What is "limited government?"

[newpolitics]

Does anyone actually know what "limited government" means, specifically?

Considering it is an idea so central to conservative political philosophy, I find it curious that i have never found it to be rigorously defined. It is a vague notion that makes every conservative feel all warm inside, but I have never heard it given any detail beyond this term.

How do you go about determining when you reached a "limited government?" In other words, how big is it, actually? Is it defined by how many employees are in the government, and if so, would be this be defined as a percentage of the population? What is the percentage? Is it determined budgetary considerations, perhaps as a percentage of GDP? Considering the fact that our population is growing, does the definition for limited government grow proportionally as population increases? I want specific numbers.

It seems like a meaningless piece of rhetoric, unless someone can help me out here.

 

[OKTexas]

The concept of limited government disappeared about 150 years ago. The definition of limited government in the US is the Constitution. Read it, then compare what is says with the leviathan we have now. There are specific enumerated powers in the Constitution, that the federal government is supposed restrain it self to. So the short answer, limited government appears to have been a fantasy our founders believed in, but have been dispelled by subsequent generations.

 

[occupied]

It's not meaningless, it's code for people wanting to divest themselves of social responsibility.

 

[OKTexas]

It's not meaningless, it's code for people wanting to divest themselves of social responsibility.

And your the perfect example as to how the commies fail to understand that the social responsibilities were left to the STATES by the Constitution.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Does anyone actually know what "limited government" means, specifically?

Considering it is an idea so central to conservative political philosophy, I find it curious that i have never found it to be rigorously defined. It is a vague notion that makes every conservative feel all warm inside, but I have never heard it given any detail beyond this term.

How do you go about determining when you reached a "limited government?" In other words, how big is it, actually? Is it defined by how many employees are in the government, and if so, would be this be defined as a percentage of the population? What is the percentage? Is it determined budgetary considerations, perhaps as a percentage of GDP? Considering the fact that our population is growing, does the definition for limited government grow proportionally as population increases? I want specific numbers.

It seems like a meaningless piece of rhetoric, unless someone can help me out here.

For conservatives it is indeed a meaningless piece of rhetoric, and a considerable source for rightist hypocrisy.

Limited government concerns the utmost protection of civil liberties afforded citizens, where the state may not preempt or limit individual liberty absent a reasonable, compelling governmental interest.

Conflict arises when the state attempts to restrict or deny us our civil liberties for subjective, capricious reasons – such as violating privacy rights with regard to abortion, violating due process rights with regard to immigration, or violating equal protection rights with regard to same-sex couples’ access to marriage; hence the hypocrisy of conservatives.

Limited government means that your fellow Americans might say or do things you find offensive or inappropriate, but you may not enlist the authority of the state to prohibit the protected speech or actions of those fellow Americans.

Limited government does not empower property owners to abuse their employees, sell unsafe goods or services, or cause harm to the environment, as most on the right will have you believe.

 

[occupied]

It's not meaningless, it's code for people wanting to divest themselves of social responsibility.

And your the perfect example as to how the commies fail to understand that the social responsibilities were left to the STATES by the Constitution.

I don't care about your twisted constitutional theories, it's what you guys mean when you say that, If all of the social welfare programs were entirely state operations you would despise them too.

 

[Darkwind]

It's not meaningless, it's code for people wanting to divest themselves of social responsibility.

I reject YOUR definition of social responsibility for My definition.

 

[OKTexas]

It's not meaningless, it's code for people wanting to divest themselves of social responsibility.

And your the perfect example as to how the commies fail to understand that the social responsibilities were left to the STATES by the Constitution.

I don't care about your twisted constitutional theories, it's what you guys mean when you say that, If all of the social welfare programs were entirely state operations you would despise them too.

Maybe, but at least they would be Constitutional and I would have the ability to go to a State that had policies I agreed with. That is the intent of federalism, each State could do what they thought best for their citizens, without federal intervention. That's why the commies hate the Constitution, it says they aren't supposed to have absolute control.

 

[newpolitics]

The concept of limited government disappeared about 150 years ago. The definition of limited government in the US is the Constitution. Read it, then compare what is says with the leviathan we have now. There are specific enumerated powers in the Constitution, that the federal government is supposed restrain it self to. So the short answer, limited government appears to have been a fantasy our founders believed in, but have been dispelled by subsequent generations.

Good answer, thank you. However, when I hear it used in rhetoric today, it seems to be in reference to the actual size of the government. "Limited' originally was never meant to refer to the actual size of government, but the breadth of its power, qualitatively. Conservatives seem to have equated "limited" with "quantity" and ran with it, especially after Reagan. Yet, neither Reagan, nor anyone after, has enumerated exactly what this quantitative value of the size of government should be. I point this out, because I believe it is meaningless, and has been used as a deceptive tactic simply to criticize the opposing position, without being able to define their own prescriptions. Or rather, it seems to be a central dogma for conservatives to rally around and to contrast themselves from liberals, yet, there still remains an undefined term with "small government."

Perhaps, I am the dumbass who is confusing limited with "small," but rhetorically, they seem to be used as an equivalnece. So, I guess what I am really asking is, how "small" is a "small government?" If conservatives wish to run on this precept, it must be rigorously defined.

 

[OKTexas]

The concept of limited government disappeared about 150 years ago. The definition of limited government in the US is the Constitution. Read it, then compare what is says with the leviathan we have now. There are specific enumerated powers in the Constitution, that the federal government is supposed restrain it self to. So the short answer, limited government appears to have been a fantasy our founders believed in, but have been dispelled by subsequent generations.

Good answer, thank you. However, when I hear it used in rhetoric today, it seems to be in reference to the actual size of the government. "Limited' originally was never meant to refer to the actual size of government, but the breadth of its power, qualitatively. Conservatives seem to have equated "limited" with "quantity" and ran with it, especially after Reagan. Yet, neither Reagan, nor anyone after, has enumerated exactly what this quantitative value of the size of government should be. I point this out, because I believe it is meaningless, and has been used as a deceptive tactic simply to criticize the opposing position, without being able to define their own prescriptions. This dishonesty I wish to address.

The federal government should be no smaller and no larger than required to carry out its responsibilities as described in the Constitution. I don't mean as interpreted either, it should be as written or amended, end of story. Many would have you to believe that there are implied powers contained in the Constitution, but the first congress and the original states should have put that to rest when they passed the 9th and 10th amendments which restricted the powers to only those enumerated, unfortunately they failed to anticipate modern lawyers who claim nothing EVER means what it says.

 

[newpolitics]

It's not meaningless, it's code for people wanting to divest themselves of social responsibility.

For some, this appears to be true.

 

[bucs90]

That term is held very dear to the right wingers.

What does it mean?

Easy. It depends who says it. EACH and every right winger has one definition of it, but varies by person: Whatever THEY personally dont need from the government...the govt shouldnt offer. If THEY can get by without X service, then so can you, and they'll be damned if their tax dollar will pay for it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Does anyone actually know what "limited government" means, specifically?

Considering it is an idea so central to conservative political philosophy, I find it curious that i have never found it to be rigorously defined. It is a vague notion that makes every conservative feel all warm inside, but I have never heard it given any detail beyond this term.

How do you go about determining when you reached a "limited government?" In other words, how big is it, actually? Is it defined by how many employees are in the government, and if so, would be this be defined as a percentage of the population? What is the percentage? Is it determined budgetary considerations, perhaps as a percentage of GDP? Considering the fact that our population is growing, does the definition for limited government grow proportionally as population increases? I want specific numbers.

It seems like a meaningless piece of rhetoric, unless someone can help me out here.

You never found it rigorously defined? Is that because you have your head so far up your ass you can't see anything? The defnition is so well known, and so rigorous, that it actually has its own Wiki entry. It has nothing to do with money, or population, it is all about limiting the government so that it doesn't have the power to lock people up without cause or recourse.

Maybe, if you understood that concept, we wouldn't have people begging the OAS to help free American citizens held without charges.

http://reason.com/24-7/2012/12/11/family-of-indefinitely-detained-american
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_government

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Does anyone actually know what "limited government" means, specifically?

Considering it is an idea so central to conservative political philosophy, I find it curious that i have never found it to be rigorously defined. It is a vague notion that makes every conservative feel all warm inside, but I have never heard it given any detail beyond this term.

How do you go about determining when you reached a "limited government?" In other words, how big is it, actually? Is it defined by how many employees are in the government, and if so, would be this be defined as a percentage of the population? What is the percentage? Is it determined budgetary considerations, perhaps as a percentage of GDP? Considering the fact that our population is growing, does the definition for limited government grow proportionally as population increases? I want specific numbers.

It seems like a meaningless piece of rhetoric, unless someone can help me out here.

For conservatives it is indeed a meaningless piece of rhetoric, and a considerable source for rightist hypocrisy.

Limited government concerns the utmost protection of civil liberties afforded citizens, where the state may not preempt or limit individual liberty absent a reasonable, compelling governmental interest.

Conflict arises when the state attempts to restrict or deny us our civil liberties for subjective, capricious reasons – such as violating privacy rights with regard to abortion, violating due process rights with regard to immigration, or violating equal protection rights with regard to same-sex couples’ access to marriage; hence the hypocrisy of conservatives.

Limited government means that your fellow Americans might say or do things you find offensive or inappropriate, but you may not enlist the authority of the state to prohibit the protected speech or actions of those fellow Americans.

Limited government does not empower property owners to abuse their employees, sell unsafe goods or services, or cause harm to the environment, as most on the right will have you believe.

Limited government is a liberal concept, not a conservative one. If you had enough brains to blow your nose without a video explaining the process you might understand that.

 

[bucs90]

To a conservative, limited govt is simply getting rid of whatever he personally doesn't like or thinks HE personally doesn't need. Screw everyone else.

 

[OKTexas]

Did you notice the lefties never mention the Constitution, it's always their opinion. Which they know if compared to the text of the document their opinions don't hold much water.

 

[newpolitics]

Does anyone actually know what "limited government" means, specifically?

Considering it is an idea so central to conservative political philosophy, I find it curious that i have never found it to be rigorously defined. It is a vague notion that makes every conservative feel all warm inside, but I have never heard it given any detail beyond this term.

How do you go about determining when you reached a "limited government?" In other words, how big is it, actually? Is it defined by how many employees are in the government, and if so, would be this be defined as a percentage of the population? What is the percentage? Is it determined budgetary considerations, perhaps as a percentage of GDP? Considering the fact that our population is growing, does the definition for limited government grow proportionally as population increases? I want specific numbers.

It seems like a meaningless piece of rhetoric, unless someone can help me out here.

You never found it rigorously defined? Is that because you have your head so far up your ass you can't see anything? The defnition is so well known, and so rigorous, that it actually has its own Wiki entry. It has nothing to do with money, or population, it is all about limiting the government so that it doesn't have the power to lock people up without cause or recourse.

Maybe, if you understood that concept, we wouldn't have people begging the OAS to help free American citizens held without charges.

Family of Indefinitely Detained American Seeks International Help - Reason 24/7 : Reason.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_government

What is the quantitative measurement of a limited government? Maybe if you actually read through the thread, you wouldn't be so aloof.

I have already read through the wiki entry on limited government, and what is clear, is that it has a qualitative definition, not a quantitative one. However, sometime between the inception of our country and now, the term has come to include a qualitative definition, and I want to know what that quantity is. It is the conservative mantra that we need a "smaller government." I assume that it is modern conservatives, after Reagan, who have conflated the terms "limited" and "small." I am not so concerned with how limited government was originally defined, although that is helpful to know, but how it is defined and referred to today, as having a quantitative aspect, at least rhetorically.

 

[newpolitics]

Does anyone actually know what "limited government" means, specifically?

Considering it is an idea so central to conservative political philosophy, I find it curious that i have never found it to be rigorously defined. It is a vague notion that makes every conservative feel all warm inside, but I have never heard it given any detail beyond this term.

How do you go about determining when you reached a "limited government?" In other words, how big is it, actually? Is it defined by how many employees are in the government, and if so, would be this be defined as a percentage of the population? What is the percentage? Is it determined budgetary considerations, perhaps as a percentage of GDP? Considering the fact that our population is growing, does the definition for limited government grow proportionally as population increases? I want specific numbers.

It seems like a meaningless piece of rhetoric, unless someone can help me out here.

For conservatives it is indeed a meaningless piece of rhetoric, and a considerable source for rightist hypocrisy.

Limited government concerns the utmost protection of civil liberties afforded citizens, where the state may not preempt or limit individual liberty absent a reasonable, compelling governmental interest.

Conflict arises when the state attempts to restrict or deny us our civil liberties for subjective, capricious reasons – such as violating privacy rights with regard to abortion, violating due process rights with regard to immigration, or violating equal protection rights with regard to same-sex couples’ access to marriage; hence the hypocrisy of conservatives.

Limited government means that your fellow Americans might say or do things you find offensive or inappropriate, but you may not enlist the authority of the state to prohibit the protected speech or actions of those fellow Americans.

Limited government does not empower property owners to abuse their employees, sell unsafe goods or services, or cause harm to the environment, as most on the right will have you believe.

Limited government is a liberal concept, not a conservative one. If you had enough brains to blow your nose without a video explaining the process you might understand that.

200 year ago... it was a liberal concept. Let's stick to today, since I am discussing application.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Does anyone actually know what "limited government" means, specifically?

Considering it is an idea so central to conservative political philosophy, I find it curious that i have never found it to be rigorously defined. It is a vague notion that makes every conservative feel all warm inside, but I have never heard it given any detail beyond this term.

How do you go about determining when you reached a "limited government?" In other words, how big is it, actually? Is it defined by how many employees are in the government, and if so, would be this be defined as a percentage of the population? What is the percentage? Is it determined budgetary considerations, perhaps as a percentage of GDP? Considering the fact that our population is growing, does the definition for limited government grow proportionally as population increases? I want specific numbers.

It seems like a meaningless piece of rhetoric, unless someone can help me out here.

You never found it rigorously defined? Is that because you have your head so far up your ass you can't see anything? The defnition is so well known, and so rigorous, that it actually has its own Wiki entry. It has nothing to do with money, or population, it is all about limiting the government so that it doesn't have the power to lock people up without cause or recourse.

Maybe, if you understood that concept, we wouldn't have people begging the OAS to help free American citizens held without charges.

Family of Indefinitely Detained American Seeks International Help - Reason 24/7 : Reason.com

What is the quantitative measurement of a limited government? Maybe if you actually read through the thread, you wouldn't be so aloof.

I have already read through the wiki entry on limited government, and what is clear, is that it has a qualitative definition, not a quantitative one. However, sometime between the inception of our country and now, the term has come to include a qualitative definition, and I want to know what that quantity is. It is the conservative mantra that we need a "smaller government." I assume that it is modern conservatives, after Reagan, who have conflated the terms "limited" and "small." I am not so concerned with how limited government was originally defined, although that is helpful to know, but how it is defined and referred to today, as having a quantitative aspect, at least rhetorically.

Do you have a problem using the English language? There are two types of governments in the world, tyranny and limited. Do you need a quantitative measurement of tyrannies before you can grasp the concept of not wanting to live under one?

It is idiots that insist that government is about doing things for people that insist that government be quantified. They do this because they believe that government has its own money, and that it exist to protect people from their own stupidity. The rest of us just want to limit your power to interfere with our lives, which is, and always will be, about quality.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

For conservatives it is indeed a meaningless piece of rhetoric, and a considerable source for rightist hypocrisy.

Limited government concerns the utmost protection of civil liberties afforded citizens, where the state may not preempt or limit individual liberty absent a reasonable, compelling governmental interest.

Conflict arises when the state attempts to restrict or deny us our civil liberties for subjective, capricious reasons – such as violating privacy rights with regard to abortion, violating due process rights with regard to immigration, or violating equal protection rights with regard to same-sex couples’ access to marriage; hence the hypocrisy of conservatives.

Limited government means that your fellow Americans might say or do things you find offensive or inappropriate, but you may not enlist the authority of the state to prohibit the protected speech or actions of those fellow Americans.

Limited government does not empower property owners to abuse their employees, sell unsafe goods or services, or cause harm to the environment, as most on the right will have you believe.

Limited government is a liberal concept, not a conservative one. If you had enough brains to blow your nose without a video explaining the process you might understand that.

200 year ago... it was a liberal concept. Let's stick to today, since I am discussing application.

It is still a liberal concept. The fact that people calling themselves liberals want to build a tyrannical government does not change that dynamic, anymore than the fact that people who call themselves conservative now are arguing in favor of it proves it is a conservative concept.