Debate Now Is Liberalism Exhausted?

[candycorn]

Not sure why I am getting notifications about being quoted in this thread?

I asked Foxfyre if she's proud of you calling Ms. Clinton a "C U N * T". She was quite proud of your word choice apparently and sees no problem with your choice of words.

 

[Pogo]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

Then explain why it is mostly the left. . .the left that is commonly referred to as liberals in America. . . that endorses and defends Roe v Wade giving the government power over abortions; that endorses and defends thousands of new rules and regulations every year controlling society, commerce and industry, trade, and how we live our lives; that endorses and defends a program like Obamacare that controls every aspect of our healthcare; that endorses and defends a tax code and social engineering that targets and punishes people the left is critical of and rewards those the left purports to champion?

Is all that not enormous power given to the federal government? Power taken away from the states and local communities and individual choices? And is it not mostly the liberals/statists/leftists/political class who approve of it and vote for people who do more of it?

Goldberg's thesis suggests that more and more American people are becoming aware of the negative aspect of all that and are finding less favor with it.

The left may do some of that (and point of clarification: Roe v Wade takes the government OUT of abortion, doesn't put it in) -- but Liberalism does not. That's a conflation that began in the Red Scare daze as a divisive tool to demagogue Democrats, and has no basis in fact.

The example I always go back to is:
To declare "all men are created equal" is Liberalism; to artificially force it into being with Affirmative Action is leftist.

Roe v Wade dictated, from the federal level, what the law re abortion will be instead of leaving that to the states or local communities to decide. And states that have tried to get around that law with their own laws have been consistently shot down in the courts because of Roe v Wade.

Be careful about the ad hominem even in so broad an area as 'red states'. The thread rules clearly do not allow that.

? Who brought up "red states"?...

And I will not get into a war of semantics with you. "Liberal" as it is commonly used in American vernacular is synonymous with leftist, statist, progressive, political class. That is what modern American liberalism is.

No, it is not. And when you try to distort it that way I'll continue to correct it. As I said it's counterproductive to dialogue when you deliberately distort terms.

If you don't define the word that way, then use whichever of those words or choose another that suits you. We won't quibble so long as you address the thread topic.

You defined it-- I corrected it. Stop misdefining and I won't have to. Every single time I've been on this issue it's in reaction to one of these misdefiinitions. Every one.

Liberals, as they are defined in modern day America, may indeed say all men are created equal. But they sure don't seem to be pushing programs and rules and laws and attitudes that promote equality for anybody other than those groups they champion. And that may be becoming apparent to more Americans and they aren't appreciating it. Which could explain why MSNBC that offers little more than promotion of liberal doctrine and bashing conservative points of view hasn't been able to attract much audience as Goldberg suggests.

Again that's conflating different groups as if they're one and the same. They're not.

 

[candycorn]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

It's great that you are making this distinction.

Keep it up.

I really mean it.

Many people don't understand it.

if we are going to discuss liberalism we must discuss it in accordance with the way it is defined today. Pogo is bringing up definitions from the 1800s which have zero meaning today.

Its okay, we're in never-never land RF....foxy was saying that there are plenty of pro-choice, pro gay marriage conservatives. She just can't name any. And also, liverals are for uniformity and order.

 

[Pogo]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

Then explain why it is mostly the left. . .the left that is commonly referred to as liberals in America. . . that endorses and defends Roe v Wade giving the government power over abortions; that endorses and defends thousands of new rules and regulations every year controlling society, commerce and industry, trade, and how we live our lives; that endorses and defends a program like Obamacare that controls every aspect of our healthcare; that endorses and defends a tax code and social engineering that targets and punishes people the left is critical of and rewards those the left purports to champion?

Is all that not enormous power given to the federal government? Power taken away from the states and local communities and individual choices? And is it not mostly the liberals/statists/leftists/political class who approve of it and vote for people who do more of it?

Goldberg's thesis suggests that more and more American people are becoming aware of the negative aspect of all that and are finding less favor with it.

The left may do some of that (and point of clarification: Roe v Wade takes the government OUT of abortion, doesn't put it in) -- but Liberalism does not. That's a conflation that began in the Red Scare daze as a divisive tool to demagogue Democrats, and has no basis in fact.

The example I always go back to is:
To declare "all men are created equal" is Liberalism; to artificially force it into being with Affirmative Action is leftist.

Overreach of governmental power is certainly a concern. But to describe it as "Liberal" is not only disingenuous but counterproductive and divisive.

Thank you.

Great post !

I see liberalism as a frame of mind.

The left is a political entity.

The left is not as "liberal" as they'd like to think. In fact they are no more tolerant than the right.

Thank you.

Liberalism, which built this country, is a philosophy that lives in Democrats, Republicans and the unaffiliated. It's under seige from both the right and the left. I wish more would understand this rather than continually falling back on soundbite-level oversimplicity. All that does is break down dialogue and polarize.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

Then explain why it is mostly the left. . .the left that is commonly referred to as liberals in America. . . that endorses and defends Roe v Wade giving the government power over abortions; that endorses and defends thousands of new rules and regulations every year controlling society, commerce and industry, trade, and how we live our lives; that endorses and defends a program like Obamacare that controls every aspect of our healthcare; that endorses and defends a tax code and social engineering that targets and punishes people the left is critical of and rewards those the left purports to champion?

Is all that not enormous power given to the federal government? Power taken away from the states and local communities and individual choices? And is it not mostly the liberals/statists/leftists/political class who approve of it and vote for people who do more of it?

Goldberg's thesis suggests that more and more American people are becoming aware of the negative aspect of all that and are finding less favor with it.

The left may do some of that (and point of clarification: Roe v Wade takes the government OUT of abortion, doesn't put it in) -- but Liberalism does not. That's a conflation that began in the Red Scare daze as a divisive tool to demagogue Democrats, and has no basis in fact.

The example I always go back to is:
To declare "all men are created equal" is Liberalism; to artificially force it into being with Affirmative Action is leftist.

Overreach of governmental power is certainly a concern. But to describe it as "Liberal" is not only disingenuous but counterproductive and divisive.

Thank you.

Great post !

I see liberalism as a frame of mind.

The left is a political entity.

The left is not as "liberal" as they'd like to think. In fact they are no more tolerant than the right.

Well, according to Foxfyre there are plenty of pro-choice, pro gay marriage conservatives running around. We're all learning something.

Is this sarcasm ?

My experience is this:

There are some conservatives who've made a thoughtful choice in either direction. They can stand behind their position in a way that shows they put some effort into reaching a conclusion (in contrast to your claim: "Which is another reason that conservatism is incongruent with sophisticated persons."....post #271).

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

Then explain why it is mostly the left. . .the left that is commonly referred to as liberals in America. . . that endorses and defends Roe v Wade giving the government power over abortions; that endorses and defends thousands of new rules and regulations every year controlling society, commerce and industry, trade, and how we live our lives; that endorses and defends a program like Obamacare that controls every aspect of our healthcare; that endorses and defends a tax code and social engineering that targets and punishes people the left is critical of and rewards those the left purports to champion?

Is all that not enormous power given to the federal government? Power taken away from the states and local communities and individual choices? And is it not mostly the liberals/statists/leftists/political class who approve of it and vote for people who do more of it?

Goldberg's thesis suggests that more and more American people are becoming aware of the negative aspect of all that and are finding less favor with it.

The left may do some of that (and point of clarification: Roe v Wade takes the government OUT of abortion, doesn't put it in) -- but Liberalism does not. That's a conflation that began in the Red Scare daze as a divisive tool to demagogue Democrats, and has no basis in fact.

The example I always go back to is:
To declare "all men are created equal" is Liberalism; to artificially force it into being with Affirmative Action is leftist.

Overreach of governmental power is certainly a concern. But to describe it as "Liberal" is not only disingenuous but counterproductive and divisive.

Thank you.

Great post !

I see liberalism as a frame of mind.

The left is a political entity.

The left is not as "liberal" as they'd like to think. In fact they are no more tolerant than the right.

Thank you.

Liberalism, which built this country, is a philosophy that lives in Democrats, Republicans and the unaffiliated. It's under seige from both the right and the left. I wish more would understand this rather than continually falling back on soundbite-level oversimplicity. All that does is break down dialogue and polarize.

My hats off to you for your posts.

 

[Foxfyre]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

It's great that you are making this distinction.

Keep it up.

I really mean it.

Many people don't understand it.

Seriously, you don't see liberalism as it is most commonly used in modern American vernacular as promoting an ever bigger, more intrusive, more powerful role for the central government?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

It's great that you are making this distinction.

Keep it up.

I really mean it.

Many people don't understand it.

if we are going to discuss liberalism we must discuss it in accordance with the way it is defined today. Pogo is bringing up definitions from the 1800s which have zero meaning today.

Its okay, we're in never-never land RF....foxy was saying that there are plenty of pro-choice, pro gay marriage conservatives. She just can't name any. And also, liverals are for uniformity and order.

They don't exist at the federal level....but even Cheney decided to equivocate on gays when his daughter came out.

Funny how that happens. (Not saying Cheney is pro-choice...pro-gay marriage....just a little less strident).

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

It's great that you are making this distinction.

Keep it up.

I really mean it.

Many people don't understand it.

Seriously, you don't see liberalism as it is most commonly used in modern American vernacular as promoting an ever bigger, more intrusive, more powerful role for the central government?

No, I don't.

That is the left.

They all themselves liberals....and give liberalism a bad name. You are right...in the modern American vernacular....they are seen as synonymous.

I look at DT over in those other threads....he's a typical left winger....attacks anyone he does not like (you know the thread on Libertarianism).

But, Pogo is right that being liberal does not mean being a member of the left (it could in some ways....).

 

[Foxfyre]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

Then explain why it is mostly the left. . .the left that is commonly referred to as liberals in America. . . that endorses and defends Roe v Wade giving the government power over abortions; that endorses and defends thousands of new rules and regulations every year controlling society, commerce and industry, trade, and how we live our lives; that endorses and defends a program like Obamacare that controls every aspect of our healthcare; that endorses and defends a tax code and social engineering that targets and punishes people the left is critical of and rewards those the left purports to champion?

Is all that not enormous power given to the federal government? Power taken away from the states and local communities and individual choices? And is it not mostly the liberals/statists/leftists/political class who approve of it and vote for people who do more of it?

Goldberg's thesis suggests that more and more American people are becoming aware of the negative aspect of all that and are finding less favor with it.

The left may do some of that (and point of clarification: Roe v Wade takes the government OUT of abortion, doesn't put it in) -- but Liberalism does not. That's a conflation that began in the Red Scare daze as a divisive tool to demagogue Democrats, and has no basis in fact.

The example I always go back to is:
To declare "all men are created equal" is Liberalism; to artificially force it into being with Affirmative Action is leftist.

Overreach of governmental power is certainly a concern. But to describe it as "Liberal" is not only disingenuous but counterproductive and divisive.

Thank you.

Great post !

I see liberalism as a frame of mind.

The left is a political entity.

The left is not as "liberal" as they'd like to think. In fact they are no more tolerant than the right.

Thank you.

Liberalism, which built this country, is a philosophy that lives in Democrats, Republicans and the unaffiliated. It's under seige from both the right and the left. I wish more would understand this rather than continually falling back on soundbite-level oversimplicity. All that does is break down dialogue and polarize.

Again the thread rules prohibit bringing political parties into the discussion. I know that was not a malicious thing nor was it partisan in this post, but I have to defend the rules for everybody so thanks for understanding.

It is not a matter of 'sound bite'. I know the dictionary definitions of 'liberal' as well as you do. But the dictionary definition is not what the vast majority of people think of when they use the term 'liberal' to define a particular modern day ideology. Even most of the liberals themselves are not thinking the dictionary definition when they use the term.

So please, I will ask you yet again to not derail this discussion into a discussion on semantics. I don't care what word you use to describe the ideology. I use 'liberal' because that is the word most people, including most liberals, use. You are welcome to use a different word you are most comfortable with.

But please direct your remarks to the thread topic and not whether Goldberg or anybody else used the right word.

 

[rdean]

What conservatives want to "debate" is what they consider their definition of "liberalism" to be as opposed to their equally imagined definition of conservatism. No wonder people who don't know the difference between fascism, communism and socialism want to compare all three to liberalism.
On the other hand, their definition of conservatism is very strange considering what their actual policies are.
Ask liberals what their policies are and the majority of Americans agree. Ask conservatives what their policies are and you don't actually get policies. You get empty slogans. I know. I've tried again and again on the USMB. "Make better" and "we want our country back" and "put Jesus back in schools" is NOT policy. Those are slogans.

However, you have to admit the "debate" between what conservatives imagine liberalism to be and what we know of today's modern conservative policies is quite amusing. Just the fact that self described conservatives say "we don't all feel that way" is laughable when you know that if the majority feel that way, then who cares what the position of minority. It's not like they are a coalition.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Not sure why I am getting notifications about being quoted in this thread?

I asked Foxfyre if she's proud of you calling Ms. Clinton a "C U N * T". She was quite proud of your word choice apparently and sees no problem with your choice of words.

I don't get that at all.

I am no fan of George Bush or Barack Obama, but I detest the things that are said about them in so many ways. It really does tear at who we claim to be.

 

[Pogo]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

It's great that you are making this distinction.

Keep it up.

I really mean it.

Many people don't understand it.

Seriously, you don't see liberalism as it is most commonly used in modern American vernacular as promoting an ever bigger, more intrusive, more powerful role for the central government?

No, I don't.

That is the left.

They all themselves liberals....and give liberalism a bad name. You are right...in the modern American vernacular....they are seen as synonymous.

I look at DT over in those other threads....he's a typical left winger....attacks anyone he does not like (you know the thread on Libertarianism).

But, Pogo is right that being liberal does not mean being a member of the left (it could in some ways....).

I trot this page out now and then as a lucid and extensive background on all this. But few ever read it.
See what you think.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What conservatives want to "debate" is what they consider their definition of "liberalism" to be as opposed to their equally imagined definition of conservatism. No wonder people who don't know the difference between fascism, communism and socialism want to compare all three to liberalism.
On the other hand, their definition of conservatism is very strange considering what their actual policies are.
Ask liberals what their policies are and the majority of Americans agree. Ask conservatives what their policies are and you don't actually get policies. You get empty slogans. I know. I've tried again and again on the USMB. "Make better" and "we want our country back" and "put Jesus back in schools" is NOT policy. Those are slogans.

However, you have to admit the "debate" between what conservatives imagine liberalism to be and what we know of today's modern conservative policies is quite amusing. Just the fact that self described conservatives say "we don't all feel that way" is laughable when you know that if the majority feel that way, then who cares what the position of minority. It's not like they are a coalition.

From what I've seen, you are more left that you are liberal.

BTW: Liberals and Conservatives don't have policies. Republicans and Democrats do.

And no, we don't have to admit anything (starting a sentence with such a statement assumes you are correct in your claim.....your sentence does not make any sense.....a debate between an imagined philosophy and modern policy ?????.....this is he way the leftist democrat might speak).

 

[Sun Devil 92]

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

Then explain why it is mostly the left. . .the left that is commonly referred to as liberals in America. . . that endorses and defends Roe v Wade giving the government power over abortions; that endorses and defends thousands of new rules and regulations every year controlling society, commerce and industry, trade, and how we live our lives; that endorses and defends a program like Obamacare that controls every aspect of our healthcare; that endorses and defends a tax code and social engineering that targets and punishes people the left is critical of and rewards those the left purports to champion?

Is all that not enormous power given to the federal government? Power taken away from the states and local communities and individual choices? And is it not mostly the liberals/statists/leftists/political class who approve of it and vote for people who do more of it?

Goldberg's thesis suggests that more and more American people are becoming aware of the negative aspect of all that and are finding less favor with it.

The left may do some of that (and point of clarification: Roe v Wade takes the government OUT of abortion, doesn't put it in) -- but Liberalism does not. That's a conflation that began in the Red Scare daze as a divisive tool to demagogue Democrats, and has no basis in fact.

The example I always go back to is:
To declare "all men are created equal" is Liberalism; to artificially force it into being with Affirmative Action is leftist.

Overreach of governmental power is certainly a concern. But to describe it as "Liberal" is not only disingenuous but counterproductive and divisive.

Thank you.

Great post !

I see liberalism as a frame of mind.

The left is a political entity.

The left is not as "liberal" as they'd like to think. In fact they are no more tolerant than the right.

Thank you.

Liberalism, which built this country, is a philosophy that lives in Democrats, Republicans and the unaffiliated. It's under seige from both the right and the left. I wish more would understand this rather than continually falling back on soundbite-level oversimplicity. All that does is break down dialogue and polarize.

Again the thread rules prohibit bringing political parties into the discussion. I know that was not a malicious thing nor was it partisan in this post, but I have to defend the rules for everybody so thanks for understanding.

It is not a matter of 'sound bite'. I know the dictionary definitions of 'liberal' as well as you do. But the dictionary definition is not what the vast majority of people think of when they use the term 'liberal' to define a particular modern day ideology. Even most of the liberals themselves are not thinking the dictionary definition when they use the term.

So please, I will ask you yet again to not derail this discussion into a discussion on semantics. I don't care what word you use to describe the ideology. I use 'liberal' because that is the word most people, including most liberals, use. You are welcome to use a different word you are most comfortable with.

But please direct your remarks to the thread topic and not whether Goldberg or anybody else used the right word.

O.K....in the context of what Goldberg calls liberalism......he is wrong.

It is what elected Barack Obama and gave us Obamacare.

 

[Foxfyre]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

It's great that you are making this distinction.

Keep it up.

I really mean it.

Many people don't understand it.

if we are going to discuss liberalism we must discuss it in accordance with the way it is defined today. Pogo is bringing up definitions from the 1800s which have zero meaning today.

No, the dictionary definition is as valid today as it was in the 1800's. But liberalism as most people understand it in America these days is not at all like the dictionary definition. I didn't make it happen that way. That's just the way it is.

So Goldberg, myself, and most others, when we use the term 'liberal' are talking about most of the group that identifies itself as liberal and these are mostly synonymous with the leftists, statist, progressives, political class. It's just like any other of many words that have been changed with common usage and now most people use much differently than the old dictionary definition. Consider the word 'gay' for instance.

I adore Pogo and have no problem whatsoever with him except when he derails my threads to object to how a word is defined.

 

[Foxfyre]

What conservatives want to "debate" is what they consider their definition of "liberalism" to be as opposed to their equally imagined definition of conservatism. No wonder people who don't know the difference between fascism, communism and socialism want to compare all three to liberalism.
On the other hand, their definition of conservatism is very strange considering what their actual policies are.
Ask liberals what their policies are and the majority of Americans agree. Ask conservatives what their policies are and you don't actually get policies. You get empty slogans. I know. I've tried again and again on the USMB. "Make better" and "we want our country back" and "put Jesus back in schools" is NOT policy. Those are slogans.

However, you have to admit the "debate" between what conservatives imagine liberalism to be and what we know of today's modern conservative policies is quite amusing. Just the fact that self described conservatives say "we don't all feel that way" is laughable when you know that if the majority feel that way, then who cares what the position of minority. It's not like they are a coalition.

From what I've seen, you are more left that you are liberal.

Sun Devil you have so much to offer any discussion and I appreciate your participation. But please read over the thread rules. I have to see that they are enforced for everybody. No ad hominem please. Do not make observations about the member personally, but address his/her post. Thanks.

 

[Foxfyre]

Then explain why it is mostly the left. . .the left that is commonly referred to as liberals in America. . . that endorses and defends Roe v Wade giving the government power over abortions; that endorses and defends thousands of new rules and regulations every year controlling society, commerce and industry, trade, and how we live our lives; that endorses and defends a program like Obamacare that controls every aspect of our healthcare; that endorses and defends a tax code and social engineering that targets and punishes people the left is critical of and rewards those the left purports to champion?

Is all that not enormous power given to the federal government? Power taken away from the states and local communities and individual choices? And is it not mostly the liberals/statists/leftists/political class who approve of it and vote for people who do more of it?

Goldberg's thesis suggests that more and more American people are becoming aware of the negative aspect of all that and are finding less favor with it.

The left may do some of that (and point of clarification: Roe v Wade takes the government OUT of abortion, doesn't put it in) -- but Liberalism does not. That's a conflation that began in the Red Scare daze as a divisive tool to demagogue Democrats, and has no basis in fact.

The example I always go back to is:
To declare "all men are created equal" is Liberalism; to artificially force it into being with Affirmative Action is leftist.

Overreach of governmental power is certainly a concern. But to describe it as "Liberal" is not only disingenuous but counterproductive and divisive.

Thank you.

Great post !

I see liberalism as a frame of mind.

The left is a political entity.

The left is not as "liberal" as they'd like to think. In fact they are no more tolerant than the right.

Thank you.

Liberalism, which built this country, is a philosophy that lives in Democrats, Republicans and the unaffiliated. It's under seige from both the right and the left. I wish more would understand this rather than continually falling back on soundbite-level oversimplicity. All that does is break down dialogue and polarize.

Again the thread rules prohibit bringing political parties into the discussion. I know that was not a malicious thing nor was it partisan in this post, but I have to defend the rules for everybody so thanks for understanding.

It is not a matter of 'sound bite'. I know the dictionary definitions of 'liberal' as well as you do. But the dictionary definition is not what the vast majority of people think of when they use the term 'liberal' to define a particular modern day ideology. Even most of the liberals themselves are not thinking the dictionary definition when they use the term.

So please, I will ask you yet again to not derail this discussion into a discussion on semantics. I don't care what word you use to describe the ideology. I use 'liberal' because that is the word most people, including most liberals, use. You are welcome to use a different word you are most comfortable with.

But please direct your remarks to the thread topic and not whether Goldberg or anybody else used the right word.

O.K....in the context of what Goldberg calls liberalism......he is wrong.

It is what elected Barack Obama and gave us Obamacare.

But because you think he is 'wrong' to use liberalism as Goldberg uses the word is not the thread topic. Whatever word he uses to call the ideology--let's call them 'greens' or 'blues' or leprechauns--I honestly don't care--the topic is whether he is right that the ideology is falling out of favor with most Americans.

 

[Agit8r]

Recent elections are not necessarily indicative of this as OP suggests. That said, Liberalism is in about the same state today that conservatism was in during Nixon's Administration--clawing it's way back into the mainstream, and making considerable compromises along the way.

 

[Foxfyre]

Liberalism gives central government enormous power

No, it does not. If anything it does the opposite.

It's great that you are making this distinction.

Keep it up.

I really mean it.

Many people don't understand it.

Seriously, you don't see liberalism as it is most commonly used in modern American vernacular as promoting an ever bigger, more intrusive, more powerful role for the central government?

No, I don't.

That is the left.

They all themselves liberals....and give liberalism a bad name. You are right...in the modern American vernacular....they are seen as synonymous.

I look at DT over in those other threads....he's a typical left winger....attacks anyone he does not like (you know the thread on Libertarianism).

But, Pogo is right that being liberal does not mean being a member of the left (it could in some ways....).

Please no ad hominem. I have to be very firm about that or the thread will immediately dissolve into the insult fests and food fight that most threads wind up being at USMB. (That's why the SDZ is such a great concept as the OP is given some control over that.)

Again, whether or not I or Goldberg or anybody else is using the right word when we say liberal, what we mean by the term is appropriate for the thread and not whether the term itself is being used rightly or wrongly.