Discussion in 'Politics' started by manifold, Jan 24, 2010.
So says a friend of mine.
What say you?
I've also heard it said that contemporary liberals are like liberatarians (or classical liberals) with a messiah complex.
Based on the views of many contemporary liberals that post here, I'd say it's a combination of guilt and a messiah complex.
As a traditional conservative, I don't know much about either. As far as I know liberals always "want something for nothing" and always have some class of people as "more equal than others".
Libertarians (Ron Paul?) are your basic class of bullshitter, like Obama, who talks a much better game than he actually has.
Ever hear of Stassen? Harold Stassen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (perpetual non-candidate)
How about Nader? another non-candidate candidate
How about Ross Perot? He came the closest to a real 3rd party, would have done better with a real VP.
Libertarians are like Greens, Druids, Consumers, and other non-entities...until proven otherwise. I think Tea-Baggers have a better shot.
Libertarians generally support less government.
Liberals generally never met a social program they didnt like.
I don't see hwo the two are comparable except that both are followed by idiots.
If you take away the support of social programs, Liberals are very close to Libertarians in terms of political beliefs. That's the only major difference between the two that I've seen.
They agree on Abortion, Drugs, Civil Liberties, etc.
Liberals generally want to restrict gun rights. Libertarians generally want to expand them.
Liberals want to control business practices, libertarians generally want to eliminate control.
But other than being totally wrong your post was spot on.
Name the so-called "liberal" who is openly for ending the idiotic "war" on (some) drugs and/or outright abolition of civil liberty crushing agencies like the BATF...And what of the "civil liberty" of keeping 100% of my productive earnings, to spend, save or give away as I see fit?
Likewise, the LP position on abortion is that it's a state issue, not the any-old-abortion-on-demand position of the DNC.
Fabian socialist "liberals" are as big of vapid poseurs on those issues, as are the alleged "conservatives" are on profligate spending on the socialistic welfare state.
Nope....Not a dadgummed dime's worth of difference.
I'll toss in historical ignorance, arrogance, self-righteousness, and the PANGie (People Are No Good) snob attitude that nobody (outside of themselves, of course) is as smart, compassionate, restrained, fair and just as are they.
Other than that, they're pretty much the same.
Libertarians are the rotisserie league of politics. They pretend to have a political party, they pretend to have candidates, they pretend they're competing in elections.
Mani a libertarian's aim is to repeal many laws and regulations already on the books, while most liberals' aim is to continue ADDING them.
Today's liberal is nothing even close to a libertarian except perhaps that they see eye to eye on certain types of social issues.
But even THERE, there's a difference in how to go about handling them.
Libertarians would typically prefer to leave social and moral issues to the states to decide, while liberals seem to want the federal government to legislate it.
If you're referring to a classical liberal, then you pretty close to correct. Classical liberals are libertarians by virtue of philosophical and ideological positions. But then, today's liberal is nothing even CLOSE to a classical liberal, now is he/she?
Separate names with a comma.