Definitions needed - define LIBERAL (in US political spectrum)

[LaDexter]

Liberal = a person who believes the US Constitution is really "just a guideline" like the "Pirate's Code." Laws and spending and size/scope of government... they are all just insignificant to whatever makes the liberal emotional. If the parroting is about CO2, for example, the liberal doesn't ask questions, the liberal simply supports the concept of spending money to "fight the problem." And everyone who isn't liberal is really awful... and worthy of discrimination. Liberals are incapable of seeing people in government as kleptocrats, and don't really care if they are kleptocrats, as long as 6 cents on the dollar goes to the "cause."


That's mine - post your's...

 

[rightwinger]

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

JFK Sept 14, 1960

 

[LaDexter]

Good - a JFK definition - keep 'em coming

 

[deltex1]

Liberals are magical thinkers...love will conquer all.

 

[PurpleOwl]

Liberal used to mean the pro big business, anti government intervention party, it still does in most of the world, but after the civil rights era Americans began using the term to mean "socially liberal" which has led to confusion ever since.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Generally speaking in the USA, you can't define Liberal without defining Conservative. Whatever they mean in an academic sense, in the US political system they're pretty much party identifiers, i.e., Conservative=GOP and Liberal=DNC. You can debate that to death, but walk up to an average voter and that's the definition they'll give you.

With that in mind, I tend to think about the two in terms of positions.

On Foreign policy, Liberals are alliance builders that attempt to act through diplomacy and coalition action. Conservatives tend to want to deal from a position of Military strength using unilateral action.

On Economic policy, Conservatives are more laissez faire and want to be hands off as much as possible while Liberals tend to want to use government to look out for consumer rights, workers rights, and environmental protection.

When it comes to domestic policy, Liberals tend to want to use taxpayer funding to support efforts for the common good through government action while Conservatives tend to use taxpayer funding through private industry partners as much as possible by privatization of service.

In social policy, Liberals tend to be in favor of the individual's right above all and using the Government to ensure that right while Conservatives tend to see the Government as the guardian of community culture and will use legislative and executive action to legalize desirable behavior and criminalize undesirable behavior as determined by the majority.

That's a bit vague at points, but that's my definition. Where it gets tough is when you agree with some parts and not others you get into variants on both groups.

Then you have the AltRight who are just assholes. Don't be an asshole.

 

[BULLDOG]

Liberal used to mean the pro big business, anti government intervention party, it still does in most of the world, but after the civil rights era Americans began using the term to mean "socially liberal" which has led to confusion ever since.

It's only confusing to right wingers.

 

[Pogo]

Liberal = a person who believes the US Constitution is really "just a guideline" like the "Pirate's Code." Laws and spending and size/scope of government... they are all just insignificant to whatever makes the liberal emotional. If the parroting is about CO2, for example, the liberal doesn't ask questions, the liberal simply supports the concept of spending money to "fight the problem." And everyone who isn't liberal is really awful... and worthy of discrimination. Liberals are incapable of seeing people in government as kleptocrats, and don't really care if they are kleptocrats, as long as 6 cents on the dollar goes to the "cause."


That's mine - post your's...

Not even close I'm afraid.

Liberals wrote the Constitution, so ............. there's that. Essentially it means that political power derives from the consent of the governed, i.e. "We the People" --- as opposed to a separate authoritarian ruling class, as existed when we invented this country --- the First and Second "Estates" (nobility and clergy) who had run things up to that time. It means there are no lords and serfs as such.

It's got nothing to do with 'asking questions' or 'parroting' anything. It's a political philosophy,not a personal style, which is what those are.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Liberal used to mean the pro big business, anti government intervention party, it still does in most of the world, but after the civil rights era Americans began using the term to mean "socially liberal" which has led to confusion ever since.

Some of that confusion comes from the parties and pundits themselves. For example: Limbaugh. He claims to be a Conservative champion but he's more of a GOP cheerleader. That mistakenly leads people even inside the GOP to think that all GOP elected officials are Conservative. They're technically not. Similarly Limbaugh labels all Democrats as liberals. That isn't actually true either.

That means both labels have essentially lost their meaning as anything other than political identifiers to the average voter.

I actually see that as very very dangerous. Once words lose their meaning you lose the ability to debate and investigate. That means that whatever stance the GOP takes, in the eyes of the average voter that will be seen as a Conservative course of action. That also means whatever the Democrats do, that will be seen as a Liberal course of action. That removes and discussion of merit of action or intent and reduces the whole game to a binary GOP/DNC choice. And that's bad.

 

[rightwinger]

 

[Pogo]

Liberal used to mean the pro big business, anti government intervention party, it still does in most of the world, but after the civil rights era Americans began using the term to mean "socially liberal" which has led to confusion ever since.

Some of that confusion comes from the parties and pundits themselves. For example: Limbaugh. He claims to be a Conservative champion but he's more of a GOP cheerleader. That mistakenly leads people even inside the GOP to think that all GOP elected officials are Conservative. They're technically not. Similarly Limbaugh labels all Democrats as liberals. That isn't actually true either.

That means both labels have essentially lost their meaning as anything other than political identifiers to the average voter.

I actually see that as very very dangerous. Once words lose their meaning you lose the ability to debate and investigate. That means that whatever stance the GOP takes, in the eyes of the average voter that will be seen as a Conservative course of action. That also means whatever the Democrats do, that will be seen as a Liberal course of action. That removes and discussion of merit of action or intent and reduces the whole game to a binary GOP/DNC choice. And that's bad.

We've got wags right on this board mired in the mythology that "Liberal" means "Democrat" means "Left", as if three different things from each other are all synonyms, and of course the vice versa with conservative/Republican/right.

"Liberal" does not mean "left" (or any particular political party) but it was conflated to that false synonymity by the Joe McCarthy/Red Scare Republicans who at the time were desperate for attention and deliberately associated "Liberal" with "left", merely so they could get a dig in on the other political party. George H.W. Bush repeated the same mythology and hammered it in his 1988 campaign against Dukakis as if "Liberal" were some kind of dirty word rather than the principle on which this country is actually founded.

I like to make the distinction with the example: to declare "all men are created equal" is Liberalism; to then try to make it happen artificially via quota legislation, is leftism. Interestiingly Affirmative Action was launched as it happens by Republicans, whether you count it from Nixon's Philadelphia Plan or from the post-Civil War "forty acres and a mule" of Reconstruction ---- which just demonstrates that these dynamics operate independent of political party labels.

Methinks too many armchair pundits seem to believe political parties exist to represent some sort of lofty ideology. They don't. They just exist to get people into power, whatever it takes.