Politics/Media
Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital
- Boyish-Tigerlilly
- Sith Devotee
- Posts: 3225
- Joined: 2004-05-22 04:47pm
- Location: New Jersey (Why not Hawaii)
- Contact:
Politics/Media
I keep hearing people bashing each other's political orientation in many ways everywhere I go. What is so bad about being a liberal? I don't get why many people seem to hate them. Isn't liberalism a good thing? Conservatism denotes the status quo, no change, no progress. Maybe I am thinking in old terms.
And the bias stuff. If they are both "biased," how can one tell the truth?
And the bias stuff. If they are both "biased," how can one tell the truth?
- Alyrium Denryle
- Minister of Sin
- Posts: 22224
- Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
- Location: The Deep Desert
- Contact:
Depends on whether you are refering to economic issues or social issues.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
Factio republicanum delenda est
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
Factio republicanum delenda est
Re: Politics/Media
Each term, is a tag for a large platform of ideals. So why being a liberal in the actual definition is not bad (nor a conservative) what most people are attacking is the range of issues associated with that term.nimetski wrote:I keep hearing people bashing each other's political orientation in many ways everywhere I go. What is so bad about being a liberal? I don't get why many people seem to hate them. Isn't liberalism a good thing? Conservatism denotes the status quo, no change, no progress. Maybe I am thinking in old terms.
And the bias stuff. If they are both "biased," how can one tell the truth?
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
- Boyish-Tigerlilly
- Sith Devotee
- Posts: 3225
- Joined: 2004-05-22 04:47pm
- Location: New Jersey (Why not Hawaii)
- Contact:
Tis election year, you really expect an honest depiction of an ideological platform?nimetski wrote:Ahhh. I was always wondering why so many people talk of disdain when they speak of liberals. I am trying to find out more information on Liberal parties in the United States, because I want to vote in November, but each source just says the opposite of the next.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
- Boyish-Tigerlilly
- Sith Devotee
- Posts: 3225
- Joined: 2004-05-22 04:47pm
- Location: New Jersey (Why not Hawaii)
- Contact:
-
- Padawan Learner
- Posts: 348
- Joined: 2002-07-25 10:52pm
- Location: Sheffield UK
Bear in mind when I write this that I'm a British left-winger, so I’m not really as familiar with American conservatism as I'd like to think, but as I understand it the reasons behind a conservative's opposition to liberalism really depends on the type of person they are. For instance you can get idiots who hate liberals 'because Rush Limbaugh says their evil', you can get religious voters who want to implement religious laws (e.g. anti-abortion legislation, 10 commandments in schools, anti-gay marriage etc) all of which pretty much contradict liberal ideology (but not necessarily Democrat vote grabbing). Alternatively you can get people who disagree with liberalism on economic grounds (although with economic policy it's difficult as 'liberal' economics are generally what American conservatives espouse, while Democrats and progressive liberals often go for more controlled forms of economics, in any case economic differences are probably something the economists can explain better than I).
Ultimately it's kind of complicated, as the word liberal is often misused not to mention sometimes people forget that liberal is not the same as Democrat and Republican does not necessarily mean conservative. So it's more of an individual thing than anything else.
Ultimately it's kind of complicated, as the word liberal is often misused not to mention sometimes people forget that liberal is not the same as Democrat and Republican does not necessarily mean conservative. So it's more of an individual thing than anything else.
I think it's when "liberal" became a noun instead of an adjective. *
To see why "liberal" has almost become an epithet in the US, you have to understand something about changes in American society over the last 70 years.
In the 1930s, white males with money were the highest on the ladder -and in some ways still are. Most of the system and society were heavily rigged in their favor. But bit by bit, poor whites, women, blacks, Jews and other minorities have made huge gains. Who is credited (or blamed, depending on your point of view) for these changes? Liberals, even though in many cases, liberals either opposed or only half-heartedly endorsed the changes that made all this possible.
Liberals also cramped the style of Big Business by passing laws like the Wagner Act, minimum wage laws, environmental protection, repealing Jim Crow and other measures that tried to even things out.
The Right has enjoyed success ever since the late 50s/ early 60s because they have successfully used bigotry and ignorance to convince most poor and middle class whites to vote against their own interests.
Up From Conservativism by Michael Lind is a great book on the subject.
The other factor is the Right's tactic of lumping dissimilar things together. If you think Dubya pulled a fast one by convincing 70% of US citizens that Saddam Hussein was in league with Osama Bin Laden, then you haven't seen a snowflake on the tip of the iceberg.
For over seventy years, everyone to the left of Baldur Von Schirach has been accused of Godless, Satanic, Race-Mixing, Jew-Loving, Liberal, Socialist, Queer, Communist Witchcraft by the right wing. This has two effects. First, it demonizes the opposition rather than debating the issues. Second, it provides an excuse for any atrocity, outrage or other crime.
The fact that these things have nothing to do with one another and are contradictory is no surprise. When you're pandering to fear and ignorance, logic isn't necessary. In fact, waves of hysteria are quite useful and the Right needs the periodic grand peur (Red scares, yellow rain, satanic ritual child abuse, the Clinton Death List, Janet Jackson's right tit) like pigs need mud.
The only thing "liberal" and "communist" have in common is that both are terms used by mouth-breathing right-wingers to describe anything they don't like. But the main reason "liberal" has been successfully demonized is the fact that too many liberals insist on fighting by the Marquess Of Queensberry Rules while getting their nuts punched.
To see why "liberal" has almost become an epithet in the US, you have to understand something about changes in American society over the last 70 years.
In the 1930s, white males with money were the highest on the ladder -and in some ways still are. Most of the system and society were heavily rigged in their favor. But bit by bit, poor whites, women, blacks, Jews and other minorities have made huge gains. Who is credited (or blamed, depending on your point of view) for these changes? Liberals, even though in many cases, liberals either opposed or only half-heartedly endorsed the changes that made all this possible.
Liberals also cramped the style of Big Business by passing laws like the Wagner Act, minimum wage laws, environmental protection, repealing Jim Crow and other measures that tried to even things out.
The Right has enjoyed success ever since the late 50s/ early 60s because they have successfully used bigotry and ignorance to convince most poor and middle class whites to vote against their own interests.
Up From Conservativism by Michael Lind is a great book on the subject.
The other factor is the Right's tactic of lumping dissimilar things together. If you think Dubya pulled a fast one by convincing 70% of US citizens that Saddam Hussein was in league with Osama Bin Laden, then you haven't seen a snowflake on the tip of the iceberg.
For over seventy years, everyone to the left of Baldur Von Schirach has been accused of Godless, Satanic, Race-Mixing, Jew-Loving, Liberal, Socialist, Queer, Communist Witchcraft by the right wing. This has two effects. First, it demonizes the opposition rather than debating the issues. Second, it provides an excuse for any atrocity, outrage or other crime.
The fact that these things have nothing to do with one another and are contradictory is no surprise. When you're pandering to fear and ignorance, logic isn't necessary. In fact, waves of hysteria are quite useful and the Right needs the periodic grand peur (Red scares, yellow rain, satanic ritual child abuse, the Clinton Death List, Janet Jackson's right tit) like pigs need mud.
The only thing "liberal" and "communist" have in common is that both are terms used by mouth-breathing right-wingers to describe anything they don't like. But the main reason "liberal" has been successfully demonized is the fact that too many liberals insist on fighting by the Marquess Of Queensberry Rules while getting their nuts punched.
You just did the same thing you are bitching about.
You went from 'liberal' to the arch enemy 'right', which isn't the same as 'liberal' v 'conservative' or 'lefty' v 'righty'.
You went from 'liberal' to the arch enemy 'right', which isn't the same as 'liberal' v 'conservative' or 'lefty' v 'righty'.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
- Wicked Pilot
- Moderator Emeritus
- Posts: 8972
- Joined: 2002-07-05 05:45pm
Re: Politics/Media
Liberalism is a good thing, it brings us new ideas to test out. However, not all liberal ideas are created equal. Some are good, some turn out to be bad. Just like science, you need liberalism to advance, but a healthy dose of conservatism to make sure things works.nimetski wrote:What is so bad about being a liberal? I don't get why many people seem to hate them. Isn't liberalism a good thing? Conservatism denotes the status quo, no change, no progress. Maybe I am thinking in old terms.
The most basic assumption about the world is that it does not contradict itself.
The topic was why "liberal" has almost become an insult. That's not so much the work of regular Republicans as it is the organized Far Right.Knife wrote: You just did the same thing you are bitching about.
You went from 'liberal' to the arch enemy 'right', which isn't the same as 'liberal' v 'conservative' or 'lefty' v 'righty'.
I thought referring to them as "The Right" was enough to differentiate between the far right-wingers and your run-of-the-mill Republicans and conservatives. I'll be more specific next time.