AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Which books? You obviously didn't read any of them. Or perhaps you could tell us the titles you are talking about?

Have you or her ever been to Wasila?
And if you havent, then how do you know what its like?

So you post a 2 year old article, and claim its still valid today?

EmperorNero wrote:

Let's not get bogged down with whether these changes have been for the better or detrimental, the question is whether they are liberal.
I am confused by your definition of 'conserving'. If you are making an argument to change the current situation, aren't you at that time making an argument for change? Even if that situation has existed before. And those who oppose you, aren't they defending the status quo, even if what they defend was just implemented a decade ago?

This is nonsensical. We use the terms 'Liberal' and 'Conservative' in a larger sense than whether or not one supports an individual issue; and passing a new law doesn't suddenly flip and make one a Liberal instead of a Conservative.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

EmperorNero wrote:

Let's not get bogged down with whether these changes have been for the better or detrimental, the question is whether they are liberal.
I am confused by your definition of 'conserving'. If you are making an argument to change the current situation, aren't you at that time making an argument for change? Even if that situation has existed before. And those who oppose you, aren't they defending the status quo, even if what they defend was just implemented a decade ago?

This is nonsensical. We use the terms 'Liberal' and 'Conservative' in a larger sense than whether or not one supports an individual issue; and passing a new law doesn't suddenly flip and make one a Liberal instead of a Conservative.

That's what the liberal-conservative dialectic is supposed to express; whether you want change or not on a particular issue. If you want a different policy implemented, then you are liberal. But once you get it, you want to maintain it, then you are conservative. You flip depending on whether what you want is change or the status quo.

As I said - you just make up terms and use them however you want. Nobody else in American politics defines the Liberal-Conservative axis this way.

Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

As I said - you just make up terms and use them however you want. Nobody else in American politics defines the Liberal-Conservative axis this way.

Cycloptichorn

What... that's like... an appeal to majority opinion?

This 'larger sense' isn't really defined in any meaningful way, except that it a priori declares the left to be liberal.

Well, if "liberal" and "conservative" are just names we happen to use as a convention, and not meaningful definitions of actual political opinions, then these terms don't conflict with the claim that modern "liberals" today largely represent a conservative movement.

You're correct that the terms themselves don't preclude what you are saying; but your argument is incorrect in its merits, as current Liberals are instead interested in furthering the causes of equality amongst all people - something which never has been nor ever will be a Conservative position.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

You're correct that the terms themselves don't preclude what you are saying; but your argument is incorrect in its merits, as current Liberals are instead interested in furthering the causes of equality amongst all people - something which never has been nor ever will be a Conservative position.

So liberalism is about egalitarianism?

Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis, "of freedom"[1]) is the belief in the importance of liberty and equality.[2][3] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but most liberals support such fundamental ideas as constitutions, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, capitalism, free trade, and the separation of church and state. These ideas are widely accepted, even by political groups that do not openly profess a liberal ideological orientation. Liberalism encompasses several intellectual trends and traditions, but the dominant variants are classical liberalism, which became popular in the 18th century, and social liberalism, which became popular in the 20th century.

You seem to be totally stuck on the fact that modern Liberalism in America generally pertains to Social Liberalism, whereas you seem to be caught up on the idea of Fiscal Liberalism, or the Laissez-Faire market system.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

You seem to be totally stuck on the fact that modern Liberalism in America generally pertains to Social Liberalism, whereas you seem to be caught up on the idea of Fiscal Liberalism, or the Laissez-Faire market system.

Then do you agree that modern liberals are socially but not economically liberal?

That depends on what definition you are using... using modern definitions, Leftists and Liberals are fiscally liberal.

C'mon, this is boring, get to whatever point you are looking to get at

Cycloptichorn