English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Liberals share a belief in individual rights, free enterprise, representative democracy, and the rule of law. In this sense, almost all Americans accept liberal ideals, so much so that it is easy to forget how revolutionary these ideals were when the American Constitution was written. Since Reagan, liberalism has been colored to appear weak and elitist. Well, if individual rights, free enterprise, and representative democracy is a weakness, that is unamerican and Foolish. Think like a liberal, think BIG!

2007-03-15 01:43:32 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

12 answers

I like your thinking

2007-03-15 02:33:22 · answer #1 · answered by Giliathriel 4 · 0 1

With all due respect, liberalism today is nothing like liberalism in the past. The description you've used more closely represents conservatism today than liberalism. Liberalism now strives to limit free enterprise, stifle democracy, and undermine the rule of law.

2007-03-15 01:58:19 · answer #2 · answered by VoodooPunk 4 · 0 1

Liberals hardly believe in individual rights. If they did, they would push for the individual to plan their own retirement, not be forced into the collective social security, educate their own kids, not force people into the collective gvmt education, take care of our own health care, not push for the gvmt to take it over and force us into a plan we don't want.

Individualism would demand that we keep taxes as low as possible.

You're perverting the definition of individualism, as liberals are nothing more than old fashion collectivist.

Liberals are the new national socialist. It's hard to see much difference from their political platform than of the political platform of Germany in the 1930's.

2007-03-15 01:56:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Actually, what you've described is libertarian. The classic liberal may believe in free enterprise, but today's liberals don't, otherwise they wouldn't paint every corporation as evil and every rich person as getting there by stepping on the necks of every poor person they can find to get there (unless, of course, that rich person then espouses the evils of corporations or inherits the money and uses it for liberal causes, at which point they're OK).

And today's liberals don't respect the rule of law, as they believe in mob rule to enforce their will on others, in terms of nationalized health care and socialized programs that rob individual freedom of choice.

2007-03-15 01:51:44 · answer #4 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 3 2

Victory you are aware what fascism is I assume.

And since you know what fascism is, I am sure you know that almost all fascist dictators in the entire worlds history have been hard core conservatives. The most recent of which, Adolf Hitler.

Newt Gingrich, neo-conservative, has said on more then one occasion that he believes free speech should be "limited."

I don't know where you get off calling liberals "Nazi-fascists."

Do you know who Benito Mussolini is?

You should read this seriously, cause you seem like a smart guy:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html

If you didn't know this, you should grab a history book and a Webster's dictionary.

2007-03-15 01:55:06 · answer #5 · answered by trevor22in 4 · 1 1

You are talking about classical liberalism. What is called liberalism today is more akin to leftism. The Libertarians are the closest to classical liberals in today's political scene. Today's "Liberals" are pushing group rights, heavy gov't regulation of enterprise, and the rule of judicial oligarchs who can impose their beliefs on us in contradiction to what has been passed by the legislature.

2007-03-15 01:53:47 · answer #6 · answered by Biz Iz 3 · 1 1

the problem there is that liberals haven;t shown a belief in personal responcibility at all.. if somethign bad happens to someone, its always the fault of someone else, not their own . If they are poor, its the systems fault for failing them, its the rich holding them down or any other excuse they could muster. If they are lacking something, they belive that wealth should be spread out if i have 3 and you have none you deserve 2, even though i have worked hard and conserved resources to get 3 of such said thing. Myself as a consertive, I belive goverment should have a hands off approach to many aspects of my life, I don;t need a new goverment regulation forcing me to do things, or giving away assest of the country to those who will not work for them

2007-03-15 01:49:51 · answer #7 · answered by lethander_99 4 · 3 2

NO! I am sure you would LOVE to force us all to agree with you and think like you, but thank GOD that will never happen. I am a conservative. I believe in the conservation of energy, natural resources, and most importantly of Morals and Values.

P.S.- Sure liberals think big, about themselves.

2007-03-15 02:00:59 · answer #8 · answered by Star Dust 2 · 0 1

In that sense, sure. But liberalism represents a lot of specific platforms that I despise.

2007-03-15 01:48:50 · answer #9 · answered by Gary W 4 · 1 1

I'm not sure if Reagan is to blame or if it's the sneaky left wingers who perverted the word liberal to change it's meaning to pacifist socialist.

2007-03-15 01:48:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

I am an old fashion liberal, yes. But not one of these neo-libs that infest America

2007-03-15 01:49:57 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers