Liberal---Conservative

[Mike Cl]

Those two terms (including 'left' and 'right') get bandied around a lot.  But what do they mean?  I get the feeling that each person who uses one of those terms has their own idea of what those terms mean.  This is what they mean to me.
Liberal comes from 'liberty' and conservative mean 'to conserve).  As a liberal, I think personal freedom and liberties are the most important.  That is in contrast to the conservative who wants to keep what was; change is bad.  I think of both terms in relationship to the French Revolution.  The revolt was mainly against the Divine Right of Kings--all leaders are appointed by god, therefore what they do and how they do it is with the graces of god.  The liberals wanted to liberate themselves from that type of government and system.  Later came the conservatives who wanted to conserve traditional institutions, including the Divine Right of Kings.  Government is to keep the playing field even, to protect all citizens and changes with the times.  I see conservatives rely much more on tradition--traditional institutions are best and should be maintained.  Change is of questionable use.  Religions are naturally conservative since they have found the truth and all the answers.  Why is one reason christians support trump because he has been anointed by god to be the leader of the US. 

I also realize there is no such thing as a 'pure' political system.  All have good points and bad points.  But I think govt. should be based on a constitution (much like ours, only followed more closely than we follow ours) that emphasizes individual freedoms and the role and responsibility of govt.  And the role and responsibility of citizens.  Anyway, I am not pure liberal, for I think some socialist, conservative, communist, and others types of govt should all be in the mix.  If that makes me a leftist, then I embrace that label.  Extremes on any side are not healthy and I distance myself from extreme left or right.  Yet I see the extreme right to be much more violent.   

[Baruch]

War of Semantics ... basic to War of Propaganda.  Words are meaningless in the minds, mouths and pens of humans.  Animal grunts.

We have discussed this here in the past, about no agreement on jargon (aka hope to escape the confusion of regular language).  If there is no agreement on terms, then then any discussion is avoided between aware people, only sheeple are fooled, because of misuse of meaning.

Bottom line?  Behavior.  I don't care how you define "is" ... if what you "is" is someone at my front door with a gun.

"Every Communist must grasp the truth, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party." ... Mao Tse Tung

This is why American politics is Maoist.  Why we are re-doing the Cultural Revolution of the 60s.

[Hydra009]

Going over the history and the evolution of these strains of political thought would be incredibly time-consuming and complex.  Suffice it to say that they both stem from the Enlightenment, reject the divine right of kings, and favor a representative democracy form of government.

Probably the defining feature showcasing how they've diverged is their view of social/political change.  Broadly speaking, liberals tend to advocate for reform while conservatives tend to be skeptical of such reform and have a more traditionalistic bent.

Over time, the American parties have picked up specific policy platforms - abortion, guns, gay marriage, climate change, etc.

Imho, there are currently 3 big issues that are pretty telling on which side of the fence a person lies:  the role of religion in society and government (should "people of faith" lead government?), is immigration overall a good or bad thing?, and do we need a "strong leader" to preserve the republic and crackdown on violators of social norms?

[Baruch]

The only "people of faith" is US government, is "faith" is corrupt politics and corrupt globalist corporations/banking.  Controlled immigration is good for the US, less good for Europe (they are overpopulated).  But both government and corporations and universities want to export all jobs to China, and import all the Chinese students to our universities.  This forces down American wages, American unions and enables graduate school corruption of the universities.



The problem isn't conservative/liberal, but stupid conservative/stupid liberal.  Robber baron Jay Gould bragged in 1886, that he could hire “one-half of the working class to kill the other half,” and he proved he was right in the first strikes of the Knights of Labor.  This is where the modern R/D fake dichotomy comes from.

We have an implied dictatorship ... Deep State style.  The US hasn't been a democracy since 1963.

"DC Think Tank Behind Steele Dossier" ... Deep State Hillary Clinton behind Deep State Christopher Steele behind fake Russian sources.  The CIA should simply rule directly, end all elections, literally eliminate the middle men/women.  Brookings/Danshenko.  Danshenko is Ukrainian, not Russian, and lives in the US.

“Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state lives at the expense of everyone.” - Frederick Bastiat

[Baruch]

'Fiona Hill is a British American foreign affairs specialist and academic. She is a former official at the U.S. National Security Council specializing in Russian and European affairs. She was a witness in the November 2019 House hearings regarding the impeachment of President Trump." ... we allowed an MI6 operative in the WH.  Not a bright move by Trump.

[Sal1981]

Took 48 minutes in to get to language confusion being weaponized, ala Russell conjugation. Otherwise interesting vid.

Eric Weinstein's take on current leadership class, as he calls it, are spot on. When the (inteligensia) leaders are found lying for whatever reason, why should we listen to them further? If leaders can't show humility when being shown wrong and instead double down, any support and credibility they used to have is thrown out the window.

Anyways, left and right political convictions are often cited as being opposites, when they're really about methodology; how to govern.

[Baruch]

First families rule ...

[Hydra009]

Anyways, left and right political convictions are often cited as being opposites, when they're really about methodology; how to govern.

Interesting.  Please elaborate.

Imo, in the US there is a certain boilerplate political campaign.  "I'm against bad things and for good things.  I like America and apple pie.  Vote for me and together, we can do vague good stuff!"  If you put your thumb over the party affiliation, it can sometimes be hard to tell who is affiliated with which party.



That has shifted somewhat lately.  Now, it's pretty noticeable.  I'm picking the two most insane and extreme examples here to really highlight the differences.



Note the emphasis on a multiracial community and the M. Knight Shyamalan twist at the end.  :P



Emphasis on guns and dislike of Marxism.

I had an even crazier one, it was modern but shot like it came out of the early 80s with a similar ideology.  Some female candidate in some heartland state ranting about America the beautiful and Jesus.  Sadly, I lost the link a long time ago.  Just as well, it was so off-the-rails that I think it might have been a clinically-diagnosed crazy person.

[Mike Cl]

Going over the history and the evolution of these strains of political thought would be incredibly time-consuming and complex.

That is very true.  Semantics figure in here a lot.  I think I developed backward.  My folks were not much into politics, but always voted Democrat.  But did not talk about it.  So I grew up with vague notions about it all.  In college I was actually for the Vietnam war because of the domino effect and was very anti-commie.  Then I was drafted, begged off a year longer from the service because I was already registered in my classes.  Did more background research into Nam and slowly realized it was not really about communism.  And I began to realize that that word, 'communist' was a loaded word.  It was used in different ways for different purposes, while nobody really defined it.  Much like Baruch using the word as a club without really knowing what it is nor what it stands for.  My intro into political propaganda and sound bites.  I have to kind of chuckle; in college, at least at first, I was a Nam fan--go get em.  When I was drafted and in the US Army (I was hoodwinked by the Army Intelligence Agent I talked to prior to my being drafted.  Because of my history degree he suggested I become an Army Intelligence Field Agent and I agreed, so it cost me another year of service and I was no longer technically a draftee--I figured it would keep me out of Nam.  Yeah, not too bright in those days.)  I was anti-Nam.  Catch-22 became my bible. 

Anyway, left and right are much like the term commie; a charged word, one that is used and one is simply supposed to accept it as it is being used by the person uttering them.  I don't use them much.  I do label myself as a liberal for I think of the root word, liberty, and that is what I think is best--being as free as one can be.  I think conservative as being the opposite of what I think of myself as.  They like to conserve what is, and do not want to change it.  Without change we cannot move forward and improve as a society. 

To dig into any of these words is a complex task, one I'm not into at the moment.  But I do find it funny that I was more conservative as a younger person.  I find I am becoming more and more liberal as I age.

[Baruch]

Yep, some people stand on their heads ;-)  I was more liberal in the past, thought that only LBJ was evil, not all Democrats.  Was a Democrat myself for 20 years.  I have never feared, hated or oppressed gay people for example.  So what label does that make me?  It has been posted before, all these labels obscure thinking, not clarify it.  Except as slogans for brainless armed militias.

So what triggers you?  Who is your "baby Hitler"?  Varies based on personal history and personality.  Unlike some, I never spent any childhood in the Deep South ... never lived anywhere in pre-1975 segregation.  Did live a few miles from Compton, so a few more miles from Watts, in 1965.  Otherwise none of the inner city got close to me, until I was 34, when I lived in a Hispanic gang neighborhood for awhile, then moving to a inner city Asian neighborhood (Japanese American retirees though).

[Hydra009]

Imo, this is pretty much sums up the left-right divide in the US.  Both sides are hurting from the same problems, but where they place the blame is different.

[drunkenshoe]

Those two terms (including 'left' and 'right') get bandied around a lot.  But what do they mean? ...

They have disintegrated (I don't know which word to use) today while once they were solid categories? These concepts are main categories defined by historians in the end. It got employed and re-employed... They seem telling more about the times they were invented, not what people want them to refer to when defending the ideal system of governance they believe.

[Baruch]

They have disintegrated (I don't know which word to use) today while once they were solid categories? These concepts are main categories defined by historians in the end. It got employed and re-employed... They seem telling more about the times they were invented, not what people want them to refer to when defending the ideal system of governance they believe.

Any governance by a party not mine ... kill them!

Yes, communism brings free medicine, see Cuba.

[Sal1981]

Anyways, left and right political convictions are often cited as being opposites, when they're really about methodology; how to govern.

Interesting.  Please elaborate.

It's part of viewing it as a political science.

[Hydra009]

Yeah, I know poli sci is a thing.  I was asking about how exactly republicans and democrats govern differently, what's different about their methodology.  I kinda feel like that's what you were writing about.