By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Adinnieken on 24 April 2013
Edit Thread
richardhutnik said:
Adinnieken said:
richardhutnik said:

You see, due to what comes out of Republican talk, the idea that somehow conservative = "smaller government".  You hear over and over this out of some political talk.  But, reality is that it is not.  You have conservatives who will advocate for more government in the area of morals, more military and other things.  You see on the left also, anarchists who want no government.

Conservatism is about preserving the past, or return to times seen as superior.  Liberalism is about moving forward and advancing, and throwing out what is seen as standard form.

The real argument for size of government is more of a Libertarian vs Statists.  It can be argued that there has been a Conservative-Libertarian political fusion going on, which has confusing issues.

Ugh, out of time. Will let others comment.

You mean Progressive, not Liberalism.  Liberalism is actually synonymous with Libertarian views.  Democrats in the 60's were accused of being Liberals, but it was a miss use of the word by Republicans.

Progressives, both Republican and Democrat, have always been...well...progressive.  Doing things that caitor to the needs of US citizens.  Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, even Richard M. Nixon were progressives within the Republican Party.  Nothing on the scale of Lydon Johnson or Franklyn D. Roosevelt, but they'd have a harder time finding a place in today's Republican Party than Susan Snowe.

I meant liberal when I said liberal.  What I did NOT state, which would of probably add more clarity, is Progressive, which is individuals who favor the use of more government to advance liberal causes.

I also meant to add in my last post the curious case of Ron Paul and how a number of Liberals worked on his campaign.  They supported Paul's reduction of government in areas that saw them getting more personal liberty, like the end of the drug war and so on.  

Size of government, and its function, is a measure of people's agendas and the belief in how much use of government will advance their causes.  

No, Liberal is a label used by Republicans on Democrats who were/are socialists, because those socialists at the time (the 1960's) were for more government social programs, free love, and open drug use.   True Liberals, however are for truly small, limited government and against government intrusion into private lives.

Progressives are socially progressive in their views, they can be fiscally progressive, moderate, or conservative.  The common theme, however, is that they believe government can benefit people by solving problems.

People aren't necessarily Conservative or Progressive.  They can be fiscally conservative yet socially progressive, or fiscally progressive yet socially conservative.  It's by no means cut or dry, which is the problem with today's politics.  Too many people, especially those on the right but not limited to them, think you must hold exactly the same views in order to be a Conservative.  Otherwise you're liberal. 

If you don't believe me, there was an episode of FrontLine back during the Bush administration that discussed how Bush won the election in 2000 with the aid of Christian conservatives.  One of the evangelical ministers that supported Bush put it succinctly when he said if you don't believe in what I believe, then you're not a conservative.  Which oddly enough put him in direct conflict with another minister who was also a Bush supporter but held far less conservative views.

It's a world view that becomes narrower and narrower based on who applies it.  If eventually everyone on the right believes it's only what they believe that is conservative or not, eventually there will only be one true conservative.