What Philosophical Principle Do Liberals Hang Their Ideology On?

[Vandalshandle]

Nice spin, Failure. If you can find no fault in a debater's statement, make their statements up yourself, and find fault with those staements.

Did you win your argument with yourserlf?

 

[Dragonlady]

None of those on the right who are posting in this thread are the slightest bit interested in what liberals believe. We're all lazy, shiftless commies who want others to give us free stuff. That's what you believe and nothing we say is going to change your opinion. Every time someone in this thread posts what they believe, the right wingers tell us that's false. The right wingers know what we believe, we don't. You keep losing elections because you refuse to listen to ANYTHING that liberals are saying and then you call US stupid.

The economic policies and models you idiots believe will save America, have failed miserably. Unregulated free markets always result in extreme poverty, supressed wages, and destruction of the middle class. Well regulated, mixed economies are far more successful and sustainable, and reduce poverty, improve education and support a thriving middle class, which is necessary to the success of a consumer based economy.

Liberals don't want a welfare state, they want a social safety net. The don't want dependency, they want jobs which pay a living wage. They want good schools and teachers for their children, safe neighbourhoods, and equal opportunities for all. They want good roads, public buildings which are maintained and show pride in community.

The rewording or the Constitution is just a laugh. Conservatives keep trying desperately to justify their greed, their disregard of the poor, and their contempt for government, but they come off as sad and desperate. They cling to their failed ideas about an unfettered free market and refuse to acknowledge that conservative Republican ideology is as much a failure as communism.

 

[Borillar]

I find it funny that liberalism means none of those things. I means "Of or pertaining to freedom." It has only recently been construed to mean the opposit as advocated by socialists/democrats/progressives/etc..

I'm not sure how you presume that modern liberalism is the opposite of what liberalism has meant classically:

"there are various ways in which the rich may oppress the poor; in which property may oppress liberty; and that the world is filled with examples. It is necessary that the poor should have a defence against the danger."
-- James Madison; Note to Speech on the Right of Suffrage (1821)

Are you the owner of yourself or are you owned by the state? Or which proportion are you of each? The closer you move to state ownership the closer you are to modern liberalism. Oh, and James Madison wanted land owning as a condition of voting at the Constitutional Convention. In anycase, liberalism is only a relative term. Democrats gave it to themselves as a PR campaign when they were running away from the name "progressive."

Does a woman own her own body? Anti-choice conservatives don't think so. Am I free to smoke marijuana? Conservative anti-drug types would throw me in prison. Is a gay person free to marry the partner of choice? Not if conservatives have their way about it. Conservatives pay lip service to freedom, but in practice not so much. Freedom to conservatives is essentially no oversight over business. Unfettered capitalism. Individual liberty, equal opportunity, and social justice mean nothing to them.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

I'm not sure how you presume that modern liberalism is the opposite of what liberalism has meant classically:

"there are various ways in which the rich may oppress the poor; in which property may oppress liberty; and that the world is filled with examples. It is necessary that the poor should have a defence against the danger."
-- James Madison; Note to Speech on the Right of Suffrage (1821)

Are you the owner of yourself or are you owned by the state? Or which proportion are you of each? The closer you move to state ownership the closer you are to modern liberalism. Oh, and James Madison wanted land owning as a condition of voting at the Constitutional Convention. In anycase, liberalism is only a relative term. Democrats gave it to themselves as a PR campaign when they were running away from the name "progressive."

Does a woman own her own body? Anti-choice conservatives don't think so. Am I free to smoke marijuana? Conservative anti-drug types would throw me in prison. Is a gay person free to marry the partner of choice? Not if conservatives have their way about it. Conservatives pay lip service to freedom, but in practice not so much. Freedom to conservatives is essentially no oversight over business. Unfettered capitalism. Individual liberty, equal opportunity, and social justice mean nothing to them.

Because they are fake conservatives. Libertarianism is the only way to go, otherwise you're an Authoritarian (right or left) and believe the State permits rights and denies rights, instead of rights being natural and unalienable.

Republicans: "I want small government, except when I want to impose my beliefs on you."

Democrats: "I want everyone to be free, except with their money and property."

---------------

You can both go **** yourselves and eat my signature (and this video):

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xcJT7F_BXo]2013 Epic DUBSTEP REMIX Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan [HD720p] Edit by Alex Totterdell - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Dragonlady]

Conservative values, as they exist today, are a recent invention. Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman, the heros of the conservative movement, did their work in the 1950's, and Republicans formed this whole cult of "personal responsibility" and "unfettered market capitalism" around their writings, in an effort to sanctify greed and selfishness. Conservatives here keep trying to tie these values to the Founding Fathers, and other leaders they admire, or to Christianity. Conservative values are not Christian, and they bear no relation to the nation your Founding Fathers envisioned.

Fortunately, enough people have stopped being fooled by the Republicans, that they're no longer buying the idea that cutting taxes will lead to prosperity. Well it does, but not for the working man or woman, middle class or lower.

Republicans don't want to pay people a decent wage, and they don't want to give them government benefits. They want everyone to smarten up and get better jobs. Yeah, like that's worked well so far.

 

[Agit8r]

Facts:

abortion is the murder of an unborn child
homosexual or promiscuous behavior is harmful to individual's health and society
there is no evidence the world is warmer than in any point in living history
the biological, married parents are the most likely to raise productive children
deceiving others is corruption, and weakens society
laws passed to benefit specific groups are not about "equality"

Democratic policy doesn't "appear" to be concerned with "facts"....

Drug dealers are now teaching drug users how to scam the food stamp program to convert gov't handouts into cash for the drug dealers. (Sorry, there is another "fact", in case you want to live up to your statement about how you decide based on "facts").

half of those are just bigoted opinions

Which ones?
Please be specific.

"abortion is the murder of an unborn child" that is a religious opinion that is not universally accepted by all religions or by even by all Christians

"homosexual or promiscuous behavior is harmful to individual's health and society" The health component is always going to depend on individual behaviors and precautions. As for harmful to society, that is pure opinion.

"the biological, married parents are the most likely to raise productive children" the biological part is unsubstantiated. Regarding intact families, I'll give partial credit, because "most likely" and "on average" are similar but not the same. Scholarly research always qualifies that there are other factors, such as socio-economic status and mental health that can affect both success of children, and success of marriage. Obviously there are many successful people who come from single parent homes, like the guys on the $10 and $20 bills.

"there is no evidence the world is warmer than in any point in living history" I don't know what you mean by "living history" but ice-cores and other data reveal that the earth is warmer now than at any time during the last 4000 years. Report: Global temps are the highest they've been in 4,000 years

regarding food stamps, yeah there are always a few who game the system “Over 98 percent of those receiving SNAP benefits are eligible, and the FY 2010 payment accuracy rate was over 96 percent--a historic high,”
IG: Welfare Recipients Traded Food Stamps for Cash to Buy Drugs and Guns | CNS News

"Democratic policy doesn't 'appear' to be concerned with 'facts'" Actually, Democratic policies are demonstrably more likely to be based on proven economic theory, sound science, and sound arithmetic.

 

[bripat9643]

"...no evidence that people in this country starved in the streets?"

I beg to differ. My mother lived through the depression, and she said that was exactly what was going on. My father got a job with CCC doing hard labor in 1930, and worked for a dollar a day, meals, and a cot in a barracks, and he worshiped FDR for the rest of his life.He said that the alternative was begging or stealing.

"Your mother says so" is your proof? seriously? My mother also lived through the depression, and she never mentioned anyone starving. Even if they had to beg or steal, they still got enough food to keep from dying, or even from showing signs of severe malnutrition.

Working for a dollar a day isn't starving. being poor and starving are two separate things. we aren't talking about tough times, we aren't talking about missing a meal or two. We're talking about people dying becuase they can't get enough to eat. That has never happened in this country except for some freak accident like Donner Pass.

 

[bripat9643]

by that logic THESE are also REAL LIBERAL philosophies:

"MANKIND being originally equals in the order of creation, the equality could only be destroyed by some subsequent circumstance: the distinctions of rich and poor may in a great measure be accounted for"
-- Thomas Paine; from 'Common Sense' (1776)


"wealth is no proof of moral character; nor poverty of the want of it. On the contrary, wealth is often the presumptive evidence of dishonesty; and poverty the negative evidence of innocence."
-- Thomas Paine; from 'Dissertation on the First Principles of Government'


"Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator?"
-- Thomas Paine, from 'Age of Reason' ("8th Pluviose, Second Year of the French Republic")


"Admitting that any annual sum, say, for instance, one thousand pounds, is necessary or sufficient for the support of a family, consequently the second thousand is of the nature of a luxury, the third still more so, and by proceeding on, we shall at last arrive at a sum that may not improperly be called a prohibitable luxury."
-- Thomas Paine, 'Rights of Man, Part the Second' (1792)


"There are, in every country, some magnificent charities established by individuals. It is, however, but little that any individual can do, when the whole extent of the misery to be relieved is considered. He may satisfy his conscience, but not his heart. He may give all that he has, and that all will relieve but little. It is only by organizing civilization upon such principles as to act like a system of pullies, that the whole weight of misery can be removed."
-- Thomas Paine; from 'Agrarian Justice' (1797)


I'm sure you must agree completely

Unlike the other Founding Fathers, who supported the institution of private property, Thomas Paine was a major socialist. It's hardly surprising that you would like him.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

And notice that Thomas Paine gets more socialist as the years go on. His views are defensible during Common Sense, he's aware that the majority of people reading Common Sense would be hostile to more socialist concepts, so he keeps nearly most of his thoughts within those bounds.

The one quoted in Common Sense though is not socialist. In the entire context, he blames Monarchy and Aristocracy as a state-controlled wealth system, so it's actually quite the opposite, socialists tend to contradict themselves. Also, the punctuation makes a huge difference; there's a missing semicolon and two missing commas in the version you provided.

There are no attacks on the free market in Common Sense.

 

[Grandma]

What Philosophical Principle Do Liberals Hang Their Ideology On?



That which does the greatest number of people the greatest amount of good for the greatest length of time.

 

[Freewill]

None of those on the right who are posting in this thread are the slightest bit interested in what liberals believe. We're all lazy, shiftless commies who want others to give us free stuff. That's what you believe and nothing we say is going to change your opinion. Every time someone in this thread posts what they believe, the right wingers tell us that's false. The right wingers know what we believe, we don't. You keep losing elections because you refuse to listen to ANYTHING that liberals are saying and then you call US stupid.

The economic policies and models you idiots believe will save America, have failed miserably. Unregulated free markets always result in extreme poverty, supressed wages, and destruction of the middle class. Well regulated, mixed economies are far more successful and sustainable, and reduce poverty, improve education and support a thriving middle class, which is necessary to the success of a consumer based economy.

Liberals don't want a welfare state, they want a social safety net. The don't want dependency, they want jobs which pay a living wage. They want good schools and teachers for their children, safe neighbourhoods, and equal opportunities for all. They want good roads, public buildings which are maintained and show pride in community.

The rewording or the Constitution is just a laugh. Conservatives keep trying desperately to justify their greed, their disregard of the poor, and their contempt for government, but they come off as sad and desperate. They cling to their failed ideas about an unfettered free market and refuse to acknowledge that conservative Republican ideology is as much a failure as communism.

Just to make a few points. I am a conservative and I am sure what you would call a right winger.

In my post on this subject I said that only liberals can answer the question.

But I must say why are right wingers greedy when the left wing in Congress, at least, have the most rich? When Obama and company brag about how much more money they can raise. Why when the left will rail against rich Republicans then in the next breath laugh because Republicans win all the poor states and have the most on welfare? Why is it greedy for me to want to keep what I, ME, MYSELF, earned and not greedy for someone to take what I earned and give it to someone else? Do liberals even listen to themselves?

Every survey I have ever read lists the conservatives as more generous in charitable giving then liberals. Yet you stereotype. As if our welfare state government is somehow those who do actually work fault. Can't be that we created the out of control welfare system through good intentions. Can't be that now that we have put millions into poverty and thus a welfare state the liberals know of no what to end what they have started, and maybe there is no way.

Can't be that the "free" trade and illegal immigrants are taking the jobs of those with low skill and education. No it has to be because a guy like me who puts in 50-60 hours a week wants to hang onto what I earned. If that is greed then I just might as well become charitable and stop working. Why in the hell would I work if getting ahead is now the liberal vice, except when applied to them.

 

[Freewill]

What Philosophical Principle Do Liberals Hang Their Ideology On?



That which does the greatest number of people the greatest amount of good for the greatest length of time.

And with the modern welfare state how is that working out for ya? Again, another example of the opposite outcome from a liberals stated intent.

 

[dblack]

What Philosophical Principle Do Liberals

That which does the greatest number of people the greatest amount of good for the greatest length of time.

So, purely as a hypothetical, if reinstituting slavery could be shown to benefit most people, would you support it?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

What Philosophical Principle Do Liberals Hang Their Ideology On?



That which does the greatest number of people the greatest amount of good for the greatest length of time.

And with the modern welfare state how is that working out for ya? Again, another example of the opposite outcome from a liberals stated intent.

Even Bill Maher announced Friday that he's going to become a Conservative. He's realizing that taking 78% of his paycheck is other people's greed.

Bill Maher on California Income Taxes: 'Liberals - You Could Actually Lose Me' | NewsBusters

 

[Grandma]

What Philosophical Principle Do Liberals Hang Their Ideology On?



That which does the greatest number of people the greatest amount of good for the greatest length of time.

And with the modern welfare state how is that working out for ya? Again, another example of the opposite outcome from a liberals stated intent.

You'll have to answer that welfare state question yourself, what with it being your side that incurred massive war debts, allowed all our jobs to be sent out of the country, allowed massive mortgage company fraud, bailed out the banks instead off nationalizing them, killed all jobs programs, and gave massive revenue-killing tax breaks to those that least deserve it.

 

[editec]

If you're still hung up on the conservative V liberal narrative?

You're one very confused person and wholly unqualified to be a voter in a democratic republic.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Why has the OP ignored the lengthy comments submitted by Londoner in this thread?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Not so, vandalshandle. Liberation Theology is not Christianity. Its Marxism with an upside down cross. No such thing as a Marxist Christian. They don't exist. - Jeremiah

Oversimplified hogwash.

Please give me a single quote of Jesus from the gospels that support today's conservative principles. On the other hand, you could start with the sermon on the mount, and find it full of today liberal concepts....and that is just a small example of his sayings that liberals embrace.

Clearly, whatever they're political bend, Liberals are pathological lairs.

Render unto Obama what is Obamas, render unto God what is Gods.

And you dare to say Jesus was a Loliberal

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What Philosophical Principle Do Liberals Hang Their Ideology On?



That which does the greatest number of people the greatest amount of good for the greatest length of time.

The "War" on Poverty, dragging on for three generations now. It's actually a War on Self Reliance and has produced generations of low information, government dependent Democrat voters

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Londoner said it best, "American Liberalism respects the rights of all individuals to freedom. But..."

And then completely controverted the respect of "individuals to be free"

That is the definition of American Liberalism, they say one thing but act 180 degrees opposite

American Liberals believe in "education" but then gave us a system that graduates progressives dumber and less functioning people with every passing generatrion