Defining Liberal?

[flacaltenn]

LOL, wasn't he a burglar who worked for Nixon during the Watergate scandal???

Yes! And it doesn't change the perfection of the quote one iota.

Never had a Liberal defend it yet.

Are you asserting that 'conservatives' don't propose to "pay off the debt with your money."?

Actually -- true Conservatives propose to "pay off the debt" by keeping the govt priorities and scope within the means of current revenue.. THAT -- is a neccessary PRErequisite to asking for more money..

 

[SniperFire]

haha thanks... I would say its not to a debt to others, but a creating a value of empathy rather than selfishness. Altruism is an evolutionary trait.

Don't confuse altruism with government bureaucracy... Once you get that part -- you'll get over being smug about being a "liberal"..

getting caught up in your vision of government rather than how we need to set up the foundations of society to create a just outcome is a problem...

That is code for using other people's money to pay the debt they have to their fellow man.

 

[Oddball]

haha thanks... I would say its not to a debt to others, but a creating a value of empathy rather than selfishness. Altruism is an evolutionary trait.

Don't confuse altruism with government bureaucracy... Once you get that part -- you'll get over being smug about being a "liberal"..

getting caught up in your vision of government rather than how we need to set up the foundations of society to create a just outcome is a problem...

Who is this "we" you speak of and who gets to determine what constitutes "a just outcome" and what is not?

 

[SniperFire]

Defining Liberal

'Where my Obama money at?'

 

[OKTexas]

haha thanks... I would say its not to a debt to others, but a creating a value of empathy rather than selfishness. Altruism is an evolutionary trait.

Don't confuse altruism with government bureaucracy... Once you get that part -- you'll get over being smug about being a "liberal"..

getting caught up in your vision of government rather than how we need to set up the foundations of society to create a just outcome is a problem...

Exactly who makes the decisions on this "set up", and who decides what is "just"?

Come on now, you've ignored my first question, you asked for input and you fail to respond, can you explain? Or are you the typical liberal who avoids answering questions that can't be answered with talking points?

 

[flacaltenn]

I've tried to come up with a list of things that defines me as a liberal - and hopefully encompasses the rest of us.... Let me know what you think!!

youtube.com/watch?v=oMowgU2-e_Y

Hey Welcome.. I actually made it thru the first 3 minutes of so of your "screed". I applaud you thinking out loud.. Takes guts to put that ordeal on display.. But I'm not really impressed with your attempt to just willynilly REDEFINE terms..

You call yourself a "left-wing liberal" and from what I heard -- you ARE unfortunately stuck with that. And it NEEDS a redefinition because it's a bastard child of an OLD political philosphy that doesn't exist anymore..

I'm a CLASSICAL liberal.. The kind that STARTED this country. So when I say that -- I don't NEED a YouTube video to define my distrust of govt authority and absolute concern for INDIVIDUAL rights and freedom.

Like I said in an earlier post.. Your attempt to ASSURE equal opportunity has almost NOTHING to do with the political process. You can't HELP the kid with the CrackWhore mom with my tax dollars. And your efforts to do so doesn't assure equal opportunities -- it tends to force EQUAL outcomes.. That's why I oppose you politically..

Nice try... Stick around USMB and see if your "definition" can survive some "peer review".

 

[lovableliberal]

I've tried to come up with a list of things that defines me as a liberal - and hopefully encompasses the rest of us.... Let me know what you think!!

youtube.com/watch?v=oMowgU2-e_Y

Hey Welcome.. I actually made it thru the first 3 minutes of so of your "screed". I applaud you thinking out loud.. Takes guts to put that ordeal on display.. But I'm not really impressed with your attempt to just willynilly REDEFINE terms..

You call yourself a "left-wing liberal" and from what I heard -- you ARE unfortunately stuck with that. And it NEEDS a redefinition because it's a bastard child of an OLD political philosphy that doesn't exist anymore..

I'm a CLASSICAL liberal.. The kind that STARTED this country. So when I say that -- I don't NEED a YouTube video to define my distrust of govt authority and absolute concern for INDIVIDUAL rights and freedom.

Like I said in an earlier post.. Your attempt to ASSURE equal opportunity has almost NOTHING to do with the political process. You can't HELP the kid with the CrackWhore mom with my tax dollars. And your efforts to do so doesn't assure equal opportunities -- it tends to force EQUAL outcomes.. That's why I oppose you politically..

Nice try... Stick around USMB and see if your "definition" can survive some "peer review".

Once again, there I am not for equal outcomes... And yes, there are MANY variables that can be treated to help produce a society that has less "crackwhore" moms and better communities for children to grow up in.

Classical liberals are on the top level, looking at how not to waste their money. Liberals have to work in the foundations - we have to see the kind of system that will better incentivize a more just outcome, rather than forcing one on unjust foundations.

I would look more toward John Rawls then I would John Locke. The classical liberals are based on the "state of nature" which is completely made up in their analysis. And Adam Smith's invisible hand is just an excuse for people to capture all the wealth in society and think its moral.

We have to be more invested in science, finding out WHY we have these cycles of poverty and the reasoning behind our behaviors.. THEN we can provide the solutions rather than covering them with money.

 

[PredFan]

I've tried to come up with a list of things that defines me as a liberal - and hopefully encompasses the rest of us.... Let me know what you think!!

youtube.com/watch?v=oMowgU2-e_Y

YOU came up with a list?

 

[lovableliberal]

Don't confuse altruism with government bureaucracy... Once you get that part -- you'll get over being smug about being a "liberal"..

getting caught up in your vision of government rather than how we need to set up the foundations of society to create a just outcome is a problem...

Who is this "we" you speak of and who gets to determine what constitutes "a just outcome" and what is not?

Don't confuse altruism with government bureaucracy... Once you get that part -- you'll get over being smug about being a "liberal"..

getting caught up in your vision of government rather than how we need to set up the foundations of society to create a just outcome is a problem...

Exactly who makes the decisions on this "set up", and who decides what is "just"?

Come on now, you've ignored my first question, you asked for input and you fail to respond, can you explain? Or are you the typical liberal who avoids answering questions that can't be answered with talking points?

You've both addressed something similar...

A just outcome is one that can be agreed upon in an unbiased position. Without knowing your status, sex, race, etc. Justice is one that can't be calculated within the special interests of a conscious society. We have to step outside and agree without our learned influences.

And, your right, altruism DOESN'T MEAN government bureaucracy. Altruism is simply the thought of working for others. Capitalism, and the free market, doesn't directly work to do that. We need an intermediary that combines the interests of the people, the efficiency of the market, and the integrity of our human values. Altruism, as I've said above, is an evolutionary trait seen in MANY social systems, especially the most complex. Going against our nature to acquire the material world is not a just outcome.

 

[lovableliberal]

I've tried to come up with a list of things that defines me as a liberal - and hopefully encompasses the rest of us.... Let me know what you think!!

youtube.com/watch?v=oMowgU2-e_Y

YOU came up with a list?

I am most influenced by philosopher John Rawls.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I wish LOLberals would stop tainitng liberalism. The fact that true liberals have had to resort to libertarian or classical liberalism due to LOLberal bastardization of this important political/social/economic philosophy is a fucking travesty.

 

[kaz]

I've tried to come up with a list of things that defines me as a liberal - and hopefully encompasses the rest of us.... Let me know what you think!!

youtube.com/watch?v=oMowgU2-e_Y

A liberal is someone who cares about other people and endlessly votes for people who don't

 

[Oddball]

getting caught up in your vision of government rather than how we need to set up the foundations of society to create a just outcome is a problem...

Who is this "we" you speak of and who gets to determine what constitutes "a just outcome" and what is not?

getting caught up in your vision of government rather than how we need to set up the foundations of society to create a just outcome is a problem...

Exactly who makes the decisions on this "set up", and who decides what is "just"?

Come on now, you've ignored my first question, you asked for input and you fail to respond, can you explain? Or are you the typical liberal who avoids answering questions that can't be answered with talking points?

You've both addressed something similar...

A just outcome is one that can be agreed upon in an unbiased position. Without knowing your status, sex, race, etc. Justice is one that can't be calculated within the special interests of a conscious society. We have to step outside and agree without our learned influences.

Wesley Mouch, is that you?...Could you be just a wee bit more vague and throw around a few more meaningless platitudes?

And, your right, altruism DOESN'T MEAN government bureaucracy. Altruism is simply the thought of working for others. Capitalism, and the free market, doesn't directly work to do that. We need an intermediary that combines the interests of the people, the efficiency of the market, and the integrity of our human values. Altruism, as I've said above, is an evolutionary trait seen in MANY social systems, especially the most complex. Going against our nature to acquire the material world is not a just outcome.

Altruism itself goes against human nature, as it is self-immolation.

And who the hell are you to claim that you yourself can determine what is a "just outcome" and what is not?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Imagine a world order in which liberalism is supreme . . . there is private property in the means of production. The working of the market is not hampered by government interference. There are no trade barriers; men can live and work where they want.

A liberal government is a contradictio in adjecto. Governments must be forced into adopting liberalism by the power of the unanimous opinion of the people; that they could voluntarily become liberal is not to be expected.

All modern political parties and all modern party ideologies originated as a reaction on the part of special group interests fighting for a privileged status against liberalism.


Ludwig von Mises

 

[Nosmo King]

Here is the best one:

"A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money."

-- G. Gordon Liddy

And the convicted felons seek shelter among the Conservatives who are all too willing to provide succor, so long as the ideology fits.

 

[Oddball]

Here is the best one:

"A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money."

-- G. Gordon Liddy

And the convicted felons seek shelter among the Conservatives who are all too willing to provide succor, so long as the ideology fits.

I didn't know that Bill Ayers was a conservative.

 

[Nosmo King]

Here is the best one:

"A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money."

-- G. Gordon Liddy

And the convicted felons seek shelter among the Conservatives who are all too willing to provide succor, so long as the ideology fits.

I didn't know that Bill Ayers was a conservative.

The only folks listening to and concerned with Bill ayers are the crazy, conspiracy driven fringe and, of course, Sarah Palin (although I think she is also a crazy conspiracy driven fringe character) G. Gordon, on the other hand, has a vibrant following on his propag...radio show and his followers all seem to be.....wait for it.... crazy conspiracy driven fringe Conservatives! Wow! I love it when a plan works!

 

[Oddball]

And the convicted felons seek shelter among the Conservatives who are all too willing to provide succor, so long as the ideology fits.

I didn't know that Bill Ayers was a conservative.

The only folks listening to and concerned with Bill ayers are the crazy, conspiracy driven fringe and, of course, Sarah Palin (although I think she is also a crazy conspiracy driven fringe character) G. Gordon, on the other hand, has a vibrant following on his propag...radio show and his followers all seem to be.....wait for it.... crazy conspiracy driven fringe Conservatives! Wow! I love it when a plan works!

Well, there's also the fact that Ayers a leftist...And that means he gets a pass.

But don't dare mention someone like Liddy, who, oh by the way, never killed anybody.

Nope...No double standard there!

 

[Nosmo King]

I didn't know that Bill Ayers was a conservative.

The only folks listening to and concerned with Bill ayers are the crazy, conspiracy driven fringe and, of course, Sarah Palin (although I think she is also a crazy conspiracy driven fringe character) G. Gordon, on the other hand, has a vibrant following on his propag...radio show and his followers all seem to be.....wait for it.... crazy conspiracy driven fringe Conservatives! Wow! I love it when a plan works!

Well, there's also the fact that Ayers a leftist...And that means he gets a pass.

But don't dare mention someone like Liddy, who, oh by the way, never killed anybody.

Nope...No double standard there!

If 'getting a pass' means living in relative obscurity, then Ayres got a pass. Until the conspiracy driven crazy Conservatives lifted his rock. On the other hand, if 'getting a pass' means celebrity as a Conservative talking head with a nationally syndicated radio show....

 

[flacaltenn]

I've tried to come up with a list of things that defines me as a liberal - and hopefully encompasses the rest of us.... Let me know what you think!!

youtube.com/watch?v=oMowgU2-e_Y

Hey Welcome.. I actually made it thru the first 3 minutes of so of your "screed". I applaud you thinking out loud.. Takes guts to put that ordeal on display.. But I'm not really impressed with your attempt to just willynilly REDEFINE terms..

You call yourself a "left-wing liberal" and from what I heard -- you ARE unfortunately stuck with that. And it NEEDS a redefinition because it's a bastard child of an OLD political philosphy that doesn't exist anymore..

I'm a CLASSICAL liberal.. The kind that STARTED this country. So when I say that -- I don't NEED a YouTube video to define my distrust of govt authority and absolute concern for INDIVIDUAL rights and freedom.

Like I said in an earlier post.. Your attempt to ASSURE equal opportunity has almost NOTHING to do with the political process. You can't HELP the kid with the CrackWhore mom with my tax dollars. And your efforts to do so doesn't assure equal opportunities -- it tends to force EQUAL outcomes.. That's why I oppose you politically..

Nice try... Stick around USMB and see if your "definition" can survive some "peer review".

Once again, there I am not for equal outcomes... And yes, there are MANY variables that can be treated to help produce a society that has less "crackwhore" moms and better communities for children to grow up in.

Classical liberals are on the top level, looking at how not to waste their money. Liberals have to work in the foundations - we have to see the kind of system that will better incentivize a more just outcome, rather than forcing one on unjust foundations.

I would look more toward John Rawls then I would John Locke. The classical liberals are based on the "state of nature" which is completely made up in their analysis. And Adam Smith's invisible hand is just an excuse for people to capture all the wealth in society and think its moral.

We have to be more invested in science, finding out WHY we have these cycles of poverty and the reasoning behind our behaviors.. THEN we can provide the solutions rather than covering them with money.

Now before you bastardize another definition like "science" -- which I'm also extremely fond of -- lets' just stipulate that better outcomes ONLY get fixed by extensive One on One human interactions. Can't be fixed by checks written from 2000 miles away, can't be fixed by psychiatric drug adminstration, can't be fixed by propaganda or watching Maury Povitch.

You want better outcomes?? Let's make welfare contigient on keeping your kids IN SCHOOL til they graduate.. Then the CrackWhore mom has to sign up for the program by signing report cards and getting little Jesus a library card...

THAT'S more altruistic than anything we're currently doing...