Liberal or Conservative?

The problem is that definition is still too linear, too static.

Recognize my thought here.

Human societies are living. Healthy living things are never static. If they're static they tend toward decadence and rot. Consequently, a healthy society requires some liberal thought with the caveat that too much change (liberal change I guess?) is akin to cancer.

Rap

Ambrose Bierce



and



Rap

David=Wanker

Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others.

-- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

EDIT: Ah, i see Rap beat me to the punch . . .

Liberal = deviant, errant, inconsistent with a designated criterion.

The essence of liberalism is deviation from SOMETHING,
a partial rejection of something, inconsistent with its original meaning.
For instance, if a boy is sent by his mother to the store with a
shopping list of 10 items and he decides not to buy 3 of them,
he is being LIBERAL, as to that list, because he DEVIATED from it
by acting inconsistently with his mother's original meaning.
If he applies some of the money to the purchase of candy of his choice,
instead of his mother's choice of food, he is being liberal,
in distorting the original intendment of the shopping list.

When I spell fonetically, I am being LIBERAL as to paradigmatic spelling.
The innermost essence of liberalism is INCONSISTENCY with some designated criterion.

The Founders of this Republic were liberal to the extent
that thay DEVIATED from and rejected the Divine Right of English Kings.



Conservative means keeping rigidly unbending in the enforcement of a rule,
or law, or agreement or some paradigm; accordingly, conservatives conserve that rule
or agreement or criterion (e.g., a common style of dress, or style of art, or interpretation of a contract).

Liberal means deviating from some rule, or law,
or agreement or some paradigm, and not taking it too seriously.
A man is LIBERAL to the extent that he is deviant, errant, or inconsistent with some rule.

For instance,
if men are playing poker n one rakes in the pot
alleging that he has a flush, when he has 4 clubs and a spade,
and when challenged on this behavior, he declares
the liberal motto: " hay, that 's CLOSE ENUF; don 't be
too technical; don 't split hairs; just don t be a ball buster, OK ?
I had a fight with my cousin, yesterday I got a flat tire,
I belong to a minority group and my left foot stinks, so gimme a break n deal the cards."

Hence, he advocates the position that logic shoud be SUBORDINATED to emotion
and that thay shoud take a LIBERAL VU of the rules of poker because his sob story OUTRANKS
the technical rules requiring 5 cards of 1 suit for a flush.

Liberal = UNFAITHFUL to a concept or to an agreement.

"Conservative" means ORTHODOX.
"Conservative" means non-deviant.
"Liberal" means deviant and inconsistent.
Without having deviated from something no one can be liberal
because the essence of liberalism is turning away from something.

For instance, if u attend a formal banquet in a black tuxedo
with red sneakers, u deviate from the paradigm of formal dress,
thereby taking a liberal vu thereof. If u attend it in your underwear,
then u take a MORE LIBERAL interpretation of that paradigm.
If u attend it naked, then u apply a radical interpretation
( "from the root" ) of that paradigm.

Whether liberalism is good or bad
depends upon WHAT the liberal is veering away from.
Like when Boris Yeltsin veered away from communism, that was a GOOD thing.
When Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess flew to Scotland in 1941, he was a liberal Nazi,
because he was deviating from Hitler’s war policy.

Liberalism includes ANY kind of deviation,
in any direction of 360 degrees of arc + up n down.

There is no logical semantic constriction on liberalism
that it can only exist in the direction of collectivist-authoritarianism a/k/a socialism.
Liberalism can be in the opposite direction or in any direction,
so long as it is deviant.

Barry Goldwater was a conservative BECAUSE his philosophy did NOT deviate
from the pro-freedom philosophy of the Founders of this Republic as set forth in the Constitution.

Barry Goldwater was a conservative BECAUSE his philosophy was rigidly faithful
to the US Constitution (which is the criterion).





David

I don't recognize that word.





David

An interesting piece or realpolitik aside from waterdude--but not really a cogent answer.

If I were to do a waterdude counter. I'd point out that conservative is strict class-ism that would include slavery, indentured servitude, religious and social intolerance, and illiteracy except for the aristocratic. IOW medieval serfdom.

Would you like inquisition with that, Sir Waterdude?

Sorry but the world was never quite that binary.

Rap

Closer to an answer to my question, and I really like the Barry Goldwater (AuH2O) example of the dichotomy of the definitions.

But to great extent strict conservatism--read adherence to orthodoxy, is unhealthy, just as is the opposite. There is a happy medium, somewhere.

Look, the US is a better nation because of the civil war. Conservatives of the time (pro-slavery) used Jefferson's word to rationalize succession and adopted a Constitution that was almost word for word identical to the US Constitution.

The other Conservatives of the time (the Federalists) used the same words of Jefferson and the same Constitution to say "no you can't go."

Hundreds of thousands of liberals died as a result fighting for 'Conservative' (read orthodoxy). I call warriors liberals in this case, because war at its most basic unorthodox.

Other actions of deviance then is suffrage, prohibition and its repeal, manifest destiny (frontiers are unorthodox), religious freedom (now that is radical even today--see post on Cain's latest gaffe).

Consequently this is not a orthodox country and there is no room for strict conservatives.

This is one of the problems I have with linearity of such definitions.

Rap

Liberals know the difference between "their" and "there", and between "bloods" and "blood".

A hint: writing like ignorant trailer trash doesn't help your message.

he recently admitted that he makes typos on purpose to get a rise out of his enemies -- typical trollish behavior...

I admit that I am a conservative.


A conservative wouldn't have taken the bait that contrex took hook line and sinker.

A conservative would have sent a private message pointing out the mistake(s) and then offer to help correct the mistake(s).

And the behavior his bait lures in?

Nothing trollish about contrex...

Everything is, ultimately, binary

The greyness so many of us perceive is most often a result of our lack of focus, but sometimes it's a product of our reluctance to establish limitations by which we don't care to be bound.

But the binary nature is ultimately only in hindsight, unless you're Cassandra, and then no one will believe your prediction.



Rap