What is a liberal?

[ThoughtCrimes]

Recently interested in politics and trying to understand what a liberal is?

It seems their primary concerns are:
1. Protecting the following groups... african-americans, women, LGBT, Latinos, Native Americans, Muslims, disabled.
2. Keeping abortion rights for women.
3. Limiting access to guns.
4. Increase taxes on the wealthy.
5. Having open borders.
6. Secular, limit religious influence of politics.

Questions:
a. Why are liberals not interested in protecting all people that struggle, for example Vietnamese or Chinese that are struggling?
b. Don't liberals realize when they start defining groups based on race or religion those groups will eventually have elevated status? In other words if you are not of those groups eventually you will be considered an outsider?
c. Do liberals believe in open borders? That if everyone from the world began moving here it would be the best thing for the national economy and citizens?

Actually, it seems you wish to attack fictitious stereotypes, OR that you are parroting those who do! No one is fooled by your dirt kicking or introductory first line!

Those 7 groups were defined by Johathan Haidt, who is a left leaning professor. What groups from the list are missing?

Hey, don't ask me! You're the one repeating the thoughts of others because you have none of your own! Drop your fucking shield and express YOUR OWN THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS!
BTW, welcome to the board!

 

[TNHarley]

Recently interested in politics and trying to understand what a liberal is?

It seems their primary concerns are:
1. Protecting the following groups... african-americans, women, LGBT, Latinos, Native Americans, Muslims, disabled.
2. Keeping abortion rights for women.
3. Limiting access to guns.
4. Increase taxes on the wealthy.
5. Having open borders.
6. Secular, limit religious influence of politics.

Questions:
a. Why are liberals not interested in protecting all people that struggle, for example Vietnamese or Chinese that are struggling?
b. Don't liberals realize when they start defining groups based on race or religion those groups will eventually have elevated status? In other words if you are not of those groups eventually you will be considered an outsider?
c. Do liberals believe in open borders? That if everyone from the world began moving here it would be the best thing for the national economy and citizens?

Actually, it seems you wish to attack fictitious stereotypes, OR that you are parroting those who do! No one is fooled by your dirt kicking or introductory first line!

Those 7 groups were defined by Johathan Haidt, who is a left leaning professor. What groups from the list are missing?

Hey, don't ask me! You're the one repeating the thoughts of others because you have none of your own! Drop your fucking shield and express YOUR OWN THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS!
BTW, welcome to the board!

Any rational person would come to those conclusions.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Are you talking about real liberals or hippy liberals?

What's the difference in beliefs between the two?

Real liberals value individual liberty, private property limited govt etc
Hippy liberals are not like that

I have not heard the term "hippy liberal". Both Sanders and Clinton were in support for private property. Is the "hippy liberal" a small faction of the democratic party?

The term I favor is "authoritarian leftist". The uber-conformist snowflakes running around with spittle flying from their mouths all in a froth over microaggressions and safe spaces are in a completely different territory than the more libertarian infused liberals. Instead of "don't sweat the small stuff", it is now "get in people's face over anything and everything" and instead of "do your own thing" it is now "march in lockstep or we will go medieval on your sorry ass".

 

[regent]

Both liberalism and conservatism start with some core beliefs, To implement the core beliefs they use those things about them, such as government, people, money and so on. Many mistake the means to implement the beliefs as part of the ideology i.e. the size of government. One of the core beliefs is found in many, many posters posts.

 

[TheDude]

Today's liberal values, no lie:

1. Reduce students to the lowest common denominator, whereby the result is communication breakdown, as we don't expect "citizens" to speak fucking English. In other terms, the capable are left behind.

2.Give equal time to gayness in such things as sex education and TV, for purposes of inclusion. We're supposed to believe homosexuality and heterosexuality are equals.

3. Men were intended to marry, have kids and use the women's bathroom.

4. Eliminate prayer, the pledge, the anthem and the flag. Really, eliminate all things American traditionalism, because the true intent is global communism under the label of socialism. Look around you, I'm not wrong.

5. Projection. BLM is a prime example. Black culture is in disarray, but they project blame on everyone but themselves. Ironically, it's in the liberal's best interests that people are dumb, foolish, weak and easily displace responsibility.

6. Thought police. If you don't think like them you're dragged through the mud economically, socially and any other means at their disposal. These people are very fucking nasty. It starts with Hollywood, where if conservative you may as well look for a career elsewhere.

7. Entitlements. Entitlements is just another way to introduce communism. I'm not saying we shouldn't help those truly in need.

8. Hypocrisy. This isn't exclusive to liberals. They just may as well have wrote the book.

Read this: Doesn't matter who wrote the "recipe", it tells me a lot. The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals

 

[The Irish Ram]

What is a liberal? Constantly offended....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Recently interested in politics and trying to understand what a liberal is?

It seems their primary concerns are:
1. Protecting the following groups... african-americans, women, LGBT, Latinos, Native Americans, Muslims, disabled.
2. Keeping abortion rights for women.
3. Limiting access to guns.
4. Increase taxes on the wealthy.
5. Having open borders.
6. Secular, limit religious influence of politics.

Questions:
a. Why are liberals not interested in protecting all people that struggle, for example Vietnamese or Chinese that are struggling?
b. Don't liberals realize when they start defining groups based on race or religion those groups will eventually have elevated status? In other words if you are not of those groups eventually you will be considered an outsider?
c. Do liberals believe in open borders? That if everyone from the world began moving here it would be the best thing for the national economy and citizens?

Next time you take a dump? Before you flush take a look in the porcelain throne.....there's your answer.

 

[peter samperos]

These terms have changed in meaning throughout the history of the past 300 years.

Liberal used to mean someone who did not believe in the absolute divine right of kings.

Liberals were those who believed in more liberty for the people through elected legislators.

John Locke was a liberal. So were the Founding Freemasons of the US Declaration Of Independence and the Constitution.

But then Liberal began to represent those who wanted more and more legislation liberally applied to try to solve all of society's problems, like Nancy Pelosi, Hillary and Bill Clinton, Harry Reid, and Chuck Schumer. We really should call these people "activists" rather than liberals because in many cases like their anti-gun and anti-2nd-Amendment views they are not liberal they are communist.

So the term has gotten sullied by misuse.

Same is true of the term "conservative." It used to mean someone who wanted to conserve the power of the king rather than liberally allow power to the elected legislatures and parliaments.

Now conservative means more tax cuts for the rich and more oil drilling everywhere, less welfare legislation like OASDI, Medicare, Medicaid, ACA, etc. and pro-war and pro-military-buildup like "W" Bush -- a classic "conservative" and a moron.

It is as if a drunken man, upon falling off his horse, immediately remounts and falls off the other side (famous French historical expression).

Thanks for the information. I've read a bit about John Locke. Locke's labor theory of property: "A person’s wealth should be what he or she creates with their own labor and enterprise, not by insider dealing or special privilege."

It's not unexpected how the parties have morphed over the years. What's difficult to understand is what both major parties in the US represent now. I guess the answer is they are ever changing. What seems to be constant is the ever growing hyper partisanship. WWII brought people together and to some extent the cold war. Since then the divide has continued to grow, not only in the populus but in washington. Identifying specifically what makes one party hate the other so much, well it's tough to see.

 

[peter samperos]

I thought a liberal was someone who feels uniquely qualified, due to being an intellectual elite, to redistribute other folk's income in an effort to further enslave the poor.

Good point that many liberals seem to believe in wealth distribution. Books from writers like Thomas Piketty seem to be making the idea popular among liberals. IMHO taxing the rich would not correct the problems of underemployment nor the lack of high paying jobs.

RE-distribution of wealth is an economic issue, not just a liberal issue.

Wealth is generally a MIS-allocation of resources. How to correct this misallocation is the economic problem which all university and grad school texts and courses address.

University and grad school level economics deals with 3 classic problems:

1 - what to produce

2 - how to produce it

3 - how to distribute it.

You armchair politicians who did not go to college or did not take any econ there or did not pay attention need to grasp the bigger picture.

 

[peter samperos]

I thought a liberal was someone who feels uniquely qualified, due to being an intellectual elite, to redistribute other folk's income in an effort to further enslave the poor.

Good point that many liberals seem to believe in wealth distribution. Books from writers like Thomas Piketty seem to be making the idea popular among liberals. IMHO taxing the rich would not correct the problems of underemployment nor the lack of high paying jobs.

RE-distribution of wealth is an economic issue, not just a liberal issue.

Wealth is generally a MIS-allocation of resources. How to correct this misallocation is the economic problem which all university and grad school texts and courses address.

University and grad school level economics deals with 3 classic problems:

1 - what to produce

2 - how to produce it

3 - how to distribute it.

You armchair politicians who did not go to college or did not take any econ there or did not pay attention need to grasp the bigger picture.

Great post, thanks. That's what I figured "that most politicians did not take any econ". When over 75% of congress is made up of lawyers where will the representation come to understand how to manage fiat currency, or to inspire and support innovation. I've read where none of our current politicians or economic advisors understand MMT (modern monitary theory).

 

[peter samperos]

Recently interested in politics and trying to understand what a liberal is?

It seems their primary concerns are:
1. Protecting the following groups... african-americans, women, LGBT, Latinos, Native Americans, Muslims, disabled.
2. Keeping abortion rights for women.
3. Limiting access to guns.
4. Increase taxes on the wealthy.
5. Having open borders.
6. Secular, limit religious influence of politics.

Questions:
a. Why are liberals not interested in protecting all people that struggle, for example Vietnamese or Chinese that are struggling?
b. Don't liberals realize when they start defining groups based on race or religion those groups will eventually have elevated status? In other words if you are not of those groups eventually you will be considered an outsider?
c. Do liberals believe in open borders? That if everyone from the world began moving here it would be the best thing for the national economy and citizens?

Actually, it seems you wish to attack fictitious stereotypes, OR that you are parroting those who do! No one is fooled by your dirt kicking or introductory first line!

Those 7 groups were defined by Johathan Haidt, who is a left leaning professor. What groups from the list are missing?

Hey, don't ask me! You're the one repeating the thoughts of others because you have none of your own! Drop your fucking shield and express YOUR OWN THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS!
BTW, welcome to the board!

Both liberalism and conservatism start with some core beliefs, To implement the core beliefs they use those things about them, such as government, people, money and so on. Many mistake the means to implement the beliefs as part of the ideology i.e. the size of government. One of the core beliefs is found in many, many posters posts.

What are those core beliefs? Equal opportunity or Equal outcome for all?

 

[peter samperos]

Today's liberal values, no lie:

1. Reduce students to the lowest common denominator, whereby the result is communication breakdown, as we don't expect "citizens" to speak fucking English. In other terms, the capable are left behind.

2.Give equal time to gayness in such things as sex education and TV, for purposes of inclusion. We're supposed to believe homosexuality and heterosexuality are equals.

3. Men were intended to marry, have kids and use the women's bathroom.

4. Eliminate prayer, the pledge, the anthem and the flag. Really, eliminate all things American traditionalism, because the true intent is global communism under the label of socialism. Look around you, I'm not wrong.

5. Projection. BLM is a prime example. Black culture is in disarray, but they project blame on everyone but themselves. Ironically, it's in the liberal's best interests that people are dumb, foolish, weak and easily displace responsibility.

6. Thought police. If you don't think like them you're dragged through the mud economically, socially and any other means at their disposal. These people are very fucking nasty. It starts with Hollywood, where if conservative you may as well look for a career elsewhere.

7. Entitlements. Entitlements is just another way to introduce communism. I'm not saying we shouldn't help those truly in need.

8. Hypocrisy. This isn't exclusive to liberals. They just may as well have wrote the book.

Read this: Doesn't matter who wrote the "recipe", it tells me a lot. The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals

Thanks for the reply.

#4. Why do liberals want global socialism? Are they hoping the gov will provide more of the necessities... food, shelter, medical?

#6. Re: "thought police". I think micro aggressions, warnings of triggers for guest speakers, etc, are affecting the education at universities nowadays. Opposing viewpoints are not being tought by professors due to fear of student complaints. Universities will soon be forced to decide if their Telos is Truth or Social Justice and make it known so a student can then decide if they want to attend.

 

[baileyn45]

Recently interested in politics and trying to understand what a liberal is?

It seems their primary concerns are:
1. Protecting the following groups... african-americans, women, LGBT, Latinos, Native Americans, Muslims, disabled.
2. Keeping abortion rights for women.
3. Limiting access to guns.
4. Increase taxes on the wealthy.
5. Having open borders.
6. Secular, limit religious influence of politics.

Questions:
a. Why are liberals not interested in protecting all people that struggle, for example Vietnamese or Chinese that are struggling?
b. Don't liberals realize when they start defining groups based on race or religion those groups will eventually have elevated status? In other words if you are not of those groups eventually you will be considered an outsider?
c. Do liberals believe in open borders? That if everyone from the world began moving here it would be the best thing for the national economy and citizens?

I'd have to disagree with this characterization of liberals. At this point the dem party is no longer liberal, they're leftists. There is a difference.

 

[AgentSparky]

Is that Ana from The Young Turks?

 

[12icer]

]
RE-distribution of wealth is an economic issue, not just a liberal issue.

Wealth is generally a MIS-allocation of resources. How to correct this misallocation is the economic problem which all university and grad school texts and courses address.

University and grad school level economics deals with 3 classic problems:

1 - what to produce

2 - how to produce it

3 - how to distribute it.

You armchair politicians who did not go to college or did not take any econ there or did not pay attention need to grasp the bigger picture.

And what entity does the production, distribution, etc. Capitalist do it in a place where the economic model is CAPITALISIM, which is the most productive, and produces the highest standard of living for all of the involved people. A socialist model produces much less total wealth, and much less equity after it exists for a while. A communist model produces even less per capita than the socialist model. Of course if one goes to a liberal socialist professor to learn the subject they will be indoctrinated with the idea of a socialist society that makes everyone equal, That is and always has been a fantasy and never has or will exist. As for redistribution, the Ruling class inall socialist societies has and will redistribute everyone elses wealth and equities to themselves first, keep the best for themselves and then to those who admire and support them even if those like they produce NOTHING then the leftovers will be returned to the actual productive members of the society.

That is what dimocrats are, want and do. So the term liberal describes only their idea of equity.

 

[saveliberty]

Thanks for the information. I've read a bit about John Locke. Locke's labor theory of property: "A person’s wealth should be what he or she creates with their own labor and enterprise, not by insider dealing or special privilege."

It's not unexpected how the parties have morphed over the years. What's difficult to understand is what both major parties in the US represent now. I guess the answer is they are ever changing. What seems to be constant is the ever growing hyper partisanship. WWII brought people together and to some extent the cold war. Since then the divide has continued to grow, not only in the populus but in washington. Identifying specifically what makes one party hate the other so much, well it's tough to see.

Unfortunately you two liberals are attempting to intellectualize your redistribution plans. Get jobs and then come back and explain the economy.

 

[peter samperos]

Recently interested in politics and trying to understand what a liberal is?

It seems their primary concerns are:
1. Protecting the following groups... african-americans, women, LGBT, Latinos, Native Americans, Muslims, disabled.
2. Keeping abortion rights for women.
3. Limiting access to guns.
4. Increase taxes on the wealthy.
5. Having open borders.
6. Secular, limit religious influence of politics.

Questions:
a. Why are liberals not interested in protecting all people that struggle, for example Vietnamese or Chinese that are struggling?
b. Don't liberals realize when they start defining groups based on race or religion those groups will eventually have elevated status? In other words if you are not of those groups eventually you will be considered an outsider?
c. Do liberals believe in open borders? That if everyone from the world began moving here it would be the best thing for the national economy and citizens?

I'd have to disagree with this characterization of liberals. At this point the dem party is no longer liberal, they're leftists. There is a difference.

Thanks. Are you mainly disagreeing with characterization #1 where a Liberal's primary concern is to protect certain groups? For example, a Liberal would assume society is composed of individuals with "inalienable rights". A Leftist may believe society is composed of different groups, with some exercising power over another. If so then it would seem the main stream media is pushing the leftist agenda, thus taking the democratic party in a leftist direction.

 

[12icer]

Actually there is a one world movement that is much more sinister and dangerous than that. It is made up of Self determined Intellectual regalist who believe that they are superior to all of the masses, and are determined to take control of all of the countries in the world. These people are not concerned at all about the genocide and actual suffering of any group of people in the world, They are most like the ruling class of the Roman empire that saw all but their friends, family and supporters as just livestock and as workers to be used up disposed of. This is your current dimocratic party, and actually quite a few of the current Republican parties mainstream politicians. The first Bush, and Jeb are members of this group, G W Bush was not as deeply into the NWO OWG as the other two. The Main center for the completion of the control is as always in Europe. the Euro, and the BREXIT caused an unforeseen problem for them and that problem may have given US a chance of dismantling the attack that has been set up in our country over the past 50 years by the group of people who began, and continue to press for a Ruling class \ subservient class socialist one world government. It depends on whether we can bring back our economic base, and STOP the dismantling of our energy production viability. The easiest way to bring down a nation is to put the nation on an energy source that is unstable, hard to maintain and repair, and barely sufficient for the current needs of the country. Anyway take it for what it is, Just what any NWO OWG person will tell you is a tin foil hat story by a "CONSPIRACY' nut. HMMMM another label what a surprise. HAHA have fun liberal leftist dimocrats.

 

[peter samperos]

]
RE-distribution of wealth is an economic issue, not just a liberal issue.

Wealth is generally a MIS-allocation of resources. How to correct this misallocation is the economic problem which all university and grad school texts and courses address.

University and grad school level economics deals with 3 classic problems:

1 - what to produce

2 - how to produce it

3 - how to distribute it.

You armchair politicians who did not go to college or did not take any econ there or did not pay attention need to grasp the bigger picture.

And what entity does the production, distribution, etc. Capitalist do it in a place where the economic model is CAPITALISIM, which is the most productive, and produces the highest standard of living for all of the involved people. A socialist model produces much less total wealth, and much less equity after it exists for a while. A communist model produces even less per capita than the socialist model. Of course if one goes to a liberal socialist professor to learn the subject they will be indoctrinated with the idea of a socialist society that makes everyone equal, That is and always has been a fantasy and never has or will exist. As for redistribution, the Ruling class inall socialist societies has and will redistribute everyone elses wealth and equities to themselves first, keep the best for themselves and then to those who admire and support them even if those like they produce NOTHING then the leftovers will be returned to the actual productive members of the society.

That is what dimocrats are, want and do. So the term liberal describes only their idea of equity.

Thanks for the reply. It appears that early (and most non-Marxist) socialism was intended to achieve greater equality by taxing away unearned rentier income, keeping natural resources and monopolies in the public domain. The Marxist focus on class conflict between industrial employers and workers placed rentiers in a secondary position. It seems the focus of liberals today has not changed and still on industrial employers that produce versus entities like Hedge Funds which are notorious for stripping assets and loading companies with debt.

 

[baileyn45]

Recently interested in politics and trying to understand what a liberal is?

It seems their primary concerns are:
1. Protecting the following groups... african-americans, women, LGBT, Latinos, Native Americans, Muslims, disabled.
2. Keeping abortion rights for women.
3. Limiting access to guns.
4. Increase taxes on the wealthy.
5. Having open borders.
6. Secular, limit religious influence of politics.

Questions:
a. Why are liberals not interested in protecting all people that struggle, for example Vietnamese or Chinese that are struggling?
b. Don't liberals realize when they start defining groups based on race or religion those groups will eventually have elevated status? In other words if you are not of those groups eventually you will be considered an outsider?
c. Do liberals believe in open borders? That if everyone from the world began moving here it would be the best thing for the national economy and citizens?

I'd have to disagree with this characterization of liberals. At this point the dem party is no longer liberal, they're leftists. There is a difference.

Thanks. Are you mainly disagreeing with characterization #1 where a Liberal's primary concern is to protect certain groups? For example, a Liberal would assume society is composed of individuals with "inalienable rights". A Leftist may believe society is composed of different groups, with some exercising power over another. If so then it would seem the main stream media is pushing the leftist agenda, thus taking the democratic party in a leftist direction.

Yes, that about sums it up, overly simply of course. I personally have a more dire outlook about "leftists". The leftist mentality blames western culture for everything and in their eyes no crime is too horrid to end western culture. That may come across as a bit "conspiracy theory" but it seems to fit.

As far as why leftists only stand for certain groups it's a matter of what sells. These people couldn't give a damn about black lives, it's a matter of what can trend on twitter. As long as they have a reason to cry racism, patriarchy, transphobia, white privilege, homophobia, nazi, fascism, islamaphobia, (have I missed any?).