What would happen if we stopped using the words 'liberal' and 'conservative' ...?

Question

... and had to re-think the way we describe politics? Is there really only two ways to think about it? What is the value in boiling complex decisions down into a simple dichotomies? Is too much energy spent on attacking the other side instead of promoting solutions that benefit us all?

Answer 1

These labels are almost curse words in the right circles so getting rid of them can only be a benefit. It would immediately disenfranchise the kook bomb throwers on either side of the aisle. Soon after that, you'd the the sides actually try to get some work done. It would take years to make happen but it would be cool to try.

Answer 2

Amen. We just play here can u imagine in the real world? We heard so much more about the Dem's VS the Republicans than any solutions to common problems that plague US. Iraq is the perfect example, then the immigration bills. We worked 2gether they said. Right?! Nothing but verbal tennis exists. And who loses? U, me and now our brave soldiers. The war could be altered if only the hill took some time out from their busy political campaign schedules long enough to work for the people who voted them into Congress & the Senate. What a joke also. Born in NY if I was there now I would be so PO that since reelected the Senator Clinton is on her own agenda. You Tube must be more fun than real life politics.
Shame on them all.
Names, tags and all those words that come b4 an issue change the outcome from the start,. Prejudice in any form is not tolerable, yet, we go on.
Personally, I hate the posters here who abuse the terms. They attack someone and don't exchange anything but old fashioned ideals. Wrong. TY!

Answer 3

the US Stopped paying the thought on it somewhat is debt in 1961 which replaced into the final twelve months any concept on the US debt replaced into paid. when you consider that that element the US has in straightforward terms been paying the activity on the debt, borrowing money to accomplish that, and the debt has finally grown to the element the place it somewhat is mathematically impossible for the thought on the debt to be paid. This end, isn't based completely on the $14 trillion on the books however the further $60 trillion in unfunded responsibilities (on the whole entitlement courses) that has been promised yet no longer yet paid. whilst ones entire responsibilities (long term and short term) can not in all probability be paid with incoming sales over that element era one is, by definition, bankrupt.

Answer 4

Gosh, life would be too difficult. We'd have to actually consider the pros and cons of each issue, issue by issue, rather than simply waiting until a position is declared to be liberal or conservative so we could instantly KNOW if it is right or wrong based upon our being liberal or conservative.

Too much work.

Next, we would be doing away with calling folks on the opposite side hypocrites rather than trying to see how their position is consistent with their own perspective on the issues.

You're suggesting I should have to actually think. How mean!

http://www.yaktivist.com
Polite Discussion, Respectful Disagreements regarding nonlethal alternatives to Abortion, Death Penalty, Lethal Weapons.

Answer 5

We'd invent new phrases for the same things.

The concepts of "conservative" and "liberal" are far too ingrained on us and those concepts have been with us since the dawn of time.

As for only two ways to think about it...no. Only a minority on the far left and a minority on the far right claim those labels. The rest of us have varying degrees of conservatism and liberalism. The problem lies in that when we go to the polls, we don't look for that person with the exact right mix of ideologies, we look for either a pretty face or a buzz phrase that suits us.

Answer 6

People often like to put themselves in groups, because they often like to feel that they belong somewhere. That being said, though, usually no two members of a political party think exactly alike. For example, a person could be socially liberal and fiscally conservative, or vice versa. I think that if people stopped putting themselves into neat, cookie-cutter categories, it would probably enhance the state of political discourse and there would probably be much less divisiveness.

Answer 7

It really doesn't matter what you call things, it is the underlying sentiment that is important and not going to change. That is why people that advocate banning the "N" word are wrong. Besides being unconstitutional, it won't change the feelings behind the word.

For example, the guy above me with the name "F U liberal moron," the fact that I restrain from calling him a complete idiot, doesn't change the fact that he is.

Answer 8

How's traditionalist & Socialist, both sides believe in different things right down to the core but it doesn't mean we hate each other now does it. Well may be a few.

Answer 9

We would stop judging people based on oft-misused words and start discussing views and issues.

Unfortunately this whole "us vs. them" mentality is so ingrained in the America mindset I seriously doubt that much would change. People would just make up new words as meaningless as "liberal" and "conservative have become.

It is easier to judge someone based on oft-misused world like "liberal" and "conservative" than it is to judge them based on their views on issues.

Answer 10

There would be new words, trust me. It is natural for humanity to group and dichotomize each other. We're very fond of labels. That doesn't mean I agree with it! I firmly adhere to the principle that education can bring us all up out've the pits of "boxing" fellow human beings!