What is Liberal?

I know this question has come up before, but I am really interested in getting peoples take on what 'liberal' is. Much of the media, and people in general seem to use the word as a general smear akin to nazi or commie.Yet, in a historical sense the term liberal and liberal thinking has allways assosciated it'self with liberty. That is social freedoms and liberty. Many of our forfathers were considered liberal thinkers such as Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine.Philosophy, Litterature, Poetry, etc. all fall under the heading of "Liberal Arts". So... what the heck is so awfull about being a liberaly minded person?It seems alot of times (on other message boards I have been too) when someone becomes very intelectual on a subject, or phillosophical, invariably some of the "conservative" members screem "liberal" over and over untill the thread is closed.I don't get it. Is there a vein of anti-intelectualisim in all this?

I find it amuzing that Liberals (at least politicians) are ashamed of being liberal. And when the media correctly labels a politician as a liberal, that politician usually runs from the label.Conservatives generally believe:
Smaller Government
Not as many socialist programs
Right to bear arms
Lower Taxes
Bigger Military
Pro life
Pro Business (Freemarket Capitalism without much Govt Interference)
Religeous/Family ValuesLiberal's Genearally believe:
Larger Government
Redistribution of Wealth from the producers to non-producers
Gun Restrictions
Higher Taxes
Smaller Military
Pro Choice
More Govnt Regulation of Business
Proponents of Gay rightsIn a nutshell.*EDIT* Pulled this off of a websiteConservative:
* Government control of the economy should be minimal. Equal opportunity and legal business practice should be guaranteed though. (Fiscal/Economic)
* Strong moral definitions should be held. Strict criminal law and sentencing are necessary. Freedom and rights cannot be compromised. A strong emphasis is placed on the individual (Moral/Social)Libertarian:
** Government control of the economy should be minimal. (Fiscal/Economic)
* As long as actions do not harm others, they should be legal. Freedom and rights cannot be compromised (Moral/Social)Moderate:
- The moderate tends to stand with different groups on an issue to issue basis. Some moderates have strong leanings in regards to certain ideologies in partial areas such as moral conservatism and economic liberalism.Liberal:
* Strong government involvement and regulation of the economy. Redistribution of wealth and strict regulation of business by the government. (Fiscal/Economic)
* As long as actions do not harm others, they should be legal. Loose Constitutional interpretation. The society is emphasized. (Moral/Social)This message has been edited by Tal, 07-20-2005 03:40 PM

---

I helped scare an old person-I stopped someone from keeping more of their money-So what if people want to have say in the places they live and the cars that they drive-I gave money to an environmental group that helped keep us dependant on foreign oil-I help the enemies of democracy get stronger by telling them laws don’t matter-What if one day I need an abortion-Sex with an intern, everybody does it-I help teach kids around America that America is always wrongDo you know what your DNC stands for?

Hi, Yaro.The main problem with "liberal" and "conservative" is that these words actually have many meanings. I know I have used the words very differently in different conversations.Originally, the word conservative is one who wishes to preserve the status quo, including the privileges and power of the ruling class.Originally, the word liberal was used for one who advocated expanding the franchise to a much wider group of people, as well as increasing the civil liberties and personal freedoms that are necessary to make this kind of democratic system possible.

Tal's description is good in that it combines many of the meanins of the various political leanings.The problem begins when there are these strict divisions in which a variety of issues are forced into one of the other two categories essentially making both sides equally wrong with regards to the various issues. I don't know if that made any sense by I'll try to explain.I consider myself conservative with regards to civil rights and to much government contol over business, entertainment, technology, etc.I tend to be very liberal when it comes to the environment, public health, safety, etc. The government should control our natural resources ensuring efficient use with little waste. The environment is everyones and as such needs to be controled by the body that everyone elects.I think it sucks how much liberal extremism has infested some schools that will suspend a kid for bringing a bible to school. I also think it sucks when Kansas legalizes teaching religion in science class.I think it is stupid to blow money on some of the social programs that exist but I absolutly think that we need a national healthcare system.Sometimes I don't know what to call myself. I hate the stupid labels of democrat or republican and I don't really feel like I am either.The one thing that keeps me "blue" is the alliance of the republicans with the neo-cons. There is no greater liberal extreme in this country that has the power to affect policy than them. It is kind of an irony that they are called neo-conservative.Neo-cons like FCC regulations, the DMCA, the Patriot Act, constitutional ammendments to restrict civil rights, removal of the Establishment Clause, etc. These are blatantly not conservative ideals.So what am I? I guess I would be a moderate. What is Bush? Most certainly a liberal under Tal's definition. What would Kerry have been? Also a liberal. What do we need? Better canidates!

---

Organizations worth supporting:
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world (Protect Privacy and Security)
Home | American Civil Liberties Union (Protect Civil Rights)
AAUP (Protect Higher Learning)

Yep, that's me, pretty much. Got a problem with that?

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Yea that does make it hard.Sometimes liberal means freedom sometimes it means socialism.
Sometimes conservative means responsible sometimes it means fascist.What are we to do?

---

Organizations worth supporting:
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world (Protect Privacy and Security)
Home | American Civil Liberties Union (Protect Civil Rights)
AAUP (Protect Higher Learning)

Not at all! That's part of why I like these forums. We can take any one of these issues and debate the pros & cons in the arena of ideas.

---

I helped scare an old person-I stopped someone from keeping more of their money-So what if people want to have say in the places they live and the cars that they drive-I gave money to an environmental group that helped keep us dependant on foreign oil-I help the enemies of democracy get stronger by telling them laws don’t matter-What if one day I need an abortion-Sex with an intern, everybody does it-I help teach kids around America that America is always wrongDo you know what your DNC stands for?

Also liberals are for personal freedom, and a right to privacy (included in pro-choice, and pro gay), and conservatives are for the governments right to control every aspect of a persons private life (Anti sodomy laws, antichoice, denying religious freedom)/SorenThis message has been edited by kongstad, 21-Jul-2005 02:21 PM

That one belongs to liberals. You mean like the right to bear arms? Or the right to say whatever you want about a candidate during an election? Antichoice is called Prolife. It is called Prolife because conservatives believe you are killing a human (which you are) that cannot protect itself (which it can't).

---

I helped scare an old person-I stopped someone from keeping more of their money-So what if people want to have say in the places they live and the cars that they drive-I gave money to an environmental group that helped keep us dependant on foreign oil-I help the enemies of democracy get stronger by telling them laws don’t matter-What if one day I need an abortion-Sex with an intern, everybody does it-I help teach kids around America that America is always wrongDo you know what your DNC stands for?

Pro choice is about a human beings medical decisions being between himself, og herself and a doctor. Conservatives want to impose on this, and deny people this.This is true concerning abortion but also concerning contraceptives. The right to use contraceptives is in danger with a conservative ruled supreme court.I notice that you did not comment on the conservative fascination with wich opening the penis is inserted into - can you imagine a larger intrusion into peoples private life than having the legislaters decide where you can put your private parts?/soren

I agree that Sodomy laws need to be nixed. What happens in the privacy of your home should stay there. ROFL!*passes out*

---

I helped scare an old person-I stopped someone from keeping more of their money-So what if people want to have say in the places they live and the cars that they drive-I gave money to an environmental group that helped keep us dependant on foreign oil-I help the enemies of democracy get stronger by telling them laws don’t matter-What if one day I need an abortion-Sex with an intern, everybody does it-I help teach kids around America that America is always wrongDo you know what your DNC stands for?

I hope we can keep in mind that this thread is about the different ways these terms are understood, so that if I answer you, you will understand that I'm showing you how a conservative regards the ideas you have expressed rather than getting into an argument about it. Absolutely the opposite from the conservative point of view. Liberals are for managing every aspect of life by government power, forcing us to pay high taxes for social programs we may object to, forcing laws on us via a leftist judiciary, against the "will of the people" that was SUPPOSED to be the foundation of our laws as reflected in our representative legislature. These take away the rights of the people, the very freedoms enjoyed by the American colonists that the founders wanted to preserve. Also, as Tal pointed out, liberals are against the constitutional freedom of the right to keep and bear arms (against a tyrannical leftist government perhaps, if it ever comes to that). Liberals are also for "hate speech" and "hate crime" laws, which are a serious encroachment on personal freedom, especially the freedom of speech but even the freedom of thought (hence the term "Thought Police" by which the right characterizes the left), actually daring to take away even our freedom to think things the left disagrees with, and subject us to Washington. They are actually considering treating as criminals those who preach the Bible and those who have an opinion about religions or ideologies that the left disagrees with. Murder is against the law in all sane societies. Redefining it as a "right to privacy" is a bleak joke, sort of like arguing Jeffrey Daumer off the hook by a purported "right" to consume people in the privacy of his home. Yes, I know this is an exaggeration of a comparison for many reasons, but it should make the point.Gays HAVE the right to privacy. What the liberals are trying to do is FORCE THEIR LIFESTYLE ON EVERYBODY ELSE, the opposite of privacy for them or anybody else. It is the liberals who are trying to cram gay marriage down the throats of everybody else, and the conservatives are merely reacting, not forcing anything on anybody. Also, it's basically only gay marriage conservatives object to, not any basic rights. Gays HAVE all the rights and freedoms of society already and if they want to form personal unions legally there's no problem with that either. The problem is with government tyranny forcing a redefinition of marriage against the will of the majority. Some definition of "freedom" the left has. You already said this. Again, the controlling is coming from the other side and conservatives are trying to fight it. As for sodomy laws, we've taken away just about all of them by now, and they hadn't been enforced in years anyway, so this is a nonproblem. And again, calling murder a "choice" is really a diabolically clever word trick I must say, and ---- denying religious freedom? You MUST be joking. Who is taking down all the symbols of our once-Christian civilization? Who is making it impossible for Christians to rent space for events because it might be a violation of the "separation of church and state." What a joke THAT is. Who is taking all expressions of Christianity out of our public schools, so that kids can't even show their Christian affiliation there with a t shirt or a prayer or an essay about a Bible character --as if a child were the Congress making a law establishing a religion -- which is what the First Amendment is about. Meanwhile what they are actually doing is "preventing the free exercise thereof" -- the other half of the First Amendment. Except that apparently OTHER religions are allowed expression. Who is calling the expression of Biblical truths "hate speech?"Teaching children in the public schools that homosexuality is a natural option is interfering with the religious rights of many children and their parents. Handing out condoms in the public schools is interfering with the religious rights of many children and their parents. Etc. etc. etc. This is why I'm for Christians leaving the public schools. There's no fighting it any more. The public schools are absolutely committed to taking away the religious rights of Christians, with government force.And I'd add here, really none of these things is "liberal" in the true or old sense of the term. That is why some of us conservatives prefer the term "leftist." This kind of twisting of the idea of freedom into something that is really often the opposite of the constitutional meaning of the term does in fact have roots in Marxist ideology as promoted by the New Left of the sixties, if not *classical* Marxism.

Nobody on the conservative side gives a damn where you put any part of your anatomy as long as you do it in private. The encroachment on freedoms is coming from those who want to force everybody to treat as good right and normal what we do not believe is good right or normal. Nevertheless WE are not trying to legislate ANYTHING along these lines, we're just trying to stop the Left from legislating all kinds of BS the majority doesn't want forced on us. Just leave it alone. THAT's freedom.

Oh I'm sorry. so all those gay parents having their children removed, is not because of their choice in sexuality?Its not because those dangoerous thingies are inserted in orifices that the bible says they should not go?/Soren

You should know that the Griswold decision from 1965 hinged on the fact that a right to privacy was assured by the constitution. That same right forms the basis for Row vs Wade, that the conservatives are trying to overthrow. So if there is no right to privacy, married couples have no right to contraceptives (Griswold), neither does unmarried people(Eisenstadt v. Bair).Now there allready is one judge on the supreme court who doesn't acknowledge any right to privacy whatsoever (in the constitution), would you guess that to be a liberal or conservative one?/Soren