Which one do you fit, and why do you hate the other?

Question

Conservatism is a political philosophy that necessitates a defense of established values or the status quo. The term derives from to conserve; from Latin conservāre, "to keep, guard, observe". While not in itself an ideology, it is a political philosophy that is determined almost entirely by its context. Defined in part as an emphasis on tradition as a source of wisdom that goes beyond what can be demonstrated or even explicitly stated

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism)

Liberalism is an ideology, philosophical view, and political tradition which holds that liberty is the primary political value.[1] Liberalism has its roots in the Western Enlightenment, but the term now encompasses a diversity of political thought, with adherents spanning a large part of the political spectrum.

Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights. It seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, especially of government and religion, the rule of law, free public education, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy that supports relatively free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected.[2] In modern society, liberals favor a liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law and an equal opportunity to succeed
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism )

Answer 1

In the context of your definition, I would be for the whole thing.....and the definition is so broad and all encompassing that it really captures the essence of both major political parties and their trains of thought....in other words you could and should be all of those qualities to be an American.

In reality, by modern terms (ie, today) the label "liberal" has a more negative connotation in the mind of the American public than the word "conservative".

I consider myself a Republican and a conservative: I believe in equal rights, free and fair elections and the rule of law. I also believe that this country's values are being run into the ground as is our constitution (thank you ACLU) and something has to be done to preserve the past and OUR American values.

Answer 2

First, I must say that I hate nobody. This is not the middle east, here we do not shoot those with opposing political viewpoints.
But I must say that with those definitions, it is a little difficult to pick one that fits me. The liberal definition is somewhat broad, the consevation, somewhat narrow, and both, somewhat out-of-date. Neither party has stuck entirely to the definitions they were founded on. Both have evolved, but have kept some core beliefs. I think the only logical way to make an informed decision is to look at the voting records of each party today.
I've chosen some random bills of the 109th congress to illustrate this point (follow link below for roll call talleys and full text of each bill):

H R 2830 - Pension Protection Act
Ayes - 224 rep, 70 dem Nays - 1 rep, 130 dem, 1 ind

H R 1065 - To establish the United States Boxing Commission to protect the general welfare of boxers and to ensure fairness in the sport of professional boxing
Yeas - 43 rep, 146 dem Nays - 183 rep, 50 dem

H R 1606 - Online Freedom of Speech Act
Yeas - 179 rep, 38 dem Nays - 46 rep, 143 dem, 1 ind

H.Res 621 - Providing for further consideration of the bill (H.R. 4437) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to strengthen enforcement of the immigration laws, to enhance border security, and for other purposes
Yeas - 213 rep, 3 dem Nays 8 rep, 194 dem, 1 ind

H.Res 648 - Expressing the commitment of the House of Representatives to achieving victory in Iraq
Yeas - 220 rep, 59 dem Nays - 108 dem, 1 ind

H R 4241 - Deficit Reduction Act
Ayes - 217 rep Nays - 14 rep, 200 dem

Admittedly, this is a small list of the past year's house. To see the comprehensive list, click the link below. I just looked through the top of the list of the most recent ones and picked the ones with a severe split along party lines. There were many more that showed overwhelming agreement on both sides. I did not show those here only because limited time allows me only to show grave differences. We all know that this country comes together on most basic vaues. I will let the above votes speak for themselves. Look through the list and you can see which party you line up with more currently. In the upcoming vote, we are voting for current legislators, not the founders of each party.

Answer 3

Well I think we can infer from your descriptions that you lean more to the liberal side of the spectrum. I agree with Republican Mom. You have tried to define liberalism in broad terms and conservatism in most narrow. To say that conservatism is not an ideology is a disservice especially when you define liberalism as such. This is a veiled attempt to use another old liberal ploy, view the opposition in a dismissive sense and portray them as followers with no original ideas. Your definition of liberalism could best be described as classic liberalism and many Democrats still hold to these principles, but there is a growing number on the left who practice a newer form of liberalism which is rooted in elitist thinking. The belief that you are superior, you ideas are better conceived and any one who disagrees lacks the knowledge to taken seriously because they cannot see what is best for them. This form of liberalism is fanatical and dangerous, much the same as radical conservatism is dangerous. Most people do not think in extremes, but are rather close to center and hold ideas which cross the lines depending on the issue at hand. I am a conservative. I do not hate anyone, but I do disagree with many liberals. This does not mean that I think they do not have a right to their opinions. In fact I wholly support their rights, but I demand the same in return.

Answer 4

I don't hate the groups or the ideologies, but how those are expressed in contemporary politics. Dictionary definitions notwithstanding, the so-called conservatives in America seem more interested in imposing a particular morality based upon their narrow view of their Bible. The so-called liberals seem to be un-focused because they have no idea how to (1) respond to the religion-based mumbo jumbo and (2) appeal to the vast voting base that is willing to surrender its civil rights.

Answer 5

The basic premise of your question is flawed. It assumes that if I fall into one of the categories you describe then I hate the other. That's not true although what passes for political discourse in this country lately can make it seem that way.
Most people, I think, are a combination of but.

Answer 6

I find it interesting that you took the most narrow connotative definition on wikipedia for conservativism and the most broad positive definition for liberalism. The ideology for "conservativism" crosses wide spectrums, as you can see below. Also from wikipedia:
American conservatism is a constellation of political ideologies within the United States under the blanket heading of conservative. Included are fiscal conservatives, free market or economic liberals, social conservatives, and religious conservatives, as well as supporters of a strong American military, opponents of internationalism, and proponents of states' rights.

Defining "American conservatism" requires a definition of conservatism in general, and the term is applied to a number of ideas and ideologies, some more closely related to core conservative beliefs than others.

1. Classical or institutional conservatism - Opposition to rapid change in governmental and societal institutions. This kind of conservatism is anti-ideological insofar as it emphasizes process (slow change) over product (any particular form of government). To the classical conservative, whether one arrives at a right- or left-leaning government is less important than whether change is effected through rule of law rather than through revolution and sudden innovation.

2. Ideological conservatism or right-wing conservatism -- In contrast to the anti-ideological classical conservatism, right-wing conservatism is, as its name implies, ideological. It is typified by three distinct subideologies: social conservatism, fiscal conservatism, and economic liberalism. Together, these subideologies comprise the conservative ideology of people in some English-speaking countries: separately, these subideologies are incorporated into other political positions.

3. Neoconservatism, in its United States usage, has come to refer to the views of a subclass of conservatives who support a more assertive foreign policy coupled with one or more other facets of social conservatism, in contrast to the typically isolationist views of early- and mid-20th Century conservatives. Neoconservatism was first described by a group of disaffected liberals, and thus Irving Kristol, usually credited as its intellectual progenitor, defined a "neoconservative" as "a liberal who was mugged by reality." Although originally regarded as an approach to domestic policy (the founding instrument of the movement, Kristol's The Public Interest periodical, did not even cover foreign affairs), through the influence of figures like Dick Cheney, Robert Kagan, Richard Perle, Ken Adelman and (Irving's son) William Kristol, it has become more famous for its association with the foreign policy of the George W. Bush Administration.

4. Small government conservatism -- Small government conservatives look for a decreased role of the federal government, and as well weaker state governments. Small government conservatives rather than focusing of the protections given individuals by the Bill of Rights, they try to weaken the federal government, thereby following the Founding Fathers who were suspicious of a centralized, unitary state like [Britain]], from which they had just won their freedom.

5. Paleoconservatism, which arose in the 1980s in reaction to neoconservatism, stresses tradition, civil society, classical federalism and heritage of Christendom. They see social democracy, ideology, and managerial society as malevolent attempts to remake humanity. Supporters say that the dominant forces in Western society no longer support conserving the traditions, institutions, and values that created and formed it. Therefore, they say true conservatives must oppose the status quo. In statecraft, they call for decentralism, local rule, private property and minimal bureaucracy. In society, they are traditionalist, support a Christian moral order and proclaim the nuclear family is a wise system. Some like Samuel P. Huntington argue that multiracial, multiethnic, and egalitarian states are inherently unstable. Paleos tend to be isolationist, arguing that American entry into foreign wars is unnecessary and unwise.

Answer 7

the American two party system is flawed. this country needs to go through a drastic change where the house represents the industrial workers and not a region. for example one rep would be for airline industry, another auto, manufacturing, so on....then we can have what the people want instead of putting someone in office based on what they tell us they will do .

Answer 8

i believe that there is something about hate contained in the bible correct between ethics and gun administration. What Jesus needs us to do is own machines designed to kill and placed money absolutely human beings.

Answer 9

I for one do not hate one or the other - I happen to agree with some ideas from both sides, depending on the issue. I also really disagree with some of the issues on both sides.

Answer 10

I subscribe to the ideology of Panocracy---however it all pans out.