What is that conservatives find wrong with this....?

Question

here's the definition of "Liberal":
Liberalism refers to a broad array of related ideas and theories of government that advocate individual liberty.[1] Liberalism has its roots in the Western Age of Enlightenment.
Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. A liberal society is characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy, free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected.[2] In the 21st century, this usually means liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law

Barry c, if they don't fit the definition, the are not a liberal...they're something eles

Brian....wikopedia (however that's spelled)

who said conservatives reject those ideals? This is my point..both liberals and conservatives embrace those ideals.

Answer 1

nothing, actually I find the Progressive Liberals don't fit into this definition, just as neo-Cons don't fit the Conservative definition.

Answer 2

To say that conservatives reject "the ideals of freedom of thought, limitations on power, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy, free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected" is a completely erroneous statement. Liberal and liberal are totally different terms, just like conservative and conservative. You can have liberal thought, but still consider yourself on the conservative side of the political spectrum. What I think you are trying to do is compare cars to tires. The definition you have is what one would apply to where they stand on one of the two main sectors of political thought: the economy and the society. You can't apply your definition of liberal (the tire) to what the complete product would be, conservative or liberal (the finished product, a car). A car can not be a part of a tire, but a tire can be a part of a car.

First, I reckon I should try to clarify your definition (at least in my eyes). The defintion you have is what is applied to school of thought, not political alignment. It is where you would stand on a particular issue.

Most (if not all) conservatives that I know are social conservatives and economic liberals. I personally am this. To say that one is an economic liberal would generally mean that they believe the role and size of the federal government in the economy should be almost non-existant. This is what one would call laissez faire economics. If you apply your definition of liberal to the economy, this is what you would believe. Do people honestly believe that someone who labels their self as a "conservative" is against people having personal freedom? On the opposite side of the economic spectrum, you would have an economic conservative; this would be a highly government regulated economy. This belief would generally align under the ideals that the economy is dependent on the federal government for every action. Welfare-state would also be under this belief.

All that I have just typed, however, doesn't always apply to every single person. You've got social conservatives and social liberals, economic conservatives and economic liberals. I generally find that people who are "conservatives" are social conservatives and economic liberals, whereas people who are "liberals" are social liberals and economic conservatives. This is a most difficult concept to explain over the internet and I wish I could have done it better.

If you don't agree with my views on the economy or society, that is fine, but I did my best to explain the "question."

Answer 3

Those people who fall into your definition of liberal are moderates in this day and age. The term liberal has moved far to the left. The liberal movement of today is a socialists movement, which does not support a free market society nor limits on government control.
If you embrace the definition above, you are a moderate.

Answer 4

Well, in individual Liberties or Freedoms, one must look at the situation at follows:

If we define individual Freedom to those who want to murder, and those who want to rob banks, should we consider that a Freedom?

Ya see? That's what Liberalism does, it believes that we should uphold all things not just the good things, but the bad also.

There is a difference in RIGHT and WRONG, We MUST uphold those things which are RIGHT! We must no longer tolerate that which is bad(Such as: Abortion)!!! We must carry the full sentence out on those who have done wrong.

Would you want to live in a society where there is no responsiblility carried out on those who have done wrong?

Would YOU want to live in a Godless Society?

Would YOU want to live in a society where you never know when someone is going to break in your house at night at any time?

That's why we have the Death Penalty my friend!

Liberalism is destroying America!

Wake up America!

Answer 5

Liberalism as defined by the dictionary is NOT what liberals mean when they use the word. I have seen socialism communism, liberalism and the undemocratic Democrat party. They are all alike. So, when the Dems say liberal, they are referring to USSR style communism. That's what they want because it enriches politicians and gives them absolute control of the people's lives, at the expense of the people. The people get poverty in return.
__________________________________
KrazyKyngeKorny(Krazy, not stupid)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Answer 6

I have always wondered that myself. But someone will probably make liberal look like idiots and try and be funny, but they won't.

Conservatives follow too much the head honcho, never thinking for themselves and panic when they have to. And damn shame really.

I guess they put too much stock in the idea of a community not valuing the individual... but I find that some have to use religion to justify reasons of thinking and most liberals don't. Maybe that's the problem.

Answer 7

I find nothing wrong with that. :)

I'm a conservative who believes in smaller government, less government control and fiscal responsibility (Bush is NOT conservative).

Instead of a larger federal government, I'd like to see more responsibility turned over to the individual states and municipalities.

Many people who define themselves as liberals and/or Democrats are proposing socialism and that's something that I'm apposed to. That to me is NOT a liberal, nor a true Democrat. :)

Answer 8

" A liberal society is characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas...". Your answer is in the definition. They can't stand these ideals.

Answer 9

What you've reproduced in your question is the definition of classical liberalism, which has nothing to do with the modern version, which is animated by collectivism, income redistribution, and coercive government. Dragging in the old definition does nothing but muddy the waters.

Answer 10

They have such negative ideas about liberals. Are we REALLY terrorists? Anyway, some Republican ideals are good, but politics always moves toward the left, though gradually, over time. Freedom always wins over time. Heck, our Founding Fathers were liberals. Take that, cons.

Answer 11

Sorry, that is not my definition of the word liberal. Not sure where you got it, but certainly doesn't fit the platform of the American Liberal party.