public benefit from an addition to the mainstream political spectrum ideology of liberal VS conserva

Question

tive. Lets go back to the original meanings of terminologies (as i understand them, corrections are welcomed. civil corrections.) A liberal is someone who believes the aim in politics aught be to increase the liberty (freedom, a concept worthy of volumes of discussion) among the masses. How liberal you were was a measure of how radical your suggestions for change were. Conservatism was meant to be a check for this, to point out how certain radical changes would have negative consequences. They were the rationalists. The idea was that liberals and conservatives worked together with a common goal in mind; civil liberty. There's a third element, though. I think what we call "moderate" today should be replaced with what we call "conservative." The third element is counter to the "liberal" element, the idea that our society should take on more authoritarian aspects. It's interesting how most liberals and conservatives mutually feel like they are fighting against some powerful overbearing

Answer 1

Since the liberal, or Rockefeller, wing of the Republican party basically squashed the conservative, or Goldwater, wing; and the radical left of the 1960's became socially acceptable and their illiberal views swept under the rug of the Democratic party, the terms don't make much sense any more. They're decent names but weighed down with so much associated disinformation, it would be best just to do away with it all and start afresh.

Answer 2

there has no longer yet been a move nationwide to type a third party which could face as a lot as both present day party so maximum folk finally end up vote casting for a less than excellent candidate as far as what they matter on. BTW, if someone is calling you a liberal and putting forward they are conservative, properly, they are not. they are merely spouting what they have heard on the radio w/o honestly awareness what they have suggested lots of the time. again on course (upload second lol), if there develop right into a celebration to type that carried no longer some thing yet conservative beliefs, the republican party might want to end to exist in important numbers. the conservative candidate very last 3 hundred and sixty 5 days develop into Palin and he or she wasn't the coolest billing. all and sundry else chosen by technique of mccain and also you'll have considered a 20% distinction in BHO's want interior the classic vote.

Answer 3

I think what you are describing is rather Utopian. I have never known of any point in history where liberals and conservatives "worked together" as a common theme. They have always been at opposition since the very beginning.



I think you may have a point though about terminology. The original meaning of liberal was really what libertarian is now today. Classical liberals (Jefferson, Locke, etc.) wanted as little government interference in life as possible. We have now seen a reversal. The people who call for MORE government control are now called liberals, and it is "conservatives" who support limited government and maximum personal freedom. I think the right to snatch back the term 'liberal' and remake it to what it was.

Answer 4

Conservatism =

1. resistance to change

2. reverence for tradition and distrust of human reason

3. rejection of use of government to improve the human condition. Ambivalence regarding government activity for other purposes

4. preference for individual freedom but willingness to limit freedom to maintian traditional values

5. antiegalitarianism=distrust of human nature



Liberals =

1. tendency to favor change that improves the human condition

2. faith in human reason

3. willingnes to use government to improve the human condition

4. preference for individual freedom but ambivalience about economic freedom

5. greater optimism about human nature than conservatives.

[Contemporary Political Ideologies: A Comparative Analysis 13th ed. Lyman Sargent 2006 ISBN.0-534-60241-x]



With this being said, you can see that Liberals prefer to make changes that they see will make things better for all Americans while creating greater freedom for all people rather than just the wealthy.

Conservatives oppose this and yes, should act as a buffer to slow any change to prevent hasty change that may cause problems that cannot be reversed.

But in modern politics, it hasn't become about considering the consequences of change, it has become about opposing anthing a liberal says, and denouncing it as unreasonable. This is actualy a neoconservative believe and what neocons have changed conservatives into.

Wit that being said, the modern conservative movement, with exception of libertarians and paleocons(which are denounce as libertines by traditional cons and the religious right), have become a set of self-conflicting ideologies in order to paint liberals s big government fascists or socialists, while trying to maintain their protradtional moral value beliefs.



example : conservative claim to be for less taxes and less government, but want abortion ban, and stronger penalties for drug users, meanwhile they claim liberals, who want to allow people to make their own decisions on abortion and their own decisions regarding if their child is exposed to religion in schools, want big government.

Abortion ban = more enforcement cost = more taxes

that sounds like promoting big government to me, but conseravtives claim they don't promote big government.



the very hallmark of a conservative is the will to maintain law and order. How do you maintain law and order with a smaller government?



The hallmark of a liberal is the view that individual freedom(within reason) trumps all other concerns in society.